development of doctrine ch 2 summary

8/14/2019 Development of Doctrine Ch 2 Summary

1/21

John Henry Newman

Chapter Summary

An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine

Ch 2 On the antecedent argument in behalf of developments in

Christian Doctrine

Section1 Developments of doctrine to be expected

IfChristianity is a fact, that impresses on our minds a number of antecedent ideas.

[Definition of antecedent:- a preceding event or circumstance.]

We learn in small steps. We cannot take a whole thing at one go, it needs to be learnt

slowly.

We conceive by means of definition or description; whole objects do not create in

the intellect whole ideas, but are to use a mathematical phrase, thrown into series, into

a number of statements, strengthening, interpreting, correcting each other, and with

more or less exactness approximating, as they accumulate, to a perfect image. There is

not other way of learning or teaching. p.55

The more people involved the more aspects will emerge but the overall idea will stay

the same.

It may be objected that in religion the texts are our only source of idea and limit the

ideas available.

Then we have to think are the ideas that we read complete? or will they develop

further in time.

But this does not mean that Christianity is merely the production of men.

The difference of Christianity to other religions is that God became man. In that way

he superadded to earth from heaven. The mind of men is now informed and quickened

by more than intellect but by divine spirit.

All doctrines are interpretations of the scriptures but they are not simply given to us.

They have a need to be developed in the minds of men.

There are too many problems that scripture does not solve

- such as the problem of the Canon of the Bible.


2/21

this would indicate that development and interpretation is essential.

- BaptismThis is another issue, scripture is not clear. It was a development that brought in infantbaptism.

[See Appendix A]

So we can see doctrine has developed, just as scripture left gaps that have now

developed. There is a divine wisdom that we can see creating doctrine, in the same

way that we can see a divine direction behind evolution.

p.63:

Thus developments of Christianity are proved to have been in the divine

contemplation of its divine author, by an argument parallel to that in which we infer

intelligence in the system of the physical world. In whatever sense the need and itssupply are a proof of design in the visible, in the same do the gaps, if the word may be

used, which occur in the structure of the original creed of the Church, make it

probable that those developments, which grow out of truths which lie around it, were

intended to fill them up.

The key is that we have development. The whole is there but hidden or not seen. Thus

the old is the same as the new. Thus Jesus said: I am here to make the law perfect.

For example the Beattitudes simplicity and mystery. Parables.

Matthew 5:2-10 (New International Version)

2and he began to teach them saying:3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,

for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.4Blessed are those who mourn,

for they will be comforted.5Blessed are the meek,

for they will inherit the earth.6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,

for they will be filled.7Blessed are the merciful,

for they will be shown mercy.8Blessed are the pure in heart,

for they will see God.9Blessed are the peacemakers,

for they will be called sons of God.10

Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,

for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

They evidence the idea of a code of divine truth ever to be interpreted.


3/21

St Basil wrote:

Every deed and every word of our Saviour Jesus Christ is a canon of piety and

virtue. When then thou hearest word or deed of His, do not hear it as by the way, or

after a simple and carnal manner, but enter into the depths of contemplation, become a

communicant in truths mystically delivered to thee. p.67

It is not possible to define a point when this development stopped. All doctrines have

continued to be developed.

The church goes forth like the Israelites with dough in the kneeding troughs bound on

their shoulders with the bread still to be leavened.

The Bible contains truths that we have not discovered we will discover them in time

much the same way that we discover truths about nature.

Scripture has also anticipated the idea of doctrinal development see the parable ofthe Kingdom of Heaven it is like a mustard seed that grows into a huge tree. See the

parable of the Leaven.

The Parables of the Mustard Seed and the Yeast

Matthew 1331

He told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed,

which a man took and planted in his field.32

Though it is the smallest of all your

seeds, yet when it grows, it is the largest of garden plants and becomes a tree, so that

the birds of the air come and perch in its branches."33

He told them still another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a

woman took and mixed into a large amount[b]

of flour until it worked all through the

dough."

34Jesus spoke all these things to the crowd in parables; he did not say anything to

them without using a parable.35

So was fulfilled what was spoken through the prophet:

"I will open my mouth in parables,

I will utter things hidden since the creation of the world."

God operates in doctrine the same way we see in nature humans, trees a gradual

gaining of knowledge over a long period of time.

SECTION II

An infallible developing authority to be expected. p.75

It seems natural that development is possible but how can we tell what sort of

development in genuine?


4/21

One indicator is that genuine development will allow for a source of independent

authority to be established:- the infallibility of the church.

But it is difficult to decide who and what merits the responsibility of authority.

We must base this on history the Apostles had authority and we must seek theclosest link to that authority the Roman Catholic Church. At least with the RC we

know authority existed at first.

