Category: Aland 1961 - Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry

Conclusion - Did the Early Church Baptize Infants?

12/17/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
12/17/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Eleven: Postscript: Infant Baptism Today?" In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 112-116). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

Aland attempts to evaluate current practices of infant baptism based on evidence from early Christianity. In the normal schemata, if the New Testament and ancient church supports a practice of infant baptism, it is necessary today. If the New Testament and ancient church does not describe infant baptism, only adult baptism should be practiced (Aland 1961, p. 112). Unfortunately, these may not be adequate categories. While the New Testament describes the purpose of baptism, it never provides instruction about the mode or timing of baptism (Aland 1961, p. 113). Aland finds a New Testament and early Christian concept of infants being holy if they are born of Chrsitian parents. Infant baptism seems to have been applied in conjunction with the conclusion that infants bore original sin. The grace of baptism should not be refused to any who bear sin.
The third interpretive option thus emerges. Infant baptism cannot be demonstrated clearly until about 200, but is expected to be continued today (Aland 1961, p. 113). The continuance of practices such as baptism and communion, even though they may have taken some time to reach their current form, remain appropriate (Aland 1961, p. 114). The theological understanding of sin and the nature of baptism militates for the continued practice of baptising infants. Aland quotes Luther's argument from To Two Clergymen about Rebaptism (WA 26, 152-173) at some length (Aland 1961, pp. 114-115). The force of the argument is that baptism and its effects must remain God's work rather than ours. This implies that it is perfectly reasonable for it to be applied to infants as those who bear sin requiring cleansing. For this reason, then, Aland endorses infant baptism, not because of a biblical instruction about the time of baptism, but because of the very nature of sin and salvation.

Definitive Introduction of Infant Baptism

12/10/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
12/10/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Ten: When and Why was Infant Baptism Introduced?" In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 100-111). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

   Aland considers it clear that Christian interpretation of Jesus blessing the children as a baptismal passage came about after infant baptism was already established. He now attempts to identify when the practice was established. "We know that c. AD 200 there were circles in Carthage desiring infant baptism, and about 250 it was the rule demanded by the bishops in North Africa. About 230-250 Origen in Palestine characterized it as the 'custom of the Church' (observantia ecclesiae), and about 220 the Church Order of Hippolytus in Rome included little children in the baptismal order" (Aland 1961, p. 100). Aland observes that by the fourth century there were voices advocating early baptism as well as postponement of baptism. Augustine considered infant baptism as "an established custom" (Aland 1961, p. 101). The greatest problem, in Aland's view, is that we lack concrete and definitive evidence for infant baptism prior to the early third century (Aland 1961, p. 102). At the same time, he admits that we likewise have no clear evidence for the development of the practice before it can be seen as an established custom.
   The bulk of growth in early Christianity was through conversion. Aland considers this to have been the case through the second century. While this may be the case, he states that only after there is a large amount of conversion growth would the birth of children of Christian parents become numerically significant (Aland 1961, p. 102). Unfortunately, he makes this assertion with no evidence. The implication of it is that converts were mostly older than the population as a whole or, for some other reason, would have a lower fertility rate. Both assumptions are unwarranted, which he admits (Aland 1961, p. 103). The remaining possible reason is that new converts vastly outweighed those who were already Christians. This argument, however, falls short. Simply because a demographic group is small does not mean that there was no practice which specifically pertains to it. The question is whether or not infant children of Christians, however few or many there were, would be baptized.
   Aland considers reasons for baptism evident in the Church fathers. Origen and Tertullian both consider baptism to wash away sins, and they admit that an infant bears inherited sin though he may not be capable for a time of committing his own sin. Aland confuses this slightly, suggesting, "If a child born of Christian parents is sinless, it does not need the bath of cleansing" (Aland 1961, p. 104). By the time of Tertullian, we find clear acknowledgements that infants bear inherited sin, thus making baptism necessary. Personal participation in sin, in Aland's opinion, is a different matter. On this front, Aland would consider Tertullian and, for that matter, Paul (1 Corinthians 7:14) to consider newborns to be pure and holy (Aland 1961, p. 104). Aland's view, then, is that the children born to Christian parents are considered holy, unlike children born to non-Christian parents. Materials as early as the Letter of Barnabas 6.11 consider baptism to restore people to the innocence they had when born (Aland 1961, p. 105).
   Aland takes Jeremias to argue the innocence is derived from baptism, while Aland argues it is the state the Fathers consider the child to be born into (Aland 1961, p. 106). Tertullian's argument that baptism should be delayed until children can receive instruction may be a statement of the practice of the church, rather than endorsement of a change of practice. Aland finds a similar endorsement of catechesis in Aristides, whom he takes to be 70-80 years earlier than Tertullian (Aland 1961, p. 107).
   Aland reviews evidence of inscriptions, particularly in funerary settings. He notes the frequent use of descriptors such as "innocent." However, these are often applied to people of various ages and for whom we have no information about their baptism. (Aland 1961, p. 108).
   Finally, Aland discounts an argument of Jeremias that having a mixed group of Christians, some baptized and some not, would lead to confusion (Aland 1961, pp. 109-110). Aland considers the time spent in catechesis to create just such a two-tiered society, and it not to create division.

