It Takes a Church to Baptize: What the Bible Says about Infant Baptism

by Scot McKnight, Todd Hunter (Foreword), Gerald McDermott (Afterword)

The issue of baptism has troubled Protestants for centuries. Should infants be baptized before their faith is conscious, or does God command the baptism of babies whose parents have been baptized?Popular New Testament scholar Scot McKnight makes a biblical case for infant baptism, exploring its history, meaning, and practice and showing that infant baptism is the most historic Christian way of forming children into the faith. He explains that the church's practice of infant baptism developed straight from the Bible and argues that it must begin with the family and then extend to the church. Baptism is not just an individual profession of it takes a family and a church community to nurture a child into faith over time. McKnight explains infant baptism for readers coming from a tradition that baptizes adults only, and he counters criticisms that fail to consider the role of families in the formation of faith. The book includes a foreword by Todd Hunter and an afterword by Gerald McDermott.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Nonfiction, Biblical Studies, Christianity, Ecclesiology, Christian Living

147 pages, Kindle Edition

Published August 21, 2018

About the author

Scot McKnight is a recognized authority on the New Testament, early Christianity, and the historical Jesus. McKnight, author or editor of forty books, is the Professor of New Testament at Northern Seminary in Lombard, IL. Dr. McKnight has given interviews on radios across the nation, has appeared on television, and is regularly speaks at local churches, conferences, colleges, and seminaries in the USA and abroad. Dr. McKnight obtained his Ph.D. at the University of Nottingham (1986).

Reviews

[Shea Stacy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A perfectly fine book. Scot McKnight is an Anglican and writes a significant portion of this book examining the Anglican baptism service using the Book of Common Prayer. This part of the book was fine but not particularly helpful to my needs. But overall his foundational arguments are that salvation and baptism are fundamentally covenantal and part of the church and family. This is how God worked in the old testament and it is still how he works now. He argues that our view of conversion being an instantaneous occurrence is insufficient to account for the biblical evidence and that we should also see it as a process or journey. In that process God plants a seed in the child that must be watered and sun through repentance and faith.

For those examining the question of baptism this is not the most helpful book (simply because of the emphasis on Anglican approaches) but it is solid and short so worth the read.

[Misael Galdámez · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I first read Bonhoeffer's "The Cost of Discipleship" in 2015 or 2016, my understanding of baptism changed In the Cost of Discipleship, Bonhoeffer describes baptism as the entrance into the visible church, a grafting into the body of Christ. At that time, I mostly believed in baptism as someone's affirmation of faith instead of something happening ontologically.

So too with Scot McKnight's It Takes a Church to Baptize: What the Bible Says about Infant Baptism. This book presents a robust theology of baptism as union with God and the people of God. But what's more, this act is also a sacred reenactment of the birth, life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. It is primarily about what God is doing and what God has already done in Christ. It is a story we step into, one that is not primarily about us. I think Christians of all backgrounds—paedobaptist or not—would benefit from reading this book.

Having said that, I appreciate McKnight's honesty up front. He states that there are no such verses that say "baptize your infants" but that it's something perceived from scripture. I dig that kind of intellectual honesty (especially as a researcher). In some ways, I am yet to be convinced of infant baptism. But I am also convinced it is the historic practice of the church and more consistent with our understanding of God's covenants in Scripture.

[Emily Murray · Rating 5 out of 5]

Must read! Really explored all the questions I had about baptism in an approachable way

[Jared Greer · Rating 3 out of 5]

There is much to commend here. McKnight’s theology of baptism is generally solid; and he displays a loving, ecumenical spirit throughout. I appreciate his emphasis on baptismal liturgies; I believe there can be great value in prolonging baptismal services, and making them more instructive and worshipful. McKnight’s book also serves as a fine corrective to overly-individualistic soteriologies. However, his argument for paedobaptism is ultimately unconvincing, and it fails to critically engage with the best of credobaptist scholarship. I would recommend this to anyone who, like me, comes from a credobaptist tradition and wants to see how paedobaptists have reached their conclusions. It’s worth the time, especially considering how short of a read it is.

