Baptism: Church Fathers

> Baptism > AnteNicene Fathers

Introduction

Views Of Baptism
The AnteNicene Church Fathers
The following is a collection of quotations taken from the AnteNicene Church Fathers. There has been absolutely no attempt to select only those quotations that reflect only one view of baptism. Instead, every statement that could be found that defined a Father's belief about baptism is included, up to the 4th century controversy about rebaptizing heretics. (Some of Tertullian's remarks in his essay on the subject were excluded for the sake of brevity, not because they revealed a differing viewpoint.) Mostly, each Father was a prominent and well respected bishop at the time they wrote and were considered to represent the orthodox view of the Church in most matters about which they wrote or spoke. Some of the earlier Fathers were even instructed directly by the Apostles or by those bishops whom the Apostles had directly appointed and taught. These men were often the primary, literary defenders of the Faith against various heresies that arose between the Apostles' time and the Council of Nicea in 325 a.d. Most of the believers in each Father's time generally considered what they said to be authoritative doctrine.
Regardless, their overwhelming, consistent testimony over a period of more than 250 years of the Church's earliest history, and their conformity to and exposition of scriptural statements concerning baptism, teach us what the original, Apostolic doctrine was.
Considering today's Evangelical interpretation of baptism, it is necessary to understand that the early Fathers' teachings do not change or replace the Biblical statements, nor should they. Instead, they affirm what the Bible teaches to anyone who simply reads the scriptures for themselves without benefit of commentaries biased by historical and philosophical developments of the last 800 years. It is significant that the first "exceptional" case mentioned in such writings did not occur until about 251 a.d. [=> Novation] The fact that such a case arose at all in Cyprian's time, testifies to the importance placed on baptism from the beginning.
In the following quotations, the words "regeneration" and "illumination" are to be understood as synonyms for or ideas connected with baptism (which the fuller context of the passages clearly show). The Fathers seemed unafraid to refer to baptism in such terms for so they had been taught. This is significant in view of today's hostility toward the doctrine of "baptismal regeneration" and Augustine's earlier doctrine of "total depravity". The word "laver" indirectly refers to the giant basin set before the Temple in which the priests immersed themselves for cleansing before entering the Temple for service, and was a synonym for the baptistry.
It should also be observed that ALL of the writers unequivocably connected baptism with the remission of sins. Nor did they ever talk of baptism of the Spirit as a replacement for water baptism, or of TWO baptisms (into Christ). The reader should also note the continual interpretation of Jesus' words to Nicodemus, "Except a man be BORN OF WATER and the spirit, he can never enter the kingdom of God," (Jn 3:5) as referring to baptism for the remission of sins. Some of today's preachers, to get around Jesus' words have interpreted "water" to be the birth waters spilled from a mother's womb! They can only maintain such a teaching because there is such a terrible lack of knowledge about how the Fathers interpreted Jesus' words. (Calvin interpreted "water" to be a metaphorical restatement of "Spirit" [Institutes, Book 4, Ch. 16, Sec. 25].)
There has been some simple editing of the translations given in Eerdman's edition in order to reflect the context of the brief quote or to make the part quoted make grammatical sense. Every effort has been made to not destroy or alter the Father's meaning or context. Since the English edition is widely available in libraries or on the Internet, verification of the quotations can be easily accomplished. In any event, it is quite clear from the quotations, what was the overall doctrine taught in the Church for the first 250 (actually, 1800) years, concerning baptism.

Epistle of Barnabas  (ca 130 a.d.)

This was an epistle written by an unknown author. Many features of style and vocabulary are shared by this author and that of Hebrews, which causes some scholars today to speculate both epistles had the same author.
"...baptism, which results in remission of sins..."
"If they have placed their trust in the cross, have gone DOWN INTO the water, they are blessed, because... they shall receive their reward in due time."
"...we DESCEND INTO the WATER, full of SINS AND FILTH, but COME UP [out of the water], bearing fruit in our heart, together with the fear of God and trust in Jesus in our spirit."
Notice that, contrary to the modern Evangelical viewpoint, according to Barnabas, the person being baptized was still "full of sins"--that they had not yet been forgiven, even though they had already believed.

