Now, how long shall we saw away along the same line on this question [i.e., what is permitted], when we have a long-standing practice which by anticipation has all but settled the question? Even though no scriptural passage prescribes it, it is strengthened by a custom that certainly arose from tradition. How can anything become normal practice if it has not first been handed down to us? But, you tell me, “You must always have a written source if you are going to plead the force of tradition.”Let us look into the matter, then, of whether or not a tradition without a written source should be accepted. The answer will certainly be no if we cannot adduce examples of other observations which are without written source in Scripture and rest solely on the basis of tradition and yet have come to have the force of custom. To begin, for instance, with baptism: When we are about to enter the water, and, as a matter of fact, even a short while before, we declare in the presence of the congregation before the bishop that we renounce the devil, his pomps and his angels. After that, we are immersed in the water three times, making a somewhat fuller pledge than the Lord has prescribed in the gospel. After this, having stepped forth from the font, we are given a taste of a mixture of milk and honey and from that day, for a whole week, we forego our daily bath. We also receive the sacrament of the Eucharist that the Lord entrusted to all at the hour for supper, at our early morning meetings, and then from the hand of none but the bishops. Further, we make offerings for the dead on their anniversary to celebrate their birthday of eternal life.
We consider fasting or kneeling during service on Sundays to be unlawful, and we enjoy the same privilege from Easter until Pentecost. We also are upset if any of our bread or wine falls to the earth at the Lord’s Supper. Lastly, we make the sign of the cross on our foreheads at every turn, at our going in or coming out of the house, while dressing, while putting on our shoes, when we are taking a bath, before and after meals, when we light the lamps, when we go to bed or sit down, and in all the ordinary actions of daily life.
Nor let any one think that, because baptism is proposed to them, heretics will be kept back from coming to the Church, as if offended at the name of a second baptism; nay, but on this very account they are rather driven to the necessity of coming by the testimony of truth shown and proved to them. For if they shall see that it is determined and decreed by our judgment and sentence, that the baptism wherewith they are there baptized is considered just and legitimate, they will think that they are justly and legitimately in possession of the Church also, and the other gifts of the Church; nor will there be any reason for their coming to us, when, as they have baptism, they seem also to have the rest. But further, when they know that there is no baptism without, and that no remission of sins can be given outside the Church, they more eagerly and readily hasten to us, and implore the gifts and benefits of the Church our Mother, assured that they can in no wise attain to the true promise of divine grace unless they first come to the truth of the Church. Nor will heretics refuse to be baptized among us with the lawful and true baptism of the Church, when they shall have learnt from us that they also were baptized by Paul, who already had been baptized with the baptism of John,36 as we read in the Acts of the Apostles.
That we must not grieve the Holy Spirit, whom we have received. Paul the apostle to the Ephesians: "Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, in which ye were sealed in the day of redemption. Let all bitterness, and wrath, and indignation, and clamour, and blasphemy, be taken away from you."
But what is "the doctrine of baptisms"? Not as if there were many baptisms, but one only. Why then did he express it in the plural? Because he had said, "not laying again a foundation of repentance." For if he again baptized them and catechised them afresh, and having been baptized at the beginning they were again taught what things ought to be done and what ought not, they would remain perpetually incorrigible.
"And of laying on of hands." For thus did they receive the Spirit, "when Paul had laid his hands on them" (Acts xix. 6), it is said.
"And of the resurrection of the dead." For this is both effected in baptism, and is affirmed in the confession.
"And of eternal judgment." But why does he say this? Because it was likely that, having already believed, they would either be shaken [from their faith], or would lead evil and slothful lives, he says, "be wakeful."
It is not open to them to say, If we live slothfully we will be baptized again, we will be catechised again, we will again receive the Spirit; even if now we fall from the faith, we shall be able again by being baptized, to wash away our sins, and to attain to the same state as before. Ye are deceived (he says) in supposing these things.
The beginning of Christ was from within Judaism—for he lived as a Jew according to the law. He says because of this, “Leaving this behind, let us be borne to that maturity,” knowing that the one about to be a high priest apart from the law must be a priest “according to the order of Melchizedek.”“Dead works and faith in God, ritual washing.” For Christians the earthly things are dead. Therefore he says that it is out of place that they neglect the way of life based on faith and the mortification of all things and return to ablutions according to the law. When the Lord came, he preached repentance, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of God has drawn near,” but it was “a repentance from dead works.” … This, then, is what he says: it is not necessary to run back to the law, leaving behind the repentance from dead works and faith in God and baptism25—which he named in the plural because of the multitude of those deemed worthy. And he spoke of baptisms and the teaching and the laying on of hands through which are the elections, and the hope of the resurrection and the rest. And he has prepared this beforehand, since the priests in the law uphold the law with a vengeance, but Melchizedek was outside the law. Not coming from the levitical priesthood, he followed “the order of Melchizedek.” He says that it was not necessary to leave behind the priest in the order of Melchizedek to pursue those who are priests under the law, so that the things written in the law might stand. But he called those things in the law a “foundation,” since it has become a preamble of godliness for men.