We have to assume that revelation will come to us in the same manner in gradual

development, because we have no other model to appeal to. This is the same way that

we find knowledge of the natural world.

p.86

As the creator rested on the seventh day from the work which he had made, yet he

worketh hitherto, so he gave the Creed once for all in the beginning, yet blesses its

growth still and provides for its increase. His word shall not return unto Him void,but accomplish His pleasure. As creation argues continual governance so are

Apostles harbingers of Popes.

Authority in the church is the voice of the conscience.

The moral conscience may not always be correct but over time it leads to moral

improvement. p.87

The Bible is a guide in the reformation it was the Bible that brought us back from

corrupt developments.

Ultimately what is required is an authority because any opinion or direction could be

found in scripture.

Authority is required otherwise you have the hollow uniformity of the Anglicans or

the division of the Protestant evangelicals.

1 Tim 3:14-1614

Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these instructions so that,15

if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God's

household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of thetruth.16

Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great:

He[c]

appeared in a body,[d]

was vindicated by the Spirit,

was seen by angels,

was preached among the nations,

was believed on in the world,

was taken up in glory.


5/21

Isaiah 59:21

21"As for me, this is my covenant with them," says the LORD. "My Spirit, who is on

you, and my words that I have put in your mouth will not depart from your mouth, or

from the mouths of your children, or from the mouths of their descendants from this

time on and forever," says the LORD.

Section III

We can further our study by examining the existing developments of doctrine.

Based on the following argument:

Revelation is a gift at a certain time.

but more important is the process of its development into a complex system through

the minds of many generations of men without perversion or corruption.

*Are there then examples that we can see in history?

In doctrine we do not see accretions but developments.

See the following diagram:


6/21

This shows how doctrine has developed over time. Heresies tend to be short lived.

Disagreements and opposing systems are resolved over time. The major source of

development is the Pope and the Councils.

There is no doubt that for Newman the purpose of this argument is to show that the

current Roman Catholic church is closer to the original early church than any other

church.


7/21

Appendix A

Infant baptism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Water is poured on the head of an infant held over the baptismal font of a Catholic

church

Infant baptism is the Christian religious practice ofbaptisinginfants or youngchildren. In theological discussions, the practice is sometimes referred to as

paedobaptism or pedobaptism from the Greekpais meaning "child." The practice is

sometimes contrasted with what is called "believer's baptism," or credobaptism, from

the Latin word credo meaning "I believe," which is the religious practice of baptising

only individuals who personally confess faith in Jesus, therefore excluding very

young children.

Most Christians practice infant baptism.[1]

They include the Roman Catholic Church,

the Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy, Armenian Apostolic Church,

Assyrian Church of the East, the Anglican Communion, Lutherans, Presbyterians,

Methodists, the Church of the Nazarene,[2]

the Reformed Church in America,[3]

theUnited Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ (UCC), and the Continental

Reformed.

Groups within the Protestant tradition that reject infant baptism include most Baptists,

Apostolic Christians, all Old Time Missionary Baptists, Disciples of Christ, most

Pentecostals, Mennonites, Amish, Community of Christ, Plymouth Brethren, Seventh-

day Adventists, most non-denominational churches, and other Arminian

denominations. Infant baptism is also excluded by Jehovah's Witnesses,

Christadelphians, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.


8/21

Ceremony

The exact details of the baptismal ceremony vary among Christian denominations.Many follow a prepared ceremony, called a rite or liturgy. In a typical ceremony,

parents or godparents bring their child to their congregation's priest or minister. The

rite used would be the same as that denomination's rite for adults, i.e., by pouringwater (affusion), or others by sprinkling water (aspersion). Eastern Orthodox and

Eastern Catholic traditions normally practice total immersion and baptise babies in a

font and this practice is also the first method listed in the Baptismal ritual of the

Roman Catholic although pouring is the standard practice within the Latin branch of

Catholicism. Catholic and Orthodox churches do not sprinkle. At the moment of

baptism, the minister utters the words "I baptise you (or, 'The servant of God (name)

is baptized') in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" (see

Matthew 28:19).

Although it is not required, many parents and godparents choose to dress the baby in a

white gown called a christening gown for the Baptism ceremony. Christening gowns

often become treasured keepsakes that are used by many other children in the family

and handed down from generation to generation. Traditionally, this gown is white or

slightly off white and made with much lace, trim and intricate detail. In the past, a

gown was used for both boys and girls; in the present day it has become more

common to dress children in a Baptismal outfit. Also normally made of white fabric,

the outfit consists of a romper with a vest or other accessories. After the Baptism

ceremony, these articles of clothing are preserved as a memory of this very special

and significant event in the child's life.

History

Scholars disagree on the date when infant baptism was first practiced. Some believe

that first-century Christians did not practice it.[4]

Others believe that they did,[5]

understanding biblical references to individuals "and [their] whole household" being

baptized (Acts 16:15, Acts 16:31-33, 1 Corinthians 1:16) as including small children

and infants.

