|
Objection 1: It would seem that those who had been baptized with
John's baptism had not to be baptized with the baptism of Christ.
For John was not less than the apostles, since of him is it written
(Mt. 11:11): "There hath not risen among them that are born
of women a greater than John the Baptist." But those who were
baptized by the apostles were not baptized again, but only received the
imposition of hands; for it is written (Acts 8:16,17) that
some were "only baptized" by Philip "in the name of the Lord
Jesus": then the apostles---namely, Peter and John---"laid
their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost."
Therefore it seems that those who had been baptized by John had not to
be baptized with the baptism of Christ.
Objection 2: Further, the apostles were baptized with John's
baptism, since some of them were his disciples, as is clear from Jn.
1:37. But the apostles do not seem to have been baptized with the
baptism of Christ: for it is written (Jn. 4:2) that "Jesus
did not baptize, but His disciples." Therefore it seems that those
who had been baptized with John's baptism had not to be baptized with
the baptism of Christ.
Objection 3: Further, he who is baptized is less than he who
baptizes. But we are not told that John himself was baptized with the
baptism of Christ. Therefore much less did those who had been
baptized by John need to receive the baptism of Christ.
Objection 4: Further, it is written (Acts 19:1-5) that
"Paul . . . found certain disciples; and he said to them: Have
you received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? But they said to
him: We have not so much as heard whether there be a Holy Ghost.
And he said: In what then were you baptized? Who said: In
John's baptism." Wherefore "they were" again "baptized in the
name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Hence it seems that they needed to
be baptized again, because they did not know of the Holy Ghost: as
Jerome says on Joel 2:28 and in an epistle (lxix De Viro unius
uxoris), and likewise Ambrose (De Spiritu Sancto). But some
were baptized with John's baptism who had full knowledge of the
Trinity. Therefore these had no need to be baptized again with
Christ's baptism.
Objection 5: Further, on Rm. 10:8, "This is the word of
faith, which we preach," the gloss of Augustine says: "Whence
this virtue in the water, that it touches the body and cleanses the
heart, save by the efficacy of the word, not because it is uttered,
but because it is believed?" Whence it is clear that the virtue of
baptism depends on faith. But the form of John's baptism signified
the faith in which we are baptized; for Paul says (Acts 19:4):
"John baptized the people with the baptism of penance, saying: That
they should believe in Him who was to come after him---that is to
say, in Jesus." Therefore it seems that those who had been baptized
with John's baptism had no need to be baptized again with the baptism
of Christ.
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 assertion is
altogether unreasonable. First, because John's baptism neither
conferred grace nor imprinted a character, but was merely "in
water," as he says himself (Mt. 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 Jn. 3:5: "Unless a
man be born of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the
kingdom of God." 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 to Objection 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 to Objection 2: As Augustine says to Seleucianus (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 to Objection 3: As Chrysostom says (Hom. iv in Matth.
[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
asserts that "this is distinctly set down in some of the apocryphal
books." At any rate, it is certain, as Jerome says on Mt.
3:13, that, "as Christ was baptized in water by John, so had
John to be baptized in the Spirit by Christ."
Reply to Objection 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 to Objection 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.
|
|