It Takes a Church to Baptize

It should be noted that this short book is written from an Anglican perspective on infant baptism from a former Credo Baptist (believer's baptism). It was specifically written as a sort of position paper on the Anglican stance and practice of infant baptism, though anyone interested in the subject matter can pick it up. Admittedly, I am a Credo Baptist and, probably to little surprise, I am still a Credo Baptist after reading this book. I still find the practice of believer's baptism to be most clear and consistent in the Scriptures, though historically and even theologically infant baptism is difficult to refute. Though I was not persuaded, I do have a greater appreciation for the covenant-family connection to infant baptism, which is often lacking in the practice of believer's baptism. In my opinion, as it seems to be the case with the majority of infant baptism advocates, McKnight admits that there is no explicit command in Scripture affirming infant baptism and assumes too much from his use of Scripture (i.e. finding what he wants to find). As a general principle of biblical interpretation, the unclear should be interpreted in light of the clear, and infant baptism is just not as clear cut as infant baptists like to think it is. There is much room for ambiguity in the circumcision argument, especially as in how far to take the analogy (i.e. Should we only baptize males?). Jesus as the archetypal baptism and John the Baptist as the archetypal baptizer also creates a difficulty (i.e. Why was Jesus baptized but none of the disciples?) God could easily have chosen the sprinkling of Jesus, but He chose immersion. The "household" argument does favor the infant baptist interpretation that there were most likely infants in a believer's household, but this is still speculation, regardless of how rational the infant baptism argument is. It is at best unwise to build a doctrinal practice on an argument from silence. Also, for as biblical as McKnight strives to be, he falls short on the mode of immersion by appealing to extra-biblical modes for his justification for sprinkling. For as picky as he seems to be about Scriptures that favor infant baptism, one would think that he might also be as fervent in Scriptures favoring believer's baptism (i.e. baptism by immersion). All in all, McKnight presents a challenging case for infant baptism. Perhaps the greatest strength of this small volume is its insistence on the family connection to baptism. That in itself might convince people. Either way, there should be grace offered on both sides. If there is one major thing all Paedo and Credo Baptists have in common, it's that both sides reject baptismal regeneration, and that is reason to be united rather than divided. I received this book free from NetGallery in exchange for an honest review.

For years, I thought infant baptism was wrong. Then, I heard a good sermon or two, and talked at length with my pastor, and I changed my mind but it was complicated. In this book, McKnight explains it well (I especially liked the way he broke down the words of the baptism service), but it took him over a hundred pages to do it. A great read.