split of early Christianity and Judaism and eventually became the predominant position among Christians.[13][14]Covenant theology largely views the Christian sacrament of baptism as fulfilling the Israelite practice of circumcision, both being signs and seals of the covenant of grace.[15]
While circumcision is not observed by the majority of Christians in most parts of the
Christian denominations do not require circumcision,[16][17][18] it is still practiced among some Christian communities.[19][20][21][22] Despite the fact that Christianity does not require circumcision of its followers, some Oriental Christian denominations retained the practice of male circumcision,[23][20][16] and males are generally required to be circumcised shortly after birth as part of a rite of passage.[23]
There are numerous references in the Hebrew Bible to the obligation for circumcision[24] and the uncircumcised are to be cut off from the people in Genesis 17:14.[25]
During the 1st century BC there was a controversy in Judaism relating to whether or not a proselyte who was already circumcised needed to be ritually re-circumcised. This is done via a pinprick creating a drop of blood and is still practiced to this day.
A similar
Haman's defeat, "became Jews," were circumcised.[27]
Zealot and Liberal parties regarding the circumcision of proselytes remained an open one in tannaitic times[27]
The disagreement centers on the correctness of contradictory passages in the Babylonian Talmud and Jerusalem Talmud and which passage is older.[28]B. Yevamot 46a is summarized as follows:
Rabbi Joshua says that if a proselyte is immersed but not circumcised this is valid. Because our mothers were immersed but not circumcised. Rabbi Eliezer says the opposite. Because such was found regarding our fathers. However the sages say both are required.[28]
P. Kiddushin 3:12 (3:14, 64d) is summarized as follows:
Rabbi Eliezer says only circumcision is required the same as in B. Yevamot 46a. Rabbi Joshua says both are required.[28]
During tannaitic times uncircumcised semi-converts also existed, see God-fearer and Ger toshav.[28]
Jewish Messiah.[30] As such, they tended to be of the view that circumcision and other requirements of the Mosaic Law were required for salvation. Those in the Christian community who insisted that biblical law, including laws on circumcision, continued to apply to Christians were pejoratively labeled Judaizers by their opponents and criticized as being elitist and legalistic.[31]
kinsmen likely held leadership positions in the surrounding area after the destruction of the city until its rebuilding as Aelia Capitolina in c. 130 AD, when all Jews were banished from Jerusalem.[32]
Artist depiction of Saint Paul Writing His Epistles, 16th century (Blaffer Foundation Collection, Houston, Texas). Most scholars think Paul actually dictated his letters to a secretary.[47]
While the issue was theoretically resolved, it continued to be a recurring issue among the
early Christian communities. After the Council of Jerusalem, Paul wrote to the Galatians about the issue, which had become a serious controversy in their region.[5][7][9][10][12] There was a burgeoning movement of Judaizers in the area that advocated strict adherence to traditional Jewish laws and customs, including circumcision for male converts.[5][7][9][10][12] According to McGrath, Paul identified James the Just as the motivating force behind the movement. Paul considered it a great threat to his doctrine of salvation through faith and addressed the issue with great detail in Galatians 3.[12][48]
According to the
Roman culture both found circumcision to be cruel and repulsive.[2][34][35][37]
Paul argued that circumcision no longer meant the physical, but a spiritual practice
"called". He added: "Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised", and went on to argue that circumcision did not matter:[12][7][9][10][53] "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts" (1 Cor 7:19
or Judaizers) and others such as Egyptians, Ethiopians, and Arabs who were.
A common interpretation of the circumcision controversy of the
Jewish Encyclopedia[60] notes: "Jesus, however, does not appear to have taken into account the fact that the Halakha was at this period just becoming crystallized, and that much variation existed as to its definite form; the disputes of the Bet Hillel and Bet Shammai were occurring about the time of his maturity." This controversy was fought largely between opposing groups of Christians who were themselves ethnically Jewish, see section Jewish background above. According to this interpretation, those who felt that conversion to Judaism was a prerequisite for Church membership were eventually condemned by Paul as "Judaizing teachers
".
The source of this interpretation is unknown; however, it appears related to
Coptic Orthodox
still practice circumcision while not considering it a part of conversion to Judaism, nor do they consider themselves to be Jews or Jewish Christians.