While the earliest extra-biblical directions for baptism,[6]

which occurs in the Didache

(c. 100),[7]

speaks to the baptism of adults, rather than young children, since it requires

that the person to be baptised should fast,[8]

writings of the second and early third

century indicate that Christians baptized infants too.[9]Irenaeus (c. 130202) speaksnot only of children but even of infants being "born again to God"

[10]and three

passages ofOrigen (185c. 254)[11]

mention infant baptism as traditional and

customary.[12]

Tertullian (c. 155230) too, while advising postponement of baptism

until after marriage, mentions that it was customary to baptise infants, with sponsors

speaking on their behalf.[13]

The Apostolic Tradition, attributed to Hippolytus of

Rome (died 235), describes how to perform the ceremony of baptism; it states that

children were baptised first, and if any of them could not answer for themselves, their

parents or someone else from their family was to answer for them.[14]

While they acknowledge that in the third century the practice of infant baptism was

believed to be of apostolic origin, some writers deny that it was in use in the first

century.[15]

Some of them link infant baptism with the use of baptismal methods other


9/21

than total immersion, and deny, in spite of the evidence of theDidache, that those

methods were used in the first century.

From at least the third century onward Christians baptized infants as standard

practice, although some preferred to postpone baptism until late in life, so as to ensure

forgiveness for all their preceding sins.[16]

Theology

The basic theology of Christian denominations often varies (see Material principle).

For this reason, the meaning of baptism itself and infant baptism in particular depends

greatly upon the Christian tradition to which the baptismal candidate belongs.

Agreements among paedobaptists

While there is debatable scriptural evidence (such as that in Colossians 2:11-12),paedobaptists believe that infant baptism is the New Testament equivalent of

circumcision. In the Old Testament, all male converts to Judaism, male infants born to

Jewish parents, and male servants were circumcised as ceremony ofinitiation into the

Jewish community[17]

. Paedobaptists believe that baptism has replaced Old Testament

circumcision and is the religious ceremony of initiation into the Christian community.

Beyond this, very little is agreed on the subject among Christian denominations.

During the medieval and Reformation eras, infant baptism was seen as a way to

incorporate new-born babies into the secular community as well as inducting them

into the Christian faith[18]

.

Differences among paedobaptists

Baptism by submersion in the Eastern Orthodox Church

(Sophia Cathedral, 2005)

Paedobaptists disagree about the precise significance of infant baptism and the exact

justification for it. These differences generally revolve around the following issues:

What baptism does, if anything What spiritual effect baptism has on the infant being baptized The extent of the effect of baptism beyond a symbolic expression

This disagreement is rooted in the interpretation of more fundamental areas oftheology, such as the doctrine ofsalvation and the doctrine of the sacraments.


10/21

Christian groups who practice infant baptism divide approximately into four groups of

opinion:

Roman Catholic Church

The Roman Catholic Church considers baptism, even for an infant, so important that"parents are obliged to see that their infants are baptised within the first few weeks"

and, "if the infant is in danger of death, it is to be baptised without any delay."[19]

It

declares: "The practice of infant Baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church.

There is explicit testimony to this practice from the second century on, and it is quite

possible that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching, when whole 'households'

received baptism, infants may also have been baptized."[20]

It notes that, "when the

first direct evidence of infant Baptism appears in the second century, it is never

presented as an innovation," that second-century Irenaeus[21]

treated baptism of infants

as a matter of course, and that, "at a Synod of African Bishops, St. Cyprian stated that

'God's mercy and grace should not be refused to anyone born', and the Synod,

recalling that 'all human beings' are 'equal', whatever be 'their size or age', declared it

lawful to baptize children 'by the second or third day after their birth'."[22]

Infant

baptism is seen as showing very clearly that salvation is an unmerited favour from

God, not the fruit of human effort.[23]

"Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by

original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the

power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God,

to which all men are called... The Church and the parents would deny a child the

priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly

after birth."[24]

The Church has no official teaching regarding the fate of infants who die withoutBaptism, and theologians of the Church hold various views (for instance, some have

asserted that they go to Limbo, which has never been official Catholic doctrine). "The

Church entrusts these infants to the mercy of God."[25]

Other ancient Christian Churches

The Eastern Orthodox Church, Oriental Orthodoxy and the Assyrian Church of the

East also insist on the need to have infants baptized as soon as is practicable after

birth. For them too baptism is not merely a symbol but actually conveys grace.

