Comparative Theology, book by H. H. Pope Shenouda III

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

Forward



We are in an age in which Ecumenical work and attempts towards the recovery of the Christian Unity have flourished. The meetings between the Churches, in councils, conferences and symposiums have increased, and the fields of co-operation and co-working have multiplied.
However, unity is in a much higher level than cooperation. The Christian Unity should be built on the foundation of the “One Faith”. Thus began the theological discussions between the Churches.
This book in your hands is a step in this theological discussion between our brethren the Protestants and us.
Our brethren the Protestants comprise numerous denominations. There are partial variances between them, but as a whole they are enclosed within one frame. We will try in an atmosphere of love to discuss the points they have in common.
Here we do not include our brethren the Anglicans, as most of the topics in this book apply to other denominations of the Protestant Church.
In our discussion we have taken care to depend exclusively upon the Holy Bible, quoting none of the sayings of the Church Fathers or Tradition.
We shall speak with absolute frankness in handling the points of variance between Protestantism and Orthodoxy. We shall analyse them and see the opinion of the Holy Bible on them.
This book is the first volume of our discussion. It will be followed by others to cover the remaining points of difference, with the aspiration that this may bring us to a dogmatic and intellectual understanding.
We are prepared to reply to all the comments that we may receive.
Lastly, we pray that the Lord may preserve our discussion in the atmosphere of love of which we are circumspect.

August, 1988
Pope Shenouda III
.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III


One Faith and Sound Doctrine


Theology is the discourse about God, blessed be His Name. Only those who have known God, and their disciples, are able to speak about Him.
Theology needs accuracy of expression and interpretation, and knowledge of the reliable sources believed in by all Christians. We, as a traditional and conservative Church, maintain the Apostolic Faith that was once entrusted to us by the saints (Jude 1-3). We do not introduce any innovations in religion, nor do we move an ancient boundary marker set up by our forefathers (Prov.22: 28).
The faith of the Church is "one faith" (Eph.4: 5). The Church reminds us every day of this one faith, in a reading we pray in Matins from chapter four of Saint Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians. This one faith is the faith of every member of the Church. Whoever did not believe was isolated by the Church and forbidden to mix with others lest he corrupt their faith. Therefore, our teacher St. John the Evangelist says: "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds" (2John. 10, 11).
The basic source of the one faith is the Holy Bible. The other sources are the sayings of the saints, the authenticated creeds of the holy councils, and what was recorded in the
Church books, especially the ritual books. All these are in accord with the Holy Bible and are called as a whole 'Church Tradition'.
The criterion by which we validate the accuracy of Tradition is the important condition that it complies with the Holy Bible. Our teacher St. Paul the Apostle says: "But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed" (Gal.1: 8). He also says: "As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" (Gal.1: 9).

That was why, in the Apostolic era and thereafter, during her early stages, the Church was extremely circumspect to safeguard the teaching and thus safeguard the faith. For this reason, St. Paul the Apostle says to his disciple St. Titus the Bishop of Crete: "But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine" (Titus 2: 1). This sound doctrine was commanded to the first bishop fathers directly by the Apostles, and then from the bishops to other generations through honest teaching. Thus the sound doctrine was handed down from one generation to the next. St. Paul the Apostle says to his disciple Bishop Timothy: "And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2Tim.2: 2) and "Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith" (2Tim.1: 13).

Teaching Is the Task of the Clergy

Teaching was the task of the Apostles and then of their disciples the bishops, priests and deacons. It was never the work of the laity. The Lord Jesus Christ entrusted the task of teaching to the Apostles when He said to them: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you" (Matt. 28:19,20) and "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mark.16: 15). He did not say this to others.
The Apostles considered preaching, teaching, ministry of the word and entrusting the faith to others, their main task, and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. On the occasion of ordaining the seven deacons, St. Peter the Apostle said: "...but we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word" (Acts 6: 4) and he said about the Lord: "...He commanded us to preach to the people" (Acts 10:42). St. Paul the Apostle said about the Gospel: "...to which I was appointed a preacher, an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles" (2Tim. 1: 11). Thus this Apostle lived preaching the kingdom of God and teaching about the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 28:31).
St. Paul the Apostle entrusted the task of teaching and preaching to his disciples the bishops. He said to his disciple St. Timothy: "Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching" (2Tim.4: 2). And to his disciple Bishop Titus, he said: "Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you" (Titus 2:15).
The task of teaching was entrusted to bishops, then to priests and clergymen in general, as we will mention in detail in due course, since the Law is sought from the mouth of the clergyman.
Holy councils of bishops were formed and had the authority to legislate laws and canons in the holy Church. The replies of many of the bishops on religious affairs were considered sacred canons recognised by the Universal Church. A vivid example of this is what occurred during the visit of Pope Timothy Alexandrus, the 22nd Pope of Constantinople, to the Ecumenical Council held in 381 A. D. All his replies were considered Church canons. (See Volume 14 of Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers series).
As for the laity, they were always in the position of learners. The clergymen became teachers not only because they preached from the Church pulpit but also because of them being spiritual counsellors in confessions and the like.
Faith and doctrine were the task of the Church, represented by her councils and bishops, and were interpreted by the clergymen to the people. Preachers are not entitled to teach their own opinions on the subjects of faith and doctrine but they must teach what is recorded in the Church doctrine entrusted to them. For if the freedom is given to every person to spread his own opinions, we will have differing dogmas and we cannot call this the Church doctrine.
Man has freedom of belief but he does not have the freedom to teach according to his own thoughts because heresies sprang from the different schools of teaching.
When Luther started to teach according to his own thoughts and was followed by Calvin, Zwingli and others, a new schism occurred in the Church. As time passed, many contradicting dogmas were formed, and what the Church knew as "one faith" began to fade away.
Everyone is free in his belief. But the freedom of belief might divert and turn into heresies and heterodoxies that are exterior to the one faith of the Church. The Church, who has been alert over the faith to maintain it, does not allow this to happen nor does she give the authority of teaching to everyone, but examines the sayings of the teachers against the faith entrusted to the saints. Thus the saying of St. Paul the Apostle (Gal. 1:9) remains a fixed criterion.
Sometimes the reason for an error in faith or teaching is due to mixing with different dogmas, or being influenced by them and their teachers, or by being disciples of such teachers or their writings. Sometimes the reason for an error in faith is due to one's sticking to one's own opinion, neither accepting any change nor obeying the Church. Most probably the reason behind this is pride in the heart convincing the person that he is right and whoever objects to his opinion is wrong, and that he understands what no-one else does.
Throughout her history, the Church has been cautious to safeguard the teaching from distortion. Just one wrong teaching of one ex-priest such as Arius, caused two popes, namely, Pope Peter the Seal of the Martyrs and Pope Alexandrus, to intervene. A council was held in Alexandria attended by a hundred bishops from Alexandria and Libya and another council was held at Nicea in 325 A.D. attended by 318 bishops from all over the world. All this was caused by one priest's error in teaching. There was a danger of his teaching spreading and nobody said: "Leave the matter alone; there is freedom of belief"!
The first schism in the Church occurred in the middle of the fifth century, in 451 AD, due to the different teachings on the Nature of Christ. Another schism occurred in the 11th century between the Roman Catholics and the Byzantine Orthodox due to the different teachings on the procession of the Holy Spirit. A third major schism occurred in the 15th century caused by Luther, the establisher of Protestantism. Different dogmas sprang up afterwards within Protestantism.
Hence arises the necessity of presenting a comparative theology to compare the various beliefs attributed to Christianity, to study the points of differences, and to reply to every teaching that does not conform to the doctrine of the Church.
In this book, we are attempting to expound the main differences in belief which exist between Orthodoxy and Protestantism, to discuss them in the light of the Holy Bible and pray to God to unify our belief because. Especially that our main call with regard to Christian Unity we call for nothing less than "Unity of faith".

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III






The disagreements between us Orthodox and the Protestants regarding Baptism


The subject of baptism revolves around in five salient points:
(1) What is the importance of baptism and what are its efficacious?
The Orthodox believe that baptism is the way to receive salvation, purification, justification, renewal of life and membership in the Body of Christ? While these things, according to the Protestant denominations, are only received by faith? If the latter is correct, what is then, the use of baptism? Is it just a sign of Christianity? Or is it merely an obedience to the Lord's commandment: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.28: 19)?

(2) Should who administer baptism?
Baptism in the Orthodox Church is administered only by the clergy. But our Protestant brethren do not, at all, accept human Priesthood. So in their churches, a minister and not a clergyman administer baptism. He could be an elder (or a lady elder in case of groups who allow women ministers). Anyhow, according to the Protestant belief, the elders or the ministers are not clergymen.
(3) We believe that baptism is one of the Church Sacraments but our Protestants brethren do not.
(4) We baptise by immersion in water whereas the majority of our Protestant brethren baptise by sprinkling water.
(5) We baptise infants on the belief of their parents, but our Protestant brethren do not believe in Paedobaptism since they condition the belief of the baptised prior to baptising him.

Some of the objections raised by our Protestant Brethren:

1. Isn’t faith sufficient without baptism?
2. How was the Penitent Thief saved without baptism?
3. Does water have the property that gives birth and renewal?
4. Why a clergyman? What happens if the clergyman who administers baptism is a malefactor?
5. If baptism is renewal of life, why do we sin thereafter?
6. How does the infant inherit the sin of his parents who were previously baptised and whose sins were forgiven?
7. Is the water in baptism a symbol of the word? The Apostle says concerning the relationship of Christ with the Church: "... that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph.5: 26).

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III


The Efficacious of Baptism


(1) Salvation is completed through baptism

This is pursuant to the Lord Jesus Christ's words: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark.16: 16). The Lord did not say: "He who believes is saved", but He put the condition of baptism alongside the condition of belief.


(2) Through baptism we receive the Second Birth which is of water and the Spirit

(a) This is pursuant to the Lord Jesus Christ's words to Nicodemus: "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John.3:3). The Lord explained this to him, saying: "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John.3: 5). Then He added "that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. The wind blows where it wishes... So is everyone who is born of the Spirit" (John.3: 6,8). Thus the Lord considers that everyone who is born of water and the Spirit is born from above or born of the Spirit.
It also seems strange that some Protestant brethren want to water-down this text by claiming that the Lord did not say, "unless one is baptised of water and the Spirit", but, "unless one is born"! Of course there is no doubt that both express the same thing, because what is the other meaning of "born of water" except "to be baptised" since the baptised comes out of the womb of the font and moreover the Apostle St. Paul affirms the same meaning when he says:

(b) "...not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration" (Titus 3: 5). And about the Church he said: "... that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph.5: 26). The Apostle considered that the washing of water (in baptism) is the washing of renewal and the washing away of sins.


(3) Baptism washes away sins



This is according to the last two verses and also according to Ananias' words to Saul: "And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptised, and wash away your sins" (Acts 22: 16). Here we see that one of the outcomes of baptism is the washing away of sins. We are surprised at Saul's case: He was called by the Lord Jesus Christ Himself to be an Apostle to the Gentiles and a chosen vessel to bear His name and to suffer for the sake of His name (Acts 9: 15,16). Nevertheless, his sins were not forgiven by his encounter with the Lord or by his faith or by becoming an Apostle,
. He was still in need of baptism to wash away his sins. Probably the Apostle Paul always remembered that washing away of sins through baptism, so he said to the Corinthians: "But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (1Cor.6: 11). This was because they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and received the forgiveness of sins as St. Peter -had said to the Jews.


(4) In baptism there is forgiveness of sins

On the Day of Pentecost, when the Jews believed and were cut to the heart, they said to St. Peter and the other Apostles: "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" Then St. Peter and the Apostles replied: "Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2: 37,38).
If the belief of the Jews was adequate for the forgiveness of sins, the great Apostles would not have instructed them to be baptised, especially on such an historical day; the day of establishing the Church; the day on which important principles were being set up for salvation.
One may ask: How are sins forgiven in baptism? We reply:


(5) Baptism is dying with the Lord Jesus Christ and rising with Him

The Holy Bible says: "For the wages of sin is death" (Rom.6:23). The way of salvation began by death: the Lord Jesus Christ died for us. It is necessary to die with the Lord Jesus Christ or at least to resemble Him in His death as the Apostle says: "...that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death" (Phil.3: 10). This is achieved in baptism. How?
The Apostle says: "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptised into Christ Jesus were baptised into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death" (Rom.6: 3,4). And he continues to confirm this expression by saying: "...we died with Him... we were buried with Him... we have been united together in the likeness of His death... our old man was crucified with Him." Confirming the same meaning, the Apostle also says in his Epistle to the Colossians: "...buried with Him in baptism" (Col.2: 12).
But why all this? The Apostle says: "Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him" (Rom.6: 8).
Therefore, baptism is essential for salvation because it is sharing in Christ's death. It is a belief in death as a means to life and it is a confession that the wages of sin is death. In chapter six of the Epistle to the Romans, we notice two important points:
(a) The phrase "buried with Him through baptism" means immersion as when the body is lowered into the grave.
(b) It appears that one of the results of baptism is the crucifixion of our old self.

