Bavinck vs Kuyper: A Neo-Calvinist Duel

In the history of Reformed churches one discovers a curious insistence on baptizing an infant "as soon as feasible." Early in Reformation history fathers would present their infant children for baptism only days after their birth. This wasn't because of the persistence of a Roman Catholic theology of ex opere operato whereby baptism had some kind of power to forgive original sin. It was largely a protest against the Anabaptists for whom the baptism of infant children was delayed until they were "of age" and could profess faith on their own. Over time, other reasons arose for delaying baptism, some familial (e.g., so the mother could be present) and others financial (e.g., celebrating multiple baptisms at once was cheaper).  The Synod of Dort (1574) was the first assembly formally to make the judgment that baptism should be administered promptly after birth, and this was reaffirmed by the Synod of Dort (1618-1619). 

Abraham Kuyper (1837-1920) was not initially concerned about delayed baptisms, but over time he became a staunch proponent of early baptisms (vroegdoop). In his commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism (E Voto Dordraceno), he critiques those who postponed baptism for insisting that the mother should be present. If the government can demand that fathers submit a declaration of birth as soon as possible (often, the same day) and they comply, the church can similarly demand early baptisms. The mother's sentiments about being present for the baptism of her child pale in comparison with the value of baptism itself. The man is the head of his wife and he is the one addressed in the baptismal questions (though mothers were sometimes accommodated in these questions). 

Herman Bavinck (1854-1921), a close associate of Kuyper's, was critical of standard defenses of early baptisms. He was especially perturbed that the postponement of baptism was sometimes construed as a sin, that early baptism was made a mark of orthodoxy, and he argued that, if the mother was present for the baptism, she should not sit in the hallway and be ignored while the baptismal questions were asked. It is mistaken, Bavinck argued, to conclude that a woman's identity is so bound up in her husband's as to erase her individuality and distinctiveness. She is an independent person, with a unique role in the family. He noted how the traditional Reformed baptismal formulary mentioned parents, and how the mother would be especially formative in the child's education. He argued on the basis of 1 Cor.7:14 that the mother by herself could be the ground of her child's sanctity. It is sensible, Bavinck argued, to wait until the mother could be present for baptism. Fathers can be quite clumsy with little ones, often occasioning fear among mothers. 

What is striking about this debate is not simply the sharp difference between these close associates, but Bavinck's comparatively high esteem of women, apparent in other writings as well. 

Source: P.L. Voorburg's Doop en Kerk. De erkenning, door kerkelijke gemeenschappen, van deelders bediende doop, PhD Diss, (Kampen, 2007) 279-346.