Sample Baby Dedication

Presentation of (child's name)

1. Parents bring all their children forward to stage
1. Father, Mother and Infant stand center
2. Other children stand to piano side
2. Grandparents & Extended Family forward to stage—stand on organ side
3. Scripture Reading:  Pastor Jim

"Hear, O Israel:  The LORD our God, the LORD is one.  Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.  These commands that I give you today are to be upon your hearts.  Impress them on your children.  Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up.  Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads.  Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates" (Deut 6:4-9)

4. Vows:  By coming here today, is it your intention to swear to God before these many witnesses that you will raise (Child's name) in the nurture and admonition of the Lord?  If so, please answer "We do" to the following questions.

                                                              i.      Do you here this day recognize this child as the gift of God, and give heartfelt thanks for God's blessing?  We do.

                                                            ii.      Do you here this day dedicate this child to the Lord who gave him to you?  We do.

                                                          iii.      Do you here this day pledge that you will do your utmost to teach him God's Word and his way of life?  We do.

                                                          iv.      Do you here this day promise to give this child every possible benefit of the nurture that comes from belonging wholeheartedly to the people of God, the Church?  We do.

Do you here this day pledge to set the example before him in speech, in life, in love, in faith, and in purity?  We do

5. Commendation of grandparents and greatgrandparents
1. Scripture:  "I have been reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also" (2 Tim 1:5).
2. From generation to generation

                                                              i.      Older men and Older women to teach the younger ones

                                                            ii.      Thanksgiving for faithfulness for these many years

3. Vows for the Witnesses

(To the congregation) By being here this day, you too show your love and devotion to Mason Jude and to his parents.  Do you also promise to be faithful to him, and to model before him the way of the Lord?  If so, please answer, "We do."  We do.

6. Special Music:  (Vocalist who happens to be the grandmother sings while holding baby)
7. Scripture and Blessing Pronouncements
1. Participants chosen by parents comes up one at a time
2. Stands in center, pronounces scripture and blessing
3. Facing congregation, holding Baby

8. Dedication:  Pastor Jim
1. Holds baby
2. Assurances of God's love and care
3. Pastor's wish

                                                              i.      Scripture:  Matt 11:25-26, 28-30

                                                            ii.      To find peace in Jesus

9. Prayer of Dedication
10. Participants return to seats

Disciple Them First, Then Baptize Them

An important verse for Baptists in the debate over Believer’s and Infant Baptism is the Great Commission passage in Matt 28:16-20.

The syntax and order of the phrases are important, for discipling precedes baptizing:

(All authority in heaven and earth is given to Jesus)

Therefore

(going)

1) make disciples

2) baptizing them

3) teaching them to keep Jesus’ commandments.

Note that the priority is on making disciples. There is not much point in baptizing if we’ve not made disciples of them.

Infant baptizers disregard this formula. First, they baptize non-disciples. Second and third, they attempt to make the non-disciples into disciples and try to teach such non-disciples to keep Jesus’ commands.

Of course, the attempt to make the baptized non-disciples into disciples often fails so that the baptism is meaningless, probably counterproductive, and definitely unbiblical.

Baptist Primary Distinctives: Soul Competency and “Believers’ Church”

The Baptist movement was forged in an age when a kingdom’s subjects were required to belong to the monarch’s own religion, and in an age when that religion was being switched back and forth with every other new monarch. Moreover, the Baptist movement was forged in an age when infants were baptised into their parents’ religion. And finally, the Baptist movement was forged in an age when everyone belonged to the church. These cultural factors significantly influenced Baptist distinctives.

In broad categories, Baptist distinctives can be brought down to two urgencies. The first urgency has historically been known as Soul Competency. Soul competency arises out of the conviction that the Spirit dwells in every believer. To be sure, this was an emphasis in all the Reformation churches, providing the impetus for bypassing intermediaries such as priest, bishop, and pope for one’s access to God’s forgiveness of sin. However, Baptists thought more deeply and more consistently about the indwelling of the Spirit than other movements. This doctrine informed their polity in that they accepted “congregational governance,” refusing to accept the notion that a powerful bishop or powerful elder board should rule over the congregation by fiat; rather, they embraced the notion that the congregation itself was competent to make decisions about its own ministry. This also implied that Christians did not have to embrace the religion or theology of the Crown, resulting in the martyrdom of many Baptist preachers who languished under poor health conditions in jails throughout Britain in the 17th century, including, for example, John Bunyan. Thus, the concept of the separation of church and state historically was first espoused and cogently argued by Baptists, although the term has been much abused in recent American history and political life.

The second urgency was a view of the church as a “voluntary association.” That is to say, people were not members of the church on the basis of their parents’ decision to have them baptised as infants. Rather, inclusion in the church was on the basis of the individual’s decision to follow Jesus, and upon his profession of faith as he was immersed in the waters of baptism. Early Baptists recoiled at the notion of baptising unbelievers, which is precisely what happens when an infant is baptised.

These two urgencies had several practical outcomes in the local church. First, Baptist churches were countercultural; in a culture where everyone belonged to the official, State-sponsored church, Baptists withdrew and formed their own independent congregations. Secondly, Baptist churches often had a congregational intimacy and purity which was practically impossible with those churches which included into its membership the whole of society on the basis of infant baptism. Thus, while the term “Believers’ Church” ought to have been theologically redundant, it was a practical reality, given that membership in the “Cultural Church” did not even include a person’s own declaration of faith.

Regrettably, many Baptists today have no clue as to these two primary distinctives and urgencies.

Infant Baptism and Infant Communion?

This is an honest question: Why is it that people who are paedo-baptists (infant baptisers) don't invite non-believers to share in the Lord's Supper?

As a Baptist, I don't baptise infants simply because infants do not have a clear profession of faith--they are not believers. And I'm as certain as can be that non-believers should not be baptised.

Paedo-baptists have their own theological explanation as to why infants should be baptised, but at this point in my theological acuity, I still can't quite grasp their argument.

Being that as it may, I now wonder why paedo-baptists don't invite non-believers to share in communion. Or, to ask it another way, Why don't paedo-baptists put a speck of bread and a drop of juice into an infants mouth, much in the same way as they baptise the infant. Just as the infant might share in the death, burial and resurrection as portrayed in baptism, the infant might also share in the body and blood of Christ through communion.

Although the covenantal argument for infant baptism is too complex for me to really grasp, I would think that it could also be applied to infant communion. So, with this in mind, why don't paedo-baptists believe in infant communion.

My argument against infant communion is the same as my argument against infant baptism: non-believers shouldn't take communion or be baptised.