[Samuel Kassing · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was an enjoyable read. I could have down without all of the Anglican liturgy. But, I enjoyed McKnight’s irenic style and his even handed approach to the topic. He asks really good questions and does a good job pushing back on the individualistic spirit of our age. I also appreciated his explicit evangelical emphasis and commitment to the scriptures. This is a great entry book if you want to understand the covenant baptism view.

[Kelsey Ebling · Rating 5 out of 5]

I read this book in preparation for my daughter's baptism. it clearly explained all of what baptism represents and its place in biblical history. i recommend this book to anyone who is interested in learning more about infant baptism.

[Anna Snead · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5, this is a really good study on the value and purposes of baptism. This changed the way I interpreted baptisms role in our church and personal faith.

[Will · Rating 5 out of 5]

McKnight makes the definitive case for baptism—regardless of age or mental faculties—in an approachable, easy to understand way for the contemporary Protestant Christian. He is such a good teacher. Reminds me a little bit of how Tim Mackie explains things so well. The argument he makes for infant baptism is Biblical and historical, consistent and faithful. I hold to it wholeheartedly and, dare I say, I think you should too.

[Aris Slabaugh · Rating 5 out of 5]

In many ways, the theology and practices of the Anglican Church, where I’ve recently found a home, have fit like a glove. Though I’ve had a lot to learn, there has not been a lot I’ve had to truly wrestle with - I feel incredibly at home based on the things I feel that God has been teaching me these last several years.

The exception to that is infant baptism. Though my own baptism occurred in a church that baptizes infants (in fact, the church where I was baptized as an 8-year-old is now Anglican), I’ve been shaped almost exclusively in churches that emphasize believers’ baptism only. This is true to the extent that I considered being re-baptized in my early college years, after I’d started to take my faith walk more seriously (I wasn’t ultimately re-baptized). In considering the very real probability that I may raise children in the Anglican tradition, the issue of infant baptism has been one that I’ve felt the need to really get my hands around recently. Several resources have contributed to my persuasion toward infant baptism, but this book has really placed a cap on my confidence in the practice.

Scot McKnight, now an Anglican, comes from a similar evangelical background to mine, and like me, continues to hold many of what I consider to be the best impulses of evangelicalism as core to his faith. This is not a man who has thrown out the idea of the necessity of personal faith and a relationship with Christ (I’d argue that the evangelical fear that all, or at least most, liturgical and/or mainline Christians have thrown this out is a bit unfounded in general, but that’s another conversation). From this perspective, he builds a compelling and very Biblical case for infant baptism, pointing out how infant baptism parallels and fulfills circumcision in the old covenant and emphasizing the necessity and role of the church and family in the spiritual formation of a child.

There is much in this book that has convinced me that infant baptism is not only historically Christian and theologically robust, but perhaps the more Biblical practice. I would recommend it to anyone in my life who is concerned about the practice of infant baptism (and I’ll likely need to if I have children). I’ll leave us with one of many very valuable quotations from this book, taken from page 12 of my copy:

“But let this be an emphasis to keep in mind: we do not by our faith make ourselves worthy of baptism. Baptism is an act of God’s grace in us that we simply receive. Faith is the proper response to that grace. Baptism, whether infant or adult, needs to be seen for what the Bible says it is: the beginning of a journey that God initiates.” (Pg. 12)

[Steve Hailstone · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wow. Excellent read. My reason for purchasing this was to truly understand "Why infant baptism?" McKnight helps me get it. My follow up question, "What does this really mean?" wasn't really dealt with until the final pages, and then by quoting John Stott. Stott gives me a satisfactory answer, but I don't see that answer squaring completely with Article 27 in the Thirty-nine Articles, where applying what is said in the first paragraph to infants and children seem to be too strong. I wish the book had devoted more time to this aspect.