Baptism is a sacrament because it is an "instrument" instituted by Jesus Christ to

impart grace to its recipients. Infants are traditionally baptized on the eighth day,recalling the biblical injunction to circumcise on the eighth day. However, this is not

mandatory. In many of these churches, the Sacred Mystery ofChrismation

(Confirmation) is administered by the priest immediately after baptism. Holy

Communion, in the form ofconsecrated wine and bread, is also given to infants after

they are baptized.[26]

Lutherans

Lutherans practice infant baptism because they believe that God mandates it. They

adduce biblical passages such as Matthew 28:19, Mark 10:13-15, 16:16, John 3:3-7,Acts 2:38-39 in support of their position. For them baptism is a "means of grace"


11/21

through which God creates and strengthens "saving faith" as the "washing of

regeneration" (Titus 3:5) in which infants and adults are reborn (John 3:3-7):

"baptismal regeneration." Since the creation of faith is exclusively God's work, it does

not depend on the actions of the one baptized, whether infant or adult. Even though

baptized infants cannot articulate that faith, Lutherans believe that it is present all the

same.[27]

Because it is faith alone that receives these divine gifts, Lutherans confessthat baptism "works forgiveness of sins, delivers from death and the devil, and gives

eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God

declare."[28]

In the special section on infant baptism in his Large Catechism Luther

argues that infant baptism is God-pleasing because persons so baptized were reborn

and sanctified by the Holy Spirit.[29]

Methodists

Methodists contend that infant baptism has spiritual value for the infant. John Wesley,

the founder ofMethodism maintained the Anglican view that baptism regenerates the

infant. He listed several ways that infants benefit from baptism:

The guilt ofOriginal Sin is removed. They gain admission into the Church. Their standing before God is changed from one under condemnation to a child

of God.

However, Wesley's own views of infant baptism seem to shift over time as he put

more and more emphasis on salvation by faith and new birth by faith alone. This has

helped to fuel much debate within Methodism over just what infant baptism does,

though almost all are agreed it should be continued.

Infant baptism is particularly illustrative of the Methodist doctrine ofprevenient

grace. The principle is that The Fall of Man ruined the human soul to such an extent

that nobody wants a relationship with God. In order for humans to even want to be

able to choose God must empower their will (so that they may choose Christ) which

he does by means of prevenient grace. Thus God takes the very first step in salvation,

preceding any human effort or decision. Methodists justify infant baptism by this

principle of prevenient grace, often arguing that infant baptism is God's promise or

declaration to the infant that calls that infant to (eventually) believe in God's promises

(God's Word) for salvation. When the individual believes in Jesus they will profess

their faith before the church, often using a ritual called confirmation in which theHoly Spirit is invoked with the laying on of hands. Methodists also use infant baptism

symbolically, as an illustration of God approaching the helpless. They see the

ceremony additionally as a celebration of God's prevenient grace.

Presbyterian and Continental Reformed churches

Some Presbyterian and Reformed Christians contend that baptism is not a mere

symbol, but actually conveys grace. Others, however, believe that it is just a symbol,

as a wedding ring is a symbol of marriage. The grace it conveys, however, is not

justifying grace. It may convey sanctifying grace or some other kind of grace.

Baptism, according to this tradition, does not produce Christians, but identifies the


12/21

child as a member of the covenant community. Some adherents of the Federal Vision

theology disagree, however, regarding instead a Christian as one who is a member of

the covenant community. Yet all would agree that being a member of the covenant

community does not guarantee salvation; though it does provide the child with many

benefits, including that of one's particular congregation consenting to assist in the

raising of that child in "the way he should go, [so that] when he is old he will not turnfrom it."

[30]

Presbyterian and many Reformed Christians see infant baptism as the New Testament

form of circumcision in the Jewish covenant (Joshua 24:15). Circumcision did not

create faith in the 8-day-old Jewish boy. It merely marked him as a member of God's

covenant people Israel. Likewise, baptism doesnt create faith; it is a sign of

membership in the covenant community.

Presbyterian and Reformed Christians consider children of professing Christians to be

members of the visible Church (the covenant community). They do not necessarily

consider them to be members of a particular church (a local congregation), nor of theuniversal Church (the set of all true believers). A profession of faith is required for the

former, and true faith is required for the latter.[31]

Paedobaptism versus credobaptism

The main question which separates paedobaptists and credobaptists is this:

Who should be baptized?

The paedobaptists answer is: adult believers andthe children of believers.

The credobaptists answer is: only those who have professed faith (believers). The

credobaptist argument is often characterized as "adults only," but this is not an

accurate representation. Simply being an adult does not qualify one for baptism; one

must come to saving faith and profess Christ as Lord and Savior. This could happen

for some in the earliest stages of life and still be valid according to credobaptists.

Roots of the disagreement

The two different answers to this question do not, by themselves, shed much light on

the nature of the dispute between paedobaptists and credobaptists. To grasp thedisagreement over infant baptism fully one needs to understand the roots of the

disagreement.