The
Jewish Encyclopedia article on Gentile: Gentiles May Not Be Taught the Torah[61]
Coptic Children wearing traditional circumcision costumes
Today, many
Christian denominations are neutral about male circumcision, not requiring it for religious observance, but neither forbidding it for medical or cultural reasons.[62][63]Covenant theology largely views the Christian sacrament of baptism as fulfilling the Israelite practice of circumcision, both being signs and seals of the covenant of grace.[15][64]
Since the
Roman Catholic Church forbade the practice of circumcision among Christians; Roman Catholic scholars, including John J. Dietzen, David Lang, and Edwin F. Healy, argue that "elective male infant circumcision not only violates the proper application of the time-honored principle of totality, but even fits the ethical definition of mutilation, which is gravely sinful."[65][66] Roman Catholicism generally is silent today with respect to its permissibility, though elective circumcision continues to be debated amongst theologians.[67]
Ethiopian Orthodox
Children wearing traditional circumcision costumes
The practice, on the other hand, is customary among the
Eritrean Orthodox practice circumcision as a rite of passage, and they circumcise their sons "anywhere from the first week of life to the first few year".[69] Male circumcision is also widely practiced among Christian communities in Africa, certain Anglosphere countries, Oceania, South Korea, the Philippines and the Middle East.[17][21] While Christian communities in Europe and South America have low circumcision rates.[17] The United States and the Philippines are the largest majority Christian countries in the world to extensively practice circumcision.[70][23] Some Christian churches in South Africa oppose circumcision,[citation needed] viewing it as a pagan ritual, while others, including the Nomiya church in Kenya,[68][71] require circumcision for membership, despite St. Paul's warnings against those who required circumcision for salvation, in his epistle to the church of Galatia.[72][73]
mainstream Christian denominations do not require the practice and maintain a neutral position on it,[78] it is practiced in certain Christian countries and communities,[19][70][20][79] while it is not observed in other Christian countries and communities.[17] Both religious and non-religious circumcision is common in some predominantly Christian countries such as the United States,[80] but outside of the Jewish and Muslim communities, not for reasons of religious observance; see circumcision controversies. It may be significant that Jewish applicants to American medical schools comprised 60% of all applications in the 1930s, at a time when circumcision was becoming popular in the US.[81] The prevalence of circumcision in the United States is approximately 80%.[82] According to studies, American Evangelicals and Mormons have the highest rates of infant male circumcision among Christian denominations in the United States.[83] According to Scholar Heather L. Armstrong of University of Southampton, about half of Christian males worldwide are circumcised, with most of them being located in Africa, Anglosphere countries (with notable prevalence in the United States) and the Philippines.[84] Many Christians have been circumcised for reasons such as family preferences, medical or cultural reasons.[84] Circumcision is also part of a traditional practice among the adherents of certain Oriental Christian denominations, including those of Coptic Christianity, the Ethiopian Orthodox Church and Eritrean Orthodox Church.[84] Circumcision is common among Christians in the Philippines,[85][86]South Korea,[87] and Australia.[88][89] Circumcision is near universal in the Christian countries of Oceania,[90] and among the Christians of Africa,[22][91] being common among Christians in countries such as the Cameroon,[89]Democratic Republic of the Congo,[89]Ethiopia,[89]Eritrea,[89]Ghana,[89]Liberia,[89]Nigeria,[89] and Kenya,[89] and is also widely practiced among Christians from Egypt,[92]Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine, Israel, and North Africa.[21][93][94] Circumcision is less common among the Christians of Canada, Europe and Latin America.[17][18] It is practiced amongst some Christians in the Indian subcontinent.[95]
. In summary, circumcision has played a surprisingly important role in Western history. The circumcision debate forged a Gentile identity to the early Christian church which allowed it to survive the Jewish Diaspora and become the dominant religion of Western Europe. Circumcision continued to have a major cultural presence throughout Christendom even after the practice had all but vanished.... the circumcision of Jesus... celebrated as a religious holiday... [has been] examined by many of the greatest scholars and artists of the Western tradition.
^ abJewish Encyclopedia: Baptism: "According to rabbinical teachings, which dominated even during the existence of the Temple (Pes. viii. 8), Baptism, next to circumcision and sacrifice, was an absolutely necessary condition to be fulfilled by a proselyte to Judaism (Yeb. 46b, 47b; Ker. 9a; 'Ab. Zarah 57a; Shab. 135a; Yer. Kid. iii. 14, 64d). Circumcision, however, was much more important, and, like baptism, was called a "seal" (Schlatter, "Die Kirche Jerusalems," 1898, p. 70). But as circumcision was discarded by Christianity, and the sacrifices had ceased, Baptism remained the sole condition for initiation into religious life. The next ceremony, adopted shortly after the others, was the imposition of hands, which, it is known, was the usage of the Jews at the ordination of a rabbi. Anointing with oil, which at first also accompanied the act of Baptism, and was analogous to the anointment of priests among the Jews, was not a necessary condition."