Let the Little Children Come to Me

12/3/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
12/3/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Nine: The Blessing of the Children." In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 95-99). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

Mark 10:13ff and its parallels, describing Jesus blessing children, is regularly considered in discussions of infant baptism. Jeremias uses the passage to conclude that the early Church not only baptized the children of new converts but also the infants born to Christian parents (Aland 1961, p. 95). The reasoning is that children were not only led to Jesus, but also that it affirmed bringing them sm. While Aland sees that the passage would be understood as endorsing infant baptism when considered by those who already endorsed the practice, he questions whether it would be able to inspire the practice among others apart from a prior assumption of infant baptism.
Aland reviews the text closely. the verb κωλύειν, "to hinder," is later applied in regards to baptism, but as it is used in Mark 10 and other places, it simply references prevention of access to Jesus, not necessarily in relation to baptism (Aland 1961, p. 96). By the mid second century Justin refers (Apol. 1, 61:4) to Mark 10:13 or John 3:5 as an endorsement of infant baptism. However, this does not mean the passages initially implied such an endorsement (Aland 1961, p. 97). Aland simply considers the evidence too weak to be definitive. The concepts are not definitively parallel. A later interpretation may not necessarily be used to demonstrate original intent. The linguistic parallels are of relatively common words and phrases (Aland 1961, p. 98).

Baptism of the Household

11/26/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
11/26/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Eight: The 'Oikos - Formula.'" In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 87-94). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

   Much of modern apologetic work for infant baptism is predicated on the "oikos - formula," considering that a group would be baptized together as a household (Aland 1961, p. 87). Aland reviews the use of οἶκος in the New Testament, observing that out of 112 instances, only nine refer to 'family', i.e. the people who are in the house.Three of these instances make generic references such as greetings (Aland 1961, p. 88). In 1 Corinthians 1:16 and Acts 18:8 the word refers to the household of Crispus, baptized by Paul. Aland takes the baptismal reference there to apply only to Crispus. However, in 1 Corinthians 1:16 Paul did baptize the household of Stephanas. There is no mention there of the composition of either household. The remaining instances relate to the conversions of Cornelius, of Lydia, and of the prison keeper in Philippi. Aland observes that we know nothing of the composition of the households except for that of Lydia, and that all we know of her household is that there is never a husband mentioned (Aland 1961, p. 89).
   In Aland's opinion, the argument for a household baptism necessarily including infants is weak, based on the examples of the households. While it is a possibility, there is no reason based on the evidence to conclude the presence of infants within the households (Aland 1961, p. 90). He concludes, "The elevation of this 'oikos-formula' to a theological status seems to me to be utterly unsatisfactory" (Aland 1961, p. 91). Aland thus considers Jeremias' argument that it was an established norm to be unwarranted (Aland 1961, p. 92).
   Aland finally reviews the claim that the oikos-formula represented a ritual norm reflected in the Septuagint. Out of approximately 1600 occurrences, about 40 passages refer to a household. This does not strike Aland as sufficiently frequently to make a conclusion, especially as to the specific presence of infants (Aland 1961, p. 93).

