Baptism in the Early Church

by H.F. Stander

Baptism in the Early Church by two internationally known and highly regarded classical scholars, members of paedobaptist churches, present a dispassionate examination of the problem, based on a careful treatment of primary sources. They approach the issue from their area of specialty and expertise, through the discipline of classical historiography, not denominational polemics, and produce a work singularly authoritative.Essentially, they argue that infant baptism was not the practice of the Apostles and their immediate successors, but developed through the convergence of several factors. It demonstrates that believer’s baptism did not simply disappear after the apostolic era, but continued to be the accepted position for centuries.

Genres: Theology, Church History, Ecclesiology, History, Church

Paperback

First published September 1, 2004

Reviews

[Michael Beck · Rating 5 out of 5]

"The book is written by paedobaptists who conclude that the baptism of infants was a latter development and that credobaptism was the pattern of the early church." Enough said.

[Josiah Cook · Rating 3 out of 5]

Stander, a paedobaptist himself, gives a thorough yet concise treatment of whether infant baptism was practiced in the first three centuries of the church. He is very honest about where other paedobaptist writers have stretched in this area. He shows that infant baptism was not a normative practice until the fourth century. Before then, it was at times permitted if an infant was dying since many of the church fathers also believed baptism was regenerative and necessary for salvation. Immersion, specifically threefold immersion, was the normative mode. Sprinkling and pouring was only allowed in the case of deathbed baptisms.

Apart from the subject at hand, there are some other areas mentioned that I will study more because of this book such as the almost universal belief in baptismal regeneration from the first century, aspects of early baptismal liturgies including nude baptism, the consumption of milk and honey, etc. This was overall such a great and engaging read.

[Timothy Decker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Concise and powerful. How books in this genre should be written!

[Richard Lawrence]

A fascinating reader in early church sources on baptism; I feel I lack the knowledge to review it, notably I'm not sufficiently widely versed on the topic to comment on whether this selection of sources is appropriately representative.

As another reviewer noted, this book evidences a variety of strange practises sometimes practised in some places in the early church including nude baptisms, anointing with oil before or after baptism, washing the feet of the baptised person; it also evidences some measure of diversity and doctrinal development. In places I wonder if the summary was overly simplistic and exclusive, but I would need to do further study to conclude on that.

[Simon Wartanian · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an excellent little volume that gets to the heart of the issues and cites every explicit text on baptism. The survey is done by two paedobaptist scholars who demonstrate that "adult" baptism was the norm even up to the fourth century (the quo terminus for the survey). Very early on, John 3:5 was connected with baptism and thereby the necessity of being baptized to go to heaven. Likewise that the forgiveness of sins is attained through baptism. With the case of infant mortality, the sacrament was beginning to be administered to little children. Some Fathers advocated for the delaying of baptism so that all your past sins would be washed away, but Cyprian argued against this delay and advocated for the baptism of infants (because no one knows when one dies) and he likewise argued for the validity of sprinkling and pouring. Up to this point, immersion was the unquestionable standard--threefold immersion even. Although Cyprian did not believe that baptism would cleanse sin from infants (because they are innocent), yet baptism would confer to them the benefits of sanctification and adoption.

Overal, I found this to be a very enjoyable volume, which was to the point and, I believe, fair with the data. I'd highly recommend it for those who do not have the time to read Everett Ferguson's massive volume called "Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology, and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries".

[Joshua Bethay · Rating 5 out of 5]

First of all, Stander and Louw are due great respect and honor for authoring a book critiquing proponents within their own camp for misusing the church fathers to propagate paedobaptist frameworks, knowing that credobaptists will eat this up.

The concise and straightforward book systematically displays how the first 3 centuries of the church were marked by adult baptism via three-fold immersion into water.

The rise of infant baptism that came to popularity in the 4th century was due to baptism coming to be seen as a remission of sins that conferred numerous blessings upon the recipient, particularly a guarantee of salvation. This was the primary motive, rather than a covenantal one, for why the church adopted the practice of infant baptism: if baptism saves, then it needs to be given to infants too.

As Jim Renihan states in the forward, “history is not determinative, but it is an important primary witness, and must not be ignored.”

The authors have provided a clear and persuasive testimony of the early church’s view on baptism and how the performative function of baptism came to gradually lead it to rocky ground, and as Baptists would accuse, rocky practices.

