Utrum Baptismus possit iterari Whether Baptism may be reiterated? Ad nonum sic proceditur. Videtur quod Baptismus possit iterari. Baptismus enim videtur institutus ad ablutionem peccatorum. Sed peccata iterantur. Ergo multo magis Baptismus debet iterari, quia misericordia Christi transcendit hominis culpam. Objection 1: It seems that Baptism may be reiterated. For Baptism was instituted, seemingly, in order to wash away sins. But sins are reiterated. Therefore much more should Baptism be reiterated: because Christ’s mercy surpasses man’s guilt. Praeterea, Ioannes Baptista praecipue fuit a Christo commendatus, cum de eo dictum sit, Matth. XI, inter natos mulierum non surrexit maior Ioanne Baptista. Sed baptizati a Ioanne iterum rebaptizantur, ut habetur Act. XIX, ubi dicitur quod Paulus baptizavit eos qui erant baptizati Baptismo Ioannis. Ergo multo fortius illi qui sunt baptizati ab haereticis vel peccatoribus, sunt rebaptizandi. Obj. 2: Further, John the Baptist received special commendation from Christ, Who said of him (Matt 11:11): There hath not risen among them that are born of women, a greater than John the Baptist. But those whom John had baptized were baptized again, according to Acts 19:1–7, where it is stated that Paul rebaptized those who had received the Baptism of John. Much more, therefore, should those be rebaptized, who have been baptized by heretics or sinners. Praeterea, in Nicaeno Concilio statutum est, si quis confugeret ad Ecclesiam Catholicam de Paulianistis et Cataphrygis, baptizari eos debere. Videtur autem esse eadem ratio de haereticis aliis. Ergo baptizati ab haereticis debent esse rebaptizati. Obj. 3: Further, it was decreed in the Council of Nicaea (Can. xix) that if any of the Paulianists or Cataphrygians should be converted to the Catholic Church, they were to be baptized: and this seemingly should be said in regard to other heretics. Therefore those whom the heretics have baptized, should be baptized again. Praeterea, Baptismus est necessarius ad salutem. Sed de quibusdam baptizatis aliquando dubitatur an sint baptizati. Ergo videtur quod debeant iterum rebaptizari. Obj. 4: Further, Baptism is necessary for salvation. But sometimes there is a doubt about the baptism of those who really have been baptized. Therefore it seems that they should be baptized again. Praeterea, Eucharistia est perfectius sacramentum quam Baptismus, ut supra dictum est. Sed sacramentum Eucharistiae iteratur. Ergo multo magis Baptismus potest iterari. Obj. 5: Further, the Eucharist is a more perfect sacrament than Baptism, as stated above (Q. 65, A. 3). But the sacrament of the Eucharist is reiterated. Much more reason, therefore, is there for Baptism to be reiterated. Sed contra est quod dicitur Ephes. IV, una fides, unum Baptisma. On the contrary, It is written, (Eph 4:5): One faith, one Baptism. Respondeo dicendum quod Baptismus iterari non potest. I answer that, Baptism cannot be reiterated. Primo quidem, quia Baptismus est quaedam spiritualis regeneratio, prout scilicet aliquis moritur veteri vitae, et incipit novam vitam agere. Unde dicitur Ioan. III, nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto, non potest videre regnum Dei. Unius autem non est nisi una generatio. Et ideo non potest Baptismus iterari, sicut nec carnalis generatio. Unde Augustinus dicit, super illud Ioan. III, nunquid potest in ventrem matris suae iterato introire et renasci, sic tu, inquit, intellige nativitatem spiritus, quo modo intellexit Nicodemus nativitatem carnis. Quo modo enim uterus non potest repeti, sic nec Baptismus. First, because Baptism is a spiritual regeneration; inasmuch as a man dies to the old life, and begins to lead the new life. Whence it is written (John 3:5): Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, He cannot see the kingdom of God. Now one man can be begotten but once. Wherefore Baptism cannot be reiterated, just as neither can carnal generation. Hence Augustine says on John 3:4: ‘Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born again’: So thou, says he, must understand the birth of the Spirit, as Nicodemus understood the birth of the flesh . . . . As there is no return to the womb, so neither is there to Baptism. Secundo, quia in morte Christi baptizamur, per quam morimur peccato et resurgimus in novitatem vitae. Christus autem semel tantum mortuus est. Et ideo nec Baptismus iterari debet. Propter quod, Heb. VI, contra quosdam rebaptizari volentes dicitur, rursus crucifigentes sibimetipsis filium Dei, ubi Glossa dicit, una Christi mors unum Baptisma consecravit. Second, because we are baptized in Christ’s death, by which we die unto sin and rise again unto newness of life (cf. Rom. 6:3, 4). Now Christ died but once (Rom 6:10). Wherefore neither should Baptism be reiterated. For this reason (Heb 6:6) is it said against some who wished to be baptized again: Crucifying again to themselves the Son of God; on which the gloss observes: Christ’s one death hallowed the one Baptism. Tertio, quia Baptismus imprimit characterem, qui est indelebilis, et cum quadam consecratione datur. Unde, sicut aliae consecrationes non iterantur in Ecclesia, ita nec Baptismus. Et hoc est quod Augustinus dicit, in II contra epistolam Parmeniani, quod character militaris non repetitur; et quod non minus haeret sacramentum Christi quam corporalis haec nota, cum videamus nec apostatas carere Baptismate, quibus utique per poenitentiam redeuntibus non restituitur. Third, because Baptism imprints a character, which is indelible, and is conferred with a certain consecration. Wherefore, just as other consecrations are not reiterated in the Church, so neither is Baptism. This is the view expressed by Augustine, who says (Contra Epist. Parmen. ii) that the military character is not renewed: and that the sacrament of Christ is not less enduring than this bodily mark, since we see that not even apostates are deprived of Baptism, since when they repent and return they are not baptized anew. Quarto, quia Baptismus principaliter datur contra originale peccatum. Et ideo, sicut originale peccatum non iteratur, ita etiam nec Baptismus iteratur, quia, ut dicitur Rom. V, sicut per unius delictum in omnes homines in condemnationem, sic per unius iustitiam in omnes homines in iustificationem vitae. Fourth, because Baptism is conferred principally as a remedy against original sin. Wherefore, just as original sin is not renewed, so neither is Baptism reiterated, for as it is written (Rom 5:18), as by the offense of one, unto all men to condemnation, so also by the justice of one, unto all men to justification of life. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Baptismus operatur in virtute passionis Christi, sicut supra dictum est. Et ideo, sicut peccata sequentia virtutem passionis Christi non auferunt, ita etiam non auferunt Baptismum, ut necesse sit ipsum iterari, sed, poenitentia superveniente, tollitur peccatum, quod impediebat effectum Baptismi. Reply Obj. 1: Baptism derives its efficacy from Christ’s Passion, as stated above (A. 2, ad 1). Wherefore, just as subsequent sins do not cancel the virtue of Christ’s Passion, so neither do they cancel Baptism, so as to call for its repetition. On the other hand the sin which hindered the effect of Baptism is blotted out on being submitted to penance. Ad secundum dicendum quod, sicut Augustinus dicit, super illud Ioan. I, sed ego nesciebam eum, ecce, post Ioannem baptizatum est, post homicidam non est baptizatum, quia Ioannes dedit Baptismum suum, homicida dedit Baptismum Christi; quia sacramentum tam sanctum est ut nec homicida ministrante polluatur. Reply Obj. 2: As Augustine says on John 1:33: ‘And I knew Him not’: Behold; after John had baptized, Baptism was administered; after a murderer has baptized, it is not administered: because John gave his own Baptism; the murderer, Christ’s; for that sacrament is so sacred, that not even a murderer’s administration contaminates it. Ad tertium dicendum quod Pauliani et Cataphrygae non baptizabant in nomine Trinitatis. Unde Gregorius dicit, scribens Quirico episcopo, hi haeretici qui in Trinitatis nomine minime baptizantur, sicut sunt Bonosiani et Cataphrygae, qui scilicet idem sentiebant cum Paulianis, quia et isti Christum Deum non credunt, existimantes scilicet ipsum esse purum hominem, et isti, scilicet Cataphrygae, spiritum sanctum perverso sensu esse purum hominem, Montanum scilicet, credunt, qui cum ad sanctam Ecclesiam veniunt, baptizantur, quia Baptisma non fuit quod, in errore positi, sanctae Trinitatis nomine minime perceperunt. Sed, sicut in regulis ecclesiasticis dicitur, si qui apud illos haereticos baptizati sunt qui in sanctae Trinitatis confessione baptizant, et veniunt ad Catholicam fidem, recipiantur ut baptizati. Reply Obj. 3: The Paulianists and Cataphrygians used not to baptize in the name of the Trinity. Wherefore Gregory, writing to the Bishop Quiricus, says: Those heretics who are not baptized in the name of the Trinity, such as the Bonosians and Cataphrygians (who were of the same mind as the Paulianists), since the former believe not that Christ is God (holding Him to be a mere man), while the latter, i.e., the Cataphrygians, are so perverse as to deem a mere man, viz. Montanus, to be the Holy Spirit: all these are baptized when they come to holy Church, for the baptism which they received while in that state of error was no Baptism at all, not being conferred