Biblical Arguments for Age of Baptism

11/19/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
11/19/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Seven: Paul and the Primitive Church" In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 780-86). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

   In this chapter, Aland particularly turns his attention to 1 Corinthians 7 and Paul's suggestion about the holiness of children (Aland 1961, p. 81). The passage makes no statement about baptism of children, let alone of infants. Jeremias takes the passage as an argument of Jewish ritual rather than of Pauline thought. In the passage, the presence of a Christian sanctified the family. Aland notes this concept cannot be identified as any sort of element in Judaism of the time (Aland 1961, p. 82).
   A relevant factor in the argument must be Paul's commitment to the Law. While Paul taught forcefully against trusting in the Mosaic Law, he also asserted the Law as good, paying for a Nazirite vow for four Christians. In Galatians 2 table fellowship seemed expected (Aland 1961, p. 82). These actions suggest to Aland that Paul would not have discouraged circumcision of Jewish children. This could lead to an assumption that Paul would endorse baptism as baptism as an analogous act for infant children of Christians. However, Aland finds no persuasive documentation that circumcision and baptism were found together, or that a culture of circumcision was present in Gentile Christian communities (Aland 1961, p. 83).
   Aland summarizes Jeremias' view of Colossians 2:11 in brief. Jeremias takes it as an unambiguous teaching that baptism serves as the new circumcision (Aland 1961, p. 84). This suggests to Jeremias that 1 Corinthians 7:14 refers to application of baptism to babies. However, Aland does not find Colossians 2:11 to necessarily indicate application to anyone other than adult converts.
   Acts 2:38 is also used to suggest baptism is applied without regard to age (Aland 1961, pp. 84-85). However, Aland understands the original context to have referred specifically to coming generations, indicating baptism at the time of birth. There is a variant reading, with the generations being "of us" or "of you." However, Aland does not consider the variant to suggest a present practice of automatically baptizing babies of Christians (Aland 1961, p. 85). he references to "those who are far" suggests to Aland not a need to baptize infants but a promise that salvation is available to all generations (Aland 1961, p. 86).

Inscriptions Show Little Evidence about the Age at which Baptism Was Administered

11/12/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
11/12/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Six: The Evidence of Christian Inscriptions." In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 75-79). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

Aland contends that while Jeremias cites inscriptions as a source of information for infant baptism, they do not date prior to the third century, at which time we know infant baptism was attested (Aland 1961, p. 75). Even the inscriptions cited by Jeremias are not completely clear about the age at which people were baptized. Aland suggests that Jeremias' point of view considers infant baptism "obligatory for children of Christian parents in the third century, as in the second" (Aland 1961, p. 77). Aland provides the texts of a number of tomb inscriptions. He questions whether, as Jeremias contends, the children of pagans had been baptized in emergencies by Christians. However, a review of the actual wording of the inscriptions does not bear this view out (Aland 1961, p. 78).