[Mike Fendrich · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very interesting book. It's amazing how we will cherry pick the Patristic Fathers to support our doctrinal positions instead of seeing them just like we see ourselves, as sinners in need of Christ and the Word of God. I was surprised to learn just how common the notion of baptismal regeneration was in the early church. While I do not hold to this position, I do sense the need to sharpen my mind to understand why some believe this and why I believe what I do about baptism from the Scripture.

Special thanks to Zach for letting me borrow the book.

[Luke Cox · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have been saying for a long time that the greatest argument in favor of paedobaptism was the historical argument. I was wrong. This book has persuaded me that infant baptism is a later development than I previously thought, and fits well with Rome's other errors which snowballed over time.

[Jan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was unsure whether to give it 2 or 3 stars. The long citations from early church literature and the short introductions to those authors were a great pleasure to read, hence my choice for 3 stars. The evaluation and discussion of those writings were a big disappointment.

The book starts with the promise from the authors that they won’t be taking a position in the debate on baptism but will only introduce the reader to the early church literature for them to make their own assessment, but the approach taken by the authors would be better defined as a refutation of infant baptism. I missed the academic approach to the subject and was surprised to find out the authors are actual university professors.

The conclusion at the end of the book was written slightly better, but I don’t think the proof presented supports all of the author’s conclusions. To come to my own informed conclusion on baptism in the early church I’m therefore required to read authors with another position or a more neutral / academic approach to the subject

[Daniel · Rating 3 out of 5]

It’s difficult to know how and what to rate this book. I’ve given it three stars (at the time of writing!) for the quality of writing was average.

However, the content and the extensive quotations are challenging to one who is inclined to a household baptist position. Based on the evidence presented in this book, it would be difficult to argue that the baptism of infants born to Christian households was normative in the early church (up until the fourth century), excepting emergency baptisms. Lots to think about!

[Zach Scheller · Rating 5 out of 5]

A thorough history of the historical writings of the early church on the subject of baptism. The interesting part is, despite the historical notion that the early church only believed in paedobaptism, the early church was actually, at best, mixed in their understanding. Many early church writings are exclusively about credobaptist process. Very interesting work to consider (especially considering one of the authors is supposedly a paedobaptist.)

[Ronnie Nichols · Rating 5 out of 5]

A historical account of baptism in the first four centuries of the Church using patristic writings to expose and dispel many speculations about this means of grace. The writing is easy to read and follow and will prove beneficial to both the Credo and Paedo Baptist alike. Thought provoking. I enjoyed it.

[Gabe Mira · Rating 5 out of 5]

A MUST read for every Baptist and Presbyterian and anyone else who debates over baptism should be for believers alone or for infants. This book shows that paedobaptism was sporadic in the 3rd century and gained more and more traction in the 4th.

Great read also for evenings since chapters are short.

[Nathan Burkhalter · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very thought provoking book - scratches the surface of early Christian thought.

[Donald Owens II · Rating 3 out of 5]

An overview, with extensive quotations, of the views on baptism of prominent churchmen in the first 400 years of the Church, attempting to prove that infant baptism was practically unknown at the beginning, and developed later as the church matured and worked out a more comprehensively consistent theology. Though seen by many Baptists as evidence of their position, this study does not actually draw any doctrinal conclusions.

In fact, I think it demonstrates things quite different: That the infant church had an infant theology, and had yet to work out many of the implications we've since understood. As such, they were plagued by manifold heresies. All theology is practical: since many "church fathers" quoted here believed baptism was not a sign and seal of faith, or a declaration of covenant membership, but a cleansing from sin, without which one could not be saved, and since they also denied original sin, most of them did not see it as a necessity for infants.

This book also demonstrates our human temptation to add to God's word, and invent new rituals. Thus the many weird practices in the early church, like prebaptismal exorcism and anointing, nude baptism, post-baptismal foot-washing, etc. The Church had not even learned to walk yet; why would we imitate their practice or their hermeneutic? The common desire to "return to primitive Christianity" is learned more from Rousseau than Christ. Even if the authors are right, and their quotes are truly representative, I don't assume that the practice of the infant Church has much relevance for us, except insofar as it accurately represents the plain teaching of Scripture.

[Brian Collins · Rating 4 out of 5]

In this book two South Africa paedobaptists survey the writings of the early church and conclude that credo baptism was the common practice of the early church until the fourth century. Though not as detailed as Everett Ferguson's survey, Stander and Louw do give a good survey of the evidence. They also often provide lengthier quotations of the primary sources than Ferguson does in his book of the same title.