Justin Martyr  (ca 150 ad)

Starting out as a pagan philosopher, he became one of the first of the great apologists of the faith, he wrote to the Emporer Titus, explaining the Christian faith in an effort to put an end to persecution and gain recognitition for the Church. He also sought to persuade the Jew, Trypho and his friends to believe in Jesus as Messiah. He also opposed Marcion.
First Apology (Chapter 61)
"Those who are PERSUADED and BELIEVE that what we teach and say is true...are instructed to pray and ask God with fasting, FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS that are past. (We also pray and fast with them). Then they are BROUGHT by us to where there is WATER, and are REGENERATED in the same way in which we ourselves were REGENERATED: in the name of God...and of our savior, Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they receive the WASHING WITH WATER. Christ said, `Except you are born again you shall not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.'"
"In order that he may obtain IN THE WATER, the REMISSION OF SINS formerly committed, the name of God the Father is pronounced over whoever CHOOSES to be BORN AGAIN, and has REPENTED of his sins,"

Justin agrees with Paul (cf Acts) that, even before we are reborn, our minds and wills are free enough and able to be persuaded by arguments and scripture of the truth, and free to believe and to choose what is right. It is clear that only one who has been persuaded of the truth of the gospel, has believed and repented can be baptized. (This provokes the question: is an infant able to fulfill these three requirements?) His words leave no doubt that he is speaking of water baptism rather than some metaphorical or subjective experience. He emphatically connects water baptism with cleansing, regeneration, and Christ's words to Nicodemus. Jesus' words leave no room to suppose that a repentant believer is able to enter God's kingdom by spirit alone--without water [of baptism].

Dialogue with Trypho (Chapter 14)
"Righteousness is not found in Jewish rites, but is found in the CONVERSION OF THE HEART which is given by Christ IN BAPTISM."
"that same BAPTISM is a LAVER OF REPENTANCE and [and gives a] knowledge of God, and...is ALONE able to PURIFY those who have REPENTED, and this is the WATER OF LIFE."

Notice that Justin states that by means of baptism, Jesus causes a change of heart and the baptized one becomes right with God. He also says that there is no other way of being purified. Note, too, that he says that those who have repented (and one supposes, believed) have still not been purified until they are baptized. From Justin's words in these two documents, we may conclude that he believed that baptism was absolutely necessary (John 3:3,5) for entering God's kingdom and obtaining life.

Clement of Alexandria  (ca 180 a.d.)

Originally a pagan philosopher from the Greek schools, after converting to Christianity, he sought out the best teachers he could find, eventually settling in Alexandria, Egypt. He taught Origen (who succeeded him) and Alexander (later bishop of Jerusalem) and Hippolytus. He came to head the catechetical school at Alexandra and was acclaimed by Jerome to have surpassed all others in his learning, understanding and explanation. He was also a Presbyter. He was said to be the founder of Christian literature, showing the uselessness and bother of all the pagan mythologies and the superiority and usefulness of Christianity.
The Instructor (Chapter 6)
"Immediately, in our REGENERATION, we obtained that perfection which we sought, for we were illuminated, which is to know God."
"But He (Christ) was perfected by the WASHING OF BAPTISM, ALONE, and [He] was sanctified by the descent of the Spirit... The same also occurs in our case.
Christ thus became our example.

BEING BAPTIZED, we are illuminated;
being illuminated, WE BECOME SONS;
being made sons, we are made perfect...immortal.

This act is variously called grace, illumination, and perfection, and WASHING;

washing, BY WHICH WE CLEANSE AWAY OUR SINS;
grace, BY WHICH THE PENALTIES accruing to transgressions ARE REMITTED; and
illumination, BY WHICH THE HOLY LIGHT OF SALVATION IS BEHELD. That is, BY WHICH WE SEE GOD CLEARLY."

