Unctus est a Patre Spiritu The Baptism of Jesus, Irenaeus ... · Scholars like Antonio Orbe, Ysabel...
Transcript of Unctus est a Patre Spiritu The Baptism of Jesus, Irenaeus ... · Scholars like Antonio Orbe, Ysabel...
-
Unctus est a Patre Spiritu:
The Baptism of Jesus, Irenaeus of Lyons, and his Interpreters
by
Marcos Antonio Ramos
A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Theology of St. Michaels College and the Graduate Centre for Theological Studies of the Toronto School of Theology. In partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Theology awarded by the University of St Michaels College.
Copyright by Marcos Antonio Ramos 2017
-
ii
Unctus est a Patre Spiritu: The Baptism of Jesus, Irenaeus of Lyons and his Interpreters
Marcos Antonio Ramos
Doctor of Philosophy in Theology
University of St. Michaels College
2017
Abstract
This thesis analyzes and contextualizes the bishop of Lyons understanding of the role
of the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan in order to critique different scholarly interpretations
of the roles of Jesus and the Holy Spirit in the baptism. The detailed study of both the
insights of Irenaeus regarding the baptism of Jesus Christ and the interpretation of diverse
scholars will demonstrate that there are still important and challenging questions
unanswered due to conflicting interpretations of passages from the Irenean corpus. I
present on this thesis that there is a need for an analysis of the linguistic and terminological
uncertainty in the context of the main theological ideas present in the work of Irenaeus of
Lyons. Irenaeus emphasis on unity, progress, and the salvation of the flesh present the
reader with a specific framework. This framework situates the flesh of Jesus Christ and his
humanity participating in an eminent way in his salvific mission as well as identifying with
the progressive plan of God for humanity. A closer look at the theology of Irenaeus could
give us a deeper understanding of his notions of the identity of Jesus Christ, including the
relationship between his divine and human natures, his development as a human being,
and how Irenaeus concept of the salus carnis flows from his understanding of the baptism
in the Jordan and its process of accustoming the flesh to the Spirit.
-
iii
Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
Chapter I. Historical Context .................................................................................................. 24
A. Theological Understanding of the Baptism at the Jordan in the second century ..... 24 1. The Role of the Baptism at the Jordan in the Development
of a Christian Theology of Baptism ........................................................................ 24
2. The Baptism of Jesus in the Gospels: A Source of Reflection and Controversy .... 27
3. The Apostolic Fathers ............................................................................................ 38
4. Christian Pseudoepigrapha and Apocrypha ........................................................... 57
5. Apologists .............................................................................................................. 63
6. Pseudo-Clementines .............................................................................................. 68
7. Clement of Alexandria ........................................................................................... 71
8. Fire and Light ......................................................................................................... 76
9. Positions of Some of the Gnostic and Sectarian Groups ........................................ 78
B. Noticeable Ideas in the Early Canonical and Non-Canonical Interpretations of the Baptism of Christ .................................................................... 91
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 98
Chapter II. Examination of the Ideas of Justin Martyr on the Baptism of Christ ................. 100
A. Ideas of Justin Martyr Regarding Christian Baptism ................................................ 102
1. Fire-Light Motif in the Baptismal Theology of Justin Martyr .............................. 106
2. The Holy Spirit in the Baptismal Theology of Justin Martyr ............................... .109
-
iv
3. Contrast Between the Jewish Washings and Christian Baptism ......................... 114
4. John the Baptist and His Baptismal Ministry in the Theology of Justin Martyr ... 118
B. Ideas of Justin Martyr Regarding the Baptism of Christ .......................................... 121
C. Influence of Justin Martyr on Irenaeus of Lyons ..................................................... 144
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 146
Chapter III. The Theology of Irenaeus on the Baptism of Jesus Christ ................................ 149
A. Views of Irenaeus Regarding Christian Baptism ...................................................... 165
B. Theological Positions of Irenaeus of Lyons Regarding Jesus Baptism .................... 177
C. Irenaeus and Creation .............................................................................................. 202
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 204
Chapter IV. The Effects of the Baptism and the Holy Spirit in the Deification of the Humanity of Christ, According to Irenaeus of Lyons ................................................ 213
A. The Salvation of the Flesh as an Essential Concept of the Theology of Irenaeus of Lyons ................................................................................. 246
B. Progress as an Essential Element in the Theology of Irenaeus of Lyons ................. 259
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 274
General Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 279
Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 309
-
1
Introduction
Theologians of the second century of Christianity were increasingly interested in the
baptism of Jesus in the Jordan River as described in the Gospels in Matthew 3: 13-17; Mark
1: 4-11; Luke 3: 21-22; and John 1: 29-34. These passages from Scripture were the source of
reflections on the nature of Christ, the role of the Spirit in the baptism of Christ, and on the
importance of baptism both to Christ personally and to all humanity.
The Church Fathers, in response to the theological challenges presented by dissenting
groups, began elaborating on the effect of baptism in the redemption of humanity. The
baptism of Jesus was also important for heterodox groups such as the Ebionites and the
gnostics. However, the interpretation of these and other dissenting groups was based on
many non-Scriptural sources. The Ebionites, influenced by rabbinic tradition, believed in the
unity of the nature of the person of God and therefore were not believers in the Trinity.1
For the Ebionites, Jesus was not the Son of God; Jesus was the Son of Joseph and Mary and
thus solely human. Various gnostic systems with their innumerable concerns regarded the
baptism of Jesus as an important event. Even though the baptism of Jesus was a
soteriological event of decisive importance for such gnostic systems, it was not connected
to the Paschal mystery for them. The gnostics regarded baptism symbolically showing the
1 The use of the term Trinity is used with the knowledge that the theology of the Trinity was not fully developed during the period studied in this work. The word Trinity was not used before Tertullian created it in the third century. However, there is a general agreement that before the third century established Christian communities practiced baptism in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and that a belief in the Father. Son and Spirit was part of the rule of faith of the established Christian communities. For more explanation on this subject, refer to M.C. Steenbergs Of God and Man: Theology as Anthropology from Irenaeus to Athanasius (T&T Clark, 2009), pp. 9-10.
-
2
events at the Jordan as the transcendental anointing of a celestial being which happened
beyond historical boundaries.
Church theologians of the second century were challenged by groups like the
Ebionites and different branches of Gnosticism (with groups as diverse as the Valentinians,
Marcosians, Ophites and others). The Christian tradition gave importance to the baptism of
Jesus in response to legitimate questions regarding the identity of Jesus Christ and how the
baptism in the Jordan influenced Jesus life and mission. One of these questions was related
to the Gospel passages concerning the baptism of Jesus. Judaic and gnostic groups saw the
descent of the Spirit of God in the form of a dove as an indication that Jesus did not receive
the Spirit until the baptism. This perception encouraged the Church theologians to ask
themselves how one could reconcile the accounts of the baptism of Jesus with the infancy
accounts that speak of the action of the Holy Spirit from the conception of Jesus.
There was also the question about the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ. The
Synoptic Gospels mention as part of the baptism episode a voice from heaven that said:
This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased (Matt. 3:17); You are my Son,
the Beloved, with you I am well pleased (Mark 1:11); You are my Son, the Beloved, with
you I am well pleased (Luke 3:22). The use of this filial phrasing became the source of a
controversy that had at its heart the issue of the identity of Jesus Christ as Son of God. Was
the emphasis of the Synoptic Gospels on his voice from heaven and its proclamation
evidence that Jesus was only human until the moment of his baptism? Was the baptism in
the Jordan the real moment of the Incarnation of Christ? Were the events at the Jordan
-
3
depicted in the Gospels an indication of Adoptionism, another theological controversy of
the early centuries?
