Dist. 5, Art. 1, Q. 2
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 5
Quaestio II. Utrum possint baptizare haeretici.
Secundo dato, quod clerici et laici possint baptizare, quaeritur, si possint baptizare haeretici. Et quod sic, ostenditur:
1. Primo auctoritate Bedae1: «Sive haereticus sive schismaticus in nomine sanctae Trinitatis baptizat, non valet ille qui baptizatus est, a catholicis baptizari».
2. Item, Augustinus2: «Nulli Sacramento est iniuriandum»; illi autem iniuriantur, qui dicunt, ea pollui per pollutionem ministrorum: ergo haeretici, quamvis polluti, possunt baptizare.
3. Item, «accedente verbo ad elementum, fit Sacramentum3»; sed haereticus dicit verbum et habet elementum: ergo potest conferre Sacramentum.
4. Item, potestas baptizandi non est donum gratiae gratum facientis, sed tantum gratis datae, quia constat, quod mali sacerdotes baptizant4: ergo esto quod aliquis sacerdos catholicus fiat haereticus; cum propter hoc non amittat gratiam gratis datam, videtur, quod possit baptizare.
Contra: 1. Cum traditur forma baptismi, praemittuntur duo, scilicet doctrina et fides, Matthaei ultimo5: Docete eos baptizantes in nomine Patris etc.; et rursus: Qui crediderit et baptizatus fuerit; sed doctrina haereticorum non est scientia, sed insipientia, et fides eorum est error, non fides: ergo nec baptismus eorum est baptismus.
2. Item, baptismus est Sacramentum fidei: ergo ubi deficit fides, deficit baptismus. Probatio primae. Augustinus6: «Accedit verbum ad elementum, et fit Sacramentum, non quia dicitur, sed quia creditur»; ergo si non creditur, non est Sacramentum: cum ergo haereticus non credat, non confert Sacramentum.
3. Item, ad baptismum requiritur intentio; sed haereticus non habet intentionem, quia non habet fidem, «quae intentionem dirigit», ut dicit Ambrosius7: ergo non potest baptizare.
4. Item, haeresis non est Ecclesia, ergo baptismus haeresis non est baptismus Ecclesiae; sed solus baptismus Ecclesiae est baptismus: haeretip. 124corum8 igitur, qui non sunt de Ecclesia, non est baptismus.
Conclusio. Haereticus, observatis observandis, valide baptizat.
Respondeo: Dicendum, sicut dictum est9, quod ista tria sunt de integritate baptismi, scilicet immersio in aquam, prolatio verbi et intentio faciendi quod facit Ecclesia; et quia haereticus, manens haereticus, potest ista tria habere; potest baptizare et baptizat, quando aliquod istorum non deficit; operatur enim tunc non ut haereticus, sed ut catholicus.
1. 2. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur de doctrina et fide, dicendum, quod illa non sunt necessitatis, sed congruitatis, fides, inquam, baptizantis; nam fides Ecclesiae necessaria est, et haec non deficit10. — Et per hoc patet sequens.
3. Similiter ad illud quod obiicitur de intentione, dicendum, quod, sicut patebit infra11, intentio potest esse respectu operis, non respectu finis; et sic potest esse recta etiam sine fide.
4. Ad ultimum dicendum, quod illud argumentum non valet; et fert Augustinus12 instantiam: Aegyptus non est paradisus: ergo fluvius Aegypti non est fluvius paradisi. Et est fallacia consequentis — homo non est asinus: ergo genus hominis non est genus asini — possunt enim Ecclesia et haeresis in aliquo communicare, quamvis multum differant.
Ex his patet casus, qui posset quaeri de haeretico, qui credit, quod Ecclesia nihil faciat; videtur enim, quod cum talis nihil intendat facere, non baptizet.
Et ad hoc dicendum, quod haereticus bene intendit aliquando facere quod facit Ecclesia, et tamen credit13, quod Ecclesia nihil faciat, quia respectu alterius est intentio et credulitas. Nam credulitas est respectu effectus, et ipse credit, quod nullus effectus subsit illi operi; tamen nihilominus intendit facere illud opus, non tantum, ut est actus ablutionis corporis, verum etiam, prout est actus quidam consuetus fieri ab Ecclesia; et hoc intendendo facere, quamvis principaliter non intendat effectum, intendit tamen ex consequenti, sicut supra14 tactum est de eo qui voluntarie se subiicit operi exteriori, per consequens voluntarie se subiicit characteri. Et sic patet totum15.
