What is the age limit in which a child can receive baptism based on the faith of the parent?

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


"Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Ken, my rule of thumb has tended to be when the child has acquired sufficient verbal skills to express their will. "I want a cracker" "Don't wanna go to bed" "Watch Blue's Clues", etc., then they are too old for infant baptism. This is a bit of a gray area, too old for paedo and too young for credo.

__________________
Lance G. Marshall
Pastor
Georgetown, Indiana

If this is a test, I believe the correct answer would be that age where the child would be able to make a credible profession of faith if called to do so.

As a practical matter, that's probably going to be about 11 years old, give or take a year, for most children.

Most cases I can recall of a non - infant child being baptised was in cases where the parents were joining after having gone to a previously credo church, and the child was baptized in connection with the parents joining, or the child was baptized when a younger sibling was (again, most frequently of parents who had previously been members of a credo church).

__________________
Edward
Deacon
PCA
Texas

Indifferentism and Rigorism

(Vern Poythress is a prof at Westminster TS)

__________________
Lynnie

PCA

Central NJ

Pardon me if I am wrong but I don't believe there is any Biblical evidence to support the idea of drawing a line when they are too young or old for Baptism. "And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway." (Acts 16:33)

__________________
Rev. Andy Eppard
Associate Minister
First Cumberland Presbyterian Church
Springfield, MO

and the ages of "he and all his" are?

The household of Lydia (Acts 16:15) could have been used to reveal the answer. Alas.

__________________
Bryan
Deacon, PCA
Tampa, FL

Yeah, I didn't realize there could be an age limit, inasmuch as the child is still under the head of the household, and the head of the household is a believer.

__________________
Ben Maas. . . . .Facebook
In college, attending First Presbyterian Church (PCUSA), Ada, OH, and
Belle Center Reformed Presbyterian Church (RPCNA), Belle Center, OH
When at home, attending Covenant Presbyterian Church (OPC), Mansfield, OH

“Prayer is as natural an expression of faith as breathing is of life.”
-Jonathan Edwards-

I hate to engage in casuistry, but your statement is best answered with an extreme situation.

A man and his wife become believers at the ripe young age of 62. They have a son who is pursuing his doctorate at whatever-U. He lives at home, since the school happens to be three blocks away, they have an unused in-law-suite, and it doesn't really make sense financially for him to live elsewhere. He's 27, and claims to be an agnostic.

Does he get baptized?

On the one hand, you've got the command to Abraham to circumcise even his household servants -- but not many of us would demand that our pool-guy be circumcised. Even in the OT, if someone would convert, he was to be circumcised. So there is a distinction between coming in of your own accord, and being brought in through your parents. Where's the line? At what point would you need to be brought in of your own accord?

My answer has already been given -- at the point at which he or she would be able to profess. I'm reluctant to give an age -- just as I don't like putting an age on communicant membership. I think this is an issue for the wisdom of elders. And, thankfully, for that calling, God equips.

__________________
Clark Brooking
Pastor
Living Hope Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Clarksville, MD

The ESV says "all his family". Household baptisms would include everyone living in one's house, under the leadership of the householder. It would include infants, small children who could speak intelligible words, and even slaves.

You are assuming there were such in his household. Scripture does not say.

What about your aging mother-in-law, who is now under your roof? Does she get baptized? What if she doesn't want to? (I hope you aren't going to say "cut her off", i.e. kill her)

-----Added 4/27/2009 at 09:17:51 EST-----

You just couldn't resist, huh?

I don't take offense at your errors
But this is a board for paedo's to answer

... My bad. Deleted my posts.

__________________
Andrew Thornquist My Photo Album
Calvinistic Baptist
Ukiah, California
To follow Christ was the best decision God made for me!

You better get out of town boy....there ain't room here for the both of us!