Irenaeus of Lyons and the Baptism of Jesus
The Fathers commonly believed that Jesus, the Incarnate Son of God and born of the
Virgin Mary, was baptized in the Spirit, at the Jordan, in order to inaugurate his public
ministry. There are, however, some differences in the theological anthropologies of the
Fathers. On the one hand, the Alexandrian school saw the soul of Jesus as the principal
protagonist of the baptism, while the Spirit anointed the soul of Jesus in order for it to be
open to divine acts. The Antiochene school, on the other hand, emphasized the importance
of the body of Jesus in the baptism where the Spirit empowered the flesh of Jesus, thus
enabling him to realize corporeal works of salvation for all humanity.2
Irenaeus of Lyons (130-c. 202 CE) was a representative of the Antiochene school and
his theological reflections on the baptism of Jesus were influential in later theological
developments regarding Christ and his mission. The Bishop of Lyons was in continuity with
some of the reflections about the baptism of Jesus that were so important for the theology
of the second century. At the same time, Irenaeus enriched the theological reflection with
some important insights of his own. The baptism of Jesus was defined by Irenaeus as a very
important event in the life and ministry of Jesus Christ where his human nature was
transformed for the sake of his salvific mission. The Bishop of Lyons also emphasized the
prominent and autonomous role of the Spirit in this process at the Jordan which did not
2 Antonio Orbe, Introduccin a la teologa de los siglos II y III, vol. I, Analecta Gregoriana 248 (Rome: Gregorian University, 1986), 661-663.
-
4
diminish the divinity of Christ. Rather, the anointing of the Spirit empowered the messianic
ministry of Jesus Christ to make the divine gifts available to all humanity and to the Church.
Scholars like Antonio Orbe, Ysabel de Anda, and others had presented their ideas on
how the baptism transformed Jesus Christ and enabled him to continue his salvific mission.
These and other authors of the second half of the twentieth century have dedicated a great
deal of study to the issues of Irenaeus of Lyons interpretations of the baptism of Jesus at
the Jordan and his anointing there by the Spirit. Among the specific topics of study for these
scholars have been the particular role of the Spirit in relation to the soteriological necessity
of the baptism of Jesus, the Trinitarian aspect of the anointing, and the anointing of the
Spirit for the inauguration of Jesus public ministry. Some of their concerns relate to the
identity of the Spirit and the anointing of Jesus as described in the works of Irenaeus.
Passages in Irenaeus that present the Spirit as specific agent in the anointing have
motivated scholars to examine if these passages are presenting the Spirit in a Trinitarian
context: some in favor (Anda [1986], Briggman [2012]) some against a Trinitarian
interpretation (Orbe [1969-1995], Fantino [1995], Smith [1997]). Another aspect studied is
the anointing of the Spirit at the Jordan and how this anointing enabled the messianic
ministry of Jesus Christ. Albert Houisseau (1955) emphasized an interpretation that became
highly influential for future scholars, presenting the Irenean concept of the salvation of
humanity as effected through the humanity of Jesus Christ. These scholars also investigated
how the anointing of the Spirit might have effected Christ himself. There are arguments for
and against the baptism and anointing in the Jordan as a moment of qualitative change in
the life of the Incarnate Word.
-
5
For these recent interpreters of Irenaeus, what was at stake were issues that defined
what they believed to be orthodoxy and a correct interpretation of Irenaeus theology.
These issues revolved around Christology and Christs two natures: of Christs personhood,
of soteriology and of how Christ could be Saviour. These issues have been discussed in a
diverse manner, with authors such as Orbe, Anda, Smith, Houssiau, and many others
presenting different scenarios according to their interpretations of the theology and
anthropology of Irenaeus. During the past decade, Anthony Briggman has challenged the
position of some of the most renowned scholars3. Briggman posits that the abundant study
on Irenaeus description of the baptism of Jesus has mostly ignored the statement by the
bishop of Lyons that the Spirit has become accustomed to all humanity by means of the
humanity of Jesus Christ. Briggman also thinks that no scholar has explained the anointing
of the humanity of Jesus by the Spirit in relationship with the succeeding glorification of the
humanity of the Word of God by the Spirit. According to Briggmans position these ignored
aspects could be beneficial for a better acknowledgement that the Spirit only anointed the
humanity of Jesus. This anointing is perceived by Briggman as a non-qualitative
empowerment of the humanity of Jesus Christ that enabled him to fulfill the Christological
mission:
According to Irenaeus, then Jesus experienced one anointing by the Spirit, an anointing of his humanity that occurred at his baptism in the Jordan. Moreover, the Spirit who descended upon Jesus was the Holy Spirit, not an impersonal Spirit or power of the Spirit of God. This anointing with the Holy Spirit resulted in a non-qualitative empowerment of Jesus humanity so that he could fulfill the messianic mission.4
3 Anthony Briggman, The Holy Spirit as the Unction of Christ in Irenaeus, in Journal of Theological Studies 61, 1 (2010): 171-193. 4 Ibid, 193.
-
6
Briggman differs with many authors in discarding the notion of the baptism and anointing at
the Jordan as a moment of qualitative change in the life of the Incarnate Word. Instead,
Briggman presents the Incarnation and glorification of Jesus Christ as the main and only
instances of qualitative change.
Thesis Statement
The influence of Irenaeus on other writers of the early Church was followed by a
period of relative obscurity during the medieval era. The Renaissance brought new
recognition of Irenaeus work. This recognition produced some negative assessments by
both Catholic and Protestant scholars due to the significantly different views of Irenaeus
regarding original sin and the economy of salvation in comparison to the Augustinian
tradition prevalent in Western theology. This theological divergence could have hindered
theologians and believers from perceiving the views of Irenaeus regarding the baptism of
Christ in the Jordan as an important contribution both to Christology and to baptismal
theology.
A closer look at the theology of Irenaeus could give us a deeper understanding of his
notions of the identity of Jesus Christ, including the relationship between his divine and
human natures and his development as a human being, as well as Irenaeuss concept of
how salus carnis flows from his understanding of the baptism in the Jordan and its process
of accustoming the flesh to the Spirit. Irenaeus also brought important insights to the role
of the Spirit in relation to Christ and humanity.
-
7
This thesis contextualizes and analyzes Irenaeus understanding of the event of the
baptism of Jesus in the Jordan in order to critique different scholarly interpretations of the
roles of Jesus and the Holy Spirit in the baptism. This analysis discusses the virtues and
faults of past and contemporary interpretations and offers, where appropriate, an
alternative or corrective interpretation. The detailed study of both the insights of Irenaeus
regarding the baptism of Jesus Christ and the interpretation of diverse scholars
demonstrates that there are still important and challenging unanswered questions due to
conflicting interpretations of passages from the Irenean corpus.
Procedure and Methodology
The thesis is divided in four parts with an introduction and a conclusion. The first
chapter is a preliminary presentation on how the second century viewed the baptism at the
Jordan in order to understand the context in which Irenaeus worked and the theological
positions he debated. The chapter will discuss the practice of baptism in the second century,
the role of baptism in the Jordan in the development of a Christian theology of baptism, and
the positions of some of the heterodox groups that were present at the time. There are
references to the works of scholars like Antonio Orbe, Eric Osborn, Daniel Vigne, Everett
Ferguson and others. There are four noticeable concepts of early interpretations of the
baptism of Jesus that will be analyzed. One of these conspicuous ideas (present in canonical
and non-canonical writings) is that the descent of the Spirit at the baptism of Jesus is an
event sometimes interpreted as the fulfillment of Isaiah 11:2. Another recurring idea in
early interpretations is the event at the Jordan as the initiation of the messianic ministry of
-
8
Jesus Christ. A third concept is the identification and revelation of Jesus during the baptism,
with diverse interpretations regarding the identity of Jesus. A fourth persistent element is
related to the purification either of the water or of Jesus (depending on the source) and the
relation of this purification with the purification of humanity.
The second chapter examines the baptism of Christ with the ideas of Justin Martyr, an
important influence on Irenaeus and other authors. The study of Justin will serve as an
example of how earlier theologians were at pains to reflect and explain the baptism of
Christ as something not in opposition to the Christian faith. In his Dialogue with Trypho,
Justin presented the events at the Jordan as necessary only for the sake of humanity; Jesus
was not personally in need of the descent of the Spirit. For Justin, the Gospel narratives
show evidence of the fruits of the Spirit in Christ, gifts that were later passed on to
humanity in virtue of the baptism of Christ. Likewise, the baptism in the Jordan was and is a
manifestation for the Christian community of the graces of the Spirit that are bestowed on
Christians through baptism.
Justins interpretation is not without difficulties. His concern about discarding any
notion of adoptionism regarding the baptism of Christ, as well as his emphasis on humanity
as the only recipient of the events at the Jordan, does not dispel nor explain the
interpretations presented by the Gospel writers on baptism as a time of the initiation of
Jesus into his ministry as Son of God. Also, Justins emphasis on the baptism as a
manifestation of the true nature of Jesus to the whole world is not without some problems,
as Justin used non-authoritative references also used by the Ebionites.