Conclusive Evidence for Baptismal Ages - not easy to come by

11/5/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
11/5/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Five: Indirect Testimonies to Infant Baptism in the Second Century?" In Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 70-74). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

Aland reiterates that conclusive evidence for infant baptism is not available prior to the third century (Aland 1961, p. 70). However, he concedes that we lack complete information about practices. It is likely that numerous practices existed without any specific record. Jeremias provides numerous indications which may suggest a practice of infant baptism. For instance, Polycarp and others testify to apparently having served Christ for their entire lives. Yet Aland observes that aged Christians in 1 Clement, written about 96 A.D., were in a place with a church founded between 40 and 50 A.D., therefore being Christians since a young age would probably not indicate infancy (Aland 1961, p. 71). Others, in the Acts of the Martyrs, testify to having been born into Christian families. However, this does not indicate that they were baptized as infants (Aland 1961, p. 72). At issue in Aland's analysis is the distinction between being raised as a Christian and being baptized specifically as an infant (Aland 1961, p. 73).

Tertullian and Baptism

10/29/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
10/29/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Four: Tertullian." Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 61-69). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

   Aland dates Tertullian from about 160 ultil after 220, placing him as a transitional figure from the second to third centuries (Aland 1961, p. 61). Tertullian's work, De Baptismo, describes his opposition to baptizing infants and small children. This implies a setting in which people would baptize the very young, and lays out an argument that baptismal candidates should come when they are older and understand more.
   While Jeremias takes Tertullian to be speaking of children who convert to Christianity, Aland considers his remarks to refer also to the children of converts (Aland 1961, p. 62-63). The dating of Tertullian's comments regarding baptism is a challenge. Tertullian's views may have changed during his adult life (Aland 1961, p. 63). Yet we are not entirely certain of the dates of his written works. Aland does think Tertullian held baptism of adult or fairly mature converts as his basic standard. They confess the faith themselves and act in ways that indicate their own volition rather than that of parents (Aland 1961, p. 64). Aland nots that Jeremias assumes that Tertullian, in De Anima chapters 39-40 assumes and endorses infant baptism. However, Aland does not take this to be the case. Rather, Aland considers the passage of Tertullian to refer to pagan practices with their children (Aland 1961, p. 65). Aland spends considerable effort on exegesis of the concept in Tertullian.
   In the end, Aland considers that Jeremias has misidentified the subject of Tertullian's argument (Aland 1961, p. 67). Tertullian's argument is that repentance should not be delayed, and that baptism follows repentance. Jeremias, on the other hand, concludes Tertullian's point to be that baptism should not be delayed (Aland 1961, p. 68).

Patristic Testimony to Baptism of Children

10/22/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
10/22/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Three: Patristic Statements concerning Infant Baptism from the Beginning to the End of the Second Century." Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 53-60). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

   Aland previously reviewed testimony about baptism from the third century. In this chapter, he moves back to the second century, looking for the customs which would lead to the third century practice. To evaluate the context, he points out the presence of "the Apostolic Fathers, then the Apologists who overlap them in time, the Irenaeus, and finally Clement of Alexandria, with whom we come almost exactly to the year 200" (Aland 1961, p. 53). Tertullian is to be discussed later, as a bridge into the third century.
   The baptismal instruction described in the Didache is clearly not oriented toward infants or very small children (Aland 1961, p. 53). The Shepherd of Hermas ahd the Letter of Barnabas both presuppose a period of liveinvolving sins which are washed away. Aland takes this to be not applicable to infants (Aland 1961, p. 54).
   Aland moves on to the apologists of the second century, beginning with Justin (Aland 1961, p. 54). His First Aplogy, chapter 61, describes baptism in such a way as to preclude infants. Those to be baptized are to be persuaded of Christianity and working to live a Christian life. The features of the baptismal ritual suggest people who are more mature than infants, though possibly fairly young children (Aland 1961, p. 55).
   Aristides' Apology is considered by Jeremias, with regard to an allusion to baptism found in 15.11 (Aland 1961, p. 55). Apology 17:4 makes an allusion to baptism of a former pagan, who thanks God that his former sins were committed in ignorance. Further references to giving thanks to God suggest to Jeremias a thankfulness that a child died before being held accountable for sin. Aland takes the case to be a signal that baptism had been applied and effectually washed the hcild from sin (Aland 1961, p. 56). Aland notes that Jeremias omits a discussion of Apology 15:6, which speaks of the baptism of children or servants within a Christian household (Aland 1961, p. 57). Though infants are not included, those who have some insight are baptized and accepted as would be any other Christian.
   Irenaeus is claimed by Jeremias as a witness for infant baptism. However, Aland considers Jeremias' study of Against Heresies II.22.4 to have ended prematurely (Aland 1961, p. 58). Lacking context, Irenaeus does seem to refer to baptism of infants. However, in Aland's view, the passage is intended to describe Jesus as living in the different ages of a normal human, thus purchasing salvation for humans at all stages of life (Aland 1961, p. 58).
   Aland notes that Jeremias takes Clement of Alexandria to speak of children drawn from the water as a sign of children in the faith. Aland takes Clement to have no clarity on the matter of children, suggesting either that it doesn't matter to Clement or that it was not an issue at Clement's time (Aland 1961, p. 59). Aland concludes that infants are not discussed as being baptized, though they are discussed as partakers of God's kingdom (Aland 1961, p. 60).

