I want to think through this issue with two ideas in mind:
1. Only one theologian challenged infant baptism for 1,500 years
2. If you want some evidence for infant baptism in Church history you can have a field day reading St. Polycarp, Origen, St. Augustine, early Church Councils, writings in the catacombs...
You might ask, "Who was the knuckle-headed theologian who opposed infant baptism?"
Tertullian was the object of my intense study during my undergraduate thesis work. That being said, it is not surprising at all that he would want to keep baptism from children. To understand why, let's consider some of the background.
First, Tertullian was not a trained theologian. He was a trained lawyer and rhetorician. In Carthage, he would be heavily influenced by Stoic philosophy, particularly in how the soul is related to the body (see De Anima). It is this anthropology that informs his understanding of the sacrament of baptism and is the likely cause for both his dualism and his insistence on the simplicity of faith (he was also a physicalist).
Tertullian taught the orthodox belief that confessio, satisfacto, and contritio to be the essential components of any forgiveness granted for post-baptismal sins. However, these concepts for Tertullian functioned within a legal systematic context. Let's focus on the words "satisfacto" and "contritio" which correspond to a series of actions prescribed by a priest that would clear the conscious of a believer and the penance paid by the penitent (see De Paenitentia). Tertullian viewed baptism as the focal point of grace and the means by which complete holiness could be obtained, and even more, that satisfacto and contritio were long legal processes (lex tingendi), therefore, he encouraged Christians to postpone baptism as long as possible in an effort to limit the opportunity for losing grace upon the potential commitment of future sin.
As such, Tertullian can be understood as a fearful rigorist. A rigorist is basically anyone who holds that absolute extremes are necessary for salvation--meaning only those who obtain to that (extreme/rigorous) level of practice/belief will be saved. For example, Tertullian condemned women who married pagans, used makeup, hair dye, fancy clothes or jewelry. St. Augustine noticed this when studying Tertullian and was critical of the World--Church dualism prevalent in his writings.
The Take Away...
Tertullian shows us the dangers of rigorism. He would not only prescribe the delay of infant baptism, he would likely discourage you or I from being baptized! Yikes!
Even more, he does not make a compelling case for the Anabaptists. Imagine a baptismal line at a geriatrics facility--the Tertullian ideal. And may they all pray for an expedient and timely death!
That aside, what Tertullian does evidence is the basic Patristic notion that baptism is salvific. In addition, we must remember that the infusion of grace is as much an empowerment to a Godly life as it is a cleansing from sin--an idea less emphasized in Tertullian. In short, we can take away from Tertullian the basic assumption that baptism is salvific without getting caught up in his rigorist errors.
(Next up: Confession--Is It Against Christian Sensibilities?)
Secondary Literature:
Phillip S. Watson, Concept of Grace, London: Epworth Press, 75.
Chalres Norris Cochrane, Christianity and Classical Culture, NY: Oxford University Press, 223.
B.J. Kidd, A History of the Church, NY: Oxford University Press, 372.
Edward Fortman, The Theology of Man and Grace, Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Co, 107.
Arthur McGiffert, A History of Christian Thought, v.2, London: University of London Press, 20.
R.A. Markus, Saeculum: History and Society in the Theology of St. Augustine, London: Cambridge University Press, p.106.
