Dist. 3, Part 2, Art. 2, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 3
Articulus II. De baptismi instituti administratione.
Quantum ad secundum articulum quaeritur secundo de baptismi instituti administratione, quae fit in parvuli immersione; et circa hoc duo quaeruntur.
Primo quaeritur, quoties oporteat mergi.
Secundo, quantum.
Quaestio I. Quoties baptizandus debeat immergi.
Et quod semel tantum sit immergendum, videtur:
1. De Consecratione, distinctione quarta3 ex Concilio Toletano: «Propter vitandi schismatis scandalum, vel haeretici dogmatis usum, simplam teneamus baptismatis immersionem»: ergo videtur, quod haereticum sit ter mergere.
2. Item, ratione videtur, quia haec est vera per essentiam: baptismus est ablutio vel tinctio in aqua4: ergo si fit triplex tinctio, triplex erit baptismus: ergo si nullo modo licet baptismum iterari, nullo modo licet ter mergi.
3. Item, ista duo sufficiunt, verbum scilicet et elementum5; et si mergatur semel, et si proferatur semel, est plenum Sacramentum: ergo si amplius mergitur, superfluit: ergo non debet nisi semel mergi.
Item, quaeritur, quare magis ter quam bis. Si dicas, quod binarius est numerus infamis, quia recedit ab unitate6; eadem ratione laudabilis, quia accedit maxime.
Sed contra:
1. Hieronymus super Epistolam ad Ephesios7: «In Patrem et Filium et Spiritum sanctum baptizamur et ter mergimur, ut Trinitatis unum appareat Sacramentum».
2. Item, Pelagius Gaudentio episcopo, de Consecratione, distinctione quarta8: «Evangelicum praeceptum nos admonet, in nomine Trinitatis trina etiam immersione sanctum baptisma cuique tribuere».
3. Item, de Consecratione, distinctione quarta9, ex canonibus Apostolorum: «Si quis presbyter aut episcopus non trinam immersionem unius mysterii celebret, sed semel tantum mergat in baptismate, quod dari a quibusdam in morte Domini perhibetur, deponatur»: ergo necessaria est trina immersio.
Conclusio.
Unitas et trinitas immersionum non sunt de necessitate baptismi, sed de congruitate; magis tamen congruit trinitas secundum morem Ecclesiae Romanae.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod unitas vel multitudo immersionum non est de substantia baptismi, p. 81 sed solum de bene esse, quia, quotiescumque immergat, dum tamen debito modo et sine dilatione magna verba1bis proferat, baptismus est et Sacramentum integrum. Etsi non sit ei de necessitate, est tamen de congruitate propter significationem, cui congruit unitas et trinitas — ut patet in fide Trinitatis, quia unitas est in essentia, sed trinitas in personis; similiter in morte Christi, quia una est in essentia, sed tribus diebus fuit in corde terrae2bis; similiter gratiae, quia una est in se, sed triplex in virtutibus unitas et trinitas convenit — sed tamen magis trinitas propter expressionem maiorem; et ideo utrumque morem servat Ecclesia. Sed Romana Ecclesia tanquam praecellens trinam servat immersionem, tum propter significationem Trinitatis, tum etiam triduanae sepulturae, tum etiam triplicis concupiscentiae3bis, a qua anima liberatur, tum etiam propter triplicem virtutem, qua imago in anima reformatur.
Si quaeritur, quoties sit immergendum; respondeo: secundum morem Ecclesiae; qui autem propria auctoritate mutat, peccat. Et ideo dicitur4bis, quod deponendus est episcopus, non quia non baptizaret, sed quia propria auctoritate nova introduceret. — Rationes igitur probantes, quod ter mergendum sit, intelligendae sunt secundum morem Ecclesiae Romanae.
Ad illud quod ad oppositum primo obiicitur, dicendum, quod loquitur secundum morem illius Ecclesiae, in qua tantum solebat semel mergi; sed haeretici inceperunt immutare5bis: ideo statuerunt tenere, ne viderentur haeresi consentire.
Ad illud quod obiicitur 2. 3. 4., quod baptismus est tinctio; dicendum, quod non est per essentiam, nisi addatur forma praescripta; si tamen tinctio fiat cum invocatione Trinitatis, baptisma est. Et si in una protulit omnia verba, non debet amplius mergere, quia baptisma consummatum est. Sed quando fit trina immersio, in prima debet nominari Pater, in secunda Filius, in tertia Spiritus sanctus; et6bis tunc nulla superfluit, quia non est completum Sacramentum quousque terminatum sit verbum; incipitur enim immersio cum verbo et cum illo terminatur. — Sequens patet; similiter, quare magis ter quam bis, et cetera obiecta.
I. Circa duas huius articuli quaestiones observandum est, quod consuetudo baptizandi per ablutionem vix ante saec. XIII. in Ecclesia Romana latius diffusa est. Magister Sententiarum solius immersionis meminit, et B. Albert. (hic a. 5. quaestiunc. 3.) de nunc recepta consuetudine ad mentem S. Bonaventurae ait: «Non mihi videtur esse laudabilis, sed immergendi consuetudo laudabilior est». Adhuc Durandus docet, congruentius baptismum fieri per trinam immersionem. Omnes autem censent, unumquemque debere consuetudinem suae Ecclesiae in ritu baptizandi observare. — Ritum ablutionis nunc in Ecclesia Latina communem esse, notissimum est.
De utraque quaestione: Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 8. m. 3. a. 1. — Scot., IV. Sent. d. 6. q. 1. n. 2. et passim. — S. Thom., hic q. 1. a. 4; S. III. q. 66. a. 7. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 3. a. 2. — Richard. a Med., hic a. 1. q. 3. — Durand., hic q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 4.
---
Article II. On the administration of the instituted baptism.
As to the second article, inquiry is made secondly concerning the administration of the instituted baptism, which is done in the immersion of the infant; and concerning this two questions are raised.
First it is asked, how often one ought to be immersed.
Second, how much.
Question I. How often the one to be baptized ought to be immersed.
And that one ought to be immersed only once, it seems:
1. From On Consecration, distinction four3, from the Council of Toledo: "For the sake of avoiding the scandal of schism, or the practice of heretical teaching, let us hold to a single immersion of baptism": therefore it seems that to immerse three times is heretical.
2. Likewise, it seems by reason, because this is true by essence: baptism is an ablution or dipping in water4: therefore if a threefold dipping is made, there will be a threefold baptism: therefore if in no way is it permitted that baptism be repeated, in no way is it permitted to immerse three times.
3. Likewise, these two suffice, namely the word and the element5; and if one be immersed once, and if it be pronounced once, the Sacrament is complete: therefore if there is further immersion, it is superfluous: therefore one ought to be immersed only once.
Likewise, it is asked why three times rather than twice. If you say that the number two is an infamous number, because it recedes from unity6; by the same reasoning it is praiseworthy, because it draws nearest.
On the contrary:
1. Jerome on the Letter to the Ephesians7: "Into the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit we are baptized and immersed three times, that the one Sacrament of the Trinity may appear."
2. Likewise, Pelagius to Gaudentius the bishop, On Consecration, distinction four8: "The evangelical precept admonishes us to confer holy baptism upon each one in the name of the Trinity and also by a threefold immersion."
3. Likewise, On Consecration, distinction four9, from the canons of the Apostles: "If any presbyter or bishop should not celebrate the threefold immersion of the one mystery, but should immerse only once in baptism — which is reported to be conferred by some in the death of the Lord — let him be deposed": therefore a threefold immersion is necessary.
Conclusion.
The unity and the trinity of the immersions are not of the necessity of baptism, but of fittingness; yet the trinity is more fitting according to the custom of the Roman Church.
I respond: It must be said that the unity or multitude of immersions is not of the substance of baptism, but only of its well-being, because, however often one immerses, provided that one pronounces the great words1bis in the due manner and without delay, it is a baptism and a complete Sacrament. Although it is not of necessity to it, it is nevertheless of fittingness on account of the signification, to which unity and trinity are fitting — as is plain in the faith of the Trinity, because the unity is in the essence, but the trinity in the persons; likewise in the death of Christ, because it is one in essence, but for three days He was in the heart of the earth2bis; likewise of grace, because it is one in itself, but threefold in the virtues — unity and trinity agree, but nevertheless the trinity rather, on account of the greater expression; and therefore the Church observes both customs. But the Roman Church, as preeminent, keeps the threefold immersion, both on account of the signification of the Trinity, and also of the three-day burial, and also of the threefold concupiscence3bis, from which the soul is freed, and also on account of the threefold virtue by which the image in the soul is reformed.
If it is asked how often one ought to be immersed; I respond: according to the custom of the Church; but whoever changes it by his own authority, sins. And therefore it is said4bis that a bishop is to be deposed, not because he would not baptize, but because by his own authority he would introduce something new. — The reasons, therefore, proving that one ought to immerse three times are to be understood according to the custom of the Roman Church.
To that which is objected in the first place to the contrary, it must be said that it speaks according to the custom of that Church in which it was customary to immerse only once; but heretics began to change5bis it: therefore they decreed to hold to it, lest they should seem to consent to heresy.
To that which is objected, 2, 3, 4, that baptism is a dipping; it must be said that it is not so by essence, unless the prescribed form be added; yet if the dipping be made with the invocation of the Trinity, it is baptism. And if in one immersion one pronounced all the words, one ought not to immerse further, because the baptism is consummated. But when a threefold immersion is made, in the first the Father ought to be named, in the second the Son, in the third the Holy Spirit; and6bis then none is superfluous, because the Sacrament is not complete until the word is finished; for the immersion is begun with the word and is finished with it. — What follows is plain; likewise, why three times rather than twice, and the other objections.
I. Concerning the two questions of this article it must be observed that the custom of baptizing by aspersion was scarcely diffused more widely in the Roman Church before the thirteenth century. The Master of the Sentences mentions immersion alone, and Blessed Albert (here a. 5, quaestiunc. 3), concerning the now-received custom, says, in agreement with the mind of St. Bonaventure: "It does not seem to me to be praiseworthy, but the custom of immersing is more praiseworthy." Further, Durandus teaches that baptism is more fittingly done by a threefold immersion. But all hold that each one ought to observe the custom of his own Church in the rite of baptizing. — That the rite of aspersion is now common in the Latin Church is most well known.
On both questions: Alexander of Hales, S. p. IV. q. 8. m. 3. a. 1. — Scotus, IV. Sent. d. 6. q. 1. n. 2. and passim. — St. Thomas, here q. 1. a. 4; S. III. q. 66. a. 7. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 3. a. 2. — Richard of Mediavilla, here a. 1. q. 3. — Durandus, here q. 1. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 4.
---
- 3Can. Propter vitandum schismatis (c. 83.). Cfr. Isidor. Mercator., Collectio Decretal. Concil. Tolet. IV. n. 5.The canon Propter vitandum schismatis (c. 83). Cf. Isidore Mercator, Collection of Decretals, Council of Toledo IV, n. 5.
- 4Vide supra p. I. huius dist. a. I. q. I.See above, Pars I of this distinction, a. I, q. I.
- 5Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. I. — Pro mergatur plures codd. immergatur.Cf. here the text of the Master, c. I. — For mergatur several codices read immergatur.
- 6Vide tom. II. pag. 334, nota 2. Pro infamis non pauci codd. et ed. I informis, Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 3. a. 1. § 3. infaustus. Hieronym., I. contra Iovin. n. 16. docet, «non esse bonum duplicem numerum, quia ab unione dividat et praefiguret foedera nuptiarum». Unde in arca Noe omnia animalia, quaecumque bina ingrediuntur, immunda sunt. Impar numerus est mundus». Cfr. Epist. 48. (alias 50.) n. 19, ubi praedicta defendit et affert auctores, qui de hac re scripserunt.See vol. II, p. 334, note 2. For infamis not a few codices and ed. I read informis; Alexander of Hales, S. p. IV. q. 9. m. 3. a. 1. § 3, infaustus. Jerome, Bk. I against Jovinian, n. 16, teaches that "the double number is not good, because it divides from union and prefigures the covenants of marriage." Hence in Noah's ark all the animals that enter two by two are unclean. The odd number is clean." Cf. Letter 48 (alias 50), n. 19, where he defends the foregoing and adduces the authors who have written on this matter.