"Thus believing alone, AND regeneration, is perfection in life;"
"We who are baptized, AFTER WE WIPED OFF THE SINS which hide the light of the Divine Spirit...gaze upon the Divine, while the Holy Spirit FLOWS down to us from above."
"...our transgressions were taken away by the baptism of the Word [Eph 5:26]. We are WASHED FROM ALL OUR SINS...our characters are not the same AS BEFORE OUR WASHING."
"After repenting of our sins, renouncing our iniquities, and being PURIFIED BY BAPTISM, we speed back to the eternal light, children to the Father."
"...so that we may become a new, holy people by REGENERATION, and may keep the man undefiled."
"...such is the union of the Word with baptism...FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLEANSING,"

Clement says that NOT UNTIL baptism--"our regeneration"--are we "illuminated" and by this means become a child of God and thus become perfect. He also says that, because "we are washed from all our sins," our characters are different after our baptism. It is perfectly clear that Clement does NOT believe we are cleansed from sin and are forgiven and are become a child of God the instant we believe. If this is not so, then what did Clement mean by saying our characters are different AFTER our baptism?

The Stromata, or Miscellanies (Chapter 4) Heretics in Clement's time maintained that FAITH was NOT the result of free (will) choice, but a result of one's nature or character. To them he said,
"...If that is true, is there now a use for the REPENTANCE of him who was once an unbeliever, by which comes forgiveness of sins? So too, neither is baptism rational, nor the blessed seal, nor the Son, nor the Father."

Note the result on arguments about "freedom of the will" and "total depravity".

(Chapter 15) "...as one no longer WASHED TO THE FORGIVENSS OF SINS."
(Chapter 24) "...those who fall into sin after baptism [LOUTRON: washing] are subjected to discipline; for the deeds done before ARE REMITTED [by the washing!], and those done after are purged."
(Chapter 26) [citing Job 1:21 and Matt 18:3] "...also He GENERATED us from our mother--THE WATER."

Clement, like Justin, believed that only PAST sins were cleansed by baptism, implying they had been influenced by the "Shepherd of Hermas" epistle. Note also, his clever comparison between our fleshly mothers who first gave us birth, and the WATER of baptism which, as a second mother, gives us our rebirth.

Irenaeus  (ca 185 a.d.)

After being raised in a Christian family, he later became the second Bishop of Lyons in Gaul (France), following after Pothinus, and had been taught by Polycarp and Ignatius, who had been directly taught by the Apostle John.
Against Heresies (Bk III, Chapter 17)
1. "The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because He has anointed Me." (Isa 61:1) That is the Spirit of whom the Lord declares, "For it is not you that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaks in you." (Mt 10:20) And again, giving to the disciples THE POWER OF REGENERATION into God, He said to them," Go and teach all nations, BAPTIZING THEM in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Mt 28:19) ...
2. ...Wherefore also the Lord promised to send the Comforter, (Jn 16:7) who should join us to God. For as a compacted lump of dough cannot be formed of DRY wheat without fluid matter, nor can a loaf possess unity, so in like manner, neither could we, being many, be made one in Christ Jesus without the water from heaven. And as DRY earth does not bring forth unless it receives moisture, in like manner we also, being originally a DRY tree, could never have brought forth fruit unto life without the voluntary rain from above. For our bodies have received unity among themselves by means of that laver which leads to incorruption; but our souls, by means of the Spirit. Wherefore both are necessary, since both contribute towards the life of God...

Notice that before, and without the water of baptism, Irenaeus compares us to DRY flour, DRY soil and a DRY tree. Without the water of baptism, the individual members--like unmoistened dough--cannot be joined nor held together. Our bodies are joined together (in the Church) by means of the baptismal laver which leads to incorruption, as our souls are joined by the Spirit. BOTH, he says, are necessary! (Jesus' own words: John 3:5)

Clement of Rome  (ca 150 a.d. - 250 a.d.)