__________________
Ben Franks

I attend: Ketoctin Covenant Presbyterian Church (OPC)
in Purcellville, Virginia
I'm a member of: Heartland Community Church (PCA)
in Wichita, Kansas
I blog here (along with my Dad): http://rrfranks.blogspot.com/
And I'm a student here: www.phc.edu

"Remember the speeches we have spoken so often over our mead, when we raised boast on the bench, heroes in the hall, about hard fighting. Now may the man who is bold prove that he is."-Aelfwine at the Battle of Maldon

Anyone under the authority of the head of the household would be baptized. There would be different ages depending on different cultures...but for instance, in the U.S.A. the age of no longer being under your parents authority is 18. Therefore at 18 they would no longer be baptized as part of those under the head of the household.

__________________
Larry Bray
Elder - Reformed Presbyterian Church of Boothwyn, PCA
Boothwyn, PA - http://www.rpcb.org/
Free Online Reformed Seminary - http://www.tnars.net
-----------------------------------------------------
Christian ritual costs nothing and is worth nothing. True Christian religion costs all that we have and is worth everything.

I was baptized when I was about 15 yr old and I wasn't a Christian. My pastor said I was still under my mother's authority so it counted.

__________________
sarah
WI
OPC
My Pastor's Sermons: Mark Jenkins...he's awesome!!!

You'd baptize a 17 year old of normal mental capacity who hasn't/can't make a profession of faith?

Do you think that is in keeping with the WCF?

"IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one, or both, believing parents, are to be baptized"

970.

Theognome

__________________
Bill Cunningham
Covenant Reformed Church, URC
Kansas City
There are three kinds of people- those who can count, and those who can't.

We could assume Lydia and the jailer had sextuplets all under the age of 3 months.

But I'm ok with just reading it as household and leaving it at that.

Excellent point...i will have to pray about this.
Thanks for the correction.

Cool .. and what is the Greek word for household in Acts 16:33?

Well, upon looking it up, I'm not sure that my position doesn't need some correction downward, as well. Now I'm going to have to find time to try to research the original intent of the drafters.

.

Excuse me. I am making a point concerning household baptisms. If we are going to get technichal about this then I will make my point from Acts 16:15. Thanks for calling me on that. I think some good examples have been mad concerning this question. We don't want to get too hypothetical. What does the Scripture say, and what does it not? If we have any questions in between, then we must seriously pray about it and seek some godly counsel from more than one credible source The more real scenarios that may approach the hypothetical, the more we shoudl pray and use some common sense.

I know, sorry, I was joking a little with Turtle. But, seriously, until the contents of the household are defined, one cannot extrapolate from the word household.

The Bible is replete with descriptions of households, and we certainly know that many of them explicitly included "little ones," or babes in arms.

So, unless one has already decided that these households simply cannot, for some theological a priori, contain such persons, then the presumption favors the abandonment of any prejudgment as to what such a household might contain. The word must be accepted according to the general biblical usage, and not restricted. The whole authority structure is assumed by the language.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

Presumption seems to me to be a very thin rope upon which to suspend a doctrine of baptism (cf. Post #5 above).

Just so there is no confusion, I am a paedobaptist.

Just imagine the state of mind of the jailer who was barely saved from killing himself because he thought Paul and all the prisoners had fled after the earthquake. Can you imagine his shock and respect to Paul and Silas and his dramatic rush of emotion? The man went from a sword on his own neck to salvation in minutes. His wife was nearly a widow and his children orphans. Can you imagine the exuberance of the jailer as he brought all of his straightway to be baptized? I can just picture the jailer and his family pulling in the donkey, cats, pots, and pans, etc. while Paul and Silas grinned at their childlike zeal and enthusiasm and had to explain it again. ..Or maybe there weren't any almost-orphans.

I think this really demarcates an excellent distinction between living in a household and actually being under the sovereignty of the head of the household. It might be a hard age exactly to pinpoint, but my answer would be whenever the person is considered not to be under the head of the household.

Until then, even if the person is an incorrigible and reprobate seventeen-year-old, if he is under the care of the head of the household and attending church with his family, then I would say he gets baptized. He is part of the covenant community at that point. Baptism is supposed to more reflect a jurisdictional claim than a soteriological claim, anyway.

Do you really think that our practice is suspended on a presumption? I'm positive you don't.

All I'm pointing out is that the Bible gives us the definition of a household. We aren't interested after that with trying to explain why that definition has to be circumscribed. As far as we are concerned, it didn't have to be explained so by Luke, Paul, or anyone else.

