Baptism and babies

Albion said:

Who is the first great church member to have told the Christian community that there is an age requirement for people seeking to be baptized?


What "sheer numbers" are you referring to? I am unaware of the existence of records from the first century that list the total number of people who were baptized.

Click to expand...

For the number, go back in the post chain and I have a list of all the people who were credo baptized.

Gregory of Nazianzus Oration 40 allows for emergency baptism of infants but suggest children should be able to give an anwer, and puts this at 4 years of age.

XXVIII. Be it so, some will say, in the case of those who ask for Baptism; what have you to say about those who are still children, and conscious neither of the loss nor of the grace? Are we to baptize them too? Certainly, if any danger presses. For it is better that they should be unconsciously sanctified than that they should depart unsealed and uninitiated.

A proof of this is found in the Circumcision on the eighth day, which was a sort of typical seal, and was conferred on children before they had the use of reason. And so is the anointing of the doorposts, Exodus 12:22 which preserved the firstborn, though applied to things which had no consciousness. But in respect of others I give my advice to wait till the end of the third year, or a little more or less, when they may be able to listen and to answer something about the Sacrament; that, even though they do not perfectly understand it, yet at any rate they may know the outlines;

Malleeboy said:

For the number, go back in the post chain and I have a list of all the people who were credo baptized.

Click to expand...

Somewhere in the previous 302 posts, you mean?

Gregory of Nazianzus Oration 40 allows for emergency baptism of infants but suggest children should be able to give an anwer, and puts this at 4 years of age.

Click to expand...

Yes, but the issue as you framed it concerns the very early church.

Malleeboy said:

Here is a list of people who we now were not infant baptized. Ephraem the Syrian, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nysa, Gregory of Nazianzus, John Chrysostom, Ambrose, Jerome, Rufinus, Paulinus of Nola, Augustine. We could also add Ambrose's brother Satyrus, Gregory of Nazianzus father Gregory, his sister Gorgonia, brother Caesarius, Jerome's friends Heliodorus and Rufius, Paulinus of Nola's brother and Rufinus of Aquileia. Some of these people above had devout parents, eg Gregory of Nazianzus had bishop for a father.

Click to expand...

I already mentioned this, and the above writers all approved of infant baptism. John Chrysostom even lists the numerous benefits of infant baptism though they were sinless.
During the persecution of Diocletian and even after with the edict of Milan when freedom of religion was given and more and more people were coming into the church some parents relaxed the practise for socio-political reasons. If Gregory Nazianzen disapproved of infant baptism why would he urge baptism of sickly babies and then give OT types prefiguring it? And why would he say the age of wait time is about 4 years old max? ( still too young for accountability for those that oppose infant baptism). He knew his own situation was an anomaly and should not be taken as the norm.

Part of the problem is the protestant belief that baptism is soley for washing away sins of old people. In actuality it was also the initiation rite into the Church, His body (1 Corinthians 12:12-14, Galatians 3:27-29)

buzuxi02 said:

I already mentioned this, and the above writers all approved of infant baptism. John Chrysostom even lists the numerous benefits of infant baptism though they were sinless.
During the persecution of Diocletian and even after with the edict of Milan when freedom of religion was given and more and more people were coming into the church some parents relaxed the practise for socio-political reasons. If Gregory Nazianzen disapproved of infant baptism why would he urge baptism of sickly babies and then give OT types prefiguring it? And why would he say the age of wait time is about 4 years old max? ( still too young for accountability for those that oppose infant baptism). He knew his own situation was an anomaly and should not be taken as the norm.

Part of the problem is the protestant belief that baptism is soley for washing away sins of old people. In actuality it was also the initiation rite into the Church, His body (1 Corinthians 12:12-14, Galatians 3:27-29)

Click to expand...

plus I think one of the Councils of Orange insisted babies needed to be baptized.

buzuxi02,

No, I would say most Protestant do believe that baptism is into union with Christ, that it brings one into the church, that it is an initiation into the Kingdom and the Church. I certainly do.

Just to be clear, I think the early church normatively baptised on conversion, but did allow infant baptism for near death babies/children. So any statement supporting infant baptism may just be a defence of that practice, not an indication of universal infant baptism.

Ferguson has clear citation and pictorial examples of inscriptions of baptized infants but they all have indication that the baptism occurred just prior to death.

An inscription from 268AD, as Marcianus at 12 years and 2 months being baptised the day before he died.

Two third century inscriptions

• Tyche at one year, ten months and fifteen days, was baptized on the day she died.
• Irene at eleven months and six days, baptized 6 days before her death

And here is a inscription in full...


The Didache, presumes instruction, fasting by the baptizand, and immersion in living (ie running water)

“And concerning baptism, in this manner baptize: when you have gone over these things, baptize in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, in running water.

If you do not have running water, baptize in other water. If you are not able to use cold water, use warm. And if you have neither, pour water on the head three times, in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. And before baptism, the one baptizing and the one to be baptized should fast, as well as any others who are able. And you should instruct the one being baptized to fast one or two days before.”

Jews circumcised babies according to God's commandment, to become jews since birth. We have to baptize babies to become Christians since birth and to receive Holy Spirit, also for remission of sins. And to receive guardian angel since birth, to be with them from the beginning of their life to guard them from sins. Baptism is the beginning of the Christian life, so it need to be in the beginning of the human life. It must be done by priest in eastern orthodox church, together with chrismation, which is the mark of the Holy Spirit. Because the eastern orthodox church is the one founded in bible, the pillar and ground of the truth according to bible.

