Author Thread: Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Admin


Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 02:52 PM

Infant Baptism in Early Church History

by Dennis Kastens



From the beginning of New Testament Christianity at the Feast of Pentecost (Acts 2: 38-39) to our time, unbroken and uninterrupted; the church has baptized babies. Entire households (Jewish, proselytes and Gentiles) were baptized by Christ�s original 12 Apostles (I Corinthians 1: 16; Acts 11: 14, 16: 15, 33, 18: 8) and that practice has continued with each generation.



The Early Church



Polycarp (69-155), a disciple of the Apostle John, was baptized as an infant. This enabled him to say at his martyrdom. "Eighty and six years have I served the Lord Christ" (Martyrdom of Polycarp 9: 3). Justin Martyr (100 - 166) of the next generation states about the year 150, "Many, both men and women, who have been Christ�s disciples since childhood, remain pure at the age of sixty or seventy years" (Apology 1: 15). Further, in his Dialog with Trypho the Jew, Justin Martyr states that Baptism is the circumcision of the New Testament.



Irenaeus (130 - 200), some 35 years later in 185, writes in Against Heresies II 22: 4 that Jesus "came to save all through means of Himself - all. I say, who through him are born again to God - infants and children, boys and youth, and old men."



Church Councils and Apologists



Similar expressions are found in succeeding generations by Origen (185 - 254) and Cyprian (215 - 258) who reflect the consensus voiced at the Council of Carthage in 254. The 66 bishops said: "We ought not hinder any person from Baptism and the grace of God..... especially infants. . . those newly born." Preceding this council, Origen wrote in his (Commentary on Romans 5: 9: "For this also it was that the church had from the Apostles a tradition to give baptism even to infants. For they to whom the divine mysteries were committed knew that there is in all persons a natural pollution of sin which must be done away by water and the Spirit."



Elsewhere Origen wrote in his Homily on Luke 14: "Infants are to be baptized for the remission of sins. Cyprian�s reply to a country bishop, Fidus, who wrote him regarding the Baptism of infants, is even more explicit. Should we wait until the eighth day as did the Jews in circumcision? No, the child should be baptized as soon as it is born (To Fidus 1: 2).



To prevent misunderstanding by rural bishops, perhaps not as well-schooled as other or even new to the faith, the Sixteenth Council of Carthage in 418 unequivocally stated: "If any man says that newborn children need not be baptized . . . let him be anathema."



Augustine



Augustine (354 - 430), writing about this time in De Genesi Ad Literam, X: 39, declares, "The custom of our mother church in baptizing infants must not be . . . accounted needless, nor believed to be other than a tradition of the apostles."



He further states, "If you wish to be a Christian, do not believe, nor say, nor teach, that infants who die before baptism can obtain the remission of original sin." And again, "Whoever says that even infants are vivified in Christ when they depart this life without participation in His sacrament (Baptism), both opposes the Apostolic preaching and condemns the whole church which hastens to baptize infants, because it unhesitatingly believes that otherwise the), cannot possibly be vivified in Christ."



Specific directions, with detailed instructions, for the baptizing of infants were given by bishops to pastors and deacons during this era of Christian history. In the year 517, seven bishops met in Gerona, Catelina, and framed 10 rules of discipline for the church in Spain. The fifth rule states that ". . . in case infants ill . . . if they were offered, to baptize them, even though it were the day that then, were born . . . " such was to be done (The History of Baptism by Robert Robinson, [London: Thomas Knott, 1790], p.269.).



The foregoing pattern, practiced in both East and West, remained customary in Christianity through the Dark and Middle Ages until modem times. Generally, the infant was baptized during the first week of life, but in cases of illness this took place on the day of birth. An example of this already comes from about 260 in North Africa in an inscription from Hadrumetum (Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres II, 4429-A):



Arisus in pace natus bixit supra scriptas VIIII



This Latin inscription indicates that a child who died nine hours after its birth was baptized. Such practice of Baptism within the first days of life. or on the day of birth in an emergency, remained for both Protestants, Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox.



The Witness of the Catacombs



The witness of the literary texts of the early church fathers, councils and apologists for the practice of infant Baptism in the first Christian centuries receives valuable confirmation from the catacombs and cemeteries of the Middle East, Africa and southern Europe, Below are epitaphs from the 200�s of small children who had been baptized. it is interesting to note that there are no Christian epitaphs in existence earlier than 200. As soon as the era of Christian Inscriptions begins, we find evidence for infant Baptism.



