The fact is that infant baptism did not become a part of the Catholic church until the fourth century. And if you study early church history you will know that there was much disagreement within the church about infant baptism at this time all the way up to the Reformation.
I dare you to even attempt to find a single quote for an early Church Father disagreeing with infant baptism.
You said that infant baptism didn’t become a part of the Catholic Church until the fourth century. Here is a writing from 215, that specifically says to baptize infants.
Hippolytus - The Apostolic Tradition - “Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them”
And Origen had two in 248:
Homilies on Leviticus - “Every soul that is born into flesh is soiled by the filth of wickedness and sin. . . . In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous”
Commentaries on Romans - “The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit”
Also Cyprian of Carthage in 253 wrote:
Letters - “As to what pertains to the case of infants: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born”
Letters - “If, in the case of the worst sinners and those who formerly sinned much against God, when afterwards they believe, the remission of their sins is granted and no one is held back from baptism and grace, how much more, then, should an infant not be held back, who, having but recently been born, has done no sin, except that, born of the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of that old death from his first being born. For this very reason does he [an infant] approach more easily to receive the remission of sins: because the sins forgiven him are not his own but those of another”
I may not be the smartest guy in the world, but last I was taught 215, 248, and 253 are all BEFORE the 4th century.
There was ZERO debate if it was OK to baptize an infant until the Anabaptist broke off the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century. The ONLY debate was if you even had to wait till the 8th day like they had to with circumcision in the Old Testament.