Baptism for Children born to Christians vs. Children of New Converts

10/15/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
10/15/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter Two: The First clear Testimonies for the Practice of Infant Baptism in the Third Century." Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 42-52). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

   Aland observes the distinction between baptism of children in a household which converts to Christianity and baptism of children born to those who are already Christians. In Aland's view this is an important distinction (Aland 1961, p. 42). As time went on, he expects the amount of catechetical instruction to have increased. Aland's survey of the Didache reveals no clear timeline for pre-baptismal instruction, though chapters 1-6 provide some detail of the content (Aland 1961, p. 43). Chapter 12 discusses reception of guests in good faith, but also indicates some sort of evaluation when a visitor remains in the community. By the time of Justin's Apologia (I.61) there is an expectation of a probationary period prior to baptism. By the early 3rd century Hippolytus' Church Order (42.1), the probationary period was three years. For this reason Aland takes entry into the Church to be recognized prior to more extensive catechesis, but full recognition to be delayed until after catechesis and baptism (Aland 1961, p. 44). If this is the case with children of Christians, everyone is treated the same. Aland interprets Jeremias as taking this point of view.
   By taking the point of view of Jeremias, that essentially all baptisms were "missionary baptisms," Aland considers there to be inadequate evidence of actual practice (Aland 1961, p. 45). Jeremias takes Easter to be the normal date of baptism except in the case of a need for baptism on a deathbed. The practice thus becomes more confused. Aland further notes that the real debate involves not all children, but specifically infants, as those who cannot purposely receive systematic catechesis (Aland 1961, p. 47).
   Origen's testimony, from Palestine between 231 and 250, suggests a prevailing belief that since infants have not sinned, they do not need baptism. Origen's argument is that even newborns bear the guilt of sin, therefore they need baptism. Aland considers that Origen would not have argued in the way he did if the consistent view from the time of the apostles had been in favor of baptizing infants (Aland 1961, p. 47). Yet Aland also finds Jeremias' view that Origen clearly assumed infant baptism as the norm not to flow by necessity from Origen's argument (Aland 1961, p. 48). The strength of the opposition in Origen's arguments calls for questioning the universal acceptance of infant baptism in Palestine at his time.
   Aland notes some specificity in the so-called Church Order of Hippolytus. Children are to be baptized. Those who cannot speak for themselves should be spoken for by a family member (Aland 1961, p. 49). However, Aland is not certain this church order actually dates to the early third century, and the Greek text is largely lost. Jeremias takes the work to come from Hippolytus and to hearken back to practice of earlier generations. Aland finds this view not necessarily warranted. Aland observes that "a Church Order has the intention of finally establishing the church situation of its time, or the perceptions and demands of its author, by means of an appeal (which is always made) back to the Apostolic age, and thus of securing for itself an anchorage for all the time - until a new Church Order comes along and sets the old one aside and tries to establish something which befits the new time" (Aland 1961, p. 50, emphasis Aland's). The nature of a Church Order is to issue future guidance. This new guidance regularly makes a claim to ancient authority (Aland 1961, p. 51). Aland finds it unclear that the Church Order of Hippolytus refers plainly to the "missionary baptism" model articulated by Jeremias. Children are the first to be baptized in this model. The adults answer for the children. This does not necessarily make sense in the context of parents answering on behalf of their children, when the parents have not yet been baptized (Aland 1961, pp. 51-52). Aland concludes that the children referenced are those of parents who are already Christians.