In that century there are attributes and symbols in tombstones inscriptions of little children which allows us to clearly infer we are dealing with baptized children. The following is as early as 200 or shortly thereafter:



In the second last line is the phrase Dei Serv(u)s which means slave of God followed by the Chi Rho symbol for Christ. The last line is the Greek ichtheos familiar as the "fish symbol" - an anagram for Jesus Christ God�s Son Savior. These words and symbols mark the one-year, two months, and four-day-old child as a baptized Christian.



From the Lateran Museum, also from the 200�s, is a Greek inscription that gives information about the religious status of the parents. It reads, "I, Zosimus, a believer from believers, lie here having lived 2 years, 1 month, 25 days."



Also from this era are headstones for children who received emergency baptism with ages ranging from 11 months to 12 years. Since the patristic sources of the third century, as those earlier, give us to understand that the children of Christian parents were baptized in infancy, we must conclude that these emergency baptisms were administered to children of non-Christians. The inscriptions themselves confirm this conclusion. In the Roman catacomb of Priscilla is reference to a private emergency baptism that was administered to the one-and-three-quarter-year-old Apronianus and enabled him to die as a believer. The inscription reads:



Dedicated to the departed Florentius made this inscription for his worthy son Apronianus who lived one year and nine months and five days. As he was truly loved by his grandmother and she knew that his death was imminent, she asked the church that he might depart from, the world as a believer.



The fact that it was the grandmother who urged the baptism makes it very probable that the father of the child, Florentius, was a pagan. This is confirmed by the formula in the first line which is pagan and not found on any other Christian epitaphs. We have thus in this inscription evidence for a missionary baptism administered to a dying non-Christian infant.



Sole Opponent - A Heretic



In the 1,500 years from the time of Christ to the Protestant Reformation, the only bonafide opponent to infant Baptism was Tertullian (160 - 215), bishop of Carthage, Africa. His superficial objection was to the unfair ability laid on godparents when the children of pagans joined the church, However, his real opposition was more fundamental. It was his view that sinfulness begins at the "puberty, of the soul,,, that is "about the fourteenth year of life" and "it drives man out of the paradise of innocence" (De Anima 38:2). This rules out the belief in original sin.



Tertullian�s stance, together with other unorthodox views, led him to embrace Montanism in 207. Montanism denied the total corruption and sinfulness of human nature. With its emphasis upon the supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit, it was the precursor to the modern Charismatic Movement.



Except for Tertullian�s heretical views, marking his departure from mainstream Christianity, the only other opposition to infant Baptism came during a brief period in the middle of the fourth century. The issue was the fear of post-Baptismal sin. This heretical view also denied Baptism to adults until their death-bed. It was not in reality a denial of infant baptism in and of itself In fact, the heresy encouraged the Baptism of infants when death seemed imminent, as it also did for adults.



The Anabaptists



Not until the 1520s did the Christian Church experience opposition specifically to infant Baptism. Under the influence of Thomas Muenzer and other fanatics who opposed both civil and religious authority, original sin and human concupiscence was denied until the "age of accountability." Although there is no basis in Scripture for this position. a considerable number of Swiss, German and Dutch embraced the Anabaptist cause. So offensive was this position that Roman Catholics, Lutherans and Reformed alike voiced strong warning and renunciation. It was considered a shameless affront to what had been practiced in each generation since Christ�s command in the Great Commission (Matthew 28: 18-20) to baptize all nations irrespective of age.



Regeneration for All Ages



Who would be so blind as to limit this expression of God�s grace and mercy to adolescents and adults and to exclude infants and children�s. If John the Baptizer could be filled with the Holy Spirit from his mother�s womb (Luke 1: 15), and if Jesus could say (Matt. 18: 6), "Whoever offends one of these little ones (Gk."toddlers") who believe in Me, it were better that he were drowned in the depth of the sea," and if the Apostle Peter could say on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2: 39), "The promise is unto you and to, your children, "what mere mortal dare declare so gracious an invitation to be invalid for infants, or forbid the continuance of the Baptism of infants for coming generations?