Prior theological commitments

The disagreement about infant baptism is grounded in differing theological views at a

more basic level. Christians disagree about infant baptism because they disagree about

the nature of faith, the role of baptism, the means of salvation, the nature of grace, and

the function of the sacraments. Pedobaptism and credobaptism are positions which

bubble up from theological views at a more fundamental level of one's theologicalsystem.


13/21

Fundamental theological questions

Christians answer the question Who should be baptized? differently because they give

different answers to the more fundamental questions which lie beneath it. These more

basic questions include:

Why do Christians baptize anyone at all (i.e., what is the point of baptism)? Who are members of God's covenant community or church? What does baptism signify and/or symbolize? Is baptism merely a symbol or is it a channel through which God conveys

grace (i.e. spiritual powers, unmerited favor, spiritual blessing)?

If baptism conveys grace, does it convey justifying grace (grace that makesone a Christian) or sanctifying grace (grace which makes one a better

Christian)?

Different answers to fundamental theological questions

Credobaptists answer these foundational questions this way:

Baptism is a public profession of faith. It is a symbolic way of publicly tellingthe world one is a Christian.

Only those who have faith in Christ are members of God's covenantcommunity (or church).

Baptism symbolizes that the individual has been washed and cleansed from hissin by the blood of Jesus.

Baptism is merely a symbol. It does not convey grace of any kind. The baptized person has been symbolically buried with Christ in baptism and

raised a new person to life eternal.

Some of these answers would be given also by paedobaptists. A sponsor or sponsors

(godparents) give a public profession of faith on behalf of the child being baptized,

who is expected to ratify later the profession made on his or her behalf;[32]

and

paedobaptists have no doubt that by baptism a child is cleansed from sin by the blood

of Jesus and is symbolically buried with him and raised as a new person to life

eternal.[33]

They do not accept that divine grace is notgiven in baptism, and they

disagree that an explicit act of faith is necessary for being a member of the church.[34]

Paedobaptists think that baptism is more than would be indicated by these answersalone. They typically give the following additional answers:

If baptism is a sign that a person is a member of God's covenant community,and if the children of believers are members of that community, it follows that

the children of believers should receive the sign that they are members of

God's covenant community by being baptized, as an infant is entitled to a

passport that indicates the child as a member of a particular country.[35]

Believers and the children of believers become members of God's covenantcommunity (or church) through baptism.

[36]

In the heart of a baptized child, faith as a gift or grace from God, as distinctfrom an act by the person, is made present.[37]


14/21

Baptism is not merely a symbol. It has a real effect, conveying divine grace.[38]Arguments for infant baptism

Paedobaptists do not completely agree on the reasons for baptizing infants, and offer

different reasons in support of the practice. Among the arguments made in support ofthe practice are:

Argument based on parallel with circumcision

Some supporters of infant baptism argue that circumcision is the sign of the covenant

God made with Abraham and should be received by all the members of his

covenant.[39]

The children of members of Abraham's covenant are themselves

members of Abraham's covenant[40]

. Christians are members of Abraham's covenant[41]

Therefore, the children of Christians are members of Abraham's covenant[42]

.

Since baptism is the New Testament form of circumcision

[43]

, the children ofChristians should receive the sign of the covenant by being baptized.

Covenant theology

Presbyterian and Reformed Christians base their case for infant baptism on Covenant

theology. Covenant theology is a broad interpretative framework used to understand

the Bible. Reformed Baptists are Reformed yet, as their name suggests, adhere to

Believers Baptism.

According to Covenant theology God makes two basic covenants, or agreements, with

humans. The first one, the Covenant ofWorks is an agreement that bases man'srelationship with God on human obedience and morality. The covenant was made

with Adam in the Garden of Eden. Adam broke this covenant so God replaced it with

a second more durable covenant--the Covenant of Grace. The Covenant of Grace is an

agreement that bases man's relationship with God on God's grace and generosity. The

Covenant of Works failed because it was based on human performance. The Covenant

of Grace is durable because it is based on God's performance.

All the covenants that God makes with humans after the Fall, (e.g. with Abraham,

Moses, and David) are really just different forms of the Covenant of Grace. They may

appear to be different but are fundamentally the same covenant. The underlying

Covenant of Grace stays the same even though the external forms changes.

Consequently, Covenant theologians see in Old Testament Israel the people of God

(the church) before Christ was born. For the Covenant theologian, therefore, there is

only one people of Godthe church.

According to Presbyterian and Reformed Christians, this theological framework is

important to the Biblical case for infant baptism because it provides a reason for

thinking there is strong continuity between the Old and New Testaments. It provides a

bridge linking the two Testaments together.

Covenant Theologians claim that the New Testament book ofHebrews demonstratesthat much of Israel's worship has been replaced by the person and work of Christ. The


15/21

result is that some important forms of worship in the Old Testament have New

Testament equivalents. The Passover festival, for example, was replaced by the Lord's

Supper (or Eucharist).