---
Question II. Whether heretics can baptize.
Granted secondly that clerics and laics can baptize, it is asked whether heretics can baptize. And that [they can], it is shown:
1. First, by the authority of Bede1: «Whether a heretic or a schismatic baptizes in the name of the holy Trinity, he who is baptized cannot be baptized [again] by catholics».
2. Likewise, Augustine2: «No injury is to be done to any Sacrament»; but those do injury to it who say that they are polluted by the pollution of the ministers: therefore heretics, although polluted, can baptize.
3. Likewise, «when the word is joined to the element, the Sacrament comes to be3»; but the heretic says the word and has the element: therefore he can confer the Sacrament.
4. Likewise, the power of baptizing is not a gift of grace making [one] pleasing [to God], but only of grace gratuitously given, since it is established that wicked priests baptize4: therefore suppose that some catholic priest become a heretic; since on account of this he does not lose the gratuitously given grace, it seems that he can baptize.
On the contrary: 1. When the form of baptism is handed over, two things are set before it, namely teaching and faith, in Matthew, the last [chapter]5: Teach them, baptizing in the name of the Father etc.; and again: He who shall have believed and been baptized; but the teaching of heretics is not knowledge, but folly, and their faith is error, not faith: therefore neither is their baptism a baptism.
2. Likewise, baptism is a Sacrament of faith: therefore where faith is lacking, baptism is lacking. Proof of the first. Augustine6: «The word is joined to the element, and the Sacrament comes to be, not because it is said, but because it is believed»; therefore if it is not believed, it is not a Sacrament: since therefore the heretic does not believe, he does not confer the Sacrament.
3. Likewise, intention is required for baptism; but the heretic does not have intention, because he does not have faith, «which directs the intention», as Ambrose says7: therefore he cannot baptize.
4. Likewise, heresy is not the Church, therefore the baptism of heresy is not the baptism of the Church; but only the baptism of the Church is baptism: therefore of heretics8, who are not of the Church, there is no baptism.
Conclusion. A heretic, the things to be observed being observed, validly baptizes.
I respond: It must be said, as has been said9, that these three things belong to the integrity of baptism, namely immersion in water, the utterance of the word, and the intention of doing what the Church does; and since a heretic, remaining a heretic, can have these three; he can baptize and does baptize, when none of these is lacking; for then he acts not as a heretic, but as a catholic.
1. 2. To that, then, which is objected concerning teaching and faith, it must be said that those are not of necessity, but of fittingness — the faith, I mean, of the one baptizing; for the faith of the Church is necessary, and this is not lacking10. — And by this the following [point] is plain.
3. Likewise, to that which is objected concerning intention, it must be said that, as will appear below11, the intention can be with respect to the work, not with respect to the end; and so it can be right even without faith.
4. To the last it must be said that that argument is not valid; and Augustine12 brings a counter-instance: Egypt is not paradise: therefore the river of Egypt is not the river of paradise. And it is the fallacy of the consequent — man is not an ass: therefore the genus of man is not the genus of the ass — for the Church and heresy can share in something, although they differ much.
From these things there appears a case which could be asked concerning a heretic who believes that the Church does nothing; for it seems that, since such a one intends to do nothing, he does not baptize.
And to this it must be said that the heretic does sometimes well intend to do what the Church does, and yet believes13 that the Church does nothing, because the intention and the belief are with respect to different things. For the belief is with respect to the effect, and he believes that no effect underlies that work; nevertheless he intends to do that work, not only as it is an act of bodily washing, but also as it is a certain act customarily done by the Church; and by intending to do this, although he does not principally intend the effect, he intends it nevertheless as a consequence, just as above14 it was touched on concerning him who voluntarily subjects himself to the exterior work, [and] consequently voluntarily subjects himself to the character. And so the whole is plain15.
---
- 1Comment. in Ioan. 3, 4. Vide infra lit. Magistri, d. VI. c. 2.Commentary on John 3, 4. See below in the Master's text, d. VI, c. 2.
- 2Libr. I. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 1. n. 2.Book I On Baptism against the Donatists, c. 1, n. 2.
- 3August., in Ioan. Evang. tr. 80. n. 3. Vide supra lit. Magistri, d. III. c. 1.Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John, tr. 80, n. 3. See above in the Master's text, d. III, c. 1.
- 4Cfr. hic lit. Magistri, c. 1, et infra a. 2. q. 1. — Pro quia constat, quod codd. A G V W quod constat, quia. Inferius voci haereticus edd. praemittunt schismaticus vel.Cf. here the Master's text, c. 1, and below a. 2, q. 1. — For quia constat, quod ("since it is established that") codices A G V W [read] quod constat, quia. Lower down, before the word haereticus ("heretic") the editions prefix schismaticus vel ("a schismatic or").
- 5Vers. 19. Cfr. Glossa ordinaria et interlinearis in hunc locum. — Seq. textus est Marc. 16, 16. — De minori vide III. Sent. d. 23. a. 2. q. 1. ad 4. et q. 2. ad 4.Verse 19 [Matt. 28]. Cf. the Ordinary and Interlinear Gloss on this passage. — The following text is Mark 16, 16. — On the minor [premise] see III Sent. d. 23, a. 2, q. 1, ad 4, and q. 2, ad 4.
- 6In Ioan. Evang. tr. 80. n. 3. — Superius pro ubi codd. F Z si.Tractates on the Gospel of John, tr. 80, n. 3. — Above, for ubi ("where") codices F Z [read] si ("if").
- 7Error videtur irrepsisse in codd. et edd.; verba siquidem haec non sunt Ambrosii, sed August., Enarrat. in Ps. 31. enarrat. 2. n. 4. Cfr. II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XL, ubi tam Ambrosii quam Augustini verba proferuntur. — De maiori vide infra d. 6. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. seq.An error seems to have crept into the codices and editions; for these words are not Ambrose's, but Augustine's, Expositions of the Psalms, on Ps. 31, exposition 2, n. 4. Cf. II Sent. the Master's text, d. XL, where both Ambrose's and Augustine's words are set forth. — On the major [premise] see below d. 6, p. II, a. 2, q. 1, and following.
- 8Codd. M O U supplent baptismus. Initium arg. cod. O exhibet sic: Item, haereticus non est de Ecclesia, ergo baptismus haeretici non est etc.Codices M O U supply baptismus ("baptism"). Cod. O presents the beginning of the argument thus: Item, haereticus non est de Ecclesia, ergo baptismus haeretici non est ("Likewise, the heretic is not of the Church, therefore the baptism of the heretic is not [baptism]") etc.
- 9Quaest. praeced. in corp. et supra d. 3. p. I. a. 1. q. 1. seq., a. 2. q. 1. seqq. ac p. II. a. 1. q. 1. — Inferius pro verbi cod. F verborum.The preceding question in the body, and above d. 3, p. I, a. 1, q. 1, and following, a. 2, q. 1, and following, and p. II, a. 1, q. 1. — Lower down, for verbi ("of the word") cod. F [reads] verborum ("of the words").
- 10Vide supra d. 3. p. I. a. 1. q. 3. et d. 4. p. I. dub. 2.See above d. 3, p. I, a. 1, q. 3, and d. 4, p. I, dub. 2.
- 11Dist. 6. p. II. a. 2. q. 1. seq.Distinction 6, p. II, a. 2, q. 1, and following.
- 12Libr. IV. de Baptismo contra Donatistas, c. 1. n. 1. — De fallacia consequentis vide tom. I. pag. 628, nota 1. et pag. 691, nota 5. — Inferius post consequentis Vat. addit sicut hic.Book IV On Baptism against the Donatists, c. 1, n. 1. — On the fallacy of the consequent see tome I, p. 628, note 1, and p. 691, note 5. — Lower down, after consequentis ("of the consequent") the Vatican edition adds sicut hic ("as here").
- 13Ita codd. K aa, in aliis et edd. intendit.Thus codices K aa; in the others and in the editions intendit ("he intends").
- 14Dist. 4. p. I. a. 2. q. 1. in fine corp.Distinction 4, p. I, a. 2, q. 1, at the end of the body.
- 15Vide scholion ad praecedentem quaest.See the scholion to the preceding question [i.e. the Article-I scholion carried in q1].