[Jon Beadle · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 stars! An excellent and generous defense of the most ancient baptismal practice. Many of the points he made were the very real moments that ended up shifting me towards infant-baptism as a legitimate practice or “possibility.” But now I’m fully in. I have been for a while now but I LOVE the way he puts things. Highly recommended to all of my evangelical friends seeking to go deeper into a more liturgical faith. And by “liturgical” I take Schmemann’s definition of the phrase: what we are together is what we can’t be on our own. Baptism is included in this definition.

[Derek DeMars · Rating 4 out of 5]

How does a world-famous professor at a Baptist seminary become convinced to support infant baptism and switch to Anglicanism? This book tells the story, and at the same time serves as an incredibly thorough, concise, and reader-friendly explanation of the logic of infant baptism. Considering his background, McKnight is the perfect voice to address this topic, and he does so with great sensitivity toward those who are predisposed to view his new stance with suspicion or antagonism. To such readers, McKnight essentially says, "Look, I get it. That was me. For decades. But ultimately the Bible changed my mind."

In It Takes a Church to Baptize, McKnight lays out a cogent case for infant baptism as the view that 1) makes the most sense in light of the covenant ideology of Scripture, especially the connections between circumcision and baptism (as seen most explicitly in Col 2:11-12); 2) makes the most sense in light of the intergenerational nature of the people of God/the church as a spiritual family, continuing the Jewish nature of the faith as one in which all family members are included whether consciously or by proxy (see the household baptisms in Acts); and 3) aligns with the consensus of the early church (by the second or at the latest the third century) that infant baptism was normative practice.

If you've already wrestled with the subject of infant baptism at length, chances are you've heard some or even all of these points before. But the strength of McKnight's book lies in his perspective as someone who is an expert in the sociological realities behind the New Testament texts and as one who has truly appreciated the force of his opponents' arguments (since they were once his own!). He makes his case with nuance and charity, but also with the verve and passion of one who really put in the hard work before making this position his own.

An added benefit is the clarity with which McKnight balances both the sacramental and spiritual power of baptism alongside of the need for personal conversion and sanctification in the ongoing life of the one baptized. Just how can we teach that baptism effects grace in the life of an infant while also insisting that they later need to personally exercise repentance and faith in order for their baptisms to have their full effect? McKnight offers the helpful image of baptism as being like planting a seed of new life in the baptized -- a seed which needs to be watered and nurtured by the faith of parents and a church community doing the hard work of discipleship, lest it wither and fail to bloom.

As someone who also had to wrestle with this topic before moving into the Anglican tradition, this was the balance I needed to see before I could change my mind, and McKnight's treatment is masterful. That alone was worth the price of the book, and his conclusions are very much in step with where my own prayerful study has led me.

Oh, and it's worth mentioning that in reply to the view that infant baptism produces too many shallow "Christians" who never live out their faith or think they're automatically saved because they did a ritual, McKnight helpfully points out that we could easily say the same about many adult baptisms! The solution is not to restrict baptism further but to promote discipleship more -- to which I heartily agree!

My only critique of the book is that I wish he had spent more time (even if just in the footnotes) addressing the counterarguments from credobaptist scholars to his exegesis of Colossians 2:11-12, 1 Corinthians 7:14, or the Acts passages. But it's apparent that McKnight wanted this to be a reader-friendly and non-technical book, and his arguments are well-explained enough to stand on their own, so such an omission is understandable.

All in all, this is an excellent and eminently readable treatment of a crucial topic in the life of the church, one which carries numerous benefits in its brief space (only 109 pages!). Not only is it a cogent apologetic for infant baptism, but it also doubles as a fine overview of the sacramental function of baptism and the beauty of the Anglican baptismal liturgy. Very recommended. (4.5 out of 5 stars.)

[Gailey · Rating 4 out of 5]

"The faith of the initial believer renders the rest of the household fit for baptism. Why? Because the family is the nucleus of God’s work in this world.”