It is across the bridge of Covenant Theology that the sign of Abraham's covenant,

circumcision, walks into the New Testament. The sign of the Covenant changes itsexternal form to reflect new spiritual realties. It was a bloody sign in the Old

Testament but because Christ has shed his blood, it has been transformed into a

bloodless sign, i.e. washing with water. Passover was a bloody form of Old Testament

worship and also transitions into the New Testament in the bloodless form of bread

and wine.

Covenant theologians point out that the external sign of the covenant in the Old

Testament was circumcision. Circumcision was performed upon the male children of

Israelites to signify their external membership in God's people, not as a guarantee of

true faith; the Old Testament records many Israelites who turned from God and were

punished, showing that their hearts were not truly set on serving God. So while allmale Israelites had the sign of the covenant performed on them in a once off

ceremony soon after birth, such a signifier was external only and not a true indicator

of whether or not they would later exhibit true faith in Yahweh.

In the New Testament, circumcision is no longer seen as mandatory for God's people.

However there is compelling evidence to suggest that the Old Testament circumcision

rite has been replaced by baptism. For instance: "In Him you were also circumcised

with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the

flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism." (Colossians 2:11-

12a)

Some paedobaptists, then, think the analogy of baptism to circumcision correctly

points to children, since the historic Israelite application of circumcision was to

infants, not to adult converts, of which there were few. Covenant theology, then,

identifies baptism less as a statement of faith than as an assumption of identity; that is

to say that infant baptism is a sign of covenantal inclusion.

Corroborating evidence

Paedobaptists point to a number of passages in the New Testament which seem to

corroborate the above argument.

Household baptisms

In the Old Testament, if the head of a household converted to Judaism, all the males

in the house, even the infants, were circumcised. Paedobaptists argue this pattern

continues into the New Testament. Reference is made, for example, to baptizing a

person and their whole household the households of Lydia, Crispus, and Stephanas

are mentioned by name Acts 16:14-15, 18:8; 1 Cor 1:16.

Paedobaptists challenge credobaptists on this point: Why would a whole household be

baptized just because the head of the house had faith? Shouldnt they baptize each

member of the family as they come to individual faith? Household baptism implies


16/21

that the rules for membership in Abraham's covenant have continued into the New

Testament, the main difference is the sign of the covenant.

Credobaptists counter with verses such as John 4:53, Acts 16:34 and Acts 18:8 in

which entire households are said to have "believed." As such, the paedobaptist

assumption is that household baptisms mentioned in the Bible involved infants,presumably incapable of personal belief.

Original sin

Paedobaptists also point to Psalm 51, which reads, in part, "surely I was sinful from

birth," as indication that infants are sinful (vid.original sin) and are thus in need of

forgiveness that they too might have salvation.

Credobaptists would admit that infants are in need of salvation but paedobaptists push

the point a step further by arguing that it makes no theological sense for infants to

need salvation but for God to make no provision for them to be saved (See 1 Cor 7:14

where Paul says that the children of a believer are holy and therefore, presumably,

would not need baptising). Some Credobaptists who agree to the Psalm 51

interpretation, argue that even though infants are sinful they are not accountable,

because of the "age of accountability." Although many theologians would argue that

an "age of accountability" is nowhere mentioned in the Bible.

An alternative viewpoint of some credobaptists is that since all Christians are

predestined to salvation (John 15:16, 1Cor 1:27, Eph 1:4, 1Pet 2:4), God will not

allow His elect to die before receiving their need, even if they are in old age (Luke

2:25-35), an argument whose relation to baptism whether of infants or adults isunclear, unless it means that infants who die without coming to explicit belief and

baptism are not among God's elect.

Peter's Speech

According to the Book of Acts in the New Testament, Peter declared in his sermon to

the Jews that they should all be baptized. They and their children, and everyone whom

God calls, no matter how far away.

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. Thepromise is for youand your children and for all who are far offfor all whom the

Lord our God will call." (Acts 2:38-39, NIV)

Credobaptists counter that only those who believe, and children who believe are

recipients of the promise. Otherwise, all children of Adam would be saved (ie.

Universalism)

Arguments against infant baptism

Circumcision was a sign and seal of physical birth, and baptism is a sign andseal of new birth (born again)


17/21

John the Baptist baptized people who were also required to be circumcised. Baptism always has the prerequisite of repentance and faith, which are

impossible for an infant.

Infants do not have faith. Hebrews 11:6, Romans 10:17 The Lord's Supper and Baptism are both sacraments and are the same sign and

seal, since the Lord Supper may not be given to unbelievers, neither shouldbaptism. 1 Cor 11:28

The New Covenant is not purely an expansion of the Old Covenants becausethe Pharisees and all who did not have faith in Jesus are excluded from the

New Covenant, but were acceptable under the old.