-
9
The third chapter is a presentation of the theological positions of Irenaeus of Lyons
regarding the baptism of Jesus at the Jordan and its relevance for soteriology and
christology. Here the particular role of the Spirit will be discussed in relation to the
soteriological necessity of the baptism of Jesus, the Trinitarian aspect of the anointing, and
the anointing of the Spirit for the inauguration of his public ministry.
A later portion of the third chapter discusses the relationship between the Trinitarian
notions of Irenaeus and his interpretation of Jesuss baptism at the Jordan. Among other
passages, there is analysis of Adversus haereses III.18.3, a passage that has generated
diverse interpretations from scholars, some advocating for a Trinitarian interpretation of it
(Andia, McDonnell, Briggman, among them) and others against it (Smith, Fantino, Orbe,
among others). The anointing of the Spirit in the Jordan and how this anointing inaugurated
the messianic ministry of Jesus Christ (chapter 9, Adversus haereses) is examined. The
interpretation of Antonio Orbe, influential for future discussions, was that the anointing of
the Spirit affected Jesus in his humanity, though the Word, in his divine nature, did not need
the anointing. 5 Other authors, like Richard Norris, believed passages in Irenaeus concerning
the anointing of the Spirit at Jesus baptism being proper to humanity established a
connection between Jesus Christ and all created persons:
One must conclude, therefore, that Irenaeus Christology does indeed involve or entail an anthropological vision, but also that it speaks with a somewhat uncertain voice. For him it is unquestionably the Incarnate Word who is the proper model of humanity; and this assertion accords both with his sense that humankind has a transcendent destiny and with his conviction that the destiny in question belongs to fleshly, historical persons. The force of this
5 Antonio Orbe, La uncin del Verbo, vol.3 of Estudios Valentinianos, Analecta Gregoriana 113 (Rome: Gregorian University, 1961), 510.
-
10
position, however, depends at once on belief that the true original of humanity is the divine Logos, and on a conviction that Jesus considered simply as a human being sums up the nature and destiny of Adams race. 6
Norris analysis of the theology of Irenaeus shows how his exegesis presented a different
understanding of the baptism at the Jordan from previous writers, like Justin Martyr. While
Justin saw the baptism merely as a sign of the power of Christ, Irenaeus went further and
proclaimed the divinity of Jesus Christ without diminishing the reality of the descent of the
Spirit. In the exegesis of Irenaeus there was no confusion between the Word and the Spirit,
to which Justins reflections were susceptible. Irenaeus also posited the idea that the
salvation of humanity is effected through the humanity of Jesus Christ. The significance of
Jesus humanity is in itself important for future christological developments, as Irenaeus
declared that the reality of all the mysteries of the human life of Christ is maintained
without a diminishment of his divinity.
The fourth chapter investigates whether there were any effects of the anointing of the
Spirit on Christ. A closer look at the writings of Irenaeus suggests an affirmative answer.
Nonetheless, there are a variety of interpretations regarding this issue. I present in this
section the main arguments for and against the baptism and anointing in the Jordan as a
moment of qualitative change in the life of the Incarnate Word and my own critique of
these arguments. I think that the analyses of scholars as Fantino, Orbe, Houssiau, Anda,
Smith, Vigne, Briggman and others are important in order to be aware that the idea of a
qualitative change in Jesus Christ is still as controversial and challenging as it was in the
times when Irenaeus created his theological corpus. One of the issues discussed is the way
6 Richard Norris, The Problems of Human Identity in Patristic Christological Speculation, in Studia Patristica 17, vol. 1 (Oxford: Pergamon, 1982), 152.
-
11
that Irenaeus used the term Christ. This usage has been the source of divergence between
different scholars and their interpretations concerning the significance of the baptism of
Jesus in his development as a human being. Passages from Irenaeus Adversus haereses (like
AH III.9.3, and III.12.7) have provoked these disagreements in interpretation.
According to some scholars there is also the notion that the anointing of the Spirit did
not produce any substantial change in the Incarnate Word. Other scholars regard the
baptism as having a more significant effect on Jesus Christ. Antonio Orbe believed there
were two elements in the life of Jesus: the Incarnation, when the Word assumed human
flesh and the anointing or baptism of the Spirit in the Jordan, where Jesus was anointed in
his flesh by the Spirit and made Jesus Christ. 7 The position of Orbe has been challenged by
other scholars, in particular Ysabel de Anda who believes that there is in Jesus a unique
mystery, the mystery of the Word made flesh, a person both human and divine. There are
also the mysteries of the life of Jesus, where the humanity of Jesus is acquainted with the
Spirit in a progressive way and becomes the source of the gift of the Spirit to humanity.8
It is my opinion that the apparent tension that some scholars ascribe to any
designation of a qualitative change in the humanity of Jesus Christ during the events at the
Jordan denotes a fear that the qualitative change implies that Jesus Christ was not all there
from the beginning of his existence. There is also unease when writers imply that Irenaeus
used concepts from the groups he was attacking to elaborate his christological arguments.
The pneumatology of Irenaeus is also a contentious factor that polarizes scholars. The
7 Orbe, La uncin del Verbo, 632-633. 8 Ysabel de Anda, Homo vivens: incorruptibilit et divinization de lhomme selon Irne de Lyon (Paris: tudes Augustiniennes, 1986), 201.
-
12
ambiguous way that Irenaeus presents the Spirit in this work could be a cause for concern
as scholars deal with the issue of a qualitative change in the humanity of Jesus at the
moment of the baptism. I suggest that an analysis of the different postures contributes to a
finer understanding of Irenaeus view of baptism as an event that is revelatory of both our
understanding of Jesus Christ and our understanding of Christian baptism. The apparent
ambiguities of the Bishop of Lyons are the product of his own historical context and his own
situation. A more detailed analysis of Irenaeus position shows his rigorous use of Scripture
as well as his awareness of the theological language of his era. A general conclusion
summarizes my main findings.
This close study of the theology of Irenaeus of Lyons regarding the baptism of Jesus in
the Jordan gleans us some important contributions from this second century author. My
study of the work of Irenaeus makes me conclude that the author presented the baptism in
the Jordan as an event of transformation for Jesus, a significant stage in his development as
a human being, as well as an event of transformation of the human nature of Jesus Christ
for the sake of his salvific mission. Irenaeus proclaims the redemption of humanity through
the sanctified flesh of Jesus Christ, subsequently declaring the holiness of the flesh of
humanity. The ideas of Irenaeus will presage subsequent reflections about the person and
natures of Christ, concerns that are still relevant to our day. Essential in this process is the
Spirit, who acquires a prominent and autonomous role in the life of Jesus as a turning point
in the history of salvation. Irenaeus went beyond the theologians of his time in presenting
the Spirit in a less subordinated manner in relationship with the Father and, at the same
time, not confusing the Spirit with the divinity of Christ.
-
13
Implications
The study of the different interpretations of the theology of baptism by Irenaeus of
Lyons show a process of interpretation that does not differ much from the issues and
concerns of theologians of the first centuries of the Christian tradition. A pioneer theologian
like Irenaeus remains a challenge to contemporary theologians, as we try to be objective in
analyzing his theological ideas while holding our own theological, liturgical, and ideological
background in the process. A critical analysis of these contemporary interpretations of
Irenaeus is in itself an analysis of the theological background of the interpreters and how
the apparent conflict in their interpretations comes sometimes from a use of terminology
that is not always consistent either with the work of Irenaeus or with his th eological and
liturgical tradition.
This particularity of the process of interpretation of the work of Irenaeus has been
very much an issue since the first edition of Adversus haereses was created in 1526 by
Erasmus of Rotterdam. Paul Parvis presents an analysis of the process of editorial
development of Adversus haereses and how each editor through the centuries has made
the work of the Bishop of Lyons his own and a response to his own theological and
ecclesiological conundrums.9 Parvis analysis reminds us of the reality that no interpretation
of an author is totally objective, as it is in itself a reflection of the values and prejudices of
the interpreter.
9 Paul Parvis, Packaging Irenaeus: Adversus haereses and Its Editors, in Irenaeus: Life, Scripture, Legacy, eds. Paul Foster and Sarah Parvis (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2011): 183-198.
-
14
This overview by Paul Parvis is highly informative as it shows the desire of the editors
of Irenaeus to adapt his words to the ecclesial and theological background of the times they
lived. For nearly three hundred years the editions were created in reaction and dialogue
with each other. Each of these editions was constructed from a specific viewpoint with the
purpose of looking for specific aspects of the text that appeal to the specific concerns of the
editor. Therefore, any text exists in a context, and every context is not similar to the one of
past generations. This reality extends to any scholar who has studied the work of Irenaeus
of Lyons, as he or she will interpret Irenaeus according to his or her own doctrinal, cultural,
and historical background.
Parvis presents a chronological account of the edtions of Adversus haereses and the
particularities of the different editors. The very first edition prepared by Erasmus of
Rotterdam was based on a manuscript by Johannes Fabri copied in Rome. The dedicatory
epistle by Erasmus to Bernard von Cles, Bishop of Trent, presents Irenaeus using
expressions used by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History. Irenaeus is described as a man of
peace who defended the peace in the church. Erasmus compares the troubles that Irenaeus
faced with the situation of those in the time of Erasmus who troubled the world with their
quarrels, writing books that promoted division. In his description of Irenaeus work,
Erasmus is not certain if Adversus haereses was originally written in Latin or Greek. However,
Erasmus tended to think that the original was Latin. Irenaeus is described by Erasmus as
logical, organized, knowledgeable of the liberal arts, and someone who preached against
heresy relying mostly on Scripture. This description is very much in consonance with the
values that Erasmus wanted to portray in his work. Erasmus dedicates space in his edition to
-
15
study the apologetic crusade that Irenaeus had against heresy and division. In 1526 Erasmus
was himself struggling with the historical and religious situation in Europe and his own
conflicted position between his agreement with the principles of the Reformers and their
challenge to the Roman church and his own support of the Catholic faith and loyalty to the
institution. At the time, Catholic theologians attacked Erasmus and saw his work as
unorthodox. Attacks also came from Luther, who considered Erasmus an atheist. The
edition of Adversus haereses presents the text only in its Latin version without much help
regarding annotations by Erasmus. The few notes include some Greek phrases and some
suggestions about how these phrases could have been used by Irenaeus. The work was
produced in haste and there are a significant number of errors, but it is nonetheless the first
edition of Adversus haereses and it has its indisputable value. It is also an edition where
Erasmus described Ireneaus as Irenaerum meum and associated the struggles of second
century Gaul with his own historical struggles.10 In his edition Erasmus presents Irenaeus as
a man of peace who could be an example of unity amid the profound division of Christianity
during the sixteenth century.
The next edition of Adversus haereses was published in 1570 by Nicolas de Gallars
(Gallasius). Gallasius was a reformed pastor from Geneva and a close collaborator of Calvin
who later served for a while as pastor of a French Protestant Church in London. After
suffering some persecution, Gallasius was encouraged by the reformer Theodore Bezae (of
Codex Bezae fame) to study the writers of early Christianity. Gallasius decided to study
Irenaeus of Lyons. In his editorial work Gallatius was firm in presenting a close similarity
10 Ibid., 184-185.
-
16
between the refutation of heresies in early Christianity and the religious warfare in
sixteenth century Europe. Among the contemporary groups that are compared to the
groups that Irenaeus debated are some Protestant groups like the Anabaptists and
Antinomians, as well as the Papists. Gallasius presents Irenaeus as an example of how
contemporary reformers needed to deal with dissenting groups by using the teachings of
Christ and the Apostles to scrutinize every religious doctrine and practice. The edition is
significant in its acceptance that Irenaeus wrote Adversus haereses in Greek, with an
addition of the Greek text for Book I quoted by Epiphanius. Gallasius followed Bezaes
indication regarding chapters and summaries and provided his own summaries at the start
of each chapter. Gallatius added extensive notes to the text in a strong effort to reconcile
Irenaeus with the tenets of the editors Calvinistic beliefs, comparing some of the gnostic
groups challenged by Irenaeus with doctrinal positions of both Catholicism and other
branches of Protestantism. Gallasius edition accomplished more accessibility to the reader
and initiated a series of editions of Adversus haereses that engaged in conversations and
reactions with older texts and editions. 11
Gallasius editorial style certainly elicited reactions. The Franciscan Friar Francis
Feuardent, Doctor and professor of Theology in Paris, produced two editions of Adversus
haereses, one in Paris in 1575 and a much revised one for Cologne in 1596. The preface of
Feuardent was done with a direct criticism of Gallasius edition, and an assurance that
Feuardents notes included quotes from other Fathers of the Church with the intent of
11 Ibid., 188.
-
17
guiding the reader to a correct interpretation according to the doctrinal and liturgical norms
of the Roman Catholic Church, as a response to the previous edition:
In addition to this, the heretics after their own fashionespecially the men of Magdeburg [that is, the Centuriators] and a certain Nicolaus Gallasius, a preacher of the Calvinistic pestilence at one time in Geneva, then in Orleans, afterward as they say in Basque countryindustriously corrupted many passages from this writer, which it was worthwhile and fitting to restore and vindicate from their false interpretation.12
The analysis of Feuardents edition brings insights into the interpretation that scholars have
given to Irenaeus work, an analysis that is in connection with the implications of this thesis.
The edition is indicative of the need to study Irenaeus not only by his texts but by a
comparative evaluation of the ideas of his most important interpreters. Among the
accomplishments of Feuardents edition is a greater construction of the Latin text with the
help of additional manuscripts, besides those used in previous editions, as well as the
incorporation of the last chapter of Book V of Adversus haereses. And Feuardents edition
complements the text of other chapters. Feuardents annotations to each chapter are quite
extensive making direct connections between the heresies of the Valentinians and
Marcionites, as referred to by Irenaeus, with the ideas of Luther and Calvin, and all in a
virulent style. The 1596 edition is fuller and complemented with Greek fragments from
Eusebius, Theodoret, and Epiphanius. There are also more pugnacious annotations using
concepts of Irenaeus in order to attack the doctrines of the Reformers.
It would take two more centuries to experience new editions of Adversus haereses.
There were two eighteenth century editions also created to react to previous editions. John
12 Ibid., 189.
-
18
Ernst Grabe published an edition of Adversus haereses in 1702, dedicated to King Frederick
III of Prussia. Grabe used again the idea of Irenaeus as a man of peace, but in this case using
the Bishop of Lyons name to establish a connection with the monarch to whom the edition
was dedicated. Grabe established that the name Irenaeus is the same as Frederick, Irenaeus
in Greek and Frederick in German, and that the king was also related to Irenaeus in his
effort to establish religious harmony in his kingdom. This edition by Grabe is a vast
improvement on its predecessors, with insights of concepts from Adversus haereses that
predate later studies inspired by the discovery of the Armenian version of the text
(published in the early twentieth century). An important insight from Grabes edition that
will be influential for future interpretations is that the editor departs from the
interpretation of Erasmus and Feuardent regarding Irenaeus approach to the apostolic
tradition and the Roman church. Grabe posited that the idea that Irenaeus created the
arguments against dissenting groups using only Scripture is erroneous: it is plain and
evident to all that Irenaeus overcame the Gnostics, not merely with the help of the
Scriptures, but also by the tradition and by the words and writings of the Fathers.13
Ren Massuet was a French Benedictine who published his edition in 1710. He wrote
because he felt that Grabes work was plagued with a false interpretation based on a desire
to make Irenaeus a proto-Anglican. Massuets preface is clear in declaring that his edition
was produced as a reaction to Grabes edition, in order to have an accurate and Catholic
version that could guide the faithful. This version, perhaps the most lavish of all, has a
preface and three lengthy dissertations on the gnostics, the life and works of Irenaeus of
13 Ibid., 192.
-
19
Lyons, and his doctrine. Among the contributions of this edition is a different set of chapter
divisions and subdivisions, with footnotes. Needless to say, an edition that was provoked by
another edition may still suffer from a polemical angle. Massuet presented Irenaeus as an
author whose work confirmed and clarified several fundamental dogmas of the Catholic
faith that were professed in the ecclesial practice of the eighteenth century. For that reason,
Massuet believed his edition of Adversus haereses established the work of Irenaeus as an
apologetic instrument capable of refuting the positions of authors from the Reformation.
Massuets accomplished edition was to remain highly respected and uncontested for the
next hundred and fifty years.
In 1857 W. Wigan Harvey contributed to the scholarship on Irenaeus of Lyons with his
Cambridge edition. Harvey, an established vicar and scholar of the Anglican communion,
dedicated his work to reconcile the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England with the
teachings of the Early Church writers. His edition of Adversus haereses is very abundant in
patristic references. The preface to Harveys edition has a brief overview of previous texts
and editions, followed by a Preliminary Matter of 151 pages. After the body of the text
there is an essay on the life and writings of Irenaeus of Lyons with an explanation on the
characteristics of the Latin version as well as the similarities of Irenaeus thought with
concepts expressed on the Thirty-Nine Articles. Harveys notes to the text are learned, brief,
and for the first time in any edition in a language other than Latin. Even with the obvious
anti-tractarian interpretation of the text, Harvey contributes in a significant manner to the
understanding of the text by making it more accessible, and he brought new fragments
from the Syriac and Armenian versions of Adversus haereses.
-
20
The latest edition (1965-1982) of Adversus haereses is the work of Dom Adelin
Rousseau who brought an even more extensive study than in previous editions, with ten
thick volumes. Rousseau had benefitted from, for the first time in the history of editions of
the work, a systematic use of the Armenian text. Rousseaus notes are erudite and
informative, and they are disengaged from the Catholic-Protestant diatribes of the previous
editions. Rousseaus work is considered the first truly critical edition of Adversus haereses.
Rousseau analyzed Irenaeus work (and its translations) with much engagement using
modern secondary works. Also, he did not base his work on previous editions but sought to
clarify only to ascertain their manuscript base. 14
Parvis overview on the history of the editions of Irenaeus Adversus haereses is highly
informative and related to the purpose of my research. There has been little work done
regarding the analysis of the editors and interpreters of the work of Irenaeus of Lyons and
how these scholars were influenced by their own historical and religious background. A
history of the diverse interpretations that scholars have given to the baptismal theology of
Irenaeus is important in order to compare these interpretations with a historical-critical
analysis of the historical and ecclesial context of Irenaeus.
The study of the theological ideas of Irenaeus of Lyons on the baptism of Jesus Christ
in the Jordan brings implications of liturgical and theological concerns that are still relevant
for our time. Irenaeus presents in his work reflections about Jesus Christ and Christian
baptism that are not only his own, but also influenced by the liturgical and spiritual heritage
of his time and context. Many studies about Irenaeus of Lyons have emphasized so much on
14 Ibid., 196-197.
-
21
his original contributions that there is a tendency to place him in a seemingly isolated status.
This isolation could be explained in part as the result of his status as pioneer systematic
theologian, with insights that sound so related to contemporary Christian theology. A
comparative analysis of the interpretations of his theological ideas and a comparison with
the liturgical and ecclesial tradition of the second century could however place his
innovative insights in dialogue with his historical context and show how his theology was
not the fruit of an isolated intellectual effort. Consequently, the corpus of Irenaeus of Lyons
was created in a liturgical and ecclesiological context that used the baptism and anointing of
Jesus in the Jordan as an important paradigm for baptismal rituals.
The baptismal theology of Irenaeus of Lyons presented Christ as an exemplar to
emulate, the anointed one who showed humanity the way to encounter the grace of God in
both our body and soul. Jesus Christ was seen as the advocate between God and humanity,
permitting men and women to become again acquainted with the divine life in a process of
progressive glorification given by God to all those willing to accept the divine grace. This
emphasis was maintained during the first centuries of Christianity even during the
difficulties in interpretation that occurred regarding the New Testament depictions of the
baptism of Jesus and its meaning for Christology.
As a result, there is a prominence given in the baptismal theology of Irenaeus to a
direct identification between Christians and the Spirit given at baptism. The theological
closeness between the baptized and the Holy Spirit evident in the theology of the first
centuries of the Christian era defines the sacrament of baptism as the moment where the
-
22
Spirit is given to humanity. The gift of the Spirit is presented as a sanctifying effect of
baptism, the moment when men and women are incorporated into Jesus Christ and
anointed for mission and discipleship, a turning point in the life of any Christian follower.
This baptismal understanding could be highly beneficial for the faithful today. The
theological developments of the Middle Ages with its gradual emphasis on the Pauline view
of baptism as a participation in the death and resurrection of Christ has obscured the
relationship of the faithful with the Holy Spirit in baptism.15 This medieval development has
been accompanied by a liturgical practice that has separated the sacraments of initiation
and consequently the imagery of the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan has been discarded
from the liturgy and preaching of the baptismal liturgy. This phenomenon, particularly
evident in the Western tradition, has placed Christ at the very center of the sacrament, with
a very ancillary role for the Spirit. This dissertation is an invitation to examine how we are
referring today to the Holy Spirit in the baptismal liturgy and how Christians could regard
the baptism of Christ as a valuable event for both the understanding of the mission and
ministry of Jesus Christ and an invitation for the faithful to be inspired and transformed by
this event.
Methodology
This thesis studies in detail the insights of Irenaeus regarding the baptism of Jesus
Christ in the Jordan and how diverse scholars have interpreted the roles of Christ and the
Spirit in the baptismal event. There is a description on the historical and ecclesiological
background that was part of the development of Irenaeus theology, as well as a historical-
15Kilian McDonnell, The Baptism of Jesus in the Jordan The Trinitarian and Cosmic Order of Salvation (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1996), 236-247.
-
23
critical analysis that examines the texts, context and theological interpretation of Irenaeus
in comparison with his contemporaries. This work is particularly intended to present a
history of the different interpretations that scholars have given to the baptismal theology of
Irenaeus and its relation to pneumatology and soteriology. This dissertation compares and
contrasts various interpreters of Irenaeus baptismal theology (Orbe, Anda, Houssiau,
Fantino and others) and presents how there are important and challenging questions still
unanswered due to the divergences regarding the interpretation of passages and the
concepts used by Irenaeus. An author like Irenaeus needs to be analyzed not only by
reading his texts but also by a comparative and critical evaluation of the ideas of his most
prominent interpreters and how they have influenced our own interpretation of the
Irenaean corpus, in some cases obscuring the original texts in order to give interpretations
that are more in conformity with contemporary theological positions. This effort could bring
a greater insight into the theology of Irenaeus according to context and recognize the
influence of the bishop of Lyons in his time and in subsequent centuries of the Christian era,
as well as the implications of a retrieved Irenaean baptismal theology for contemporary
theology and ecclesial practice.
-
24
Chapter I-Historical Context
A. Theological understanding of the baptism at the Jordan in the second century
In order to understand the context in which Irenaeus worked and the theological
positions he debated this chapter is a broad presentation on how second century
theologians viewed the baptism at the Jordan. The chapter will discuss the practice of
baptism in the second century, the role of the baptism of Jesus at the Jordan in the
development of a Christian theology of baptism, and the positions of some of the diverse
gnostic groups that were present at the time. The last part of the chapter will analyze four
noticeable concepts of early interpretations of the baptism of Jesus: the descent of the
Spirit, the beginning of the messianic ministry of Jesus, the identification and revelation of
Jesus, and the purification of water or of Jesus (in his identification with humanity).16
1. The Role of the Baptism at the Jordan in the Development of a Christian Theology
of Baptism
This section deals with the influence of the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan and an
elaboration of an understanding of Christian baptism in the second century. The study of
the insights of diverse authors is helpful in order to bring to the fore the historical,
ecclesiological, and theological background that was part of the theology of Irenaeus of
Lyons. The awareness of the theological development of second century authors regarding
16 It is important to note that when this chapter refers to the development of a Christian theology of baptism the chapter is not referring to dogmatic statements. Dogma as defined as the formal definition and communication of core beliefs of the Christian faith is a concept that has historical power in the wake of the ecumenical councils that started in the fourth century. During the second century there were solid convictions of specifics of the Christian doctrine. However, the concept of dogma refers to definitions which were declared much later than the time of Irenaeus of Lyons and his contemporaries.
-
25
Jesus and his baptism will provide a better understanding of the context and theological
interpretation of Irenaeus in comparison with his contemporaries.