Baptism is a subject matter I have been wrestling with for quite some time. For most of my youth, I believed infant baptism was a holdover from Roman Catholicism that was not initially practiced by the early church. I struggled to find any explicit mention of a child being accepted for baptism. What's more, if the children cannot make a profession of faith, what is the water actually signifying?

These arguments appeared watertight to me (pun intended). However, as with any debate, there is a tendency to read much about what you hold to be true and much less about what you don't. Books like "It Takes a Church to Baptize" highlight how important is to take time to understand someone else's perspective, and not just on baptism. Scot McKnight presents an extensive yet not overbearing case with love and genuine care for each of his readers.

This debate is complicated, complex, and easy to get lost in. So many people talk past each other and use words that often have different meanings depending on who you ask. It is appropriate then that this book is penned by an ex-Baptist, who for quite some time found himself arguing against infant baptism. He cuts through the strawmen and misrepresentations and gets to the heart of the issue by simply arguing the convincing arguments that helped change his mind.

Some of the main arguments that I found convincing were as follows:
-Biblical - I appreciate Scot's commitment to scripture. He is passionate to show the reader that, while there is no explicit mention of infants being baptised, there is nevertheless a convincing biblical case. Here he discusses the word "household" that is discussed multiple times alongside the command to get baptized. His explanation of 1 Corinthians 7 14 particularly made me consider the position in a new light. It is like it finally clicked with me.

-Historical - I think history is very important in this discussion. The connection between circumcision and baptism plays a big role here. However, Scot also shows that believers baptism was the practice of the early church, Christians would have raised concern with the shift to infant baptism. Silence in both scripture and early Christian writings is revealing.

-Individualism - Scott noted that there is a likely connection between modern individualism and the attraction to believer's baptism. He contrasts this with the importance of baptism as a church event and connects strongly to the bible's focus on the family and spiritual nurturing.

- Power and impact - This was an interesting point I never considered. Scot points out that believers' baptism is symbolic, but baptism should be more than that. Infant baptism bestows covenant rights and gifts to the child and unites them with Christ. In this sense, there is much more involved in the latter. I'm unsure I really understand this entirely, but it was a point worth considering.

- Not of choice but of grace - Scot is quick to point out that, while BB focuses on the individual's choice, IB focuses on what God has done and is doing in the life of those in the covenant. I can imagine this being a point of contention with Baptists, but there is definitely something here.

This book is very evangelical in nature. It is also very short and concise, making it an approachable option for curious baptists or uncertain Presbyterians. I should note that Scot wears his Anglicanism on his sleeve, and the book does seem to be directed at those in that congregation. However, the book is careful not to alienate its audience.

I personally really appreciated this book. It has greatly helped me as I try to decide what is the truth. Pick it up and make a decision for yourself.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

McKnight does a great job of exploring the controversy of Infant Baptism and Believers Baptism. He does this with a tactfulness and respect that any theologian or pastor should emulate.

The second thing I think he accomplishes is showing how the issue is not infant vs believer baptism, but rather the debate is more over the nature of faith, eternal security, and sanctification. In addition, words like household, baptize, and circumcision will be interpreted differently based on the theology one has been raised with; in this sense both infant baptism advocates and believers baptism advocates tacitly affirm the truth that tradition may inform our interpretation more than we would like to admit.

That said, the advantage that McKnight has is that he used to hold to believers baptism and this book gives his reason for why he changed his interpretation of the debated terms mentioned above. I think he successfully demonstrates that Christians who baptize infants are not sinning or unwarranted in their interpretation. In addition, we know that Jesus blessed infants when they brought the children to him. So the concept of pastoral or priestly blessing of infants is not outside the bounds of scripture.

However, I don’t think he makes the case that baptism is regenerative as Anglican Liturgy explicitly states. That said, I think I agree with his belief that there is the beginning of a redemptive work in the child that the child can choose to reject or accept by faith. But this doesn’t seem to be what the Anglican Liturgy is advocating when they baptize infants.