Although you ought to be teachers, not only are you not teachers, but also you cannot even learn anything except the rather rudimentary and elementary and simple things, and even these things not absolutely but weaker than the beginning of the oracles of God. He does not say the “elements of the oracles,” but the elements of “the beginning” of the oracles. Most likely the elements of the oracles of God would be the words about the incarnation, but the elements of the “beginning” of the oracles are the things about which he goes on to say, “not laying again a foundation,” etc.The argument of the arrangement is this: “Therefore, leaving behind the word of the beginning of Christ, let us be carried to perfection, and we will do this, if God permits.”
“The Word of Christ.” What sort of word? The word of teaching that it is necessary to lay down a foundation of repentance from dead works, the word of teaching that it is necessary to believe in God, the word of teaching that one must be baptized, the word of teaching that one must be deemed worthy of the Holy Spirit, the word of teaching that there will be a resurrection and that there will be a judgment. For the word and the teaching have a common origin in every respect.
When he says to leave behind the elementary matters concerning Christ and to leave behind the word which stops any progress at the beginning and to be carried “to perfection,” he does not simply say perfection in its proper sense, but the perfection, as it were, that exists between the rudiments of the oracles of God and the heavenly perfection. For the “elements of the beginning of the oracles of God” consist of renouncing Satan and his works, believing in God, being baptized, receiving the Holy Spirit, knowing about the resurrection of the dead and believing that there is a judgment. These things are the elements of the beginning of the oracles of God. But the “elements of the oracles of God”—not merely the beginning of the oracles of God—is to know that Christ suffered on our behalf, that he removed our sins, that he wrought our salvation for us, that he has become our high priest, that he offered himself on our behalf, and such other things. And “perfection” in renouncing Satan and his cohorts consists of advancement in the virtues and endurance amid tribulations, persecutions and periods of testing. And heavenly “perfection” is the exact apprehension concerning the divine teaching of Christ, insofar as is humanly possible. So first we believe and are baptized, then we know what sort of things Christ underwent for our sake and what sort of things he did in his human nature, then we are perfected in the virtues, then we are deemed worthy of the knowledge which is in accordance with divine wisdom.
Having said above that the elementary teaching about the humanity of the Lord, and indeed the perfection of those who pertain to divinity, lest they might feel impatiently as unworthy of more perfect discourses, he also approaches to speak of more perfect matters. He speaks not in the same way as he called the perfect: (for they were not able to hear), but he skillfully approaches the discourse in another way, indeed calling baptism the elementary teaching, and the laying on of hands and the seal within it; but perfection, the idea through works. And he more clearly states what the elementary teaching is for those who have just believed, and what the perfection is.
— The following of the arrangement.
“teaching about Christ." What kind of teaching? The teaching [λόγον] of the doctrine [διδαχῆς], of the necessity to lay the foundation of repentance from dead works, the teaching of the doctrine, of the necessity of faith in God; the teaching of the doctrine, of the necessity to be baptized; the teaching of the doctrine, of the necessity to be deemed worthy of the Holy Spirit; the teaching of the doctrine, that there is resurrection, that there will be judgment. For in common, according to all, both the teaching and the doctrine.
"on to perfection." Having said this, he lets go of the elementary and foundational teachings concerning Christ and is carried towards perfection, not simply referring to the ultimate perfection, but as if to that which is between the elementary teachings of the words of God and the highest perfection. For there are indeed elementary principles of the words of God, which must be put away from Satan and his works, to believe in God, to be baptized, to receive the Holy Spirit, to know the resurrection of the dead, to believe that there will be a judgment. These are the elementary teachings of the words of God. The fundamentals of the words of God, and not the elementary teachings of God, are to know that Christ suffered for us, that He took upon Himself our sins, that He accomplished salvation for us, that He became our high priest, that He offered Himself for us, and anything similar. The perfection of rejecting Satan and his associates is the progress in virtues, the patience in tribulations, persecutions, and temptations. The highest perfection is that concerning the theology of Christ, insofar as it is possible for a man to have an accurate understanding. First, therefore, we are baptized as believers, then we acknowledge all that Christ suffered and did for us according to His humanity, then we are perfected in the virtues, and afterward we are deemed worthy of the knowledge according to theology.
"Let us not lay again a foundation." Let us not lay another foundation again, as he says, being laid down in baptism, that is, the renunciation of the works of Satan. For once, he says, having repented, we were baptized upon them, and it is no longer necessary to do these things from the beginning.
“and of faith toward God.” For it is no longer necessary now to believe in God as if from the beginning; for you have already believed.