. For most part, Christianity does not require circumcision of its followers. Yet, some Orthodox and African Christian groups do require circumcision. These circumcisions take place at any point between birth and puberty.
. In his cultural accounts of circumcision, Boyarin clearly presupposes an alienated attitude to circumcision in Western countries. They show that the Christian memory of Jesus' circumcision is significantly weaker than the growing awareness of his Jewishness. In contemporary political debates – as in Canada or in North-European countries and especially in Germany – circumcision is typically described as an "archaic" rite, with those practicing it presented as forced to do so by some "ancient" law or custom.
. In the last resort, even Jewish men otherwise well equipped to pretend to be Christians could be spotted, since circumcision was rare among Eastern European Christians.
. Christian theology generally interprets male circumcision to be an Old Testament rule that is no longer an obligation ... though in many countries (especially the United States and Sub-Saharan Africa, but not so much in Europe) it is widely practiced among Christians
. male circumcision is still observed among Ethiopian and Coptic Christians, and circumcision rates are also high today in the Philippines and the US.
^ abc"Circumcision protest brought to Florence". Associated Press. March 30, 2008. However, the practice is still common among Christians in the United States, Oceania, South Korea, the Philippines, the Middle East and Africa. Some Middle Eastern Christians actually view the procedure as a rite of passage.
. Uniformly practiced by Jews, Muslims, and the members of Coptic, Ethiopian, and Eritrean Orthodox Churches, male circumcision remains prevalent in many regions of the world, particularly Africa, South and East Asia, Oceania, and Anglosphere countries.
^Leviticus 12:3 says: on the eighth day a boy is to be circumcised.
Any uncircumcised male, who has not been circumcised in the flesh, will be cut off from his people; he has broken my covenant.
^Brenton's translation of Esther in the Septuagint 8:17: "in every city and province wherever the ordinance was published: wherever the proclamation took place, the Jews had joy and gladness, feasting and mirth: and many of the Gentiles were circumcised, and became Jews, for fear of the Jews."
. Page 174: "In effect, they [Jewish Christians] seemed to regard Christianity as an affirmation of every aspect of contemporary Judaism, with the addition of one extra belief — that Jesus was the Messiah. Unless males were circumcised, they could not be saved (Acts 15:1)."
^McGrath, page 174: "Paul notes the emergence of a Judaizing party in the region — that is, a group within the church which insisted that Gentile believers should obey every aspect of the law of Moses, including the need to be circumcised. According to Paul [reference is made to Galatians, but no specific verse is given], the leading force behind this party was James ... the brother of Jesus ..."
prohibiting circumcision (I Macc. i. 48, 60; ii. 46); and the Jewish women showed their loyalty to the Law, even at the risk of their lives, by themselves circumcising their sons.
Apostolic Canon, expressly blames the Latins because they had ceased to observe this command. What the Latin Church, however, thought on this subject about the year 400, is shown by St. Augustine in his work Contra Faustum, where he states that the Apostles had given this command in order to unite the heathens and Jews in the one ark of Noah; but that then, when the barrier between Jewish and heathen converts had fallen, this command concerning things strangled and blood had lost its meaning, and was only observed by few. But still, as late as the eighth century, Pope Gregory the Third 731 forbade the eating of blood or things strangled under threat of a penance of forty days. No one will pretend that the disciplinary enactments of any council, even though it be one of the undisputed Ecumenical Synods
, can be of greater and more unchanging force than the decree of that first council, held by the Holy Apostles at Jerusalem, and the fact that its decree has been obsolete for centuries in the West is proof that even Ecumenical canons may be of only temporary utility and may be repealed by disuse, like other laws."
Joseph Barber Lightfoot in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians writes: "At this point [Galatians 6:11] the apostle takes the pen from his amanuensis, and the concluding paragraph is written with his own hand. From the time when letters began to be forged in his name (2 Thessalonians 2:2; 2 Thessalonians 3:17
) it seems to have been his practice to close with a few words in his own handwriting, as a precaution against such forgeries... In the present case he writes a whole paragraph, summing up the main lessons of the epistle in terse, eager, disjointed sentences. He writes it, too, in large, bold characters (Gr. pelikois grammasin), that his handwriting may reflect the energy and determination of his soul."
prohibiting circumcision (I Macc. i. 48, 60; ii. 46); and the Jewish women showed their loyalty to the Law, even at the risk of their lives, by themselves circumcising their sons.
^McGarvey on Acts 16: "Yet we see him in the case before us, circumcising Timothy with his own hand, and this 'on account of certain Jews who were in those quarters.'"