He was the third Bishop of Rome, following after Linus, and had personally heard both Peter and Paul speak.
Recognitions of Clement (Bk I, Chapter 39) [to prevent (the Jews) from supposing] "that when the sacrifices stopped [due to the destruction of the Temple], there was no REMISSION OF SINS for them, He [Christ] instituted BAPTISM BY WATER...by this means they might BE ABSOLVED FROM ALL THEIR SINS when they called on His name..." [Acts 22:16]
(Bk IV, Chapter 8-9) "this is His will: that you BE BORN ANEW BY MEANS OF WATER...For He who has been REGENERATED IN INCORRUPTION has made the one WHO IS REGENERATED BY WATER His heir.
Therefore, with your minds prepared, as if already sons, approach to the father so that your SINS MAY BE WASHED AWAY..." "Even if you cultivate all piety and all righteousness, BUT DO NOT RECEIVE BAPTISM, do you suppose that you can have hope towards God? ...God has ORDERED every one who worships Him to be SEALED BY BAPTISM; but if you refuse, and obey your own will rather than God's, you are certainly contrary and hostile to His will."
"when you are REGENERATED AND BORN AGAIN OF WATER and of God...you shall be able to attain salvation; but OTHERWISE IT IS IMPOSSIBLE! For Jesus said, 'unless a man is born again of water, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.' [Jn 3:5] ...there is IN THESE WATERS A CERTAIN POWER OF MERCY...souls are consecrated by baptism." "...these WATERS, for they ALONE can quench the violence of the future fire, and concerning he who delays to approach them, it is clear that the idol of unbelief remains in him. ...the WATERS WHICH BESTOW SALVATION."
"whether you be righteous or unrighteous, BAPTISM IS NECESSARY for you in every respect."
Sermons of Clement, (Sermon 7, Chapter 22-23)
"receive the clean wedding garment which is baptism, which is FOR THE THE REMISSION OF the SINS done by you..." "you are dressed in a foul garment which you cannot otherwise put off than by being FIRST BAPTIZED in good works. And thus being pure in body and soul, you shall enjoy the future eternal kingdom."

Tertullian  (ca 190 a.d.)

An apologist who wrote mostly in Latin, but who clearly understood and sometimes used Greek as well. He was a presbyter in an African church. Of all the Fathers, he alone most rejected the use of, and even less, an interest in Greek and Roman philosophy, asking the pertinent question: "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?" Philosophers are always seeking the truth; Christians have found it and know Him! Sadly, the Church chose not to listen and continues to do so even today--at its peril. He wrote the longest essay on baptism of any of the Fathers. In his later life, he joined with Montanus, whom he had earlier opposed. This was possibly out of despair of seeing a reformation in the increasingly imoral Church of his day. (Montanism can be seen as a movement attempting to call the Church of that day back to basics and purity.)
Against Marcion
(Chapter 28) "...REGENERATION of man...WASHES man...into this SACRAMENT OF SALVATION wholly plunges that flesh..."
On Repentance,
(Chapter 4) "...what God requires is good and best. I consider it daring to argue about the goodness of a divine precept. It is not the fact that the precept is good which binds us to obey, but the fact that God has required it. [So, consider Matt 28:19!]
(Chapter 6) [Arguing against those who delayed baptism after their repentance because of the belief that baptism resulted in the forgiveness of all PAST sins only, and that such forgiveness was only available once, he said,] "in earning the favor of God...they trust in repentance, BUT NEGLECT TO COMPLETE IT. They have a presumptuous confidence in baptism which introduces all kinds of terrible delays and contradictory ideas concerning repentance. Because they feel sure that their sins will CERTAINLY BE PARDONED [when they are baptized], they steal the intervening time [between their repentance and their baptism] and make it...a holiday for sinning."
"...the divine gift--I mean the PUTTING AWAY OF SINS--is in every way certain for those who are...ENTERING THE WATER."
On Baptism
(Chapter 1) "Happy is our SACRAMENT of WATER, because that, BY WASHING AWAY THE SINS of our early blindness, we ARE SET FREE and ADMITTED INTO ETERNAL LIFE."
(Chapter 2) "Is it not wonderful that DEATH should BE WASHED AWAY BY BATHING? But it is because we believe `The foolish things of the world which God has chosen to confound the wise.'"
(Chapter 4) "All waters...attain the SACRAMENTAL POWER of SANCTIFICATION, for the Spirit immediately is added [=> supervenes] from the heavens."
"...since we are defiled by sins, as if by dirt, we should be WASHED from those stains in WATER."

If baptism is only a ceremony, why does Tertullian say it has POWER to sanctify?

(Chapter 5) "...death being done away with through WASHING OF SIN."
(Chapter 6) "...faith, that is sealed in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, obtains THE WASHING AWAY OF SINS, by means of which the Holy Spirit is about to come upon us."
(Chapter 7) "The act of BAPTISM itself is carnal [i.e. physical], because we are plunged in WATER, but the RESULT is spiritual, because WE ARE FREED FROM SINS."
(Chapter 8) "...our flesh, as it EMERGES from the font, AFTER its old sins [are washed away], THEN flies the dove of the Holy Spirit [to our hearts]."
(Chapter 9) "the nations are SET FREE FROM THE WORLD by means of WATER."
(Chapter 10) [After presenting his case, that John's baptism was only for repentance in order to prepare the way for the remission of sins: "...by saying that John 'baptized for repentance only, but that One would come to baptize with the Spirit and fire;'--[I mean] of course that true and stable faith is BAPTIZED WITH WATER, UNTO SALVATION, but pretended and weak faith is baptized with fire, unto judgement."
(Chapter 11) Before Jesus' death "His disciples used to baptize, as ministers, with [the baptism] which John, as forerunner, had before baptized. Let none think it was with some other [baptism], because no other exists, except that of Christ afterward (which in John's time, of course, could not be given by His disciples, since the glory of the Lord had not yet been fully attained, nor the EFFICACY OF THE FONT established through the passion and the resurrection)..."

Compare Tertullian's teaching with Calvin's (Institutes, Bk 4, 15.7) where he says that there was no difference between John's baptism and the apostles' baptism in the name of Jesus, based on a similarity of words used to describe the two baptisms (i.e. "of repentance for the remission of sins" Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3; 24:47). Calvin denied any difference whatsoever between John's baptism and the apostles' done in the name of Jesus.

(Chapter 12) "WITHOUT BAPTISM, SALVATION is attainable BY NONE, chiefly on the basis of that declaration of the Lord, who says, `Unless one be BORN OF THE WATER, he has not life.'"
[Answering some objections that baptism is unnecessary:]

The apostles, except Paul, were not baptized: "Since Paul is the only one of them who has 'put on the garment of' Christ's baptism [Gal 3:26-27], either the DANGER of all the others who LACK THE WATER OF CHRIST is prejudged, that the requirement/command may be maintained, or else the requirement is rescinded IF salvation has been ordained EVEN FOR THE UNBAPTIZED." "...since the opposers of the Lord [i.e. Pharisees and scribes] refused to be baptized, [it follows that] they who followed the Lord were baptized..." "since the Lord Himself had defined baptism to be SINGLE [Jn 13-9-10]; (saying to Peter...'He who has ONCE BATHED has no necessity TO WASH a second time,' which, of course, He would NOT have said at all to one NOT BAPTIZED) even here we have an emphatic proof AGAINST THOSE WHO, in order to destroy the SACRAMENT OF WATER, deprive the apostles even of John's baptism. [i.e. through their speculations and arguments]

(Chapter 13) [Continuing the answers to objections:]

That Abraham pleased God without being baptized: "In all cases, new things have more authority than the old." "before the passion and resurrection of the Lord, there was salvation by means of bare faith. But now that faith has been enlarged, and has become a faith which believes in His nativity, passion, and resurrection, there has been an amplification added to the sacrament [of faith], namely, the SEALING ACT OF BAPTISM. This act is the clothing, in some sense, of the faith which before was bare, but which cannot now exist without its proper law. For the LAW OF BAPTISM has been IMPOSED..." [Mt 28:19] Jesus' own words, "`Unless a man has been reborn of water and spirit, he shall not enter the Kingdom of the Heavens,' [Jn 3:5] has tied faith to the NECESSITY OF BAPTISM. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers used to be baptized. ...Paul, when he believed, was baptized."

