mealybug schreef:het zou wel zo eerlijk zijn als je de gehele tekst van de Didachr (Didache?)weergeeft.
Om over na te denken
Uit The Oldest Church Manual - Shaff - blz. 31 (een commentaar op de Didache, de leer van de twaalf apostelen):
... Baptism of believing converts was the rule, and is to this day on every missionary field. Hence in the New Testament the baptized are addressed as people who have died and risen with Christ, and who have put on Christ. Baptism and conversion are almost used as synonymous terms.(!) But for this very reason the silence of the Didache about Infant Baptism cannot be fairly used as an argument against it any more than the corresponding passages in the New Testament, which are addressed to adult believers. When Christianity is once established and organized, then comes in family religion with its duties and privileges. That Infant Baptism was practised in Christian families as early as the second century is evident from Tertullian, who opposed it as imprudent and dangerous, and from Origen, who approved it and speaks of it as an apostolic tradition! Compulsory Infant Baptism, of course, was unknown even in the Nicene and post-Nicene, and is a gross abuse, dating from the despotic reign of Justinian in lose connection with the union of church and state.
En blz 49:
The same writer (p. 169) quotes from the Armenian order as follows: "While saying this, the priest buries the child (or Catechumen) three times in the water, as a figure of Christ's three days' burial. Then taking the child out of the water, he thrice pours a handful of water on his head, saying, 'As many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ, Hallelujah!'.
Bron: https://archive.org/stream/oldestchurch ... 1/mode/1up
Indien iemand een vertaling wil vraag het even (evt PB), kost me nu even te veel tijd
