Marcionites baptized in the name of Christ
Posted: Fri Dec 30, 2022 8:49 am
The letters of Cyprian indicate that Marcionite Christians of the 3rd century practiced “baptism in [or into] the name of Jesus Christ.” Cyprian decrees that such a baptism is invalid, since Marcionites believe in the wrong God.
This form of baptism, considered heretical and invalid by Cyprian, is of course the only form of baptism known in both the letters of Paul (Gal 3:27, 1 Cor 1:7, Rom 6:3) and Acts of the Apostles (2:38, 10:48, 19:5).
But today only certain “oneness Pentecostals” baptize in the name of Jesus alone. All other Christians conform to the Trinitarian formula commanded by the risen Christ in Matthew 28:19. Agreement on Trinitarian baptism is even considered a foundational principle of ecumenism.
Cyprian is aware of the awkwardness. He makes a miserable argument, repeated down the centuries, that the apostles in Acts were concerned primarily with bringing the Jews up to date, who already worshipped the true Father, and therefore only needed the name of the Messiah. (Both Luke and Paul were writing about the baptism of gentiles, mainly.)
For Cyprian, the words of the risen Lord trump the words of Peter and Paul:
Matthew’s Trinitarian form agrees with Justin (1 Apology, 61) and Didache 7, and becomes the standard Catholic practice with Tertullian and Cyprian.
Certainly, since I found in the letter the copy of which you transmitted to me, that it was
written, “That it should not be asked who baptized, since he who is baptized might receive remission
of sins according to what he believed,” I thought that this topic was not to be passed by, especially
since I observed in the same epistle that mention was also made of Marcion, saying that “even those
that came from him did not need to be baptized, because they seemed to have been already baptized
in the name of Jesus Christ.” Therefore we ought to consider their faith who believe without, whether
in respect of the same faith they can obtain any grace. For if we and heretics have one faith, we
may also have one grace. If the Patripassians, Anthropians, Valentinians, Apelletians, Ophites,
Marcionites, and other pests, and swords, and poisons of heretics for subverting the truth,2853 confess
the same Father, the same Son, the same Holy Ghost, the same Church with us, they may also have
one baptism if they have also one faith.
And lest it should be wearisome to go through all the heresies, and to enumerate either the
follies or the madness of each of them, because it is no pleasure to speak of that which one either
dreads or is ashamed to know, let us examine in the meantime about Marcion alone, the mention
of whom has been made in the letter transmitted by you to us, whether the ground of his baptism
can be made good. For the Lord after His resurrection, sending His disciples, instructed and taught
them in what manner they ought to baptize, saying, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in
earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”2854 He suggests the Trinity, in whose sacrament the nations were to
be baptized. Does Marcion then maintain the Trinity? Does he then assert the same Father, the
Creator, as we do? Does he know the same Son, Christ born of the Virgin Mary, who as the Word
was made flesh, who bare our sins, who conquered death by dying, who by Himself first of all
originated the resurrection of the flesh, and showed to His disciples that He had risen in the same
flesh? Widely different is the faith with Marcion, and, moreover, with the other heretics; nay, with
them there is nothing but perfidy, and blasphemy, and contention, which is hostile to holiness and
truth. How then can one who is baptized among them seem to have obtained remission of sins, and
the grace of the divine mercy, by his faith, when he has not the truth of the faith itself? For if, as
some suppose, one could receive anything abroad out of the Church according to his faith, certainly
he has received what he believed; but if he believes what is false, he could not receive what is true;
but rather he has received things adulterous and profane, according to what he believed.
Letter 72: 4-5
written, “That it should not be asked who baptized, since he who is baptized might receive remission
of sins according to what he believed,” I thought that this topic was not to be passed by, especially
since I observed in the same epistle that mention was also made of Marcion, saying that “even those
that came from him did not need to be baptized, because they seemed to have been already baptized
in the name of Jesus Christ.” Therefore we ought to consider their faith who believe without, whether
in respect of the same faith they can obtain any grace. For if we and heretics have one faith, we
may also have one grace. If the Patripassians, Anthropians, Valentinians, Apelletians, Ophites,
Marcionites, and other pests, and swords, and poisons of heretics for subverting the truth,2853 confess
the same Father, the same Son, the same Holy Ghost, the same Church with us, they may also have
one baptism if they have also one faith.