Regardless of these minor inconsistencies, which it would be hard to even label as inconsistent, I would highly recommend this book. First as a primer on respectful dialog when opposing different denominations, as well as the level of citation a work can have even though the page count may be low; McKnight even provides the reader with recommendations of top books for Believers Baptism - this speaks of a confidence and humility that we rarely see in intramural debates between opposing denominations.

I hope you read it and share your thoughts on this book as well. God bless.

[Mr. Perry · Rating 4 out of 5]

(trying to be more conservative about giving out 5 star reviews so I "really liked it" will suffice for this book, which equates to 4 stars)

If you're interested in becoming Anglican and are coming from a Baptist/Baptistic background, this is a great book to check out regarding arguments used in support of infant baptism (McKnight is part of the ACNA). As a Presbyterian, the overwhelming majority of the arguments felt quite familiar to me and leveraged what I'm used to interacting with regarding how we define "the church visible", a robust covenant theology framework, and viewing salvation and its' implications on ones' household as opposed to just focusing on the individual. There's emphasis on the family as a result (Baptists who dedicate their children to God...you're almost there!). Included are a bunch of historical references in early church history in support of infant baptism as well. It was enlightening to read and learn a bit about what the 39 Articles have to say about baptism coming from my familiarity with the WCF and the Augsburg Confession.

Is there a book like this for Methodist support for infant baptism?

[Deon Strydom · Rating 5 out of 5]

Clearly stated

The main thesis is summarised by the author as this: "baptism is not what we do but something that God does to us." And that says it all!
Clearly stated and referenced from scripture
Well worth the read!

[Zach Miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

I thought this book started pretty slow, but really picked up in chapters 4 & 5 where he explains what happens in baptism and gives his defense of infant baptism. Those chapters made the book worth the read.

[Dalen · Rating 4 out of 5]

A short book that lays out its arguments in an easy to read and understandable way. It is specifically tailored to the Anglican view rather than a Presbyterian or Roman Catholic one, but hits on many of the same points that I’ve heard from the Presbyterian and Dutch Reformed churches. It is not an academic work, but one intended to help laypeople, particularly those coming from a Baptist background. I don’t know that I’ll ever read something that will give me 100% certainty that I know the right answer to the baptism question, but this was helpful to read.

[Ashley Hoss · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is by far the most ecumenical book on baptism I’ve ever read. I appreciate McKnight’s charitable tone.

[Luke · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have been thinking about this topic for years, but this is the first book I have actually read dedicated to it. I liked it. I am squarely in the intended audience (grew up Baptist, now considering Anglicanism). I appreciated the generosity towards other viewpoints and the humility of "I might be wrong" while still committing to his argument. I also appreciated that he referenced other authors throughout which I can now follow up with for more on the topic.

[Jamie Sestak · Rating 5 out of 5]

An incredible book! It was theologically challenging, yet grounded in Scripture, and beautifully illuminates baptism as a holy sacrament given through God's grace, not merely a symbol that believers perform for each other.

[Rocky Woolery · Rating 5 out of 5]

I very much appreciate the view of infant baptism from one who previously accepted beginner's baptism. Even though in the end I do not agree with all of Scot's conclusions, I found much that I would agree with him on in contrast to the beliefs of many who practice beginner's baptism. In particular that baptism is an act that engages the Spirit of God to bring us into a relationship with Himself. I would also agree that baptism needs to be seen as a church family related matter, I believe it takes a church to help mature a new follower of Christ.

As with any point of view that is different from that which a reader holds Scot's presentation of the Anglican view of infant baptism caused me to consider my beliefs and why I hold them. It also gave me a new respect for the beliefs of others who do not see this issue as I do.

[Joshua · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lots of personal anecdotes. Not a pure defense of the doctrine. Wouldn't recommend for someone seeking a rigorous argument, but for someone already convinced it's fine - there are much more convincing defenses out there. I read mainly for understanding of how Anglicans view the sacrament.

