4 a Baptism: Infant or Believers’?

Religious identity through diversity in baptism: The case for infant baptism by Augustine and Zwingli (the role of baptism in salvation; the role and importance of Christian parents); the case for believer’s baptism with reference to Karl Barth (the example of Christ; importance of consent).

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

4 a Biblical evidence baptism and theologians ideas on baptism Infant baptism Luke 18:15 Acts 2:38-9 John 3:5 Apostles Augustine - Sacrament - A VISIBLE SIGN OF INVISIBLE GRACE Zwingli Adult baptism Acts 8:12 Samaritans Acts 8:25-36 Ethiopian Acts 16:14-15 Lydia Acts 19:5-6 JB Disciples Tertullian (160AD) Barth

Do you need faith to be baptised? The first Christians were people who heard the message preached by the Apostles, and believed in it. They were baptised when they publically proclaimed repentance from sin and faith in Christ. St. Paul was baptised, after his vision of Jesus converted him to repentance and faith in Christ. Read and explain 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?

Acts 8:12 New International Version (NIV) 12 But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Acts 16:14-15 New International Version (NIV) 14 One of those listening was a woman from the city of Thyatira named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth. She was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message. 15 When she and the members of her household were baptized, she invited us to her home. “If you consider me a believer in the Lord,” she said, “come and stay at my house.” And she persuaded us Acts 19:5-6 New International Version (NIV) 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them,and they spoke in tongues[a] and prophesied

Philip and the Ethiopian 26 Now an angel of the Lord said to Philip, “Go south to the road—the desert road—that goes down from Jerusalem to Gaza.” 27 So he started out, and on his way he met an Ethiopian[a] eunuch, an important official in charge of all the treasury of the Kandake (which means “queen of the Ethiopians”). This man had gone to Jerusalem to worship, 28 and on his way home was sitting in his chariot reading the Book of Isaiah the prophet. 29 The Spirit told Philip, “Go to that chariot and stay near it.” 30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked. 31 “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him. 32 This is the passage of Scripture the eunuch was reading: “He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,     and as a lamb before its shearer is silent,     so he did not open his mouth. 33 In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.     Who can speak of his descendants?     For his life was taken from the earth.”[b] 34 The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” 35 Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus. 36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?”

Other texts suggest that infants can be baptised (no faith)…explain how the quotes show this. To Nicodemus Jesus said “no-one can enter the Kingdom of Heaven unless he be born of water and the Holy Spirit” (John 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 and Augustine The Apostles were said to have baptised infants, so 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. God’s love is poured out, and the strength of the Holy Spirit – this helps a person to grow in Christian life. Infants should receive this benefit too. Faith is present in the faith of the baptising Church, and of the parents/ godparents. 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 or 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?

What is a Sacrament? A VISIBLE SIGN OF INVISIBLE GRACE consists of tangible and visible symbols, chosen by God these 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 apart from our disposition and will.

Augustine Catholic View Not just 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.

Protestants and Sacraments Anti-Papal authority/ anti-medieval Church: “getting back to basics”. Protestants reject all practices that do not have a scriptural basis 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” claim to convey God’s grace, objectively, and “ex opere operato”, out of the work of Christ (a personal expression of faith from that person is not necessary)

Protestant view of Sacraments No “good works”. No justifying grace, except by faith. Sacraments only symbolic: are expressions of faith, public signs of commitment and useful for strengthening faith Only meaningful, and effective, because of the person’s faith in Christ, RECEIVE

Baptism as public sign of loyalty and Christian identity To discuss: Would Zwingli have agreed with infant baptism? Why? What would Augustine have replied? Summarise Zwingli’s view in the second column of your table. 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: baptism is a public pledge of loyalty to serving Christ. Hearing the word of preaching (kerygma) brings them to faith, then they get baptised as a sign of this faith. So baptism in Zwingli’s view does not do anything – it does not give 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. Hearing the kerygma Coming to faith Baptism as public sign of loyalty and Christian identity Complete the questions on page 6

Believers Baptism - Karl Barth The New Testament focuses on Baptism following faith – many examples. The return to adult baptism began during the reformation – Anabaptist groups – re-baptism. It was condemned by the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in 1547. Karl Barth Baptism is a human not divine act. Jesus is the sacrament – the outward sign of God’s invisible grace – not baptism. It is not right that the church claims it has the authority to give out God’s grace So infant baptism is an attempt by the church to control God God’s salvation is free of human control. Infant baptism is coercive and not ethical. It is not a personal faith response. It is 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”. Baptism can only represent Jesus’ saving death and resurrection in a symbolic way. It is only an image of Christ’s saving death, not the reality – which has to be received by faith. Summarise Barth’s view, in your table.

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

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?

AO1 Compare differences between adult and infant baptism Faith of believer (believer’s baptism) vs. faith of parents/ community & promise of upbringing in faith Sign of free personal commitment (Barth) vs. receiving indelible character/ ontological change, removal Original Sin in exchange for corrupt nature (Augustine) Effective only by faith vs effective by God’s guarantee in Christ

Essay Planning AO1 – Explain the case for believers baptism Intro – What is baptism – part of the 7 Sacraments of the Catholic Church and considered to be a sacrament of initiation is many other Christian Traditions. Para 1 – What is believer’s baptism and how is it different from other forms of baptism? Refer to biblical background – Jesus was Baptised as an adult and at the time of his baptism he encourages the disciples to be baptised as adult believers. Para 2 – other Biblical evidence for believers baptism. Para 3 – The Anabaptists – what did they argue and why? Para 4 – What does Karl Barth teach about believer’s baptism?

‘Infant baptism is unnecessary as it doesn’t express the commitment of the person being baptised’ ETV Is unnecessary Is necessary Evaluation It’s about the parents – no commitment from the infant   It is an act of God – it removes original sin and is effective through the water John 3:5 Parents often have to go to preparation classes and make promises It is a form of child abuse – Barth - it is not done in obedience, it is not administered according to proper order (ie faith first), and therefore it is necessarily clouded baptism”. It is about the commitment of the whole congregation. It is initiation into the church the ‘body of Christ’ ‘What a child should never be taught is that you are a Catholic or Muslim child… That’s child abuse.’ Dawkins Jesus was baptised as an adult – lots of examples of adult baptism after faith Infant baptism in the Bible and early Church Adult baptism focuses too much on the role of the individual and less on the role of God

A02 – To what extent are both infant and adult baptism simply symbolic acts? They are simply symbolic acts They are more than symbolic acts They are full of symbolic acts – washing away of sins and anointing with oil. To say baptism is more than symbolic limits God’s freedom and puts the power of salvation into the hands of the church. Augustine would argue that Baptism changes the life of the recipient and is therefore not a symbolic action. God causes an ontological change – a change of being It ingrafts us into Jesus’ body. Zwingli – it is a sign and seal of the covenant just like circumcision. This could be argued to be purely symbolic. It is a sacrament – imparting grace. So not just a symbol. It is an image of salvation history. An image must therefore symbolic. It unites us with Christ absolutely - Brunner