The statement is beyond dispute; for the teaching has been delivered through a medium to all that is present, and this is the agreement according to its meaning: not to overthrow the foundation of the teaching again, but thus to show in enumeration the matters concerning the foundation of the teaching.Paul wishes to say that for those who now first approach faith, we lay down as a sort of foundation the teaching concerning these things, first reasonably urging them to repent from works that lead to death; when they have repented, to believe in God; when they have believed, to be baptized; when baptized, to submit to the laying on of hands for the partaking of the Spirit; having thus partaken in this, no longer to doubt concerning the resurrection from the dead, knowing that there will be a judgment when they will be raised and live again, and that a continuous and just reward awaits them for what we have lived like here.
"of faith toward God." For it is not necessary now, as it was from the beginning, to believe in God. For you have already believed through teaching. The structure is thus. Therefore, leaving the elementary of God, what is this? The doctrine of baptisms, the laying on of hands (by which, it says, you were enlightened), and the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment, let us press on to perfection. For it is not necessary, it says, always to speak the same things; for it has been said once and has come to pass, but it is necessary, it says, also to contribute what is among you, namely, a good conduct and a faith worthy of it. For this is perfection, to be two-handed in virtue, as it were, saying; Be sober; for there is no need to live carelessly, and again to be baptized, and through the laying on of hands to receive the Holy Spirit's visitation.
“of instruction about baptism.” Not as if there were many baptisms, Paul said this in the plural; for there is one baptism (Eph. 4:5); but this follows from the context. For if he were to instruct them again, and baptize them again; and again baptize those who have fallen away; then necessarily there would be many baptisms; but this is absurd. Therefore, it is not necessary to rebaptize you; but to remain with the former baptism.
Perhaps these, still clinging to the law, thinking more in Jewish manners, because there are different and many baptisms in the law, wished also that the baptism of the New Covenant, which grants regeneration, should be administered many times, because they wished that the remission of sins should be considered worthy only once.
“the laying on of hands.” Those things that take place in baptism; or there, when the apostles laid on their hands, they gave the Spirit, which Simon the sorcerer also sought. (Acts 8:18-19)
“the resurrection of the dead.” For this also takes place in baptism through the form of rising up, and is confirmed in the confession; for we confess that we believe in the resurrection of the dead.
“and eternal judgment.” That is, of the coming judgment, which grants either eternal good or punishment. This seems to say: since it was likely that they would be shaken, although they had already believed, either that if we live deeply, or fall away from faith, we shall be baptized again, or again be able to wash away sins, and to share in the same things as before. For they err in thinking these things.
"And this we will do." Which? To be carried to perfection.
"if God permits." The phrase "if God permits" is not to indicate that God does not always permit (for God always permits the good and perfect), but as is customary for us to say, If God wills, we will do this. At the same time, it also teaches us from this that everything depends on that will, and we should not rely confidently or arrogantly on our own judgment and power, even in matters generally acknowledged. This is explicitly encouraged by the apostle James.
Paul spoke of this in the plural not because there are many baptisms — for baptism is one (Eph. 4:5) — but because this would, as it were, follow as a consequence. If he were catechizing again, then he would also baptize again; and in the case of apostasy, he would baptize again: by necessity there would be many new baptisms, but this is absurd. Therefore you must not repeat baptism, but abide by the first baptism. Perhaps they, as those who firmly adhered to the law, even under grace recognized many baptisms in the Jewish manner. Note that baptism follows repentance. Since repentance by itself cannot render us clean, we are therefore baptized, so that everything may be the work of the grace of Christ.
Through this they received the Holy Spirit, so as to prophesy and work miracles. When, it says, Paul laid his hands on them, they received the Holy Spirit (Acts 19:6).
This occurs at baptism under the figure of immersion in water and rising from it, and is affirmed in the confession of faith, for we confess that we believe in the resurrection of the dead.
That is, a judgment that gives either eternal blessings or punishments. He seems to say this because they were probably wavering, even though they had already believed, or were living badly and carelessly, saying at the same time: be vigilant. It is impossible to say that if we have lived negligently, or have fallen away from the faith, we will be baptized again, will again receive the opportunity to be washed from sins and be deemed worthy of the very same things we were deemed worthy of before. You are deceived, he says, reasoning in this way.
[AD 220] Tertullian on Hebrews 6:1-3
We consider fasting or kneeling during service on Sundays to be unlawful, and we enjoy the same privilege from Easter until Pentecost. We also are upset if any of our bread or wine falls to the earth at the Lord’s Supper. Lastly, we make the sign of the cross on our foreheads at every turn, at our going in or coming out of the house, while dressing, while putting on our shoes, when we are taking a bath, before and after meals, when we light the lamps, when we go to bed or sit down, and in all the ordinary actions of daily life.