[Tim · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a well-written, thoughtful essay on so-called "infant baptism." Even though McKnight included some helpful thoughts, I do not believe that he made his case for sprinkling. For this reason (even though it is a good read), I only gave it three-stars.

[Jake Owen · Rating 5 out of 5]

Am I a baby sprinkler now? Maybe. Who knows!

[Jaime K · Rating 5 out of 5]

McKnight looks at infant baptism through an Anglican lens, though makes sure to point out similarities and differences in other Christian denominations. He used to scoff at infant baptism, but a closer look at the Bible as well as learning more about the history of infant baptism caused him to accept it more. That does not mean, however, that he finds those who believe in adult faith-based baptism to be wrong.

He is a very understanding man and looks at infant baptism through six lenses:
1. Family--Church as well as nuclear, from where faith formation originates
2. Bible--and its support for infant baptism. While not all rituals for infants are explicit in the New Testament (though they are more so in the OT), there is an implicit desire for infant baptism. The Bible connects ritual with salvation.
3. Gospel--which dips a person in the life of Jesus
4. Conversion--Repent and believe; be baptized to learn to grow and trust in God with constant daily conversion. One of the things that hooked me on to this book is McKnight’s reminder that conversion is a lifelong process.
5. Debate--including some historical context for the debate for/against infant baptism, particularly between denominations.
6. Heritage--not only within the church [as a whole] but also within the Bible.

McKnight argues that since baptism is a public church event that connects the baptized with church, family, and faith, an infant is more than welcomed to be baptized. Instead of an adult saying they will grow, parents and/or godparents say that they will help the child grow and learn of God. It’s the integration of individual into a family. In the greatest comparison I’ve heard, McKnight equates infant baptism to an infant born in a country immediately becoming a citizen, with the notion that they will be taught by both family and an educational context of what it means to be a citizen.
We need to recognize baptism as a communal event, not an individualistic one, in order to recognize the importance of any baptism, let alone that of infants.

I really like how he talks about the downfalls of decentralizing the family.

There are three themes of Baptism:
~ Union with Christ--Victory was already won. Baptism allows for new life through a union with Christ (much as circumcision provided a union with God)
~ Spirit & Church reception--One Baptism transfers a person into the church-adult or otherwise.
~ Forgiveness & redemption--It is a seal that confirms God’s redeeming grace on a person; a seed of grace that even infants can receive.

Baptism is not about a person’s faith, but about God’s grace acting upon that person. By that argument alone, infants should be baptized.

However, McKnight also looks into the Biblical aspects of infant communion with God. Religion has almost always been inherited, so when Scripture talks of a person’s HOUSEHOLD, it is not only talking about adults, but EVERYONE. Not just family members, but even slaves. The household, from Abraham (and circumcision) to the early Christians (in the Bible and in original Tradition), meant that the faith of one (namely the father) meant the faith of all.

Circumcision is a birthright Rite; therefore Baptism is as well.
Baptism is a Sacrament, NOT a symbol.

I don’t think I knew before now that there were options other than full immersion for baptism, even in the early Church.

Past behavior towards people who solely believe in adult/believer’s baptism was atrocious.
Christian history is awful.

[Carl Jenkins · Rating 4 out of 5]

I grew up Methodist and was sprinkled as an infant. At the age of 17 I joined the Churches of Christ and was immersed in water as an act of believer's baptism. I also love Scot McKnight and his books and so this one quickly caught my interest.

McKnight's approach to arguing in favor of infant baptism is unique for sure. As an Anglican he guides the reader through the Common Book of Prayer as if they were attending worship with him on a Sunday that a baptism was happening. The reader is able to take a deeper look into the liturgy and have a better understanding of why it is approached the way that it is.

Near the end McKnight breaks from this in order to write about what the Bible teaches about baptism, and then to work to provide a scriptural case for infant baptism before returning to the liturgical baptism.