in the name of the Trinity. On the other hand, as set down in De Eccles. Dogm. xxii: Those heretics who have been baptized in the confession of the name of the Trinity are to be received as already baptized when they come to the Catholic Faith. Ad quartum dicendum quod, sicut dicit decretalis Alexandri III, de quibus dubium est an baptizati fuerint, baptizentur his verbis praemissis, si baptizatus es, non te rebaptizo, sed si non baptizatus es, ego te baptizo, et cetera. Non enim videtur iterari quod nescitur esse factum. Reply Obj. 4: According to the Decretal of Alexander III: Those about whose Baptism there is a doubt are to be baptized with these words prefixed to the form: ‘If thou art baptized, I do not rebaptize thee; but if thou art not baptized, I baptize thee,’ etc.: for that does not appear to be repeated, which is not known to have been done. Ad quintum dicendum quod utrumque sacramentum, scilicet Baptismi et Eucharistiae, est repraesentativum dominicae mortis et passionis, aliter tamen et aliter. Nam in Baptismo commemoratur mors Christi inquantum homo Christo commoritur ut in novam vitam regeneretur. Sed in sacramento Eucharistiae commemoratur mors Christi inquantum ipse Christus passus exhibetur nobis quasi paschale convivium, secundum illud I Cor. V, Pascha nostrum immolatus est Christus, itaque epulemur. Et quia homo semel nascitur, multoties autem cibatur, semel tantum datur Baptismus, multoties autem Eucharistia. Reply Obj. 5: Both sacraments, viz. Baptism and the Eucharist, are a representation of our Lord’s death and Passion, but not in the same way. For Baptism is a commemoration of Christ’s death in so far as man dies with Christ, that he may be born again into a new life. But the Eucharist is a commemoration of Christ’s death, in so far as the suffering Christ Himself is offered to us as the Paschal banquet, according to 1 Cor. 5:7, 8: Christ our pasch is sacrificed; therefore let us feast. And forasmuch as man is born once, whereas he eats many times, so is Baptism given once, but the Eucharist frequently. Articulus 10 Article 10 Utrum sit conveniens ritus quo ecclesia utitur in baptizando Whether the Church observes a suitable rite in baptizing? Ad decimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod non sit conveniens ritus quo Ecclesia utitur in baptizando. Ut enim dicit Chrysostomus, nunquam aquae Baptismi purgare peccata credentium possent, nisi tactu dominici corporis sanctificatae fuissent. Hoc autem factum fuit in Baptismo Christi, qui celebratur in festo Epiphaniae. Ergo magis deberet celebrari solemnis Baptismus in festo Epiphaniae quam in vigilia Paschae et in vigilia Pentecostes. Objection 1: It seems that the Church observes an unsuitable rite in baptizing. For as Chrysostom (Chromatius, in Matth. 3:15) says: The waters of Baptism would never avail to purge the sins of them that believe, had they not been hallowed by the touch of our Lord’s body. Now this took place at Christ’s Baptism, which is commemorated in the Feast of the Epiphany. Therefore solemn Baptism should be celebrated at the Feast of the Epiphany rather than on the eves of Easter and Whitsunday. Praeterea, ad idem sacramentum non videtur pertinere diversarum materierum usus. Sed ab Baptismum pertinet ablutio aquae. Inconvenienter igitur ille qui baptizatur bis inungitur oleo sancto, primum in pectore, deinde inter scapulas, tertio, chrismate in vertice. Obj. 2: Further, it seems that several matters should not be used in the same sacrament. But water is used for washing in Baptism. Therefore it is unfitting that the person baptized should be anointed thrice with holy oil first on the breast, and then between the shoulders, and a third time with chrism on the top of the head. Preaterea, in Christo Iesu non est masculus neque femina, barbarus et Scytha, et eadem ratione nec aliquae aliae huiusmodi differentiae. Multo igitur minus diversitas vestium aliquid operatur in fide Christi. Inconvenienter ergo baptizatis traditur candida vestis. Obj. 3: Further, in Christ Jesus . . . there is neither male nor female (Gal 3:23) . . . neither Barbarian nor Scythian (Col 3:11), nor, in like manner, any other such like distinctions. Much less, therefore can a difference of clothing have any efficacy in the Faith of Christ. It is consequently unfitting to bestow a white garment on those who have been baptized. Praeterea, sine huiusmodi observantiis potest Baptismus celebrari. Haec igitur quae dicta sunt, videntur esse superflua, et ita inconvenienter ab Ecclesia instituta esse in ritu Baptismi. Obj. 4: Further, Baptism can be celebrated without such like ceremonies. Therefore it seems that those mentioned above are superfluous; and consequently that