An analysis of the earliest data, from the New Testament to the first non- canonical
writings in the Christian tradition, presents baptism as a rite of initiation into the Christian
community. The New Testament writings confirm this in an indirect manner, from the
Pauline letters, and their insistence on baptismal imagery through the Gospels, and the Acts
of the Apostles, with their depictions of baptismal practices and the proclamation of the
Risen Christ to his disciples as part of the Great Commission: Go therefore and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Spirit. (Matthew 28:19-20). Baptism is depicted in these New Testament books as a
necessary condition for salvation, and a reflection of the beliefs of the first Christian
communities in Palestine.17
It seems that from the establishment of the Christian tradition the baptism with water
was done with a Trinitarian formula and accompanied by the laying on of hands,
representing the gift of the Spirit on the recipient. The second century also brought some
additions to the baptismal rite, like anointing.
There is evidence of a reference to a prebaptismal anointing in the attributed writings
of Hippolytus of Rome (170-235 CE). He wrote that a catechumen, after renouncing Satan,
received a first anointing with the oil of exorcism. There was a second anointing after triple
immersion and the confession of faith. This anointing with the oil of thanksgiving had two
parts. There was one anointing by the priest in the baptistery where the priest would say to
17 Frederic C. Grant, Early Christian Baptism, Anglican Theological Review 27 no.4 (1945): 253-263.
-
26
the catechumen: I anoint you with sacred oil in the name of Jesus Christ. A second
anointing on the head was given by the bishop in the church after the laying on of hands,
with the formula: I anoint you with holy oil in the almighty Father, in Christ Jesus and in the
Holy Spirit. 18
Jewish Christian theology placed a pronounced importance on the baptism of Christ,
regarding it as even more important than the Nativity. Several authors, among them Jean
Danilou, suggested that this emphasis was caused by the influence of the Essene
movement and its relationship with John the Baptist.19 Johns practice of baptism by
immersion was in concordance with the characteristics of the Essene Baptist movement, as
well as the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as an eschatological symbol. Danilou establishes
the resemblance between the outpouring of the Spirit in Christian baptism with the
eschatological effusion that was prominent in the Qumrn texts.
An important element discussed by Judeo-Christian theology is the descent of Jesus
into the Jordan. The Testament of Asher (from the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs,
written circa the end of the second century), presents the descent of Jesus in this way:
Quand le Seigneur visitera () la terre, lui-mme tant venu comme un home parmi les hommes, mangeant et buvant et dans la tranquillit () crasant la tte du dragon par leau ( ), il sauvera Isral et toutes les nations, Dieu portant une figure () dhomme.20
The passage has evident Christian influence and presents a connection between the
baptism in the Jordan and the Passion of Christ. There is also in the passage a presentation
18 Ysabel de Andia, Anointing, Communio 25 (Summer 1998): 214-292. 19 Jean Danilou, Thologie du Judo-Christianisme : Histoire des doctrines chrtiennes avant Nice vol. I (Tournai :Descle, 1958) : 247-248. 20 Testament de XII Patriarches, VII.3, Texte grec, par R.H. Charles (Oxford, 1908) as cited in Danilou, 248.
-
27
of the baptism of Christ as a prefiguration of Christian baptism, both in the consecration of
the waters and the connection of the descent into the waters with the Paschal Mystery.
2. The Baptism of Jesus in the Gospels: A Source of Reflection and Controversy
The baptismal significance in the Christian tradition was also based on the Gospel
passages depicting the baptism of Jesus Christ in the Jordan River. However, it is important
to remember that the passages from the Gospels describing the baptism of Jesus Christ
were in themselves a source for controversy and divergent opinions about the
interpretation of the event at the Jordan. To begin with, John the Baptist was part of a
baptismal movement in Palestine and Syria that was very influential for early Christianity.
There is a large consensus on the belief that John baptized his disciples in the Jordan River
and that some of the followers of John became disciples of Jesus, as can be seen in John
1:35-42.
At the same time the four Gospels are insistent in the presentation of John the Baptist
as an announcer of a greater successor. The Gospels also presented the Spirit descending
and remaining on Jesus, with an emphasis that Jesus is the one announced by the Baptist
(Mark 1:8). The Four Gospels agree in three elements in their depictions of the baptism in
the Jordan: the splitting of the heavens, the descent of the Spirit on Jesus, and the
emergence of the voice from heaven declaring Jesus the Son, the Beloved. There is also
unanimity in the Gospel accounts on depicting the ministerial, public life of Jesus after the
anointing by the Spirit. The Synoptics will add further importance to the baptismal event,
with an emphasis on the Spirit guiding Jesus into the desert to be tempted. The accounts
-
28
could also imply Jesus awareness of his baptism in the Jordan as a way of fulfilling the will
of God and an acknowledgment of the validity of John the Baptists prophetic role.
a. The Gospel of Mark
The account in Mark 1:4-11 has been described by tradition as the first witness to
the baptism, with the other two Synoptic Gospels using elements of Mark for their accounts.
Marks account of the baptism of Jesus emphasizes the superiority of Jesus over John. In
contrast with the other people who came for baptism, Jesus does not confess sins. Jesus
was baptized by John in [] the Jordan River. The Greek preposition literally means
into, but the expression was also used to designate the preposition in, and could be
interpreted as a confirmation that Jesus was baptized by immersion in concordance with
studies indicating that Johns baptism was of immersion like other Jewish washings of the
time.21 There are references to passages from different segments from the Hebrew
Scriptures presenting Jesus as the fulfillment of the messianic prophecies with the voice
from heaven proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God (You are my Son, the Beloved) and
expanding the content of Psalm 2: 7. These words are spoken only to Jesus, not to John nor
the spectators.
The account in Mark presents Jesus as the sole subject of the event in the Jordan: the
opening of the heavens, the descent of the Spirit, and the proclamation of the heavenly
voice. The words from heaven as well as the anointing with the Spirit also imply that Jesus
is the Messiah. The other part of the proclamation with you I am well pleased refers to
Isaiah 42:1 and suggests the relationship with the Servant of Yahweh, the figure in the book
21 Everett Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church: History, Theology and Liturgy in the First Five Centuries (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2009), 101-102.
-
29
of Isaiah destined to establish a covenant between God and humanity by virtue of his
suffering and death. These allusions can be also found in other chapters of the Gospel of
Mark. In Mark 11:27-33, Jesus is asked about the basis of his authority and Jesus counter
argument is based on Johns baptism and its validity. Jesus is presented in the Synoptic
Gospels as a defender of the validity of Johns baptism. 22 Marks account also made clear
that Jesus was immersed in the Jordan, as opposed to some early Christian art depicting
John the Baptist pouring water from his hand or from a shell above a standing Jesus. Mark
makes clear to the reader that Jesus was already the Son of God at the baptism. However,
this is the same Gospel where Jesus never directly reveals his divine identity to his disciples.
b. The Gospel of Luke
The account of the Gospel of Luke (3:21-22) is the most brief on the baptism of Jesus
in the New Testament, even when the Lukan narrative has the most detailed presentation
on the ministry of John the Baptist. Lukes account presents the description of the event in a
more passive and detached manner: heaven opened and the Holy Spirit descended on Him
in bodily form like a dove; and there came a voice from heaven. The passage still
presents the experience as something pertaining only to Jesus, with no indication of other
participants. Luke has already recognized Jesus as Savior, Lord, Messiah, and Son in
previous chapters. The account of the baptism in the Jordan adds two other elements from
the account by Mark: Jesus appears praying when the heavens opened after the baptism,
and the Spirit is described as descending in the form of a dove. The description of Jesus as
my beloved Son is in concordance with previous references in the Gospel to Jesus as Son
22 Kilian McDonnell, The Baptism of Jesus in the Jordan, 1-3.
-
30
of God (1:35). Various Latin transcriptions of the Gospel as well as the Codex Bezae
elaborate on this declaration with the next words of Psalm 27: Today I have begotten you.
This evidence is in agreement with other early Christian texts that present the heavenly
voice using the full phrase from Psalm 27, interpreting the psalm in a messianic context.23
There is no reference to John the Baptist in the passage nor to his reaction to the event,
thus making a more emphatic stance on Jesus presence and reducing the dangers of a
subordination of Jesus to John. There is also an emphasis on the baptism, anointing, and
declaration of the sonship of Jesus taking place during (and perhaps because of) his prayer,
similar to the transfiguration description found in Lukes ninth chapter.24
c. The Gospel of Matthew
The baptismal account of the Gospel of Matthew (3:13-17) also adds to the diversity
of interpretations, with a description more detailed than in the other Gospel accounts.