Almost thou persuadest me, Scot. Almost. Scot focused primarily on covenants and the history of God bringing in not just one who receives the sign of the covenant (shown through circumcision) but how other males were also circumcised based on the faith of the patriarch whether slave or son, adult or infant. I think he makes a good point, and it's always bothered me how many Christians have raised their children as kids that have faith, participate in worship, confess, repent, and pray for forgiveness, and suddenly we tell them they need to get baptized and give their lives to Christ as if their lives so far have been a sham faith.

Perhaps I'm just not "there" yet, but I wasn't convinced that baptism is equated with circumcision to the extent that it copies the act of bringing people into God's family based on the faith of a family leader. The argument that "households" would most likely have kids and so we should assume they infants were baptized is more of a leap for me than anything, and his use of 1 Corinthians 7:14 to argue infant baptism seems very out of context.

That being said, I still highly recommend it. It prompted me to really consider what we do as a church that practices believers baptism to show that we care deeply about our children and helping them find their place within the family of God as early as possible.

*I received a free copy from Netgalley for my honest review*

[Robert D. Cornwall · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was born and baptized in the Episcopal Church, and later confirmed. In high school I moved to a Pentecostal church, and decided at camp to get rebaptized. So, I've done both. I have read widely on the subject as a result, and while I understand the reasons for adopting infant baptism, in the end I've found the reasons for believer's baptism by immersion to be more clearly rooted in scripture.

Scot McKnight is a New Testament scholar, a position in the church I respect. In this book McKnight, who started out life as a Baptist, defends infant baptism, arguing that while not explicitly stated in the New Testament references to circumcision and household baptisms imply infants and children are included. He may very well be correct, but then I still wonder why we don't see any references to inclusion of children until the third century. It is possible that everyone assumes that once the father decides everyone in the household gets baptized, and so there is no need for any directive. Still, you would think there would be something prior to Hippolytus.

In any case this is a brief read -- I read it through in a couple of hours. It covers the bases. So, if you're wanting to read a solid defense of infant baptism with a strong emphasis on the family, this will be your book. As for me, I will stay with believer baptism.

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

This books has been on my reading list for a long time because of the author. Not only have I been a fan of Scot McKnight's books, but I found him to be a uniquely apt author to write on this topic as McKnight was raised Anabaptist only later finding his way into the Anglican church.

While I initially dove into this book for McKnight's perspective on infant baptism, I quickly found that this was really a secondary issue (to be sure, it does get a full two chapters dedicated to it) to McKnight's main point: baptism is a community affair. McKnight emphasizes the ideas that we are baptized into a Covenant community (not merely an individualistic statement) and that this is a work of God in us (not a work of ourselves). He frames his argument by taking the reader through the Anglican liturgy on Baptism, because in Anglicanism belief is expressed through worship (it even has a Latin phrase: lex orandi, lex credendi).

Regardless of whether I am convinced of infant Baptism (McKnight does make a decent argument that I'll have to chew on in addition to other arguments I've read since then), "It take a church to Baptize" has helped me gain a deeper appreciation of Baptism and its meaning.

Recommended for anyone interested in deepening their understanding of Baptism or learning a little bit about the Anglican faith.

[Ayekah · Rating 3 out of 5]

This short read is a exposition on infant baptism citing what the author pulls in as the biblical foundation for. While doing so he's also wound this around the sacrament of baptism as held in the anglican community, which I am well familiar with. The book is well put together in most respects and yet I wanted something more, I point to the title It Takes A Church. That is does. When we stand to witness the baptism of not just infants but any one else, the church family and community, two very important factors that we hold to be be also promise that we collectively assume this role as well.
It does indeed take a church family/ community to uphold this covenant of faith. I absolutely understand what the author was trying to put forth, however the last quarter of the book took a curve that could have been placed earlier or not at all. It is by all means a very readable, easy to understand book, it does have somewhat of a scholarly approach but again easy straightforward read. It is a great book for those seeking to understand the broader view of baptism narrowed down.
I recommend it for any reader looking for a broader understanding or searching their own beliefs.

*I received an arc from NetGalley and publisher for an honest review*