Was infant baptism the standard in the early church?


I’m reading Henry Chadwick’s history The Early Church and there are some absolute gems which I’ll post for your reflection, edification and application.

Over the years I’ve had regular arguments with friends about infant baptism. Sooner or later we get round to debating its place in the early church, so I was interested to read this comment as Chadwick begins his section on the great Augustine of Hippo (b 354 AD) who converted to Christianity in 386 AD.

“In his Confessions, written some thirteen tears later, he described his personal quest in one of the most moving works of Christian prose. At his birth Monica [his mother] had had him signed with the cross and entered as a catechumen. (At this period it was still rather unusual for infants to be baptised.)” [emphasis added]

Augustine was baptised Easter 387AD. If it was unusual still in the 4th century then it strikes me as unlikely that the early church with either their oral traditions or on reading the scriptures thought infant baptism was the thing to do. If I ever start to feel argumentative on this blog, baptism will probably be the topic.

Just in case you were wondering, Chadwick himself was an Anglican clergyman so was no credo-baptist champion.


Discover more from The Simple Pastor

Enjoyed this? Subscribe to The Simple Pastor to get the latest posts sent to your email.

3 responses

  1. I don’t think Chadwick is correct about that. In his Homilies on Leviticus and Luke Origen calls infant baptism ‘customary’ as does Tertullian, both late 2nd century. Iraeneus, who was slightly earlier talks of infants being baptised. It seems that within a few generations of the Apostles, it was certainly normative within some Christian communities.

    Of course, this is an argument about history, not theology. I suspect that after a good few hundred years of debate that won’t get resolved 🙂

    1. Not sure you’re right about that (but then I wouldn’t be would I?), Tertullian himself was in favour of postponement so he described a practice he wasn’t wholly supportive of and where those that do speak of it they speak of it as sign of salvation (per the Catholics). But I’ll leave it to you to disagree with Anglicanism’s greatest early church historian 😉

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from The Simple Pastor

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading