Replies

On Pentecost, Peter commanded them all to be baptized, including their children. Whole households were baptized (Acts 16:33; 1 Cor. 1:16). Baptism is the Christian equivalent of circumcision, and circumcision was done, as you may know, on the eighth day. From the time of Abraham, it has been known that entering into the covenant did not depend upon being old enough to believe for oneself. The same is true of the New Covenant.

St. Irenaeus [189 AD], for example, writes, "Christ came to save all who are reborn through Him to God, infants, children, and youths".

Origen [248 AD] says, "In the Church, baptism is given for the remission of sins, and, according to the usage of the Church, baptism is given even to infants. If there were nothing in infants which required the remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous" (Homilies on Leviticus 8:3).

Again, Origin writes, "The Church received from the apostles the tradition of giving baptism even to infants. The apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of the divine sacraments, knew there are in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit" (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

Gregory of Nazianz [388 AD] writes, "Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal [of baptism] because of the weakness of nature? Oh, what a pusillanimous mother and of how little faith!" (Oration on Holy Baptism 40:7) He also writes, "‘Well enough,’ some will say, ‘for those who ask for baptism, but what do you have to say about those who are still children, and aware neither of loss nor of grace? Shall we baptize them too?’ Certainly [I respond], if there is any pressing danger. Better that they be sanctified unaware, than that they depart unsealed and uninitiated" (ibid., 40:28).

Augustine writes, ""What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

"The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic" (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

"Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born" (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

-A8

On Pentecost, Peter commanded them all to be baptized, including their children. Whole households were baptized (Acts 16:33; 1 Cor. 1:16). Baptism is the Christian equivalent of circumcision, and circumcision was done, as you may know, on the eighth day. From the time of Abraham, it has been known that entering into the covenant did not depend upon being old enough to believe for oneself. The same is true of the New Covenant.

If "baptism" is equivalent to circumcision, it would come as a shock to those who practiced both - ancient Jews. Many "Christians" incorrectly think that "baptism" is a "New Testament" thing. It is not. The mikvah has been a part of Judaism since ancient times. No one was shocked at John when he told them to repent and be immersed. The Temple in Jerusalem had huge mikvot (immersion pools) at the entrance. Everyone entering during festival time (yes, Shavuot [Pentecost] is a commanded festival. Immersion was a part of religious life. The average "Christian" may be shocked to know that it is still a part of Judaism. A ancient ruling said that if a village could not afford a synagogue and a mikveh (an immersion pool), they should build a mikveh first.

So, no - immersion was not a "Christian" invention - and it is not the same or an equivalent to circumcision. Immersion, in the Hebrew Scriptures signified a CHANGE IN STATUS (especially repentance), circumcision signified a CHANGE IN IDENTITY. Not the same then, not the same now.

You gave me no scriptures where it says babies were baptized. There are many households that could be baptized without including children. Surely if this was such important dogma at least one example of a child obeying the gospel would have been given in the word. I did not ask for a bunch of your "Father's" opinions on the matter just scripture.