Should the Babies of Christian Parents be Circumcised?

 

An illustration of a 4300-year tomb relief at Ankhmaho, Saqqara showing circumcision. 

Dr. Alice C. Linsley

Circumcision existed before the time of Abraham (c. 2000 BC). It was performed as early as 4000 BC among the Horite and Sethite Hebrew who maintained separate temples and shrines along the Nile River. This has been verified by temple texts and images dated to 4000 BC that show priests circumcising young men. (4000 BC is before Egypt emerged as a political entity.) Since Abraham was of the Hebrew ruler-priest caste, circumcision for him and his household was a received tradition.

Circumcision is one of the customs associated with the early Hebrew, a ruler-priest caste. Other customs include animal sacrifice, concern about ritual purity, dietary restrictions, caste endogamy, ministry at temples and shrines, and sacred moral codes.

There are three references to circumcision in the Bible that tell us about this practice. The first concerns Moses' cousin wife, Zipporah. While traveling to Egypt, she circumcised her son with a flint knife. She accused Moses, saying, "You are truly a bridegroom of blood to me!" She added, "A bridegroom of blood because of the circumcision." (Exodus 4:25-26)

It appears that Zipporah was angry about having to perform a rite that should have been performed by her priest father back in Midian. This is because, among the Hebrew, the firstborn son of the cousin wife belonged to the household of his maternal grandfather.

Another reference concerns God's command to Abraham to circumcise all the males of his household (Gen. 17:10-14). This account reflects the covenant theology of a later period. As a Hebrew, Abraham would have been circumcised as a young man while he was living in Mesopotamia. This was the custom among the early Hebrew (4200-2000 BC).

Finally, there is the ambiguous account of the renewal of the covenant whereby Joshua was to circumcise the "people" a second time. Presumably, the circumcision was performed on uncircumcised boys who had been born during the wanderings of the clan of Jacob (Israelites). 

At that time the Lord said to Joshua, "Make flint knives and circumcise the people of Israel again the second time." So Joshua made flint knives and circumcised the people of Israel at Gibeath ha-aralot (Josh. 5:2-3). This appears to be an explanation for Ha-aralot, which means a "hill of foreskins." It is a reference to an uncircumcised people. 

Some considerations

Christian parents have asked whether or not they should have their infant sons circumcised. I offer these considerations.

In as much as Christians are grafted into the faith of Abraham the Hebrew, circumcision is appropriate.

In as much as Christians are not under the Law of Moses, parents should not feel compelled to circumcise their infant sons.

In as much as the Apostolic Tradition poses Baptism using the Trinitarian Formula as the Christian equivalent to circumcision, all Christian parents should have their children baptized, thereby making them members of the mystical Body of Christ.

Related reading: Baptism in the Teaching of Paul; Circumcision Debated; Cousin Brides Among the Hebrew; The Substance of Abraham's Faith