I would not baptize one like that. I don't think Abraham circumcised any who refused the knife either. He just said, "Thanks for coming; here are some nice parting gifts..." and they were out of the covenant community, having "broken my covenant."

A person who is obviously a candidate for immediate, punitive discipline by the church is in no position to be admitted to the church. He may be living under that roof, but he is already a stiffened rebel in his heart. On the other hand, a meek, open-to-teaching, being under the authority of his parents with cheer--if his father will avouch for him then perhaps.

Unless there were extenuating circumstances, however, I would want him immediately to begin a communicant's class. He is mentally capable of handling the instruction. He needs, by that age (barring some retardation) to be prepared to "answer for himself" (John 9:21). And if that, why not simply put him through the same examination as the parents to begin with?

When I was typing this, I figured either I would be right and receive no answer or wrong and receive a right answer. I had a feeling some rebuke was coming. Thank you.

It's scenarios like this that still have me on the fence about paedobaptism. My husband is thoroughly convinced and I'm about 90% there, but this poses a huge problem for me. I can't find scripture to support NOT baptizing the 27 year old if he is in the household. I'm under the impression that baptism in the paedo view is not about personal profession, but rather membership in the church (I KNOW I'll be corrected if I'm wrong on this). Of course, on the face of it, it would be absurd to baptize an agnostic. *sigh* help.

-----Added 4/28/2009 at 06:50:32 EST-----

__________________
~Gloria G.~
Bride of Warren G.
Member of Trinity Presbyterian Church, PCA, Southeast Georgia

"Turn my eyes from looking at worthless things; and give me life in your ways." Psalm 119:37

__________________
Aaron Josh Wright
Deerbrook Baptist Church, Humble Tx
New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary

This is a Paedo Answers Forum.

Baptist's, please refrain from answering.

__________________

Norseman Moderator

R. Martin Snyder
1689er
http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/puritancovenanter/

"Our object should not be to have scripture on our side but to be on the side of scripture; and however dear any sentiment may have become by being long entertained, so soon as it is seen to be contrary to the Bible, we must be prepared to abandon it without hesitation."
William Symington

Click to get:Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

We must also keep in mind the context of our current culture versus the context of the culture during biblical times...and during the times of the Confession being written.

We look at splintered families and wonder how it all fits in...but when the Confession was drafted there were not as many problems within families as we see today.

It seems to me that the context of the Confession on the point of Baptism is taking for granted Christian parents having a baby. I don't think that it specifically addresses a family who later comes to faith in Christ and what to do with their teenagers.

Scripturally there may be more data in this regard...as has already been mentioned with slaves and such being circumcised.
Abraham may not have circumcised those who refused it...but he wouldn't keep them in his home either...so i'm not sure where that leaves the issue.

Sorry, I didn't realize there was a seperate forum for paeto answers only. I was thinking, earlier: "I wonder why a baptist started this and only prebyterians answered."

Gloria,
The scenario could confuse you, but did you notice this part of my post
Even in the OT, there is a distinction between paedo-circumcision and a convert being circumcised. So once you have accepted the connection between circumcision and baptism (for which, see my post here Clark H. Brooking: Colossians 2, Circumcision and Baptism) you should not be dissuaded of it by a challenging scenario. While in the OT, given that God's people was a nation, such a scenario would have been met with grave consequences for the agnostic son, the point I was making was that there was already a distinction in the OT between being born into the covenant and being converted to it. I'm sorry I brought more confusion than clarity.

I was only trying to respond to the original post, which, though cast in terms of age, with which I disagree, was raising what I thought to be a legitimate question.

When I was a credo I used to 'assume' there was enough water to immerse the Ethiopian in Acts 8 when the scripture does not say how much water there was.

__________________
Psa 55:16 As for me, I will call upon God; and the LORD shall save me.
Psa 55:17 Evening, and morning, and at noon, will I pray, and cry aloud: and he shall hear my voice.
James Farley
Husband of Melissa and father of Ann.
Members of Redeemer Church ARP, Blacksburg Va.
http://www.redeemerblacksburg.org/