- 7Cap. 4, 6. Edd. In Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto, sed contra textum originalem et contra C. Eodem modo (81.), de Consecrat. d. 4, ubi tamen in nota adiecta lectio edd. recensetur. Codd. et edd. falso Hieron. super Epistolam ad Philippenses.Chapter 4, 6. The editions read In Patre et Filio et Spiritu sancto, but against the original text and against C. The canon Eodem modo (81.), On Consecration d. 4, where however the editions' reading is recorded in an added note. The codices and editions falsely [cite it as] Jerome on the Letter to the Philippians.
- 8Can. Multi sunt (82.), qui in nomine solummodo Christi una etiam mersione se asserunt baptizare. Evangelicum vero praeceptum, ipso Deo et domino salvatore nostro Iesu Christo tradente, nos admonet... baptisma unicuique tribuere etc.The canon Multi sunt (82.) — those who in the name of Christ only claim to baptize with a single immersion. But the evangelical precept, handed down by God Himself and our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, admonishes us... to confer baptism upon each one, etc.
- 9Can. Si quis presbyter (79.), ubi textus originalis iubetur pro perhibetur, et in nota adiecta dicitur, quod textus Graecus exhibeat quae in mortem Domini datur. Codd. immergat pro mergat.The canon Si quis presbyter (79.), where the original text has iubetur for perhibetur, and in an added note it is said that the Greek text presents quae in mortem Domini datur ("which is conferred in the death of the Lord"). The codices read immergat for mergat.
- 1bisCodd. omittunt verba, et cod. H prosequitur perfectus baptismus est. Post debito modo in cod. Y additur facta. Cfr. tamen infra ad 2-4, et Alex. Hal., S. p. IV. q. 8. m. 4. § 3.The codices omit verba, and codex H continues perfectus baptismus est. After debito modo in codex Y facta is added. Cf. however below, on [objections] 2–4, and Alexander of Hales, S. p. IV. q. 8. m. 4. § 3.
- 2bisMatth. 12, 40: Sicut enim fuit Ionas... sic erit Filius hominis in corde terrae tribus diebus et tribus noctibus. Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 7, et Dionys., de Eccles. Hierarch. c. 2. p. III. § 7.Matthew 12:40: "For as Jonah was... so shall the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights." Cf. here the text of the Master, c. 7, and Dionysius, On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, c. 2, p. III, § 7.
- 3bisDe qua vide I. Ioan. 2, 16. — Vat. tum etiam propter triplicis concupiscentiae minutionem. Inferius pro qua imago cod. H quae per Christum, ed. I cum aliquot codd. qua Christus.Concerning which see 1 John 2:16. — The Vatican edition reads tum etiam propter triplicis concupiscentiae minutionem ("also on account of the diminution of the threefold concupiscence"). Below, for qua imago codex H reads quae per Christum, ed. I with several codices qua Christus.
- 4bisIn Canone praeallegato. — Paulo inferius pro nova codd. D F H novam consuetudinem.In the canon cited above. — A little below, for nova codices D F H read novam consuetudinem ("a new custom").
- 5bisCodd. A G H K V aa mutare, cod. bb hoc mutare. Subinde pro tenere, quod codd. E W omittunt, plures codd., contextu repugnante, ter, edd. bene semel, cod. F legit: ideo statuit Ecclesia ter, ne viderentur sibi consentire.Codices A G H K V aa read mutare, codex bb hoc mutare. Thereupon, for tenere, which codices E W omit, several codices — against the context — read ter, the editions rightly semel; codex F reads: therefore the Church decreed [to immerse] three times, lest they should seem to agree among themselves.
- 6bisEdd. quia. Inferius post terminatum edd. subiungunt non. — Superius pro baptismus edd. cum aliquot codd. baptizatus.The editions read quia. Below, after terminatum the editions add non. — Above, for baptismus the editions with several codices read baptizatus.