Dimensions of Baptism Biblical and Theological Studies

(Michael S) #1

WRIGHT Out, In, Out: Jesus' Blessing 197


Fourth-century interpreters of the blessing narrative are more numerous


than pre-Nicene. Hilary of Poitiers' exposition of Matthew's Gospel fastens


on the disciples' attempt to prevent the children coming to the Lord. He


attributes it to a desire to fulfil a typological design, for these children are


the image (forma) of the Gentiles who would receive salvation by the


hearing of faith (cf. Rom. 10.17). Their action therefore did not bespeak


unapostolic severity. The gift of the Holy Spirit was indeed to be bestowed


on Gentiles by the laying on of hands and prayer, once the work of the law


lapsed.^28 Hilary may have in mind the narrative of Acts 8.14-17, but even


so is not prompted to refer to baptism. Elsewhere Hilary makes only one


brief use of our pericope, in one of his Psalms exegeses when invoking the


innocence of these children, for 'of such is the kingdom of heaven'.^29


Hilary's two works were written in the middle decades of the century.


Jerome's commentary on Matthew, written at the end of the century, offers


an influential reading of Jesus' words:


It is significant that he said 'of such', not 'of these', to show that manner of
life (mores) and not age was what counted, and that a reward was promised
to those who had a like innocence and simplicity.

Paul said the same in 1 Cor. 14.20: 'Brothers, do not be childish (pueri)


in thought, but infants (parvuli) in evil'.^30 Jerome's brief explanation


may depend on the commentary on the same Gospel by Apollinarius of


Laodicea. Extant only in catena extracts, it likewise cited 1 Cor. 14.20 in
support of 'not "of these" but "of such"', and also other Gospel sayings
about becoming like a child (Mk 10.14-15; Mt. 18.4).^31 Jerome's short
paragraph in turn constitutes the greater part of Bede's expositions of the
Markan and Lukan passages.^32 Even in an era when infant baptism was
becoming the norm, it did not warrant a mention.
Ambrose's more thoughtful interpretation in his Lukan commentary
argues that Jesus cannot have been commending the age of infancy—


  1. Hilaire de Poitiers, Sur Matthieu II (ed. Jean Doignon; SC, 258; Paris: Cerf,
    1979), pp. 90-93.

  2. Hilary, Tractatus super Psalmos 63[64].12 (ed. A. Zingerle; CSEL, 22;
    Vienna: F. Tempsky, 1891), p. 232.

  3. Jerome, Comment, in Matheum III, ad loc. (ed. D. Hurst and M. Adriaen; CCSL,
    77; Turnhout: Brepols, 1969), p. 169.

  4. Joseph Reuss, Matthaus-Kommentare aus der Griechischen Kirche (TU, 61;
    Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1957), pp. 31-32.

  5. Bede, Opera II.3 (ed. D. Hurst; CCSL, 120; Turnhout: Brepols, 1960), pp. 325-
    26, 559.

Free download pdf