Baptism: Infant or Believers’? To consider evidence for believers’ baptism and for infant baptism To evaluate Augustine’s defence of infant baptism

Does anything actually happen to this baby, when it gets baptised “in the name of the Father, Son & Holy Spirit” ?

The first Christians were people who heard the message preached by the Apostles, and believed in it. They were baptised when they publically proclaimed that they repented of sin, and had faith in Christ. St. Paul converted and was baptised, after his vision of Jesus. Look up and present under what conditions the following were baptised: Acts 8:12 Samaritans Acts 8:25-36 Ethiopian Acts 16:14-15 Lydia Acts 19:5-6 JB Disciples Most NT account of baptisms, are of people who believed the message, and then were baptised. No cases are recorded of baptising those who did not express faith. Is this surprising?

Baptising infants? To Nicodemus Jesus said “no-one can enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless he be born of water and the Holy Spirit” (Jn 3:5) When people were bringing children to Jesus to bless, Jesus said to his disciples Jesus said “do not stop them”(Lk 18:15) In the Great Commission, Jesus’ final instructions to his disciples were: “Go, make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded”. (Mt 28:19) In the NT, the Apostles baptised “whole households” which would have included infants. Peter preached that “the promise (of God’s offer of salvation in Christ) is made for you and for your children”(Acts 2:38-9) So most accounts of baptism in the NT are of people becoming believers, and then being baptised. But the texts above could allow infants to be baptized as well. What should we conclude? What sort of baptism do these texts imply? Adult believers, or infants? Write out 3 and explain.

Early Church Tradition & Augustine The Apostles were said to have baptised infants, and the practice was believed to have Apostolic Authority Most of the Church Fathers all supported infant baptism Only Tertullian (160AD) said baptism should be delayed until faith could be expressed But no-one could explain why…after all, baptism is “for the forgiveness of sins” and is the expression of faith in Christ – infants can do neither… 4th Century - growing sacramentalism: that baptism is effective in itself to give God’s grace, pouring the love of God and strength of the Holy Spirit, which would help a person to grow in Christian life. Infants should receive this benefit too. Augustine’s doctrine of Original Sin: we are born with a corrupt human nature, inherited from Adam – we are under God’s anger, as much as he was. But baptism gives us a new birth, in a new humanity – Christ’s. It washes away the guilt of Original Sin. Infants also deserve to have this. Read Augustine’s defense of infant baptism. What are his main points of argument? Do you agree with them? To what extent?

Should infants be baptised? What are the arguments FOR? AGAINST?

Augustine on Baptism Replies to two problems: how can infants be baptised - if they have no sins to be forgiven of if they cannot express belief Read Augustine’s defence of infant baptism. How does he reply to each problem? Does he persuade you that infants should in fact be baptized?

A VISIBLE SIGN OF INVISIBLE GRACE What is a Sacrament? A VISIBLE SIGN OF INVISIBLE GRACE A sacrament consists of tangible and visible symbols, chosen by God, which convey the grace of God to the person receiving it. The sacramental objects, used in the context of faith, have spiritual qualities, making God’s grace present NOT MAGIC! Don’t work about from our disposition and will. Increase effectiveness and activity of God’s spirit in us.

Protestants and Sacraments Anti medieval-Church/ Papal authority: “getting back to basics”. Repudiate all practices that do not have a scriptural warrant ie not in the NT… Sola scriptura: is this practice in the bible? does it make someone rely on the Word of God, in faith? Sola fide (Justification by faith): sacraments seem to be “good works”, claiming to bring God’s grace apart from the faith of that person