Malleeboy said:

Just to be clear, I think the early church normatively baptised on conversion, but did allow infant baptism for near death babies/children. So any statement supporting infant baptism may just be a defence of that practice, not an indication of universal infant baptism.

Click to expand...

again, St Polycarp shows this isn’t the case.

ArmyMatt said:

again, St Polycarp shows this isn’t the case.

Click to expand...

ArmyMatt,

Polycarp does not say he was baptized as a infant. He says he has followed Christ for 86 years, but that is exactly what and how many who were born in a devout credobaptist family would describe their life following Christ, even though they were baptised when they came of an accountable age.

Hekler said:

Jews circumcised babies according to God's commandment, to become jews since birth. We have to baptize babies to become Christians since birth and to receive Holy Spirit, also for remission of sins. And to receive guardian angel since birth, to be with them from the beginning of their life to guard them from sins. Baptism is the beginning of the Christian life, so it need to be in the beginning of the human life. It must be done by priest in eastern orthodox church, together with chrismation, which is the mark of the Holy Spirit. Because the eastern orthodox church is the one founded in bible, the pillar and ground of the truth according to bible.

Click to expand...

Hekler,
Then why do all the earliest examples we have, that give a clear example of when people were baptized, have them not being baptized as infants. Again, given I don't except Polycarp, (cause he simple doesn't mention baptism), go read the early writing and give me the name of the first person baptized as an infant for whom you can give clear written proof of an infant baptism. Or find an inscription that unambiguously records an infant baptism, that is not just prior to death, as I have supplied inscriptions above (btw if anyone wants references to the inscriptions I can provide them).

“For from the infant newly born to the old man bent with age, as there is none shut out from baptism, so there is none who in baptism does not die to sin. But infants die only to original sin; those who are older die also to all the sins which their evil lives have added to the sin they brought with them.” St. Augustine, The Enchiridion, chptr XLIII (43), Gateway Eds. ISBN: 0-89526-938-4, c. 1961.


I tend to think the absence of a controversy re infant baptism in early Christian history attests to it as a norm but not universal. I think St. Augustine is just reiterating something that was ongoing. Why would infants be excluded when ( for ex.) the Holy Spirit fell upon the house of Cornelius ( Acts of the Apostles 10:44-48)?

Malleeboy said:

ArmyMatt,

Polycarp does not say he was baptized as a infant. He says he has followed Christ for 86 years, but that is exactly what and how many who were born in a devout credobaptist family would describe their life following Christ, even though they were baptised when they came of an accountable age.

Click to expand...

he actually said he served Him for 86 years, not just followed him. so you would have to show how back then people understood that one could serve Christ apart from being baptized.

ArmyMatt,

Irenaeus reported that Polycarp was converted by the apostles, if he was baptized as an infant how was he converted by someone?
Are you aware of the Harris fragments, which give an early record (3rd to 6th century) of Polycarp being 104 when he died (which would make his baptism as 18)?

Malleeboy said:

Hekler,
Then why do all the earliest examples we have, that give a clear example of when people were baptized, have them not being baptized as infants. Again, given I don't except Polycarp, (cause he simple doesn't mention baptism), go read the early writing and give me the name of the first person baptized as an infant for whom you can give clear written proof of an infant baptism. Or find an inscription that unambiguously records an infant baptism, that is not just prior to death, as I have supplied inscriptions above (btw if anyone wants references to the inscriptions I can provide them).

Click to expand...

This doesn't matter, the orthodox is the one true catholic church and she know how to proceed.

Malleeboy said:

ArmyMatt,

Irenaeus reported that Polycarp was converted by the apostles, if he was baptized as an infant how was he converted by someone?
Are you aware of the Harris fragments, which give an early record (3rd to 6th century) of Polycarp being 104 when he died (which would make his baptism as 18)?

Click to expand...

why can’t a baby be converted? where does it say that’s an impossibility?

as for the Harris Fragments, no I am not.

ArmyMatt,

Again we each see things from our own, someone being converted as babies just sounds unusual to me.

Anyway for Polycarp -no clear indication of when baptism occurred, Harris fragment records him as 104 on death from 3rd century.

Hekler said:

This doesn't matter, the orthodox is the one true catholic church and she know how to proceed.

Click to expand...

Hekler,

No problem, just asking for evidence but if for you, church says so is enough, that is your choice.
I just don't see apostolic evidence from bible or early church fathers.

Malleeboy said:

ArmyMatt,

Again we each see things from our own, someone being converted as babies just sounds unusual to me.

Anyway for Polycarp -no clear indication of when baptism occurred, Harris fragment records him as 104 on death from 3rd century.

Click to expand...

well, it does not matter if infant baptism sounds odd to you. that’s irrelevant to whether or not it’s true.

and secondly, why should I trust the Harris fragment?

ArmyMatt,

What evidence do you have that Polycarp was baptized as an infant?
Only that he is recorded as saying that he had served Christ for 86 years, and without knowing how old he was when he started serving God, you then presume he started serving God from being an infant, and therefore he was baptized as an infant.

How do you know how old he was when started serving God?
How do you know that he was baptized before he started serving God?

You can mistrust the Harris fragments, but it is the only written indication from the 3rd century of how old Polycarp was when he martyred.

Malleeboy said:

ArmyMatt,

Again we each see things from our own, someone being converted as babies just sounds unusual to me.

Click to expand...

I don't know any church body that thinks babies are converted to disciples at Baptism. For the sake of the discussion, if you do know one or several, this might be a good time to reveal whom you have in mind.