Weighing the Debate on Infant Baptism

10/8/2024

Tuesday Scholarly Notes
10/8/24

Aland, Kurt. (1961). "Chapter One: Changes." Did the Early Church Baptize Infants? (Translated by G. R. Beasley-Murray). (pages 29-41). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock. (Personal Library)

Aland begins his work with a review of the thought of the generation before his as to the practice of infant baptism. He takes Harnack's summary as a helpful starting point, when he referenced infant baptism as verifiable after the end of the second century but not verifiable earlier (Aland 1961, p. 29). Other scholars with less liberal views likewise say that there is no clear evidence for a usual custom of infant baptism at an early date. In 1931, Ethelbert Stauffer conceded that there is no mention of infant baptism in the New Testament (Aland 1961, p. 30). Aland then references "the work of Joachim Jeremians, Infant Baptism in the first Four Centuries, published in German in 1958 and in English in 1960" (Aland 1961, p. 30. The 1960 edition of Jeremias was published by SCM Press). The preface of this volume indicates that it self-consciously serves as a counter-argument to Jeremias' work. Aland will work with Jeremias' arguments, particularly drawing on the English edition, as it is of a more recent date.
   Aland reports that Jeremias "makes a point of distinction between 'the baptism of children joining the Church' and 'the baptism of children born to Christian parents'" (Aland 1961, p. 31, cf. the first and second chapter titles in Jeremias 1960). Because of the missionary nature of the first century Church, adult converts are at the center of the picture. However, as families would convert to Christianity the accounts are made in terms of households. When these families included children, it is natural to assume the children were baptized along with the parents. It would be expected that if some were omitted, there would be some mention of the fact. Aland walks through Jeremias' argument of this point in detail, with specific references to the location of the different elements of the argument in Jeremias.
   A persuasive element of Jeremias' argument as described by Aland is that of Jewish baptism of proselytes. Children who were already born at the time of the family's conversion were circumcised (male) or baptized (female). If children were born after the family, they were treated exactly as other Israelites (Aland 1961, p. 32-33). It is reasonable to assume a similar pattern for Christian family conversions.
   If baptism is a Christian version of circumcision (Colossians 2:11), and Christians rejected circumcision, it is valid to ask whether baptism was applied to children or not (Aland 1961, p. 33). Jeremiahs, in his 1958 edition, finds a change of baptismal practice in the mid fifties (Aland 1961, p. 33-34). Before this time, the consensus was to not baptize children.
   Jeremias' 1960 edition did not identify baptism, but rather the descent of children from a Christian parent was taken to place people into the protection of God.
   Jeremias takes there to be an abrupt change in A.D. 55. Before that time he finds less evidence for infant baptism, but after then there is a greater bulk of information about the makeup of families who convert to Christianity.
   From the middle of the first century to the end of the third century, there is considerably more evidence for baptism, though not in all regions (Aland 1961, p. 37). Origen's report, which may be influenced by the testimony of his grandfather and father, suggests a habit of baptizing infants at an early time in the Christian period (Aland 1961, p. 38). The second century testimony of Tertullian is more difficult, as it makes arguments for cases in which a delay of baptism would be appropriate (Aland 1961, p. 40).