"Roman Catholics need to get rid of infant baptism" - WLC

I recently listened to a clip from Catholic apologist Trent Horn’s interview with his most admired Protestant apologist and theologian, Dr. William Lane Craig (WLC). Anyone in the apologetics field is familiar with Dr. Craig; he is the most articulate, persuasive, and renowned defender of the historical resurrection of Jesus, among other areas of Christian overlap.

Something he said in the interview really set off alarm bells in my head because I have noticed that a lot of low-information Catholics have been saying something similar. He argued that Catholics should get rid of infant baptism and switch to "believer's baptism" because too many people are "Catholic" in name only due to being baptized as babies without knowing anything about the Faith.

Here is how the dialogue went:

Dr. Craig: "I think Roman Catholics need to get rid of infant baptism. It seems to me that there is a fatal combination here that has had disastrous effects on the church."

Trent: "Well, it wouldn't just be Catholics. Many Protestants believe in infant baptism."

Dr. Craig: "Well, yeah, but today I'm talking to a Catholic theologian... The twin doctrines of baptismal regeneration and infant baptism, I think, result in a church which is filled with unregenerate non-Christians because they're trusting that in being baptized as an infant, they were regenerated by the Holy Spirit. If you simply hold to baptismal regeneration—that regeneration occurs at the moment of baptism the way Lutherans do—well, then you could hold to that without great harm if you only baptize believers. On the other hand, if you do hold to infant baptism like the Reformed do, but you don't regard that as the moment of regeneration, then again, the consequences won't be so bad.

But it's this combination of baptismal regeneration and infant baptism that I think results in a church that is filled with so-called 'cradle Catholics' who have been nominally Catholic from birth but who live like non-Christians because they're really unregenerate. And so it seems to me that it would be very easy for the Roman Catholic Church, without any great change of doctrine, to just say, 'We're not going to baptize infants anymore. We're going to adopt believer's baptism.'"

Dr. Craig uses the term "regeneration" to mean spiritual rebirth—the supernatural renewal of a person's whole being by the Holy Spirit. For him, the issue is whether someone who is changed ontologically through grace must be aware of it and assent to it as a believer to live a life of discipleship.

Trent Horn responded by making a case based on the historical precedent of infant baptism:

Trent: "I would say that is one... that's going to be non-negotiable from a Catholic perspective…The only opposition in the early church was people said, 'Well, you should wait eight days to baptize an infant because that's when circumcision was done,' and you had early writers saying, 'No, do it immediately. Children die all the time.'"

Dr. Craig: "Though some, remember, would delay as long as possible..."

Trent: "Yes."

Dr. Craig: "...so that their post-baptismal sins wouldn't need penance and so forth."

Trent: "Abusus non tollit usum (Abuse does not annul the proper use). Okay. So I would say that baptismal regeneration and infant baptism really do represent Christian teaching for fifteen hundred years. And I'd say that there's a strong pedigree to that."
The topic in the interview changed soon after this exchange.

The Core of the Debate

Dr. Craig is not wrong to point out the problem of a large number of Catholic adults who were baptized as infants but have become "people of the world," completely disassociated from the Faith. This reality has fueled modern attacks on infant baptism. Critics argue that a person should choose for themselves when they are personally convinced, claiming it is an injustice to impose a radical change in ontological identity on a baby without their consent.

The Catholic Church indeed teaches that baptism causes a profound ontological change—a permanent alteration to the very essence of a soul. It is an act of "sacramental regeneration" that fundamentally transforms the individual.

The question is: Should parents wait to baptize until their child asks for it to avoid imposing this change against their will and creating uninformed, nominal Catholics?

Trent’s response was weak and woefully incomplete. Wanting to keep the conversation friendly rather than turning it into a debate, he basically said, "Well, the Church has always done infant baptisms, so we should too." By relying solely on the historical argument, Trent frustrated his Catholic audience. He could have laid out a much stronger rebuttal by exploring the scriptural, ecclesial, personal, and even non-religious reasons for baptizing babies.

1. Scriptural Reasons for Infant Baptism

Jesus emphatically told Nicodemus that unless one is born of water and Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God (John 3:1-5). Jesus made our salvation contingent on the ritual of baptism, rendering it urgent—especially in a biblical culture with a very high infant mortality rate.

Furthermore, Saint Paul argued that baptism replaced circumcision:

"In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism..." (Colossians 2:11-12).

