Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 5
The conversation frames infant baptism as “the root of the problem” (Sattler calling it “the chief abomination of the pope”) because it changes how the church is formed; in what concrete ways does a “born into it/citizen-church” model still survive in our churches even when we don’t practice infant baptism?
Another way to ask: Even without infant baptism, how do churches today still act like people are “born into” the church or are Christians mainly because they belong to a culture or nation?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript suggests “citizen-church” instincts survive when belonging is treated as automatic (by culture, family, or politics) rather than formed by conscious repentance, baptism, and a committed community with a shared way of life.
- Dean says the church should be formed by “preaching the gospel… calling them to repentance and conversion… and then through baptism, you form a special community” with “a lifestyle that goes with this.”
- He cites Schleitheim: Sattler says “the chief abomination of the pope was infant baptism… That’s the root of the problem,” and “the Protestants didn’t change it.”
- They describe the old model: church and state were intertwined; you were “baptized as a baby into the state,” making church membership part of society.
- The host notes infant baptism functioned like being “in the record… liable for tax and tithe… you’re a citizen,” and Dean agrees it was “almost like you’re a citizen paying your share.”
- Dean applies it to today: he’s “brokenhearted” when Christians (even conservative Anabaptists) trade “Jesus-following kingdom building” for trust in “the state and politics.”