(Chapter 15) "There is to us one, and but one, baptism; not only according to the Lord's gospel [eg Jn 13:9-10: 'he who has once bathed...'], but according also to the apostle's letters [Eph 4:4-6]." "So we enter the font, once; ONCE are sins WASHED AWAY."
(Chapter 17) [About who can baptize:] "If bishops, or priests, or deacons, are not present, other disciples are called (i.e. to the work). ...baptism can be administered by all. ...how believable is it, that Paul, who has not permitted a woman even to learn with over-boldness, should give a female the power of teaching and of baptizing?"
(Chapter 18) [concerning the early baptism of infants and small children, he said,] "What is the need (for there is no need) to endanger the sponsors [of the infant or child]? Because [the sponsors] may fail...or be deceived... So, let the little ones become Christians when they have become able to know Christ." (through hearing, understanding and believing the gospel) "Let them know how to 'ask' for salvation, that you may seem to have given 'to him that asks.'" "If any understand the WEIGHTY IMPORTANCE of baptism, they will fear its [too soon] reception more than its delay."
(Chapter 19) [concerning when to baptize:] "every day is the Lord's; every hour, every time, is suitable for baptism."
(Chapter 20) [About how the candidate should prepare:] "They who are about to enter baptism ought to pray with repeated prayers, fasts, and bendings of the knee, and vigils all the night through, and with the confession of all past sins..."
"...when you ASCEND from that most sacred font of your NEW BIRTH..."
On the Resurrection of the Flesh
(Chapter 48) [concerning the baptism for the dead - 1 Cor 15]
since "some are also baptized for the dead," we will see whether there be a good reason for this. [they] suppose that the PROXY BAPTISM (in question) would be BENEFICIAL to THE FLESH OF ANOTHER in anticipation of the resurrection; for unless it were a bodily resurrection, there would be no pledge secured by this process of a corporeal baptism. ...it is not the soul which is SANCTIFIED by the baptismal bath: its sanctification comes from the "answer." ["of a clear conscience" - 1 Pet 3:21]

Hippolytus  (ca 170-236)

Irenaeus' disciple and also Clement of Alexandria's. (Irenaeus was taught by Igatius who was taught by John.)
Discourse on the Holy Theophany
8. The Father of immortality sent the immortal Son and Word into the world, who came to man IN ORDER TO WASH HIM WITH WATER and the Spirit [Jn 3:5].  And He, BEGETTING us again to incorruption of soul and body...made us to have an incorruptible fullness.  If, therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be God. [2 Pet 1:4; Ps 82:6] AND IF HE IS MADE GOD, BY WATER AND the Holy Spirit after THE REGENERATION OF THE LAVER, then...  For this reason I preach:  'Come...to the IMMORTALITY OF THE BAPTISM.  ...And how shall we come?  How?  By WATER and the Holy Spirit.  This is the WATER, together with the Spirit, by which...

paradise is watered...
the earth is enriched...
plants grow...
animals multiply, and (to sum up the whole in a single word)
by which MAN IS BEGOTTEN AGAIN AND MADE ALIVE,

in which also Christ was baptized, and
in which the Spirit descended in the form of a dove."
10. "For he who

COMES DOWN in faith to THE LAVER OF REGENERATION, and
renounces the devil, and
JOINS HIMSELF TO CHRIST,
who DENIES the enemy, and
MAKES THE CONFESSION that Christ is God;
who PUTS OFF the bondage, and
PUTS ON the adoption, [Gal 3:26-27]
he COMES UP FROM THE BAPTISM brilliant as the sun and, which is indeed the chief thing, he RETURNS a son of God and joint heir of Christ.

The implication of Hippolytus' words is that the believer's prior faith did NOT join him to Christ. Nor had it already make him a son of God! (Jn 1:12) Rather, neither of these conditions occurred until after baptism!

Apostolic Traditions 21:3-5,
They shall baptize the little children first. If they can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let their parents or someone from their family answer. And next they shall baptize the adult men, and last, the women.

Origen (ca 225)

He was taught by Clement of Alexandria and became Clement's successor as head of the Christian "academy" at Alexandria. He is noted for preparing an early "parallel bible" version of the Old Testament with six different versions of Hebrew and Greek texts. He is also noted for his peculiar style of interpreting scripture, though it was not all that peculiar at the time he wrote.
Sermon on Luke 14:5
Infants are baptized for the remission of sins. Of what kinds? Or when did they sin? But since, "No one is exempt from stain," the stain is removed by the mystery of baptism. For this reason infants are baptized. For "Unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven".
Sermon on Lev 8:3
[After quoting Ps 51:5 and Job 14:4] These verses may be quoted when it is asked, "Since the church's baptism is given FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS, why is baptism given even to infants?" Because certainly, if in infants there is nothing requiring forgiveness and mercy, then the grace of baptism would be unnecessary.
Commentary on Romans 5:9
[After quoting Lev 12:8 and Ps 51:5] ...the church had a tradition from the apostles, to give baptism even to infants. For they...knew that there is in everyone the natural stains of sin which MUST BE WASHED AWAY by the WATER AND THE SPIRIT. Because of these stains the body itself is called the body of sin.