Circumcision was a drastic change to impose on a baby, yet no one thought of postponing it until the child became a teenager (and let's be honest, no teen boy in his right mind would ever ask for that). Parents simply understood they were duty-bound to follow God's commandment. To be a part of God’s family, this mark was an indispensable sign of entering the Mosaic covenant. Just as infants were not excluded from the Old Covenant, they are not excluded from the New Covenant.

Additionally, the Acts of the Apostles notes that entire households converted and were baptized together: "...and he was baptized at once, he and all his family" (Acts 16:33).

2. Ecclesial Reasons for Infant Baptism

Membership has its privileges. Baptism is the gateway to all other sacraments in the Catholic Church. Without it, a person cannot receive Jesus in the Eucharist. There would be no identity as an adopted child of God to be confirmed, rendering Confirmation pointless. Matrimony would be off-limits, and Reconciliation would be reduced to a simple blessing rather than a flow of sacramental grace.

Baptism initiates a child into a family full of blessings. Just as a loving parent does not wait for a child to reach the age of reason before feeding, clothing, or housing them, a Catholic parent provides the necessary spiritual blessings of God's family (sacraments). In baptism spiritual consent is passed to the parents as a matter of obligation. Delaying baptism is a dereliction of parental duty in the face of grave spiritual jeopardy. As one commentator noted, “If baptism regenerates, then we should give it to our children. If it doesn’t, then we shouldn’t bother with it at all.”

3. Personal Reasons for Infant Baptism

Every human being is called to know, love, and serve the God whose image they bear. Baptism has been part of God’s plan for your child from the beginning of time:

"He chose us in him, before the foundation of the world, to be holy and without blemish before him. In love he destined us for adoption to himself through Jesus Christ..." (Ephesians 1:4-5).

Waiting for an adult conversion before seeking baptism gets things backward. Baptismal grace equips us with supernatural faith and the capacity to know God. To expect an unbaptized adult to stumble into this spiritual world without grace is foolish. Just as a fish is naturally equipped with gills and fins to live underwater, a Christian must be transformed from the inside out to participate in the divine life and be protected from spiritual attack. Our natural birth occurred without our awareness or consent; likewise, our supernatural regeneration in baptism requires no initial personal consent.

Dr. Craig underestimates the power and necessity of baptismal grace. Baptism is not a mere symbolic ritual to demonstrate a pre-existing faith; it is the very means by which faith is born. It is the beginning of a new life—making it perfect for babies, who excel at starting anew. Since grace perfects nature, the child grows naturally and supernaturally within the family of God.

4. Non-Religious Reasons for Infant Baptism

While being labeled a "cultural Catholic" is usually pejorative, it has its benefits. Baptism reinforces identity within a multi-generational family tradition. It honors religious grandparents and builds supportive family bonds through godparents, who offer emotional security and emergency guardianship.

Furthermore, while baptism isn't always a prerequisite for Catholic schools, baptized children are more likely to be enrolled, opting out of secular public education and often benefiting from parish tuition discounts. Growing up in a parish community provides a lifelong foundation of friendships with like-minded families.

Baptism is Not Merely Cultural

These non-religious reasons are, on their own, insufficuent but they should not be discounted. We can think of them as icing on the cake. The truth is that baptism is an efficacious sacrament that modern society has stripped of its supernatural significance. The best thing you can do for your baby is have them baptized; the next best thing is to raise them in the Faith, saturating their lives with sacramental grace and supernatural love. This is what Dr. Craig failed to consider. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) explicitly addresses the problem of infant baptism lacking parental follow-up:

• "The faith required for Baptism is not a perfect and mature faith, but a beginning that is called to develop." (CCC 1253) 
• For "the grace of Baptism to unfold, the parents' help is important," alongside godparents and the parish community. (CCC 1255) Parents are expected to be the "first heralds" of the faith, introducing their children to prayer and the life of the Church from their tenderest years. (CCC 2225)

 Infant baptism is not the problem. Parental dereliction in forming and educating children is what creates disaffiliated, nominal Catholics. If the Catholic Faith is the air children breathe, it becomes an indispensable lifeline throughout their lives. Sanctification then becomes a lifelong process of incremental assent. Just like the Catholic martyrs, who did not ask to receive infant baptism or the Catholic faith, yet willingly died for both as adults.