If the entire families and households of the Philippian Jailer, Lydia, Cornelius, Crispus and Stephanas of the New Testament were incorporated into the household of faith through Baptism, surely that testimony is immutable and established for all time.



Yes, we baptize babies. Unmistakably Scriptural proof substantiates that doctrine. Christian history, unbroken and uninterrupted. reflects such practice in each generation. Conscientious Christians do not delay but hasten with their children to Baptism that they may received the gift of salvation and regeneration and gratefully embrace the Apostle�s affirmation extended to those of all age groups: "For as many of you as have been baptized have put on Christ" (Galatians 3: 27).



Dennis Kastens is pastor of Peace Lutheran Church in St. Louis, Missouri.



Bible References



Acts 2: 38-39

38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off--for all whom the Lord our God will call."



1 Corinthians 1: 16

(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else.)



Acts 11: 14

He will bring you a message through which you and all your household will be saved.'



Acts 16: 15, 33

15 When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. "If you consider me a believer in the Lord," she said, "come and stay at my house." And she persuaded us. 33 At that hour of the night the jailer took them and washed their wounds; then immediately he and all his family were baptized.



Acts 18: 8

Crispus, the synagogue ruler, and his entire household believed in the Lord; and many of the Corinthians who heard him believed and were baptized.



Matthew 28: 18-20

18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."



Luke 1: 15

for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth.



Matthew 18: 6

But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.



Galatians 3: 27

for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 10:36 PM

Pixy, what is there to understand about babies and children going to heaven. Biblically, those who have repented of their sins and received Jesus Christ go to heaven. What sin or (s) has a baby or child committed? How can a bay or a child know in whom he/she can believe?NONE!



Therefore, the child is innocent and when they died where do the inocent go who have no sins?... To heaven this is based on scripture since we are told that no one with sin or sins will enter into heaven... therefore, what sin or sins has a child or baby committed when they die.



As I said the responsible age of accountibility can very well be based on the age of 12, the same age Jesus took responsibility for his behavior, this also depends on the maturity of the child to know right from wrong... even the law of the land recognizes the age of 12 as an age for accountability.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 10:42 PM

Mankind is completely depraved and corrupt. And there is NOTHING in the Bible that suggests otherwise. Through the bloodline of Adam, there are NONE who are innocent. From the moment sperm meets egg, a sinful person has come into being.



Sin is more than just actions... And even if it were just actions, I personally have never known a child who never engaged in any overt sin! Even a 3 year old can feel remorse and understand that a rule has been broken when he or she is naughty... People know the difference b/w right and wrong LONG before the age of 12.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 10:50 PM

Pixy you're speaking about people who know to do right from wrong. Tell me what baby and child do you know to do right from wrong. Isn't that's wht accountability means, knwoing to do the right thing and taking responsibility for ones behavior and conduct? Babies and child can't even feed themsleves not to speak of sinning.:ROFL: They are innocnet of SIN and SINS!



Salvation means what? To have a chnaged life by faith and receive what Christ did on the cross and know His resurrection, Salvation means to be delivered from soemthing, and saved from guilt of SINS and the penalty of of sin which id death. Jesus Christ died for all of this for babies and children and grown folks... therefore since babies and children have NOT commited sins they are safe!



I think if you go back and read from page 2 of this thread you will see where James and I have come to this stage of the discussion...

Post Reply

InHisHonor

View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 10:56 PM

ET I agree with you on infant baptism but I can't agree with you on the young ones being without sin. That is unbiblical.

Romans 3:22 This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

For ALL have sinned and fall short.

ALL have the sin of Adam. Except of course Jesus

Does a child lie? Of course! and that is breaking the ninth commandment.

Does a child always do what his parent tells him to do? Nope, and that would be breaking the fifth commandment.

Do they take things that aren't theirs? You bet they do, that is the eight commandment.

Does that mean if they don't come to Christ they go to hell? I don't believe it does. If a child can not truly understand what Jesus did on the cross I do not believe that God would send them to hell. David had the hope that his son would be with God and I do too.

The reason God ordered boy children to be circumcised was because it was part of the old covenant, Baptism is part of the new covenant.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 11:02 PM

A 3 year old child does not know the difference between right and wrong. A 3 year old child knows the response threaten REACTIONS of consequence of good and bad, stop and no. yes and ok, but not right and wrong.



