Short answer, no.
In the book Believer’s Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ, Steven A. McKinion suggests that Tertullian’s De Baptismo was “written in response to the innovative practice of infant baptism” (p. 173; emphasis mine). Unfortunately, such a statement reveals a reluctance to deal with Tertullian on his own terms, in his own context. Bryan Holstrom, author of Infant Baptism and the Silence of the New Testament, notes:
“ . . . such a statement fits perfectly with McKinion’s presupposition that believer’s baptism was the apostolic model. But there is just one little problem with such a statement: there isn’t a shred of evidence in Tertullian’s treatise that suggests he considered infant baptism to be an innovation! On the contrary, as historian Philip Schaff noted, “He meets it not as an innovation, but as a prevalent custom”. (p. 98)
If paedobaptism found no pedigree in the Apostles, Tertullian could have easily said so. That would have put the issue of infant baptism to bed once and for all. However, he doesn’t. That should probably tell us something.
Flicking through Tertullian’s short treatise on baptism, I stumbled upon an interesting quote which got me thinking. Perhaps those who quote him to support their credobaptist (‘believers only’ baptism) perspective should also be heartened by his objection to the unmarried and widows getting baptized as well. In his own words:
“For no less cause must the [baptism of the] unwedded also be deferred – in whom the ground of temptation is prepared, alike in such as never wedded by means of their maturity, and in the widowed by means of their freedom – until they either marry, or else be more fully strengthened for continence. If any understand the weighty import of baptism, they will fear its reception more than its delay [ . . . ].”
(De Baptismo, 18.10,11; emphasis mine)
Tertullian’s objections to infant baptism (as well as ‘unmarried’ and ‘widow’ baptism) stems from an early belief in the perils of sinning after baptism takes place. He was concerned, like many in the early church, for the welfare of the souls of those who sin after they are baptized. For this reason, he exhorts us to “fear its reception”.
I might suggest that those who find Tertullian’s reluctance to baptize infants as confirmation of their own views on baptism should re-think the actual reasons for his objections.
spes clara 