This series reviews Baptist Doctrines: Being an exposition, in a series of essays by representative Baptist Ministers, of the distinctive points of Baptist Faith and Practice, C.A. Jenkens, ed., St. Louis: Chancy R. Barns, 1882. Being unaware of the history behind Baptist Doctrines, and given the independent nature of Baptists generally, I cannot say how widely received it was when published. However, because the contributors were well-known Baptist leaders in their day, I expect that the doctrines espoused were widely accepted among late 19th century conservative, evangelical Baptists.

When possible, I will provide provide brief biographical information for the authors. See other posts in the Baptist Doctrines series here.



Born in the County of Londonderry, in the north of Ireland, November 8, 1826, William Cathcart was converted to Christ at an early age and baptized in 1846. Following his formal education (Latin, Greek, Literature & Theology), he was ordained pastor of the Baptist Church of Barnsley, near Sheffield, England, in 1850. Cathcart emigrated to the United States in 1853, eventually to become pastor of Second Baptist Church (Philadelphia) in 1857. A short biographical sketch can be found here.

Chapter 3: Infant Baptism Unscriptural

Rev. William Cathcart, D.D., Philadelphia, PA

That William Cathcart wastes no time in setting the stage for his assault on infant baptism can be seen in the biblical text chosen to introduce this essay:

So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. (Matthew 15:6 ESV)

Any view of baptism ignoring cognizant faith on the part of the one being baptized is, to these 19th century Baptist leaders, an attack against the veracity of God’s Word, and a denial of the explicit command of the triune God.

The baptism of the New Testament must be administered in the name of the Trinity, and in this respect it stands alone; no other act of obedience must be performed in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (p.70).

Having noted the unique nature of the baptismal formula – done in the name of the Triune God – Cathcart presses home what he sees as unavoidable implications – to baptize an infant was tantamount to nullifying the baptismal ordinance commanded by Christ.

Baptism is the most important duty a believer can perform; the Trinity has invested it with the weightiest sanctions; and it should receive the reverential obedience of the Saviour’s earthly family. Anything which has for its object to pervert the baptismal institution is a grevious affront to Jesus, and a great wrong to His people. The nullification of a gospel law aims a rebellious blow at the divine Founder of Christianity; and as He cannot appoint anything useless, the removal of a gospel ordinance is a calamity (p.70).

Cathcart travels a familiar road in establishing the view that infant baptism cannot be established by an appeal to Scripture. Along with a survey of pertinent biblical texts, he considers the teaching and practice of the first centuries of the Christian church.

He begins with the final words of Jesus prior to his ascension into heaven – those texts we know as the Great Commission.

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-20 ESV)

Following his death and resurrection, Jesus speaks with “all authority in heaven and on earth” as he commissions his disciples to go “make disciples of all nations, baptizing them” (emphasis mine). The proper subjects of baptism are those who have become disciples – followers – of Jesus Christ.

There is to be no baptism before instruction, unless we have a new revelation from heaven showing that the Saviour was mistaken when He commanded His apostles first to teach and then to baptize (p.71).

The gospel of Mark records the commission:

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:15-16 ESV)

Having briefly surveyed the two accounts of the Great Commission – the responsibility to proclaim the gospel message throughout the world – William Cathcart concludes:

The two forms of the commission are agreed in leaving no lurking place for infant baptism (p.73).

Having established the prerequisite for faith prior to baptism, Cathcart surveys a number of biblical texts which speak of household baptisms – texts used by paedobaptists to support their practice of infant baptism. He notes that none of the texts explicitly mention children, going as far as to say that the texts, when read carefully, would exclude baptizing infants. So certain is Cathcart of the Baptist position, he says:

If we had positive evidence that there was an infant in every one of the households, we would know from the commission that it was not baptized (p.79).

Not only do the two accounts of the Commission exclude infants – in both accounts the proper recipients were “disciples” and those who “believe”, Cathcart says that the biblical terms “household” and “family” do not require us to believe infants in those households were baptized.

… even the words “whole family,” or “household” are often used with a limitation that would justify such a conviction. A resident of Gloucester, Massachusetts, has several sons and some very young daughters, and the sons are all engaged with himself in fishing, and the neighbors freely tell you that the whole family are employed in fishing. Every one who hears the statement understands in a moment that the mother and little children are excepted. This use of the word household, or family, is common to all languages, and it occurs frequently in the Old Testament and in the New (pp.79-80).

Cathcart illustrate this point from Paul’s letter to Titus, warning him of false teachers infiltrating the congregation.

