Originally Posted by Zenas

Hypotheticals: (For Presbyterians!)

1. Parents have a child. 18 years later the parents convert and are Baptized. The child, though 18, is still under their authority and in their house. Should the child be Baptized?

2. Same facts, except change the child's age to 25. He is unmarried and still under his parents authority, technically.

3. Same facts as #1 except the 18 year-old is a well known fornicator and drunkard.

At what point do we require a profession of faith from the child an thus engage in credo-Baptism and at what point do we apply the ordinance to the child on the merit of him now being a child in a Covenant family and thus practice paedo-Baptism?

I have never myself thought through this before. Though I find the practice of paedo-Baptism consistent with a Covenantal view of Scripture, I can surmise no criterion to draw a bright-line between paedo and credo practice. At risk of being known as ignorant and unlearned, I leave it to you.