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).
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).
RSS Feed