Cyprian (ca 249-258)

He was another major bishop of the North African Church who stood for reconciliation but was not afraid to confront Rome (Pope Stephen) when there was a difference of view.
Epistle 73 (to Pompey against Stephen's letter about the baptism of heretics)
   5. Since some people attribute the effect of baptism to the majesty of the name, so that those who are baptized anywhere and anyhow, in the name of Jesus Christ, are considered to be renewed and sanctified, why then, in the name of the same Christ, are hands not laid upon the baptized persons among them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit? Why is not the same majesty of the same name useful through the imposition of hands, which they contend was useful in the sanctification of baptism? For, if any one born outside of the Church can become God's temple, why cannot the Holy Spirit also be poured out upon the temple? For he who has been sanctified--his sins being put away in baptism--and has been spiritually reformed into a new man, has become fitted for receiving the Holy Spirit; since the apostle says, "As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." [Gal 3:27]. He who, having been baptized among the heretics, is able to put on Christ, may much more receive the Holy Spirit whom Christ sent! Otherwise, he who is sent will be greater than Him who sends; so that one baptized outside [the Church] may begin indeed to put on Christ, but not to be able to receive the Holy Spirit, as if Christ could either be put on without the Spirit, or the Spirit be separated from Christ. Moreover, it is silly to say, that although the second birth is spiritual, by which we are born in Christ through the laver of regeneration, one may be born spiritually among the heretics, where they say that the Spirit is not. For water alone is not able to cleanse away sins, and to sanctify a man, unless he have also the Holy Spirit. [Note that Cyprian did not believe in the cleansing ability of the water itself, apart from the Spirit.] Wherefore it is necessary that they should grant the Holy Spirit to be there, where they say that baptism is; or else there is no baptism where the Holy Spirit is not, because there cannot be baptism without the Spirit.

   6. But what [an absurd] thing it is, to assert and argue that those who are not born in the Church can be the sons of God! For the blessed apostle sets forth and proves that baptism is the [means] in which the old man dies and the new man is born, saying, "He saved us by the washing of regeneration." [Tit 3:5] But, if regeneration is in the washing, that is, in baptism, how can heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, generate sons to God by Christ? For it is the Church alone which, conjoined and united with Christ, spiritually bears sons; as the same apostle again says, "Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify it, cleansing it with the washing of water." [Eph 5:25-26] If, then, she is the beloved and spouse--who alone is sanctified by Christ--and alone is cleansed by His washing, it is quite clear that heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, nor can be cleansed--nor sanctified--by His washing, cannot bear sons to God.

Cyprian argues that, if it is acceptable to consider the baptism performed by heretic leaders to be effective to cleanse a (heretic) convert's sins and unite them with Christ, then it should also be acceptable for them to administer the "laying on of hands" to confer the gift of the Holy Spirit. Pope Steven, who opposed Cyprian's argument in order to avoid being accused of sanctioning more than "one baptism", accepted the first premise while rejecting the second, i.e. he agreed that only a duly authorized, bishop of the Church could confer the gift of the Holy Spirit. The important thing to notice for this study, however, is the several descriptions of baptism--working together with the Spirit--as producing various results, such as sanctification, cleansing from sin, "putting on" Christ, etc.

Conclusions

The statements of Hippolytus and Origen, and even Tertullian (On Baptism, 18) give clear indication how early the sponsored baptism of infants and small children began. However, Tertullian's warnings, and the teachings of all earlier Fathers, argue against Origen's claim that the practise was taught by the apostles. Nevertheless, even Origen's words confirm the apostolic/Biblical doctrine that baptism (coupled with faith) produces the forgiveness of sins. Indeed, the practise of baptizing infants and little children, as well as the delay of baptism until old age (cf Clement's and Justin's comments) CANNOT be explained apart from the idea that baptism effects the washing away/remission and forgiveness of sins (Acts 22:16).

