_On the contrary,_ Augustine says (Super Joan., Tract. v): "Those who were baptized with John"s baptism needed to be baptized with the baptism of our Lord."
_I answer that,_ According to the opinion of the Master (Sent. iv, D, 2), "those who had been baptized by John without knowing of the existence of the Holy Ghost, and who based their hopes on his baptism, were afterwards baptized with the baptism of Christ: but those who did not base their hope on John"s baptism, and who believed in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, were not baptized afterwards, but received the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands made over them by the apostles."
And this, indeed, is true as to the first part, and is confirmed by many authorities. But as to the second part, the a.s.sertion is altogether unreasonable. First, because John"s baptism neither conferred grace nor imprinted a character, but was merely "in water,"
as he says himself (Matt. 3:11). Wherefore the faith or hope which the person baptized had in Christ could not supply this defect.
Secondly, because, when in a sacrament, that is omitted which belongs of necessity to the sacrament, not only must the omission be supplied, but the whole must be entirely renewed. Now, it belongs of necessity to Christ"s baptism that it be given not only in water, but also in the Holy Ghost, according to John 3:5: "Unless a man be born of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of G.o.d." Wherefore in the case of those who had been baptized with John"s baptism in water only, not merely had the omission to be supplied by giving them the Holy Ghost by the imposition of hands, but they had to be baptized wholly anew "in water and the Holy Ghost."
Reply Obj. 1: As Augustine says (Super Joan., Tract. v): "After John, baptism was administered, and the reason why was because he gave not Christ"s baptism, but his own ... That which Peter gave ... and if any were given by Judas, that was Christ"s. And therefore if Judas baptized anyone, yet were they not rebaptized ... For the baptism corresponds with him by whose authority it is given, not with him by whose ministry it is given." For the same reason those who were baptized by the deacon Philip, who gave the baptism of Christ, were not baptized again, but received the imposition of hands by the apostles, just as those who are baptized by priests are confirmed by bishops.
Reply Obj. 2: As Augustine says to Seleucia.n.u.s (Ep. cclxv), "we deem that Christ"s disciples were baptized either with John"s baptism, as some maintain, or with Christ"s baptism, which is more probable. For He would not fail to administer baptism so as to have baptized servants through whom He baptized others, since He did not fail in His humble service to wash their feet."
Reply Obj. 3: As Chrysostom says (Hom. iv in Matth. [*From the supposit.i.tious Opus Imperfectum]): "Since, when John said, "I ought to be baptized by Thee," Christ answered, "Suffer it to be so now": it follows that afterwards Christ did baptize John." Moreover, he a.s.serts that "this is distinctly set down in some of the apocryphal books." At any rate, it is certain, as Jerome says on Matt. 3:13, that, "as Christ was baptized in water by John, so had John to be baptized in the Spirit by Christ."
Reply Obj. 4: The reason why these persons were baptized after being baptized by John was not only because they knew not of the Holy Ghost, but also because they had not received the baptism of Christ.
Reply Obj. 5: As Augustine says (Contra Faust. xix), our sacraments are signs of present grace, whereas the sacraments of the Old Law were signs of future grace. Wherefore the very fact that John baptized in the name of one who was to come, shows that he did not give the baptism of Christ, which is a sacrament of the New Law.
_______________________
QUESTION 39
OF THE BAPTIZING OF CHRIST (In Eight Articles)
We have now to consider the baptizing of Christ, concerning which there are eight points of inquiry:
(1) Whether Christ should have been baptized?
(2) Whether He should have been baptized with the baptism of John?
(3) Of the time when He was baptized;
(4) Of the place;
(5) Of the heavens being opened unto Him;
(6) Of the apparition of the Holy Ghost under the form of a dove;
(7) Whether that dove was a real animal?
(8) Of the voice of the Father witnessing unto Him.
_______________________
FIRST ARTICLE [III, Q. 39, Art. 1]
Whether It Was Fitting That Christ Should Be Baptized?
Objection 1: It would seem that it was not fitting for Christ to be baptized. For to be baptized is to be washed. But it was not fitting for Christ to be washed, since there was no uncleanness in Him.
Therefore it seems unfitting for Christ to be baptized.
Obj. 2: Further, Christ was circ.u.mcised in order to fulfil the law.
But baptism was not prescribed by the law. Therefore He should not have been baptized.
Obj. 3: Further, the first mover in every genus is unmoved in regard to that movement; thus the heaven, which is the first cause of alteration, is unalterable. But Christ is the first principle of baptism, according to John 1:33: "He upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, He it is that baptizeth."
Therefore it was unfitting for Christ to be baptized.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Matt. 3:13) that "Jesus cometh from Galilee to the Jordan, unto John, to be baptized by him."
_I answer that,_ It was fitting for Christ to be baptized. First, because, as Ambrose says on Luke 3:21: "Our Lord was baptized because He wished, not to be cleansed, but to cleanse the waters, that, being purified by the flesh of Christ that knew no sin, they might have the virtue of baptism"; and, as Chrysostom says (Hom. iv in Matth.), "that He might bequeath the sanctified waters to those who were to be baptized afterwards." Secondly, as Chrysostom says (Hom. iv in Matth.), "although Christ was not a sinner, yet did He take a sinful nature and "the likeness of sinful flesh." Wherefore, though He needed not baptism for His own sake, yet carnal nature in others had need thereof." And, as Gregory n.a.z.ianzen says (Orat. x.x.xix) "Christ was baptized that He might plunge the old Adam entirely in the water." Thirdly, He wished to be baptized, as Augustine says in a sermon on the Epiphany (cx.x.xvi), "because He wished to do what He had commanded all to do." And this is what He means by saying: "So it becometh us to fulfil all justice" (Matt. 3:15). For, as Ambrose says (on Luke 3:21), "this is justice, to do first thyself that which thou wishest another to do, and so encourage others by thy example."
Reply Obj. 1: Christ was baptized, not that He might be cleansed, but that He might cleanse, as stated above.
Reply Obj. 2: It was fitting that Christ should not only fulfil what was prescribed by the Old Law, but also begin what appertained to the New Law. Therefore He wished not only to be circ.u.mcised, but also to be baptized.
Reply Obj. 3: Christ is the first principle of baptism"s spiritual effect. Unto this He was not baptized, but only in water.
_______________________
SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 39, Art. 2]
Whether It Was Fitting for Christ to Be Baptized with John"s Baptism?
Objection 1: It would seem that it was unfitting for Christ to be baptized with John"s baptism. For John"s baptism was the "baptism of penance." But penance is unbecoming to Christ, since He had no sin.
Therefore it seems that He should not have been baptized with John"s baptism.
Obj. 2: Further, John"s baptism, as Chrysostom says (Hom. de Bapt.
Christi), "was a mean between the baptism of the Jews and that of Christ." But "the mean savors of the nature of the extremes"
(Aristotle, De Partib. Animal.). Since, therefore, Christ was not baptized with the Jewish baptism, nor yet with His own, on the same grounds He should not have been baptized with the baptism of John.
Obj. 3: Further, whatever is best in human things should be ascribed to Christ. But John"s baptism does not hold the first place among baptisms. Therefore it was not fitting for Christ to be baptized with John"s baptism.
_On the contrary,_ It is written (Matt. 3:13) that "Jesus cometh to the Jordan, unto John, to be baptized by him."
_I answer that,_ As Augustine says (Super Joan., Tract. xiii): "After being baptized, the Lord baptized, not with that baptism wherewith He was baptized." Wherefore, since He Himself baptized with His own baptism, it follows that He was not baptized with His own, but with John"s baptism. And this was befitting: first, because John"s baptism was peculiar in this, that he baptized, not in the Spirit, but only "in water"; while Christ did not need spiritual baptism, since He was filled with the grace of the Holy Ghost from the beginning of His conception, as we have made clear above (Q. 34, A. 1). And this is the reason given by Chrysostom (Hom. de Bapt. Christi). Secondly, as Bede says on Mk. 1:9, He was baptized with the baptism of John, that, "by being thus baptized, He might show His approval of John"s baptism." Thirdly, as Gregory n.a.z.ianzen says (Orat. x.x.xix), "by going to John to be baptized by him, He sanctified baptism."
Reply Obj. 1: As stated above (A. 1), Christ wished to be baptized in order by His example to lead us to baptism. And so, in order that He might lead us thereto more efficaciously, He wished to be baptized with a baptism which He clearly needed not, that men who needed it might approach unto it. Wherefore Ambrose says on Luke 3:21: "Let none decline the laver of grace, since Christ did not refuse the laver of penance."
Reply Obj. 2: The Jewish baptism prescribed by the law was merely figurative, whereas John"s baptism, in a measure, was real, inasmuch as it induced men to refrain from sin; but Christ"s baptism is efficacious unto the remission of sin and the conferring of grace.
Now Christ needed neither the remission of sin, which was not in Him, nor the bestowal of grace, with which He was filled. Moreover, since He is "the Truth," it was not fitting that He should receive that which was no more than a figure. Consequently it was more fitting that He should receive the intermediate baptism than one of the extremes.
Reply Obj. 3: Baptism is a spiritual remedy. Now, the more perfect a thing is, the less remedy does it need. Consequently, from the very fact that Christ is most perfect, it follows that it was fitting that He should not receive the most perfect baptism: just as one who is healthy does not need a strong medicine.
_______________________
THIRD ARTICLE [III, Q. 39, Art. 3]
Whether Christ Was Baptized at a Fitting Time?
Objection 1: It would seem that Christ was baptized at an unfitting time. For Christ was baptized in order that He might lead others to baptism by His example. But it is commendable that the faithful of Christ should be baptized, not merely before their thirtieth year, but even in infancy. Therefore it seems that Christ should not have been baptized at the age of thirty.
Obj. 2: Further, we do not read that Christ taught or worked miracles before being baptized. But it would have been more profitable to the world if He had taught for a longer time, beginning at the age of twenty, or even before. Therefore it seems that Christ, who came for man"s profit, should have been baptized before His thirtieth year.
Obj. 3: Further, the sign of wisdom infused by G.o.d should have been especially manifest in Christ. But in the case of Daniel this was manifested at the time of his boyhood; according to Dan. 13:45: "The Lord raised up the holy spirit of a young boy, whose name was Daniel." Much more, therefore, should Christ have been baptized or have taught in His boyhood.