The early church performed credo baptism by immersion Baptism represents more than just physical washing, but being clean and good

standing before God, and therefore regenerate. Romans 6.

Opponents of paedobaptism point out that Jesus himself was baptized at the age of 30.

They also point to the two (out of five) Great Commission passages that speak of

baptism. They see Matthew 28:18-20 as giving exclusive instructions about who is tobe baptized: "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the

name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all

things that I have commanded you" (verses 19-20, NKJV). They interpret this as

referring to three successive stages, with baptism following on becoming a disciple

(which is beyond the power of an infant), and instruction following on baptism, not

preceding it. Pedobaptists point out that the passage is ambiguous enough to interpret

that a person becomes a disciple directly through baptism, meaning children could be

baptized.

The Mark 16:15-18 Great Commission passage speaks of believing: "He who believes

and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" (verse

16, NKJV). This, they say, excludes infants, whom they see as incapable of believing.

Pedobaptists point out that the second clause mentions believing, but not baptism.

Therefore, one could be baptized and still not be a believer. They argue that this may

not exclude infant baptism, but rather corroborate it. In return, opposers declare that

baptism is for those who already believe and are able to state their belief, which

infants cannot do. In Peter's address to adults, "Repent and be baptized" Acts 2:38,

they see repentance as a prerequisite, and this requires a mature understanding of sin

and a decision to turn away from sin. Some point to Deuteronomy 24:16 or 1 Peter

3:21 as evidence that each individual must make a mature decision regarding baptism.

See Believer's Baptism.

Some oppose baptism of children as incorporating them into the church without their

own consent.

Denominations that do not accept infant baptism as valid generally require those who

join them, after being baptized as infants elsewhere, to be "rebaptized," or rather to be

baptized for the first time. They deny that they in fact rebaptize, saying that Christians

are to be baptized only once, but as believers, and they reject the term "Anabaptist"

(i.e. Rebaptizer) as a description of them.


18/21

Denominations and religious groups opposed to paedobaptism

Trinitarian Christian denominations that oppose infant baptism include Baptists,

Churches of Christ, Mennonites, Amish, Brethren, and most Pentecostal Apostolic

groups. Several non-Trinitarian religious groups also oppose infant baptism, including

Christadelphians, Jehovah's Witnesses, and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-daySaints.

Religious groups that oppose infant baptism have sometimes been persecuted by

paedobaptist churches. During the Reformation, anabaptists were persecuted by

Protestant, Anglican, and Catholic regimes. The English government imposed

restrictions on Baptists in Britain and Ireland during the 17th century. The Russian

Orthodox Church repressed Baptists prior to the 1917 revolution, and sought

restrictions on Baptists and Pentecostals after being re-established after the fall of

Communism.

B.R. White describes the motivations behind persecution of the anabaptists during the

Reformation as follows:

Other Christians saw the baptism of each new-born baby into the secular parish

community and close links between church and state as the divinely-ordained means

of holding society together. Hence many other Christians saw the Anabaptists as

subversive of all order. Consequently, from the earliest days, they were sharply

persecuted and leaders were soon executed.[44]

Note: Quakers and the Salvation Army cannot be classified as specifically opposing

infantbaptism, since they generally do not observe baptism in any form.

Confirmation

For Roman Catholics, Confirmation is a sacrament that "confirms" or "strengthens"

(the original meaning of the word "confirm")[45]

the grace ofBaptism, by conferring

an increase and deepening of that grace.[46]

For some other Christians the ceremony of Confirmation is a matter not of "being

confirmed" but of "confirming" the baptismal vows taken on one's behalf when an

infant. This is the essential significance of the Lutheran non-sacramental ceremony

called in German "Konfirmation," but in English "affirmation of baptism" (seeConfirmation).

In Eastern Christianity, including the Eastern Catholic Churches, the sacrament of

Confirmation is conferred immediately after baptism, and there is obviously no

renewal of baptismal promises. In the Latin-Rite (i.e. Western) Catholic Church, the

sacrament is to be conferred at about the age of discretion (generally taken to be about

7), unless the Episcopal Conference has decided on a different age, or there is danger

of death or, in the judgement of the minister, a grave reason suggests otherwise

(canon 891 of the Code of Canon Law). The renewal of baptismal promises by those

receiving the sacrament in the Western Catholic Church is incidental to the rite and

not essentially different from the solemn renewal of their baptismal promises that is

asked of all members of this Church each year at the Easter Vigil service. Only in


19/21

French-speaking countries has there been a development of ceremonies, quite distinct

from the sacrament of Confirmation, for young Catholics to profess their faith

publicly, in line with their age.[47]

The AnglicanBook of Common Prayer requires that all who are to be confirmed

should first know and understand the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the TenCommandments, and be able to answer the other questions in the Church Catechism.