A 3 year old is not expressing emotinions of guilt of doing some thing wrong when conforted, they are expressing emotions of being either good or bad, stop or no, yes or ok, out of response of the person who has conforted them. A 3 year old hase no sins, because they don't knwo what sin is nor do they know right form wrong, nor can they take responsibility for their own behavior or conduct. They only respond to threaten reaction of consequences for being good or bad... and only understand if they do this, this will happen, if they don't do this that will happen...

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 11:02 PM

@ET- Do you mean this that James said:

"*What is the age of accountability? How would I know.

I can find it in Scripture, lets just make one up.

Lets say 12 years old."

???

I kinda thought he was being sarcastic there w/ giving an age... I didn't really interpret that to be any kind of agreement w/ you. But I could be wrong.

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 11:04 PM

Christians accepted Infants Baptism from the very beginning and for 1500 years after.



There was no vast "Outcry" of "Blasphemy!".



It was only after the Protestant Revolution did all kinds of "New" ideas and interpretation prop up. As new church were created, debate ensued as to whether baptism was regenerated or symbolic...sprinkled or submerged...white wine or red?



Christ promised that His Church would remain...unchanged...till His Return.



Not a drop removed or added to what he left with The Apostles. The Whole Deposit of Faith would be Vouchsafed and held Reverently by His Church.



Christ never meant for us to rely solely on Sacred Scripture. There was so much more that He Taught His Disciples. Even Scripture states that �...the world could not hold all the books if Evrything Jesus said and did was written down.�



You can go back to just 50 years after Christ's Death and Resurrection and read what was written by The Church.



Think of how it was possible for The Church to decide which Books and Letters would go into The New Testament if they did not have The Truth to compare them to?



I don't expect these words to change anyone's mind, but just consider why you feel you know better then those that Heard The Word straight from The Apostles mouths? From those that went to their Deaths believing what they wrote.



How the dark one must be howling with glee as he watches us try to use our �superior brains� to refute The very Fathers of The Church and we bicker with each other using specious sophistry. Please...think.



Amen

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 11:08 PM

View Profile

History



Mattew 28:18-20;Is Water Baptism Taught Here?

Posted : 8 Jun, 2010 10:04 PM





This is something the Lord had been showing me for a few years about Matthew 28:18-20,this



is not a mandate for water Baptism;Acts 2:38 is.







Please look up the word Baptizing in Matthew 28:19,along with the two words "Teach"verse 19



and Teaching verse 20..







Then ask ABBA,what He is saying in this His Word..







Remember the context of this is about Discipleship.







Yeshua has commissioned these Jewish men to be going to the Nations/the Ethnos-Unclean ones.







They are to be making Disciples unto Yeshua the Jewish Messiah.







What the Lord shows you should be understood and taught by the Church,for this is not talking about water Baptism.







This is talking about immersing People into or with the Names Of GOD,as revealed in the Old Covenant.







To baptize a person in water,is a one time event.







To be baptizing/immersing believers into or with the names of GOD,is an on going continuous process,which requires that I have a deep understand of the Lord and His revealed names myslef.







Each name reveals His character,attitude,personality;Who He is and what He is like.







Baptism,in water is unto the Remission/Forgiveness/the release of sins from the sinner..



And in the name of Yeshua,ONLY:Please read Acts 2 :38







In Yeshua;

trucker/George

Post Reply



View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 11:09 PM

We could argue for hours about at what point a child understand things. And honestly, it will vary from child to child. So I don't believe there is a definitive point on when a child can fully comprehend such things.



But anyway... it doesn't matter, because we ALL have a sin nature, as I've said, and as InHisHonour said. Adults don't always realize when they've sinned either... Us "normal" adults... sociopaths... senile people... disabled people. We could on-and-on about all of the people and all of the cirucmstances in which someone may not realize that they've sinned. It still doesn't change the fact they are sinners.



The Bible is VERY clear that Jesus was the only sinless person.

Post Reply

InHisHonor

View Profile
History
Infant Baptism in Early Church History
Posted : 10 Jun, 2010 11:12 PM

Lixy I noticed you weren't looking at me when you said "normal" people. :goofball:

Post Reply

Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6