Origen's and Cyprian's (Epistle 58 [64]) statements are the earliest known which justify infant baptism on the basis of interpreting Ps 51:5 as proof that babies when born, though innocent of their own sins, have received a "stain" because they are physcial descendants of Adam. Cyprian calls this stain, the "contagion of ancient death". However, neither Origen nor Cyprian are bold enough to claim outright that babies are sinful when conceived or born, though the implication of proxy guilt is in their words. Because of Origen's fame, we must remember Tertullian's and the earlier Fathers' opposite teaching.

In case the reader did not understand what was read, the following summary of points is offered:

1.

Baptism is absolutely necessary to be saved, based on Jesus' own words. [Jn 3:3,5,7]

2.

Whoever is not baptized is in danger. Even though such a one does all he can to be totally pious and righteous, he is still in rebellion against God's command, and salvation is impossible for him.

3.

Baptism is a sacrament of salvation with the power to sanctify.

4.

Baptism, coupled with faith and prior repentance and confession, and the work of the Holy Spirit, results in

a.

being regenerated (i.e. born again)

b.

the forgiveness (washing away) of sins

c.

sanctification

d.

receipt of the Holy Spirit

e.

becoming a child of God

f.

receiving an intimate knowledge of God

g.

entering Christ

h.

being set free from the world

i.

being made perfect...immortal

5.

Baptism means immersion, not pouring or sprinkling; the reluctance to accept Novation's "clinical" baptism shows this.

Today's typical Evangelical teaches that we are saved by God's grace alone through faith alone, based mostly on Eph 1:13 and 2:8-9 and passages in Romans. They categorically deny that baptism is necessary for salvation, on the basis that sins are remitted, we are made children of God, enter Christ, and receive the Holy Spirit at the instant of our [confession of] belief. Baptism for them is merely a visible ceremony witnessing what God has already done inwardly to the believer. Some Evangelicals even go as far as claiming that this has ALWAYS been the Church's teaching. It is devoutly hoped that anyone who shares this viewpoint will, after studying the Fathers' statements, cease to spread this fiction.
Does the Bible contain any such claims for Christians? No. Clearly, not a breath nor whisper of such a teaching can be found in the early Fathers, nor from Augustine up to the Reformation. Even Calvin asserts that the believer receives by faith what God has before promised in the sacrament. He says [Institutes Bk 4, 5.17],

"God in baptism has promised the remission of sins...That promise was offered to us in baptism, let us therefore embrace it in faith. Concerning us, the promise was indeed for a long time buried BECAUSE OF OUR UNBELIEF [in God's promise of the remission of sins by baptism]. Now, therefore, let us with faith receive it."

But if Calvin is right, then the Evangelicals, like Calvin in his unbelief, may be unable to receive any of the benefits which God has promised to those who are baptized. Evangelicals possess no faith in the sacrament of baptism, nor faith in what God has said regarding baptism, to enable them to receive the promises God has made to those who in faith are baptized. To them, baptism is merely a ritual bath which accomplishes nothing for them except a removal of bodily filfth.
Such promised benefits are clearly stated in both scripture and the Fathers' writings (and even Calvin's). And God has not, since the time of Peter's Pentecostal sermon promised those most valuable of benefits to anyone who has ONLY believed. Calvin probably over-emphasized faith too much in order to argue against those who depended too much on reason (i.e. the Thomists of the Roman Church). However, it is still clear that he affirms that it is in baptism that the believer receives the benefits promised. Even Calvin did not teach that the benefits are received by faith alone.
Evangelicals defend their doctrine (of salvation by faith alone) only by endless appeals to exceptional, hypothetical examples (e.g. a man in a desert), scriptures isolated from their contexts, poor hermeneutics, and Church history going back only as far as the Reformation--or later. Even though many famous, as well as common, people hold this doctrine, their view is only found in the Western Church and has never existed in the Eastern or other Orthodox churches. Why should this be so if this view was the teaching of Christ and His apostles?