Matthews narrative comprises the main elements found in Mark and in Luke while adding
some particular points. Jesus is identified as Messiah from the first verse of the Gospel in
the introduction to the genealogy (1:1). The description of John the Baptist as a forerunner
to the Messiah appears before the baptismal narrative. Through the genealogy and the
baptismal account Matthew presents a Jesus perceived as a prophetic Messiah, empowered
by the Spirit. The presence of the Spirit is both a sign of the eschatological era brought by
Jesus and the sign of his power as Messiah. Matthew presents a Baptist who objects to
baptizing Jesus, an addition probably reflecting the embarrassment of earlier Christian
communities to the situation of having the sinless Jesus seeking a baptism of repentance for
23 Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church, 102-103. 24 McDonnell, The Baptism of Jesus in the Jordan, 7.
-
31
the forgiveness of sins. Matthews narrative is firm in presenting the intention of Jesus to be
baptized by John to fulfill all righteousness (3:15). The expression for righteousness or
justice in Matthew () is very much present throughout the gospel, and it has
the meaning or context of obedience to the will of God and doing what is right. Along with
other scholars, Kilian McDonnell posits that in this context the fulfillment of all
righteousness could mean that the baptism of Jesus by John is a sign of the design of God to
show the solidarity of Jesus with humanity.25 Matthew also adds a dialogue between John
the Baptist and Jesus, where the Baptist says: I need to be baptized by you, and do you
come to me? and Jesus answers: Let it be so now. This dialogue could be seen as a way
for early Christians to respond to the objections of pagans regarding Jesus being
subordinate to John or needing to be baptized because of personal sin. The expression to
fulfill all righteousness could be interpreted as a sign of Jesus as the Servant of God,
carrying the sufferings of humanity.
The Gospel of Matthew is the only account where the voice of heaven is presented
using the third person, i.e., This is my Son, the Beloved. instead of the second person
used in the other Synoptic Gospels, i.e., You are. Nonetheless, there is in this account a
similarity with Mark and Luke in its implication that only Jesus heard the voice from heaven
and saw the descent of the Spirit. At the same time Matthew is the only writer who uses the
full phrase This is my Son, the Beloved, with whom I am well pleased, the same phrase
used later in the Transfiguration account (17:5). This phrase could also be related to the
Trinitarian formula used at the end of the Gospel, with a Father who spoke from heaven, a
25 Ibid., 17-18.
-
32
Son who was revealed, and a Spirit who descended.26 In Matthews narrative there is a
vision of Jesus as both Messiah and Suffering Servant, a connection that will continue until
the death of Jesus on the cross, the fulfillment of the baptism.
d. The Gospel of John
The Gospel of John does not deal with controversies regarding the sinlessness of Jesus
in the baptismal narrative. The Johannine Gospel presents an indirect account of the Gospel
narrative depicting John the Baptist as a witness of the event: I saw the Spirit coming down
from heaven like a dove and resting upon him.(John 1:32) This passage is certainly a
modification of the Synoptic account, where there is no contradiction in the way the Baptist
is related to Jesus. Johns baptism is presented in this Gospel as a moment of revelation of
Jesus. This coming of the Spirit as a dove is a common feature in all the Gospel accounts, an
event indicative of the importance of the anointing of Jesus for the initiation of his ministry
and for his self-consciousness.
The Fourth Gospel presents the coming of the Spirit also as a moment of revelation for
John the Baptist (1:31, 33, 34), with a confession of Jesus as the Son of God coming from
John in 1:34. The Gospel of John also presents another element existing in all Gospels: John
the Baptists testimony about an upcoming baptism in the Holy Spirit that will be
administered by Jesus (1:33). However, John also proclaims Jesus as the one who takes way
the sin of the world (1:29). Unique to the Gospel of John is the allusion that Jesus was
involved in a baptismal ministry that was occurring either in combination with Johns
ministry or in a parallel existence (Jn. 3:23, 26; 10: 41-42.) It seems that these references
26 Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church, 102-103.
-
33
reflect an historical awareness by the early Christian communities of the baptism of Jesus
and his own practice of baptism. 27
e. Conflicts in interpretation of Gospel Passages
Nonetheless, even the Synoptic Gospels present contradictions about the knowledge
of John regarding Jesus. The Lucan account presents John asking from prison if Jesus is the
Coming One, something that is not in the account by Mark. This addition from Luke stands
in contradiction with the previously cited passage from the Fourth Gospel and its depiction
of John the Baptist as aware of the events at the Jordan and of the identity of Jesus. The
earlier accounts, however, present the Baptist as never proclaiming Jesus in any messianic
terms.
These conflicts in interpretation also add to confusion regarding what exactly inspired
the institution of Christian baptism. Some scholars (like John P. Meier) believe that there is
no explicit relation between the New Testament passages about the baptism of Jesus and
the practice of Christian baptism. Simon Lgasse, on the other hand, goes even further:
Lexamen prcdent des pricopes synoptiques aboutit une constatation ngative que corrobore lensemble du Nouveau Testament: il nest aucun indice qui permettait dadmettre quau 1er sicle les chrtiens ont tabli un rapport quelconque entre le baptme de Jsus par Jean et le rite de linitiation pratiqu dans lglise.28
Lgasse has presented his idea that the connection between Christian baptism and the
imparting of the Spirit present in the scriptural depictions of the baptism in the Jordan is not
very clear and that the baptism of Jesus was a baptism in water, not in the Spirit. In the
27 G.R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973), 68-69. 28 Simon Lgasse, Naissance du baptme (Paris : Les ditions du Cerf, 1993), 68.
-
34
opinion of Lgasse, there was another way in which the early Church made the link between
Jesus baptism and the baptism of Christian believers:
Il est possible, vraisemblable mme, quen rapportant les paroles de Jean-Baptiste les crivains vangliques aient eu une vise oblique ladresse des candidates au baptme, auxquels, par le truchement du Prcurseur, pouvait sadresser un message tel que celui-ci: Si Jean-Baptiste a exig la conversion lors du seul baptme deau, combien plus forte raison devez-vous oprer cette mme conversion, vous qui allez recevoir un baptme dans lEsprit Saint! Mais justement ce message ne cadre pas avec la thorie qui considre le baptme deau reu par Jsus comme le prototype du baptme chrtien. A telle thorie le Nouveau Testament noffre pas le moindre support. Pour la formuler les Pres de lglise ont t amens faire un curieux dtour, en recourant lide de la sanctification des eaux. Ide nouvelle et sans fondement dans les textes canoniques, puisque au lieu dtre, comme dans ces derniers, lobjet de laction, le Christ devient dsormais loprateur, grce au contact mystrieux de sa chair avec leau du Jourdain.29
Other scholars value some of Lgasses points while at the same time opposing some of his
conclusions in light of the historical and literary evidence. Kilian McDonnell accepts the idea
that there is no specific connection in the New Testament between the baptism of Jesus
and Christian baptism. However, McDonnell posits that it is improbable to just dismiss the
historical evidence of the postbiblical sources, starting with Ignatius of Antioch:
The larger context is Ignatius against those who deny the reality of Jesus Christs humanity. Here Jesuss baptism in the Jordan is a symbol anticipating the redeeming death of Jesus, which is real because his humanity is not a phantom but is full and complete. In some way the water is penetrated with the efficacy of that death, an efficacy touching the future candidates of baptism. Already at this early date there is evidence of the institution of Christian baptism by the efficacy of Jesus death anticipated in the baptism of JesusThe baptism of Jesus is the institution of Christian baptism because therein is found the effective content of the sacrament. 30
29 Ibid., 69. 30 McDonnell, 186.
-
35
Etienne Nodet also objects to the position of Lgasse, and in an extensive analysis he
objects to Legassess refusal of acknowledging the baptism of Jesus as a model of Christian
baptism. Nodet contends with Lgassess view that the biblical texts denote a lack of
connection between the baptism of Jesus and the baptism of Christians. The analysis of
passages like Acts 19 and its depiction of the community at Ephesus attest to a connection
between the baptism in the Jordan and the baptism of believers in the name of the risen
Christ. Nodet also notes that the writers of the New Testament were not concerned with
the issue of institution. Rather the writers saw Jesus as participating in and thus significantly
transforming the baptism of John in a fluid continuity to his own resurrection.31
Extra canonical accounts presented this conflict in a more detailed way, showing
evidence of early interpretation of the baptism of Jesus in the Jordan, even when they do
not enhance in a substantial way the historical evidence of the event. The analysis of the
exegetical works of the first two centuries shows in some texts a sense of embarrassment
regarding the baptism of Jesus. Ignatius of Antioch mentions the baptism of Jesus twice in
his work in an obvious effort to defend it, saying that Jesus was baptized in order to purify
the waters and to fulfill all justification. Justin Martyr also presents a defense of the baptism
in the Jordan, and a text attributed to Melito of Sardis is defensive about the event,
justifying it with a cosmic explanation: if the sun, moon and stars seem baptized by the sea
when you stand at the end of the ocean, why not also the Christ, the Sun out of the
Heaven?32
31 Etienne Nodet, review of Lgasses Naissance du Baptme, in Revue Biblique 102 (1995) 600-611. 32 Fragment 8b, Melito of Sardis, On Pascha and Fragments, S.G. Hall, ed. (Oxford, Clarendon, 1979), 73.