(6) Another Result of baptism is newness of life
The Apostle says: "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life" (Rom.6: 4). The new life is the life we receive through baptism. Therefore our old nature is renewed in baptism. How?

(7) In baptism we put on Christ
The Apostle says: "For as many of you as were baptised into Christ have put on Christ" (Gal.3: 27). Is there a more powerful phrase than this to signify the great efficacy of baptism?
We put on Christ... We put on His righteousness which He bestows upon us in baptism, we put on salvation which He bestows upon us in baptism by His blood, we put on God's image (Gen.1: 26) which we lost through the original sin.

(8) In baptism we become members of the Church
There is no doubt that baptism was symbolised by circumcision in the Old Testament. The Apostle St. Paul says about the Lord Jesus: "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col.2: 11,12).
It is known that in circumcision a part of the body is cut off and it dies. This refers to the complete death in baptism.

Circumcision is a mark that can not be effected
Likewise, baptism can not be erased
As blood is shed in circumcision
likewise, The merit of the Blood shed on our behalf is received in the new life in baptism
As the circumcised was considered a member of God's people(Gen.17: 7)
likewise, The baptised becomes a member of the Church; of God's Body
As the uncircumcised was cut off from the community (Gen.17:14)
likewise, he who is not born of water and the Spirit (John.3:3,5) will not enter the kingdom of God because he was not baptised, he was not buried with Christ and did not rise with Him
As circumcision was a must and a necessity by God's command
likewise, baptism is necessary for the forgiveness of sins and for the membership in Christ's Body


As man dies only once and then rises, and is circumcised only once, therefore baptism is performed only once: it is not to be repeated because the baptised does not die with Christ more than once.
As for the relation between circumcision and baptism and the forgiveness of sins, the Apostle expresses it in his discourse about the spiritual circumcision; circumcision made by Christ and not by the hands of men; circumcision in which the old sinful body is taken off. He refers to baptism when he says: "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ. And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses" (Col.2: 11,13).

The symbols of baptism in the Old Testament give the same meaning
Noah's Ark was a symbol of baptism
St. Peter the Apostle says: "...while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us, namely baptism" (1Pet.3:20,21). We explain that there is salvation in baptism with water. Similarly, in Noah's ark which is a symbol of baptism, all those who were in the ark were saved from the death of the Flood. This confirms what we have previously said about salvation through baptism according to the Lord's words in (M k.16:16).
Circumcision is another symbol of baptism and we have already explained this point
Another symbol of baptism in the Old Testament is the crossing of the Red Sea
St. Paul the Apostle says: "Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptised into Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1Cor.10: 1,2). It is known that the crossing of the Red Sea was salvation to the people from the slavery of Pharaoh. Here St. Paul refers to the salvation we receive in baptism from the slavery of sin and death. The element of water is clear in both examples. Here Moses resembles priesthood in the same way that Noah resembles priesthood in the symbol of the Ark in the Era of the Patriarch Fathers.
Another symbol of baptism in the Old Testament is found in (Ezek.16: 8,9) where the Lord says to the sinful Jerusalem which here resembles the human soul in its fall: "'When I passed by you again and looked upon you, indeed your time was the time of love. I entered into a covenant with you, and you became Mine,' says the Lord God. 'Then I washed you in water; yes, I thoroughly washed off your blood, and I anointed you with oil.' "
This water and this washing are symbols of baptism and the ointment is a symbol of the anointing of the Holy Spirit. The phrase "you became Mine" means that Jerusalem (the human soul) became a member of Christ's Body (the Church).


Therefore, in baptism there is salvation and forgiveness of sins, not only according to the teaching of the New Testament but also according to the symbolic references in the Old Testament: circumcision, the Ark and the Red Sea.
The remission of sins we obtain in baptism is explicitly professed in the Creed by the phrase "We believe in one baptism for the remission of sins".

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III


Baptism is the Task of the Clergymen


Baptism should be administered by a canonical clergyman. The Holy Bible shows us that the Lord Jesus Christ did not commend the task of baptism to the public but commanded it to His pure Apostles. Before His ascension, He said to them: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.28: 19). This is also confirmed in (Mark.16: 15,16).