they are unsuitably inserted by the Church in the baptismal rite. Sed contra est quod Ecclesia regitur spiritu sancto, qui nihil inordinatum operatur. On the contrary, The Church is ruled by the Holy Spirit, Who does nothing inordinate. Respondeo dicendum quod in sacramento Baptismi aliquid agitur quod est de necessitate sacramenti, et aliquid est quod ad quandam solemnitatem sacramenti pertinet. De necessitate quidem sacramenti est et forma, quae designat principalem causam sacramenti; et minister, qui est causa instrumentalis; et usus materiae, scilicet ablutio in aqua, quae designat principalem sacramenti effectum. Cetera vero omnia quae in ritu baptizandi observat Ecclesia, magis pertinent ad quandam solemnitatem sacramenti. I answer that, In the sacrament of Baptism something is done which is essential to the sacrament, and something which belongs to a certain solemnity of the sacrament. Essential indeed, to the sacrament are both the form which designates the principal cause of the sacrament; and the minister who is the instrumental cause; and the use of the matter, namely, washing with water, which designates the principal sacramental effect. But all the other things which the Church observes in the baptismal rite, belong rather to a certain solemnity of the sacrament. Quae quidem adhibentur sacramento propter tria. Primo quidem, ad excitandam devotionem fidelium, et reverentiam ad sacramentum. Si enim simpliciter fieret ablutio in aqua, absque solemnitate, de facili ab aliquibus aestimaretur quasi quaedam communis ablutio. And these, indeed, are used in conjunction with the sacrament for three reasons. First, in order to arouse the devotion of the faithful, and their reverence for the sacrament. For if there were nothing done but a mere washing with water, without any solemnity, some might easily think it to be an ordinary washing. Secundo, ad fidelium instructionem. Simplices enim, qui litteris non erudiuntur, oportet erudire per aliqua sensibilia signa, puta per picturas, et aliqua huiusmodi. Et per hunc modum per ea quae in sacramentis aguntur, vel instruuntur, vel sollicitantur ad quaerendum de his quae per huiusmodi sensibilia signa significantur. Et ideo, quia, praeter principalem sacramenti effectum, oportet quaedam alia scire circa Baptismum, conveniens fuit ut etiam quibusdam exterioribus signis repraesentarentur. Second, for the instruction of the faithful. Because simple and unlettered folk need to be taught by some sensible signs, for instance, pictures and the like. And in this way by means of the sacramental ceremonies they are either instructed, or urged to seek the signification of such like sensible signs. And consequently, since, besides the principal sacramental effect, other things should be known about Baptism, it was fitting that these also should be represented by some outward signs. Tertio, quia per orationes et benedictiones et alia huiusmodi cohibetur vis Daemonis ab impedimento sacramentalis effectus. Third, because the power of the devil is restrained, by prayers, blessings, and the like, from hindering the sacramental effect. Ad primum ergo dicendum quod Christus in Epiphania baptizatus est Baptismo Ioannis, ut supra dictum est, quo quidem Baptismo non baptizantur fideles, sed potius Baptismo Christi. Qui quidem habet efficaciam ex passione Christi, secundum illud Rom. VI, quicumque baptizati sumus in Christo Iesu, in morte ipsius baptizati sumus; et ex spiritu sancto, secundum illud Ioan. III, nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua et spiritu sancto. Et ideo solemnis Baptismus agitur in Ecclesia et in vigilia Paschae, quando fit commemoratio dominicae sepulturae, et resurrectionis eiusdem; propter quod et dominus post resurrectionem praeceptum de Baptismo discipulis dedit, ut habetur Matth. ult., et in vigilia Pentecostes, quando incipit celebrari solemnitas spiritus sancti; unde et apostoli leguntur ipso die Pentecostes, quo spiritum sanctum receperant, tria millia baptizasse. Reply Obj. 1: Christ was baptized on the Epiphany with the Baptism of John, as stated above (Q. 39, A. 2), with which baptism, indeed, the faithful are not baptized, rather are they baptized with Christ’s Baptism. This has its efficacy from the Passion of Christ, according to Rom. 6:3: We who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in His death; and in the Holy Spirit, according to John 3:5: Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit. Therefore it is that solemn Baptism is held in the Church, both on Easter Eve, when we commemorate our Lord’s burial and resurrection; for which reason our Lord gave His disciples the commandment concerning Baptism as related by Matthew (28:19): and on