|
Objection 1: It seems that children of Jews or other unbelievers
should be baptized against the will of their parents. For it is a
matter of greater urgency to rescue a man from the danger of eternal
death than from the danger of temporal death. But one ought to rescue
a child that is threatened by the danger of temporal death, even if its
parents through malice try to prevent its being rescued. Therefore
much more reason is there for rescuing the children of unbelievers from
the danger of eternal death, even against their parents' will.
Objection 2: The children of slaves are themselves slaves, and in
the power of their masters. But Jews and all other unbelievers are
the slaves of kings and rulers. Therefore without any injustice rulers
can have the children of Jews baptized, as well as those of other
slaves who are unbelievers.
Objection 3: Further, every man belongs more to God, from Whom
he has his soul, than to his carnal father, from whom he has his
body. Therefore it is not unjust if the children of unbelievers are
taken away from their carnal parents, and consecrated to God by
Baptism.
On the contrary, It is written in the Decretals (Dist. xlv),
quoting the council of Toledo: "In regard to the Jews the holy
synod commands that henceforward none of them be forced to believe: for
such are not to be saved against their will, but willingly, that their
righteousness may be without flaw."
I answer that, The children of unbelievers either have the use of
reason or they have not. If they have, then they already begin to
control their own actions, in things that are of Divine or natural
law. And therefore of their own accord, and against the will of their
parents, they can receive Baptism, just as they can contract
marriage. Consequently such can lawfully be advised and persuaded to
be baptized.
If, however, they have not yet the use of free-will, according to
the natural law they are under the care of their parents as long as they
cannot look after themselves. For which reason we say that even the
children of the ancients "were saved through the faith of their
parents." Wherefore it would be contrary to natural justice if such
children were baptized against their parents' will; just as it would
be if one having the use of reason were baptized against his will.
Moreover under the circumstances it would be dangerous to baptize the
children of unbelievers; for they would be liable to lapse into
unbelief, by reason of their natural affection for their parents.
Therefore it is not the custom of the Church to baptize the children
of unbelievers against their parents' will.
Reply to Objection 1: It is not right to rescue a man from death of
the body against the order of civil law: for instance, if a man be
condemned to death by the judge who has tried him, none should use
force in order to rescue him from death. Consequently, neither should
anyone infringe the order of the natural law, in virtue of which a
child is under the care of its father, in order to rescue it from the
danger of eternal death.
Reply to Objection 2: Jews are slaves of rulers by civil slavery,
which does not exclude the order of the natural and Divine law.
Reply to Objection 3: Man is ordained unto God through his
reason, by which he can know God. Wherefore a child, before it has
the use of reason, is ordained to God, by a natural order, through
the reason of its parents, under whose care it naturally lies, and it
is according to their ordering that things pertaining to God are to be
done in respect of the child.
|
|