. Although many Christian denominations maintain a neutral stance with respect to infant male circumcision, there continues to be a debate regarding the practice.
. Simon Peter, considered the first Catholic Pope, condemned the practice of circumcision for converts (Acts 15). The Catholic Church formally denounced religious circumcision in its 1442 Cantate Domino, composed during the eleventh council of Florence (Eugenius IV, Pople, 1990 [1442]). Some Catholic hospitals today continue to oppose the practice based on the belief that it violates natural law within the Catholic moral tradition and Church teaching (Slosar & O'Brien, 2003). Various writings of the Church have been referenced in support of this position. The Catechism of the Catholic Church provides in pertinent part: 'Except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against moral law. (United States Catholic Conference, 1997)' Directive 29 of the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services advises that "all persons served by Catholic healthcare have the right and duty to protect and preserve their bodily and functional integrity" (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2001). Accordingly, neonatal circumcision performed for other than medical reasons is viewed as a prohibited amputation of the foreskin.
. Michael Benatar and David Benatar (2003) identify and insightfully refute two arguments that opponents of neonatal male circumcision use in an attempt to demonstrate the moral illicitness of the practice. The first argument they consider is that circumcision is tantamount to an unjustifiable form of mutilation. The second argument is that, because circumcision is not a strictly therapeutic procedure, parents are not justified in giving consent for it on behalf of their child. As ethicists for a large Catholic health system, we have encountered a third argument opposing the practice, particularly in Catholic hospitals. In short, this argument is that the practice of circumcising male neonates is a violation of the natural law as conceived within the Catholic moral tradition and Church teaching. ... We are unaware of the Catholic Church explicitly addressing the practice of circumcising male infants in any of its official teachings.
^ abCustomary in some Coptic and other churches, indicating that it has been regionally normative since ancient times:
"The Coptic Christians in Egypt and the Ethiopian Orthodox Christians— two of the oldest surviving forms of Christianity— retain many of the features of early Christianity, including male circumcision. Circumcision is not prescribed in other forms of Christianity... Some Christian churches in South Africa oppose the practice, viewing it as a pagan ritual, while others, including the Nomiya church in Kenya, require circumcision for membership and participants in focus group discussions in Zambia and Malawi mentioned similar beliefs that Christians should practice circumcision since Jesus was circumcised and the Bible teaches the practice."
"The decision that Christians need not practice circumcision is recorded in Acts 15; there was never, however, a prohibition of circumcision, and it is practiced by Coptic Christians." "circumcision", The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2001-05.
. Coptic Christians, Ethiopian Orthodox, and Eritrean Orthodox churches on the other hand, do observe the ordainment, and circumcise their sons anywhere from the first week of life to the first few years.
. Although it is mostly common and required in male newborns with Moslem or Jewish backgrounds, certain Christian-dominant countries such as the United States also practice it commonly.
^Mattson CL, Bailey RC, Muga R, Poulussen R, Onyango T (2005) Acceptability of male circumcision and predictors of circumcision preference among men and women in Nyanza province Kenya. AIDS Care 17:182–194.
^Sicard, Sigvard von (1970). The Lutheran Church on the Coast of Tanzania 1887-1914: With Special Reference to the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Tanzania, Synod of Uzaramo-Uluguru. Gleerup. p. 157.
^For example, "The Calendar of the Church Year" in The (Online) Book of Common Prayer (Episcopal Church in the United States of America), [1] retrieved 11 October 2006.
. It is obligatory among Jews, Muslims, and Coptic Christians. Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant Christians do not require circumcision. Starting in the last half of the 19th century, however, circumcision also became common among Christians in Europe and especially in North America.
. Neonatal circumcision is the general practice among Jews, Christians, and many, but not all Muslims.
^Pfuntner A., Wier L.M., Stocks C. Most Frequent Procedures Performed in U.S. Hospitals, 2011. HCUP Statistical Brief #165. October 2013. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. [2]Archived 2013-10-24 at the Wayback Machine.
. Circumcision is not usually performed by public sector health care providers in Mexico and we estimate the prevalence to be 10% to 31%, depending on the population.
^Pang MG, Kim DS. Extraordinarily high rates of male circumcision in South Korea: history and underlying causes. BJU Int. 2002; p.89
^Nga, Armelle (30 December 2019). "The Ritual of Circumcision in Africa: The Case of South Africa". Africanews. This practice is old and widespread among African Christians with very close links to their beliefs. It can be executed traditionally or in hospital.
. Although it is stated that circumcision is not a sacrament necessary for salvation, this rite is accepted for the Ethiopian Jacobites and other Middle Eastern Christians.
Bible portal
,_c._1657.jpg)