Whitsun-eve, when the celebration of the Feast of the Holy Spirit begins; for which reason the apostles are said to have baptized three thousand on the very day of Pentecost when they had received the Holy Spirit. Ad secundum dicendum quod usus aquae adhibetur in Baptismo quasi pertinens ad substantiam sacramenti, sed usus olei vel chrismatis adhibetur ad quandam solemnitatem. Nam primo, baptizandus inungitur oleo sancto et in pectore et in scapulis, quasi athleta Dei, ut Ambrosius dicit, in libro de sacramentis, sicut pugiles inungi consueverunt. Vel, sicut Innocentius dicit, in quadam decretali de sacra unctione, baptizandus in pectore inungitur, ut spiritus sancti donum recipiat, errorem abiiciat et ignorantiam, et fidem rectam suscipiat, quia iustus ex fide vivit; inter scapulas autem inungitur, ut spiritus sancti gratiam induat, exuat negligentiam et torporem, et bonam operationem exerceat; ut per fidei sacramentum sit munditia cogitationum in pectore, et fortitudo laborum in scapulis. Reply Obj. 2: The use of water in Baptism is part of the substance of the sacrament; but the use of oil or chrism is part of the solemnity. For the candidate is first of all anointed with Holy oil on the breast and between the shoulders, as one who wrestles for God, to use Ambrose’s expression (De Sacram. i): thus are prize-fighters wont to besmear themselves with oil. Or, as Innocent III says in a Decretal on the Holy Unction: The candidate is anointed on the breast, in order to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, to cast off error and ignorance, and to acknowledge the true faith, since ‘the just man liveth by faith’; while he is anointed between the shoulders, that he may be clothed with the grace of the Holy Spirit, lay aside indifference and sloth, and become active in good works; so that the sacrament of faith may purify the thoughts of his heart, and strengthen his shoulders for the burden of labor. Post Baptismum vero, ut Rabanus dicit, statim signatur in cerebro a presbytero cum sacro chrismate, sequente simul et oratione, ut Christi regni particeps fiat, et a Christo Christianus possit vocari. Vel, sicut Ambrosius dicit, unguentum super caput effunditur, quia sapientis sensus in capite eius, ut scilicet sit paratus omni petenti de fide reddere rationem. But after Baptism, as Rabanus says (De Sacram. iii), he is forthwith anointed on the head by the priest with Holy Chrism, who proceeds at once to offer up a prayer that the neophyte may have a share in Christ’s kingdom, and be called a Christian after Christ. Or, as Ambrose says (De Sacram. iii), his head is anointed, because the senses of a wise man are in his head (Eccl 2:14): to wit, that he may be ready to satisfy everyone that asketh him to give a reason of his faith (cf. 1 Pet. 3:15; Innocent III, Decretal on Holy Unction). Ad tertium dicendum quod vestis illa candida traditur baptizato, non quidem ea ratione quod non liceat ei aliis vestibus uti, sed in signum gloriosae resurrectionis, ad quam homines per Baptismum regenerantur; et ad designandam puritatem vitae, quam debent post Baptismum observare, secundum illud Rom. VI, in novitate vitae ambulemus. Reply Obj. 3: This white garment is given, not as though it were unlawful for the neophyte to use others: but as a sign of the glorious resurrection, unto which men are born again by Baptism; and in order to designate the purity of life, to which he will be bound after being baptized, according to Rom. 6:4: That we may walk in newness of life. Ad quartum dicendum quod ea quae pertinent ad solemnitatem sacramenti, etsi non sint de necessitate sacramenti, non tamen sunt superflua, quia sunt ad bene esse sacramenti, ut supra dictum est. Reply Obj. 4: Although those things that belong to the solemnity of a sacrament are not essential to it, yet are they not superfluous, since they pertain to the sacrament’s wellbeing, as stated above. Articulus 11 Article 11 Utrum convenienter describantur tria Baptismata, scilicet aquae, sanguinis et flaminis, scilicet spiritus sancti Whether three kinds of Baptism are fittingly described—viz. Baptism of water, of blood, and of the Spirit? Ad undecimum sic proceditur. Videtur quod inconvenienter describantur tria Baptismata, scilicet aquae, sanguinis et flaminis, scilicet spiritus sancti. Quia apostolus dicit, Ephes. IV, una fides, unum Baptisma. Sed non est nisi una fides. Ergo non debent tria Baptismata esse. Objection 1: It seems that the three kinds of Baptism are not fittingly described as Baptism of Water, of Blood, and of the Spirit, i.e., of the Holy Spirit. Because the Apostle says (Eph 4:5): One Faith, one Baptism. Now there is but one Faith. Therefore there should not be three Baptisms.