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.
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.
RSS Feed