在馬丁路德發起宗教改革剛滿五百年之際，本文就嬰兒洗禮的問題，聆聽二十世紀的卡爾．巴特與十六世紀主要的改教領袖們對話。
本文要問，五世紀前的重洗派反對嬰兒洗禮的原因是什麼？改教領袖們為何支持嬰兒洗禮？他們在神學上的理由是什麼？巴特又為何反對嬰兒洗禮？他如何回應改教領袖們的神學論據？
本文首先檢視改教時期重洗運動廢除嬰兒洗禮的主張，並列舉慈運理、路德及加爾文等主要改教領袖們之堅持嬰兒洗禮的理由。本文主要部份說明卡爾巴特的洗禮觀及他對嬰兒洗禮的批判，並留意檢視他對主要改教領袖們的回應。本文說明他將洗禮分為聖靈洗與水洗兩方面。這兩方面分別對應於上帝的工作與人的回應。巴特之反對嬰兒洗禮，是因為水禮的意義在於受洗者因信上帝而來之對上帝命令的順服與對上帝應許的盼望。但嬰兒卻不能以行動表達此信仰和順服的行動，所以為嬰兒施洗就失去了意義。
本文也進一步說明巴特反對嬰兒洗禮的根本原因是反對將洗禮視為聖禮，就是將洗禮視為是上帝的作為。最後，本文說明巴特如何各別地批判慈運理、路德及加爾文對嬰兒洗禮的支持。

On the occasion when the world had just commemorated the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, this article intends to review the problem of infant baptism, by hearing the mainstream reformers of the 16th century on the one side and Karl Barth of the 20th century on the other side. This article asks, what caused the Anabaptists to reject infant baptism? Why did the mainstream reformers support infant baptism, and what were their reasons? Why did Karl Barth reject infant baptism too, and how did he response to the reformers’ theological arguments for it? This article first reviews the reasons for abolishing infant baptism by the Anabaptists. Then reasons for supporting infant baptism by Zwingli, Luther, and Calvin are analyzed. The main part of this article is devoted to explain Karl Barth’s view of baptism and his critique of infant baptism. Particular attention is laid on his responses to the reformers. His division of baptism into two sides is explained, namely baptism in the Holy Spirit and that in water. The former corresponds to the divine work, and the later to the human response. Barth rejected infant baptism because the meaning of baptism by water is the obedience of the baptized believer toward God’s commands, and the believer’s hope for God’s promise. But the infant cannot actively express this obedience and hope, so it is meaningless to baptize an infant. The more fundamental reason of Barth’s rejection of infant baptism is that it is based on the sacramental view of baptism which sees baptism as a direct divine work instead of a human responsive action. Finally, this article presents Barth’s criticism of Zwingli, Luther, and Calvin’s arguments for infant baptism.