-
36
The evidence of the canonical and non-canonical texts presenting the baptism of Jesus
in the Jordan clearly present significant conflicts in the theological interpretation of the
event. To justify the baptism of Jesus diverse interpretations arose during the first centuries.
Among these interpretations is the idea that Jesus was baptized in order to consecrate
baptism and provide an example to be emulated for Christians. There is also the
interpretation that Jesus repentance was not done for his own sins but for the sins of the
rest of the human race. Related to the previous concept is the idea that the baptism in the
Jordan was a sign of his total identification with sinners. 33
The Gospel of the Nazarenes (a text from approximately the first half of the second
century and sometimes confused with the Gospel of the Hebrews for their similarities in
date and structure) presented this passage:
Behold the mother of the Lord, and his brethren said unto him, John the Baptist baptizeth unto the remission of sins; let us go and be baptized of him. But he said unto them: Wherein have I sinned that I should be baptized of him, unless peradventure this very thing that I have said is a sin of ignorance?34
This passage is unique in the literature of Early Christianity. The Gospel of the Nazarenes is
highly dependent on the Gospel of Matthew, and its previously quoted baptismal account
could illustrate the unease created over the submission of Jesus to be baptized by John. The
Gospel of Matthew answers these concerns in a more uncomplicated manner.
Interpretations for this passage of the Gospel of the Nazarenes argue that the sin of
ignorance spoken by Jesus could refer to his ignorance of another use for baptism apart
from forgiveness of sins, yet another interpretation presents the possibility of the passage
33 Charles H. Scobie, John the Baptist (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1964), 148. 34 Scobie, 148.
-
37
referring to Jesus own ignorance of his lack of sin. Another explanation for the passage
could refer to the expression of Jesus as a double question, the second question being an
affirmation of the first one, a statement that Jesus had no sin.
The Gospel of the Ebionites (also from the first half of the second century) presents
John the Baptist seeing a great light after baptizing Jesus and then falling down and
begging Jesus to baptize him. This passage (an elaboration of the dialogue between the
Baptist and Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew) could witness to the uneasiness that the
baptism of Jesus presented in the early Christian tradition. The Gospel of the Ebionites is
mainly concerned with the ministry of John the Baptist and with the baptism of Jesus, and it
strongly depends on the Synoptic Gospels. The original insights of the baptismal narrative
are the expansion of the words by the heavenly voice with the additional words of Psalm
2:7 and also the appearance of a great light around the place.
The Gospel of the Hebrews, probably of Egyptian origin, presents Semitic features like
the referral to the Holy Spirit as female and a style reminiscent of Wisdom literature:
And it came to pass when the Lord was come up out of the water, the whole fount of the Holy Spirit descended upon him and rested on him (Isa. 11.2; 61:1) and said to him: My Son, in all the prophets was I waiting for you [Wis. 7:27] that you should come and I might rest in you [Sir.24:7]. For you are my rest [Ps.132:14]; you are my first-begotten Son [Ps. 2:7] that reigns for ever [Ps. 89:29; Luke 1:33].35
This passage, quoted by Jerome on his In Isaiah, distinguishes Jesus from the prophets by
presenting the Holy Spirit fully resting on him. The Spirit speaks directly to Jesus, calling him
My Son and using references to Psalm 2:7. These diverse scriptural references are
intended to establish orthodoxy, to present Jesus as not being begotten at the baptism.
35 Ferguson, Baptism in the Early Church, 105-106.
-
38
The Gospel of Nicodemus was an apocryphal work that claimed to be written as a
derivation from a Hebrew work written by Nicodemus, an acquaintance of Jesus mentioned
in the Gospel of John. The dates of the composition of The Gospel of Nicodemus are pretty
uncertain, with different scholars giving diverse dates. This work used Jewish references and
includes what is called the Acts of Pilate and another section that describes Christs descent
to Hades. Some of these passages are perhaps from the fifth or sixth century. However, the
baptismal account in this book seems influenced by earlier sources. John the Baptist
describes his ministry in this way:
[I] preached repentance to the people for the forgiveness of sins. And the Son of God came to me, and when I saw him afar off, I said to the people: Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world [John1:29]. And with my hand I baptized him in the river Jordan, and I saw the Holy Spirit like a dove coming upon him, and heard also the voice of God the Father speaking thus: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased [Matt.3:16-17]. And for this reason he sent me to you, to preach that the only begotten Son of God comes here, in order that whoever believes in him should be saved, and whoever does not believe in him should be condemned.36
Other texts of the time were more influenced by Jewish and gnostic elements and began to
present the baptism in the Jordan as a moment of metaphysical change in Jesus, or at least
an important consideration according to the testimony of Christian exegetes.
3. The Apostolic Fathers
Epistle of Barnabas
The second century writers speak about baptism as an immersion in water by a
penitent for the remission of sins. The Epistle of Barnabas, from approximately 130 CE,
describes the process in its eleventh chapter in this way:
36 Gospel of Nicodemus 18.2, in Wihelm Schneemelcher, ed., New Testament Apocrypha, Vol. 1, 522.
-
39
On the one hand, it is written about the water that Israel will not at all accept the baptism that brings forgiveness of sins, but will create something in its place for themselves.This means that we descend into the water full of sins and filth, but come up out of it bearing the fruit of reverential fear in our heart and having the hope in Jesus in our spirits.37
The author of the Epistle of Barnabas identified chapters eleven and twelve as concerning
the water and the cross, dedicating chapter eleven to the water and chapter twelve to the
cross. The water and the cross are therefore interconnected, declaring Christian baptism as
capable of bringing forgiveness of sins. This forgiveness of sins effects a new birth where the
baptized person becomes a new creation, enters the Promised Land, becomes a temple of
God and will live forever. The Epistle of Barnabas discusses Jewish religious practices and
presents them as not having the same value as Christian baptism. Chapter nine discusses
circumcision in a spiritual sense and presents Jewish circumcision as a seal but not as similar
to Christian baptism. Instead, the Epistle of Barnabas presents Jewish ritual washings as a
counterpoint or counterpart of baptism. The Epistle of Barnabas associated Christian
baptism with a seal of the Spirit on the heart of the believer.
The Epistle of Barnabas speaks about baptism with more concern for the significance
of baptism than for a concrete description of the baptismal ceremony. However, the text
refers to baptism as an act of immersion, even establishing parallels in chapter eleven with
the descent of Jesus into hell after his death. There is also a parallel between Jesus Christs
descent into hell and come up out of it and receive the hope of Jesus in their spirits. Also
the reference in chapter sixteen of the name of the Lord in connection with the
forgiveness of sins and becoming a temple of God could imply the dispensation of baptism
37 Bart D. Erhman, editor and translator, The Apostolic Fathers, Vol. II (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2005): 53-55.
-
40
in Gods name.38 There is also a reference in the text about the promised land abounding
with milk and honey, an image that could be interpreted as a symbol of newly born people
entering into a covenantal relationship with God:
What does the other prophet, Moses, say to them? See, this is what the Lord God says, Enter into the good land, which the Lord swore to give to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and receive it as an inheritance, a land flowing with milk and honey. Why then does he speak of milk and honey? Because the child is first nourished by honey and then milk. So, also, when we are nourished by faith in the promise and then by the word, we will live as masters over the earth.39
The Epistle of Barnabas was probably the first