They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach. (Titus 1:11 ESV)

Pointing out that the word rendered “whole families” is also used for the household of Lydia (Acts 16:15) and the house of the Philippian Jailer (Acts 16:31) – in both cases families were baptized following expressed belief in Jesus Christ – Cathcart observes:

It is beyond doubt that unconscious infants were not in the mind of the inspired writer when he put Titus on his guard about deceitful talkers, whose tongues carried away whole houses from the simplicity of the gospel of Christ. There may have been infants in them, but the nature of Paul’s advice showed that he did not include them at that time in the “houses.” And so in the baptized households there may have been no children, or there may have been littles ones, – we can only entertain a supposition about it. The baptism of Christ required faith … it is absolutely certain that they baptized none but professed believers (p.80).

Through a brief survey of New Testament texts alluding to baptism, Cathcart shows that all require the presence of a cognizant faith, and none provide support for the baptism of an infant unable to express faith.

Cathcart quotes Dean Stanley (1815-1881) to show that the early centuries of the Christian Church did not support to practice of infant baptism.

In the Apostolic Age, and in the three centuries which followed, it is evident that, as a general rule, those who came to baptism came in full age; we find a few cases of the baptism of children; in the third century we find one case of the baptism of infants (p.94)

Dean Stanley, Cathcart notes, made a distinction between children and infants, and it isn’t until the 3rd century that infant baptism is found. Further, Cathcart says:

If Tertullian‘s tract, De Baptismo, was written four or five years before the end of the second century, we have evidence that the baptism of children, not infants, was discussed for the first time in Christian literature, and denounced by Tertullian in his orthodox days (emphasis author’s) (pp.94-95)

Further support for believer’s baptism is garnered from a quote from the early church father, Justin Martyr, in his Patrologia Græca, vol. vi. 240.

As many as are persuaded and believe that the things which we teach and declare are true, and promise that they are determined to live accordingly, are taught to pray to God, and to beseech Him with fasting to grant them remission for their sins, while we also pray and fast with them. We then lead them to a place where there is water … (p.96).

Reference is made to a unknown country bishop named Fidus who wrote Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, around A.D. 256, inquiring as to how early an infant could be baptized. The fact that a council of sixty-six bishops was required to rule on the matter seems to indicate that this was a novel question – a practice that was hardly well-known and received at the time.

Gradually the practice of infant baptism made its way into church practice, but even then, faith was always required of the one being baptized. This challenge, in the case of infant baptism, was answered by implementing sponsorship faith – an adult professed faith on behalf of the infant being baptized. How all this developed is briefly covered by Carthage as he moves through church history, referencing several church leaders, including John Wesley and John Calvin.

Cathcart concludes:

The believer’s baptism of the first four centuries, and of multitudes for centuries later, has been completely set aside by the baptism of in in all Christian communities, except Baptist churches (p.106).

It is fascinating to me that Cathcart thought he was witnessing the decline of infant baptism in his generation, believing that the day was coming when it would be completely uprooted.

If there is no such command in the Scriptures in express terms, nor any such practice, we can readily see … that infant baptism is not Scriptural, and that it is one of the plants which must be rooted up because our heavenly Father did not plant it. Nay, He is pulling it up by the roots very actively just now. The Evangelical churches of our country are evidently drawing nearer the Saviour’s ways and spirit, and in nothing is this more apparent than in the disuse of infant sprinkling in Pedobaptist churches. Twenty years ago, a reliable authority quoted by Professor Curtis says, “In one of the oldest (Congregational) churches in the State, there had not been, a few years since, an instance of infant baptism for seven preceding years. Last year there were seventy Congregational Churches in New Hampshire that reported no infant baptisms. This year ninety-six churches reported none. If this indifference continues, the ordinance will become extinct in the Congregational Churches.” Dr. Curtis calculated that less than a third of the Presbyterian children born in a year, at the time he published his work, were baptized, whereas a century ago they were all baptized; and that the infant rite was far less practiced among the Methodists.” There is every reason to believe that infant baptism is declining still, and will continue to be observed less and less, until this plant, which our heavenly Father hath not planted, disappears altogether, and the servants of Jehovah cease forever to make the commandment of God of no effect by their tradition, and unite in receiving one Lord, one faith, and one baptism (p.108).

These final words should give pause to all of us. What seemed obvious and inevitable to Cathcart in his day was obviously naïve and premature. Infant baptism has not disappeared from the Christian church.

This should serve to remind us that we live in a moment of time. Despite observable trends, we cannot predict the future with certainty – God is sovereign over history and we do well to remember that.

Our certainty must be rooted in the clear doctrines of Scripture, and in the matter of baptism, I gladly stand with William Cathcart and the generations of believers before and after him have practiced believer’s baptism as described and prescribed in the inspired and inerrant holy Word of God.