It is very clear that it was the Apostles who undertook the task of baptism as we read in the Book of Acts in the spread of the Early Church. Then the Apostles commanded the task to their disciples the bishops who in turn commanded it to the priests.
For these reasons we do not accept a baptism which was not administered by a clergyman. The clergyman should be an canonical clergyman in the sense that the laying on of hands was carried out by an apostolic and a canonical bishop. He should not be an expelled nor an anathematized priest, but a priest who has the Presbyterian to administer the Sacraments.
The above reasons are our answers to the question, repeatedly asked of us: “why do the Orthodox Church re-baptise the converts from the Protestant denominations”?
We could also say that we adorn them with all the spiritual treasures which they did not receive when accepted their
Protestant baptism. We usually ask of them: "Have you received salvation in your baptism? Have you received righteousness, newness of life and the forgiveness of sins? Have you been clothed with Christ in baptism? Have you been born anew? Especially that you did not consider baptism to carry with it any of those graces
We also repeat the non-Orthodox baptism as a canonical priest did not conduct it, while our Protestant brethren refute human priesthood, as well as the teaching of the holy sacraments.
While it may have been administered in the Name of The Holy Trinity , we tend not to call the baptism of a Protestant convert “a re-baptism” as it lackes three important qualities:
(a) It was not administered by a clergyman
(b) It was not considered a Sacrament
(c) It was not considered to carry any spiritual efficacious

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III


“ The Necessity of Baptism Ever Since the Establishment of the Church




Since the beginning of Christianity, baptism has been an inseparable part of accepting the . Especially that it is an undisputed commandment by Christ Himself.

His Holy and imperative commandment is “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt.28: 19). He also commanded: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark. 16:16). If baptism were meant to be only a sign, the Lord would have not given it all that importance.

Regarding the practical administration of baptism, when the Jews believed on the Day of Pentecost, St. Peter immediately called them to baptism. He said: "Repent, and let every one of you be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). On that day 3000 believers were baptised. Undoubtedly, baptising that multitude was a tedious and difficult task and must have taken a long time. Unless baptism was so important for Salvation the Apostles would of bypassed it, avoiding the hassel of baptising all these thousands, and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. It would have been easier for the Apostles to say: "Since you now believe, brethren, you have received salvation. Go, the Lord's blessing be with you."

We find the same situation with the Ethiopian eunuch who himself asked to be baptised immediately after he had believed. He was baptised by Philip and went on his way rejoicing (Acts 8: 36-39).

Saul of Tarsus was called to be baptised to wash away his sins after he had believed (Acts 22:16). Lydia, the woman dealer of purple cloth was baptised together with all her household after they had believed. When Cornelius believed, Peter the Apostle baptised him together with all those who heard the message, after saying: "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptised who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (Acts 10: 44,47)

If salvation was to only be attained through belief, why were all those who believed baptised?

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

Baptism by Immersion

(1) It is clear from the Holy Bible that baptism was by immersion and not by sprinkling, even at the time of John the Baptist. The Lord Jesus Himself was baptised by immersion. That is why the Holy Bible says: "Then Jesus, when He had been baptised, came up immediately from the water" (Matt.3:16); (Mark.1: 10). Our Church names the Day on which the Lord Jesus Christ was baptised "Immersion Day" to confirm this meaning in our minds.

(2) The same meaning of the expression "came up immediately from the water" is used in the event of Philip baptising the Ethiopian eunuch. The Holy Gospel says: "And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptised him. Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught Philip away" (Acts 8: 38,39). This proves that baptism was by immersion. If it were by sprinkling, it would have been adequate for Philip to sprinkle water on the eunuch while he was in the chariot without the necessity for both of them to go down into the water.

(3) The word 'baptisma' means dye. Dyeing cannot be done without immersion.

(4) Baptism is the action of being buried with Christ and tasting death with Him, as the Apostle says: "Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death" (Rom.6: 4) and we were "buried with Him in baptism" (Col.2: 12). The action of burying cannot be achieved except by immersion. The coming up out of the font signifies rising with Christ after having died and been buried with Him, whereas sprinkling does not express the action of dying and rising.

(5) Baptism is a rebirth. Birth is the coming out of a body from another body. This is manifested in baptism when the body of the baptised comes out of the font, whereas sprinkling does not express the action of birth at all.