Confirmation enables those who have been baptized as infants, when they are of age

to do so, openly before the church, to take upon themselves and confirm the promises

made on their behalf by their godparents.

See also

Anabaptists Baptism Believers baptism Sacraments of Initiation Infant communion William Wall (theologian)

References

1. ^ For instance, the Roman Catholic Church: 1,100,000,000; the EasternOrthodox Church: 225,000,000; most of the 77,000,000 members of the

Anglican Communion; Lutherans and others (Religious Bodies of the World

with at Least 1 Million Adherents;Major Denominational Families of

Christianity). See also Worldwide Adherents of All Religions by SixContinental Areas, Mid-1995

2. ^SoYou Want to Be Baptized? Leaders Guide.3. ^The Sacraments4. ^ Stanley J. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God(Grand Rapids, MI:

Eerdmans, 2000), 528

5. ^John Calvin,Institutes of the Christian Religion; Gregg Strawbridge, Ph.D.;Jordan Bajis,

6. ^ "the Didache, the earliest surviving 'pastoral manual' of the Christianchurch" (Fuller Seminary Bookstore)

7. ^ "Chapter 7, "Concerning Baptism."8. ^ "Before the baptism let the baptiser fast, and the baptised, and whoever else

can; but you shall order the baptised to fast one or two days before" (Didache,

7)

9. ^ Apart from quoting books of the second and third centuries mentioned here,the 1980 Instruction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith states

that "Many inscriptions from as early as the second century give little children

the title of "children of God," a title given only to the baptised, or explicitly

mention that they were baptised: cf., for example, Corpus Inscriptionum

Graecarum, 9727, 9801, 9817; E. Diehl, Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae

Veteres (Berlin 1961), nos. 1523(3), 4429A."10.^Against Hereses, 2.22.4]).11.^ The three passages identified by scholars areHomilies on Leviticus 8.3.11;

Commentary on Romans 5.9; andHomily on Luke 14.5. They are mentioned,


20/21

for instance, in the following sites: 1, 2, 34, 5, 6 and, of course, in the sites

that give the full texts of Origen on Leviticus and Luke.

12.^ The first passage cited has: "Baptism according to the practice of the Churchis given even to infants"; the second has: "The Church had a tradition from the

Apostles, to give baptism even to infants"; the third has: "Infants are baptized

for the remission of sins ... That is the reason why infants too are baptised."13.^ "The delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of

little children. For why is it necessary ... that the sponsors likewise should be

thrust into danger? ... For no less cause must the unwedded also be deferred

in whom the ground of temptation is prepared, alike in such as never were

wedded by means of their maturity, and in the widowed by means of their

freedomuntil they either marry, or else be more fully strengthened for

continence" (On Baptism 18).

14.^ "The children shall be baptised first. All of the children who can answer forthemselves, let them answer. If there are any children who cannot answer for

themselves, let their parents answer for them, or someone else from their

family. After this, the men will be baptised. Finally, the women" (TheApostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome 21.4-5).

15.^ "The practice of infant baptism was unknown at this period (the firstcentury). ... That not till so late a period as Irenaeus [c. 140-203 C.E.], a trace

of infant baptism appears, and that it first became recognized as an apostolic

tradition in the course of the third century, is evidence rather against than for

the admission of its apostolic origin" (Augustus Neander,History of the

Planting and Training of the Christian Church by the Apostles, 1864, p. 162

16.^http://www.apuritansmind.com/Baptism/MillerSamuelInfantBaptismDiscourse

1.htm Infant Baptism: Scriptural and Reasonable]; What does the Bible teach

about the subject of baptizing of infants? by Don Matzat; Infant Baptism in

Early Church History; Christian Heresies of the Sixteenth Century

17.^ See Genesis 17:10-1418.^ White, B.R., Eerdmans' Handbook to Christian Belief, Eerdman's

Publishing, p. 443

19.^Code of Canon Law, canon 86720.^Catechism of the Catholic Church, 125221.^Against Heresies, 2.22.422.^Instruction on Infant Baptism23.^ "The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in

infant Baptism" (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1250).24.^Catechism of the Catholic Church, 125025.^Catechism of the Catholic Church, 126126.^ Ware, Bishop Kallistos (Timothy) (1964), The Orthodox Church, New

York: Penguin Books, pp. 284

27.^ See "Baptism and Its Purpose"28.^ See "Luther's Small Catechism" [1]29.^ See "Luther's Large Catechism" subsection "Of Infant Baptism" [2]30.^ Proverbs 22:631.^ Westminster Confession of Faith, chapters 25, 2832.^The Baptism Service33.^ "Baptism not only purifies from all sins, but also makes the neophyte "a newcreature," an adopted son of God, who has become a "partaker of the divine


21/21

development of doctrine ch 2 summary

Documents