Protestant view of Sacraments Not “good works”. Cannot bring justifying grace, since this only comes by faith. Sacraments can only strengthen faith, reminding us of God’s promises & to put our trust in them Are only a personal action, a public sign to show one’s faith and belonging to the Christian religion The person’s faith in Christ, makes these rituals meaningful as expressions of faith – and therefore bring God’s grace. ex opere operantis: “out of the work of our working” (faith in Christ). Our faith attitude to them is what makes sacraments effective. The blessings received depend on the faith and love shown. PROTESTANT ex opere operato – they are effective “out of the work worked” by Christ. It is not our faith that matters, but what Christ has already done, and we simply receive. The sacraments are effective in themselves, because of him. Receiving them, is effective in bringing God’s grace to the person in a distinctive way (not just “blessings of faith”) CATHOLIC

How do Protestants see the Sacraments and why How do Protestants see the Sacraments and why? How is this different from the Catholic view? Justification by faith Ex opere operantis

Would Zwingli have agreed with infant baptism? Why? To discuss: Do you think baptism is about being a sign of commitment & trust in God? Or more than this? Would Zwingli have agreed with infant baptism? Why? What would Augustine have replied? Zwingli was a Reformer in the 16th Century. He served as an army chaplain to the Swiss Confederacy He thought of sacraments as similar to when a soldier makes an oath of allegiance: so baptism is a pledge to prove to the Church that someone intends to be a soldier of Christ They come to faith, through hearing the word of preaching. Then they get baptised to publically swear loyalty to this faith. So baptism in Zwingli’s view does not do anything – it does not give them any grace, or help to salvation – it is just a sign of identity and commitment. It reminds the person of God’s promises to them in Christ, and commits them in their own faith – it is a sign of their faithful response to God. Hearing the Gospel preached Coming to faith Baptism as a way of publically demonstrating allegiance & identity

Catholic View Ex opere operato – out of the work worked by Christ In two columns, compare the Catholic (substantial) and Protestant (symbolic) views of baptism Which do you agree with and why? Ex opere operato – out of the work worked by Christ Not signs of faith or of belonging, but effective and distinctive means of grace: Baptism confers an indelible character A change at the deepest level of their being – an “ontological” change (change in ‘being’) The person is a “new creation” in Christ (1 Cor 2:13) It incorporates them as members of the “Body of Christ” - living stones of the Church - it is not like joining a club or society. Nothing apart from baptism can do this. It is the distinctive role of this particular sacrament.

Karl Barth Circumcision Baptism Jewish: in faith and in identity How was Barth’s view of baptism different from the Jewish understanding of circumcision? Baptism Christian in faith and in identity

Nazi Germany Baptism, and true Christianity, must be a free, personal, faith response to show that a person has been moved by the Holy Spirit and now truly believes and accepts Christ in their life. It is their faith response to the Spirit working in their life. Barth opposed infant baptism because: SPIRIT moves  FAITH in CHRIST  BAPTISM as FAITH RESPONSE, pledge of obedience Infant baptism is not a faith response. It is not freely given. It is coercive and therefore subjectively invalid: “it is not done in obedience, it is not administered according to proper order (ie faith first), and therefore it is necessarily clouded baptism”.   Barth also asked: how can any human action, even a sacramental one, compel God to save? Nothing can force God to give grace. God can act earlier or later in the life of that person. God is not bound by the rite of the Church. Baptism only represents Jesus’ saving death and resurrection in a symbolic way. Baptism is only an image of his saving death, not the reality.

Role Play A baptism as if you were a Zwinglian Reformer A baptism as if you were a Catholic priest in a way that explains to them what their baptism is about.

Complete the sentences.. Barth thought baptism was… He disagreed with infant baptism because… He did not think that baptism could… Which aspect of Barth’s ideas might you challenge? Why?

Compare differences between Protestant & Catholic understanding of baptism Faith of believer (believer’s baptism) vs. faith of parents/ community & promise of upbringing in faith Sign of free personal commitment (Zwingli, Barth) vs. receiving indelible character/ ontological change, removal Original Sin in exchange for corrupt nature (Augustine) Effective only by faith (ex opere operantis) vs effective by God’s guarantee in Christ (ex opere operato)