(6) Baptism is the washing away of sins as said to St. Paul (Acts 22:16) and as St. Paul said in his Epistle to Titus: "He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3: 5). The action of washing needs dipping into water which is represented by immersion but not by sprinkling.

(7) Whoever looks at the buildings of the early churches will notice the existence of immersion fonts which are proof that baptism was by immersion and not by sprinkling because the action of sprinkling does not need a deep font.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

Paedobaptism (Infant Baptism)


Our Protestant brethren do not baptise little children, insisting on the necessity of belief before baptism and depending on the Lord's saying: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" (Mark. 16:16) and also on the fact that little children do not comprehend what is happening in baptism. So how can baptism be administered without belief or without comprehension?
But we insist on paedobaptism for the following reasons:
(1) We are concerned about the eternal life of children because the Lord says: "...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God" (John.3: 5). So how can we prevent children from being baptised and expose them to God's Judgement as long as the Lord did not exempt children when He said the above words?
(2) Through baptism, little children are given the opportunity to practise the life of the Church and enjoy the divine Sacraments therein together with all their efficacious. They can also enjoy all the means of Grace in the Church and their effects on their lives. In this way, we practically prepare the infants for the life of faith. If we excluded them from the Church we would be depriving them of faith and of the means of Grace.
(3) The Lord's saying: "He who believes and is baptised will be saved" is meant for adults who are capable of comprehending the meanings of faith. That is why we cannot baptise adults unless they believe, according to the Lord's words in (Mark.16: 16). As for infants, we apply the Lord's saying: "Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 19: 14).
(4) From the point of view of faith, little children are in the stage of believing and accepting everything; they do not refuse or reject faith; the doubt, inquiring, questioning and reasoning of adults have not yet entered their sphere. There is nothing in them to prevent them from the kingdom of heaven. Baptising them conforms to the principle of "Free Salvation" which is believed in and strongly propagated by our Protestant brethren.
(5) If we were utterly strict on the condition of belief, we would have forbidden from baptism many adults who were not mentally mature to comprehend the facts and depths of belief, such as the peasants, labourers, illiterates, the poorly educated and those of too limited understanding to get into the depth of the theological facts. May we ask: What would be the extent of those people's belief? Should we prevent them from being baptised, as little children should be?
(6) Some ask: What happens if the little child refuses the faith when he grows up?

He will be considered an apostate. He may refuse the grace he received in baptism by his own free will. We had done our duty towards him and the matter is left to him. He will be like a person who, after having begun in the Spirit, is now trying to be made perfect by the flesh (Gal.3: 3).
Probably the little children who are baptised and live in the Church, tasting all the means of Grace therein, are less liable to perversion than those who are left without baptism until they grow up.
(7) Those who deny paedobaptism are in fact denying the necessity of baptism for salvation (Mark. 16:16); because if they believe in the necessity of baptism for salvation, it would be a serious matter to deprive little children of salvation.
Since our Protestants brethren hold that belief is a condition for salvation and that little children have no belief, what then, from their point of view, is the destiny of little children who are unbaptised and have no belief? Will they be saved without belief and baptism? The question remains unanswered.
(8) We baptise little children because the Holy Bible indicates this. The Holy Bible mentions baptisms of whole families or of a person with his entire household, and there is no doubt that there must have been children in those families.

The following are a few of numerous examples:

(a) The baptism of the jailer at Philippi: St. Paul and St. Silas said to him: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household" (Acts 16: 31), and we have discussed this issue before here on st-takla.org in other pages. This means that the jailer's belief would be the first step which would lead his household to salvation. That is why it is said after that: "Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house" and then "immediately he and all his family were baptised" (Acts 16:32,33). The Holy Bible did not exempt little children from the household of the jailer at Philippi but said about their baptisms: "...he and all his family”, of course including little children.
(b) In the event of baptising Lydia, the dealer of purple cloth, it is written: "And when she and her household were baptised" (Acts 16: 15).
(c) St. Paul the Apostle said: "Yes, I also baptised the household of Stephanas" (1Cor.1: 16). Could all these households have been without little children?
(d) The Holy Bible does not mention that there were no little children among those who were baptised on the Day of Pentecost.
(9) Paedobaptism was practised in history. Here we remember the disagreement between St. Augustine and St. Jerome on the origin of the soul: whether is it born or created?. St. Augustine said that it is born with man and St. Jerome said that it is created. St. Augustine asked: "If it is created, it does not inherit Adam's sin. Why then do we baptise infants?" St. Jerome could not reply to this question.
(10) There is not a single verse in the Holy Bible that forbids paedobaptism.
(11) With regard to belief, we baptise little children on the belief of their parents which in essence has many examples in the Holy Bible:
(a) Circumcision in the Old Testament symbolised baptism as we have previously explained. The circumcised was considered a member of God's people according to the covenant between God and Abraham (Gen.l7: 11). It is known that circumcision was to be done on the eighth day after birth, according to God's command (Gen.l7: 12). What understanding did the eight-day old baby boy have regarding the covenant between God and Abraham? To what extent was he aware of this membership in God's people? Undoubtedly, he had nothing of the sort, but he was circumcised on his parents' belief in such a covenant; he became a member of God's people and was entitled to the promises which God endowed upon our Father Abraham. The baby attained all these through the belief of his parents.
(b) The crossing of the Red Sea was a symbol of baptism or a baptism itself as St. Paul the Apostle explained in (l Cor. 10:2). It represented salvation from the slavery of death, Satan and sin. Adults who were aware of God's promise to the Prophet Moses crossed the Red Sea; they knew that they were slaves to Pharaoh; they knew the meaning of salvation from slavery by the Mighty Hand of God and when they crossed the Red Sea (baptism), they were saved. What was the position of the little children who were carried by their mothers and fathers across the Sea? Of course they received salvation from slavery; they were baptised, not on their own faith but on the faith of their parents because those children were not aware of any of the occurring events.
(c) Another important and very strong example 1s the salvation of the little children, through the blood of the Passover lamb, from the hand of the Angel who killed every firstborn son. The Lord commanded Moses to kill a one-year-old male goat or sheep without any defect and put its blood on the sides and tops of their doors, and said: "And when I see the blood, I will pass over you" (Ex. 12:13).
The blood of the Passover lamb was a symbol of the Lord Jesus Christ's Blood through which we have received salvation, as St. Paul the Apostle said: "For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us" (1Cor.5: 7).
And the question now is: What was the belief of the little children who were saved by the blood of the Passover lamb? What did they know about the covenant between God and Moses or of the Passover and the salvation from death by the blood of the Passover lamb? Undoubtedly they were not aware of anything but they were saved by the faith of their parents; the parents who believed in the blood, its effect and the importance of the blood of the Passover lamb for salvation from death.
These little children who were saved by circumcision, by the blood of the Passover lamb and by the crossing of the Red Sea, came to know the meaning of all these things later on when they grew up. Nevertheless, they received salvation freely in their childhood through the belief of their parents in God's promises and covenants with men. When the children grew up, they entered into this belief practically.

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III

If baptism is renewal of life, why do we sin after being baptised?



Baptism is renewal of life according to the teaching of the Holy Bible (Rom.6: 4), but it does not bestow infallibility. We receive new birth, new life and new graces in baptism, and we take a new nature. The Apostle says: "...according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5). This nature has the capability and the potentiality of a spiritual life. Nevertheless we are not infallible as long as we are still in the flesh,

. Here we are in a test, we still possess our freedom to do good or bad because the grace of renewal we received in baptism does not eliminate the grace of freedom which we possess and with which we were created after God's image. That is why a virtuous person falls seven times a day and rises again. But we shall receive infallibility and the crown of righteousness in the life to come. Our teacher the Apostle Paul said effusively when his hour came: "Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that Day" (2Tim.4: 8).

[Mary Naeem]

Pope Shenouda III





Does baptism still carry its efficacious if the clergyman who administers it is a malefactor?




Does baptism still carry its efficacious if the clergyman who administers it is a malefactor?
The graces we receive in baptism are from God and not from the clergyman who is but a minister of the Lord the Giver. The graces are based on the true promises of God and not on the deportment of the clergyman.
The clergyman is like the postman who carries a joyful letter to you; whether he is handsome or ugly does not affect the joy your letter brings.
We can also compare the clergyman to the gardener sowing seeds in the earth to bring forth fruits. Whether he is sinful or virtuous does not matter; what matters are the seeds themselves and the life therein, not the hands of the gardener who sows them.
You may drink water from a gold or copper cup, yet the water itself remains the same irrespective of the kind of cup you drink from.
In our discourse about baptism and its efficacious, we shall discuss the dogma objectively. We shall not touch any subjective issue as this leads to judging others and to disregarding what the Lord endowed upon human beings in baptism