And lest it should be wearisome to go through all the heresies, and to enumerate either the
follies or the madness of each of them, because it is no pleasure to speak of that which one either
dreads or is ashamed to know, let us examine in the meantime about Marcion alone, the mention
of whom has been made in the letter transmitted by you to us, whether the ground of his baptism
can be made good. For the Lord after His resurrection, sending His disciples, instructed and taught
them in what manner they ought to baptize, saying, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in
earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost.”2854 He suggests the Trinity, in whose sacrament the nations were to
be baptized. Does Marcion then maintain the Trinity? Does he then assert the same Father, the
Creator, as we do? Does he know the same Son, Christ born of the Virgin Mary, who as the Word
was made flesh, who bare our sins, who conquered death by dying, who by Himself first of all
originated the resurrection of the flesh, and showed to His disciples that He had risen in the same
flesh? Widely different is the faith with Marcion, and, moreover, with the other heretics; nay, with
them there is nothing but perfidy, and blasphemy, and contention, which is hostile to holiness and
truth. How then can one who is baptized among them seem to have obtained remission of sins, and
the grace of the divine mercy, by his faith, when he has not the truth of the faith itself? For if, as
some suppose, one could receive anything abroad out of the Church according to his faith, certainly
he has received what he believed; but if he believes what is false, he could not receive what is true;
but rather he has received things adulterous and profane, according to what he believed.
Letter 72: 4-5
This form of baptism, considered heretical and invalid by Cyprian, is of course the only form of baptism known in both the letters of Paul (Gal 3:27, 1 Cor 1:7, Rom 6:3) and Acts of the Apostles (2:38, 10:48, 19:5).
But today only certain “oneness Pentecostals” baptize in the name of Jesus alone. All other Christians conform to the Trinitarian formula commanded by the risen Christ in Matthew 28:19. Agreement on Trinitarian baptism is even considered a foundational principle of ecumenism.
Cyprian is aware of the awkwardness. He makes a miserable argument, repeated down the centuries, that the apostles in Acts were concerned primarily with bringing the Jews up to date, who already worshipped the true Father, and therefore only needed the name of the Messiah. (Both Luke and Paul were writing about the baptism of gentiles, mainly.)
For Cyprian, the words of the risen Lord trump the words of Peter and Paul:
Let nothing be innovated, says he, nothing maintained, except what has been
handed down. Whence is that tradition? Whether does it descend from the authority of the Lord
and of the Gospel, or does it come from the commands and the epistles of the apostles? For that
those things which are written must be done, God witnesses and admonishes, saying to Joshua the
son of Nun: “The book of this law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate in it
day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein.” Also the
Lord, sending His apostles, commands that the nations should be baptized, and taught to observe
all things which He commanded. If, therefore, it is either prescribed in the Gospel, or contained in
the epistles or Acts of the Apostles, that those who come from any heresy should not be baptized,
but only hands laid upon them to repentance, let this divine and holy tradition be observed. But if
everywhere heretics are called nothing else than adversaries and antichrists, if they are pronounced
to be people to be avoided, and to be perverted and condemned of their own selves, wherefore is
it that they should not be thought worthy of being condemned by us, since it is evident from the
apostolic testimony that they are of their own selves condemned? So that no one ought to defame
the apostles as if they had approved of the baptisms of heretics, or had communicated with them
without the Church’s baptism, when they, the apostles, wrote such things of the heretics. And this,
too, while as yet the more terrible plagues of heresy had not broken forth; while Marcion of Pontus
had not yet emerged from Pontus, whose master Cerdon came to Rome,—while Hyginus was still
bishop, who was the ninth bishop in that city,—whom Marcion followed, and with greater impudence
adding other enhancements to his crime, and more daringly set himself to blaspheme against God
the Father, the Creator, and armed with sacrilegious arms the heretical madness that rebelled against
the Church with greater wickedness and determination.
Letter 73: 2
handed down. Whence is that tradition? Whether does it descend from the authority of the Lord
and of the Gospel, or does it come from the commands and the epistles of the apostles? For that
those things which are written must be done, God witnesses and admonishes, saying to Joshua the
son of Nun: “The book of this law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate in it
day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein.” Also the
Lord, sending His apostles, commands that the nations should be baptized, and taught to observe
all things which He commanded. If, therefore, it is either prescribed in the Gospel, or contained in
the epistles or Acts of the Apostles, that those who come from any heresy should not be baptized,
but only hands laid upon them to repentance, let this divine and holy tradition be observed. But if
everywhere heretics are called nothing else than adversaries and antichrists, if they are pronounced
to be people to be avoided, and to be perverted and condemned of their own selves, wherefore is
it that they should not be thought worthy of being condemned by us, since it is evident from the
apostolic testimony that they are of their own selves condemned? So that no one ought to defame
the apostles as if they had approved of the baptisms of heretics, or had communicated with them
without the Church’s baptism, when they, the apostles, wrote such things of the heretics. And this,
too, while as yet the more terrible plagues of heresy had not broken forth; while Marcion of Pontus
had not yet emerged from Pontus, whose master Cerdon came to Rome,—while Hyginus was still
bishop, who was the ninth bishop in that city,—whom Marcion followed, and with greater impudence
adding other enhancements to his crime, and more daringly set himself to blaspheme against God
the Father, the Creator, and armed with sacrilegious arms the heretical madness that rebelled against
the Church with greater wickedness and determination.
Letter 73: 2
Matthew’s Trinitarian form agrees with Justin (1 Apology, 61) and Didache 7, and becomes the standard Catholic practice with Tertullian and Cyprian.