Dist. 6, Part 2, Art. 1, Q. 1
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 6
Articulus I. De idoneitate ex parte baptizati.
Quaestio I. Utrum aliquis in utero possit baptizari.
Circa primum quaeruntur duo. Primo quaeritur, utrum aliquis possit in utero baptizari, sicut et sanctificari. Secundo, utrum sanctificati in utero debeant baptizari.
Et quod aliquis possit baptizari in utero, ostenditur sic.
1. Maior est gratia sanctificationis quam gratia baptismalis; sed parvulus in utero est susceptibilis gratiae sanctificationis, sicut patet de Ioanne Baptista et Ieremia: de Ioanne, Lucae primo1: Spiritu sancto replebitur adhuc ex utero matris suae. Si ergo parvulus in utero est capax gratiae sanctificationis, videtur similiter, quod et gratiae baptismalis.
2. Item, pronior est Deus ad miserandum quam ad condemnandum2; sed parvulus in utero non tantum est susceptibilis culpae, sed etiam poenae: ergo videtur, quod Deus debeat in utero remedium praeparare. Sed remedium contra culpam originalem est baptismus: ergo videtur, quod homo possit in utero baptizari.
Sed contra:
1. Augustinus dicit, et habetur in littera3: « Non potest quis renasci, antequam sit natus »; sed baptizari est renasci: ergo non potest baptizari, antequam nascatur.
2. Item, originalis culpa contrahitur ex carne corrupta4: ergo quamdiu parvulus est coniunctus carni corruptae, est coniunctus causae morbi, quia semper nutritur sanguine menstruo: ergo non debet quis purificari in loco infectionis, nisi separetur: ergo non debet baptizari, antequam nascatur et a matre separetur.
3. Item, baptismus est Sacramentum exterius5, et omne aliud Sacramentum: ergo nullus est susceptibilis baptismi, nisi exterius prodeat in lucem: non ergo baptizabilis est, quamdiu in utero latet.
Conclusio. Baptismus non potest dari existentibus in utero.
Respondeo: Ad praedictorum intelligentiam est notandum, quod ratio, quare quis non purificatur nec baptizatur in utero, est divina institutio, quae sic instituit. Ratio autem divinae institutionis assignatur congruitatis, non necessitatis, quia posset utique aliter esse, si Deus vellet. Et secundum diversos plures et diversae congruentiae assignantur.
Fuerunt enim qui dixerunt, quod ratio sumitur ex parte aequitatis divini iudicii, quae6 « nec parvulum nec adultum iustificat sine aliquantula poena; et ideo debuit circa parvulum aliquid fieri poenale ad hoc, ut iustificaretur; et illud dicunt fuisse omni tempore. » — Sed ista ratio non videtur conveniens, quia non est generalis. Nam tempore legis naturae, ut dicit Gregorius7, iustificabantur in sola fide parentum. Praeterea, esto quod parvulus baptizetur in aqua calida sive tepida, potius esset ei solatium quam poena, et ita haec ratio non sufficit.
Fuerunt alii, qui dixerunt, quod ratio sumitur ex parte Sacramenti. Quia enim in originali peccato et est caro infecta et anima deformata; ideo Sacramentum baptismi duo habet, scilicet aquam et Spiritum, ut dicit Damascenus8, et quodam modo est ibi purificatio et generatio carnis et spiritus: et ideo non tantum praesupponit nativitatem in utero, quae est in infusione animae, verum etiam nativitatem ex utero, quae est in egressu. — Et ista quidem ratio bona est, sed particularis, quia non valet ad remedium legis naturae, quod non respiciebat parvuli carnem9.
Fuerunt et alii, qui sumserunt rationem ex parte culpae. Quia enim culpa originalis contracta est ex carne infecta et ex carne parentum secundum actum generationis; totum tempus generationis et cibationis ex illa carne infecta, ut puta ex sanguine menstruo, est tempus deputatum peccato, non remedio: et ideo ante necesse est, a carne matris parvulum separari, et totam generationis actionem consummari, quam superveniat benedictio, quoniam illud totum est tempus maledictionis. — Et ista quidem ratio bona est, nisi etiam repugnaret sanctificationi, quoniam ibi datur gratia mundans a culpa originali.
Fuerunt et quarti, qui dixerunt, quod ratio est ex parte gratiae. Quia enim gratiae est dare esse ordinatum et gratiae est regenerare; et esse ordinatum praesupponit esse distinctum10, et renasci praesupponit nasci: ideo necesse est, quod ante baptismum parvulus nascatur, ut sit perfecte natus secundum carnem, sit etiam distinctus, quoniam quamdiu est in ventre, coniungitur matrici per umbilicum, unde recipit alimentum. — Et haec quidem ratio bona est, maxime quia consonat et ortum habet a verbis Sanctorum11; tamen adhuc per istam rationem posset ostendi, quod parvulus non deberet sanctificari in utero, sicut nec baptizari.
Et propterea est dicendum, quod ratio sumenda est ex parte sacramentalis remedii. Quia enim sacramentale remedium respicit operationem Ecclesiae; et operatio Ecclesiae non se extendit ad parvulum nisi extra uterum: ideo nullo tempore nec fide parentum nec aliquo Sacramento iustificatus est parvulus, antequam natus, quantum est de lege communi; quia Deus decrevit salvare puerum per Sacramentum, vel aliquid, quod sit loco Sacramenti.
Ad hoc autem intelligendum est notandum, quod triplex status distinguitur in homine post animae infusionem: primus est in utero; secundus extra uterum in statu infantiae; tertius in statu naturae adultae. In primo statu manifestus est Deo; in secundo manifestus est nobis; in tertio manifestus est sibi. — In primo igitur statu, cum soli Deo sit notus, potest per eius voluntatem5p150 sanctificari, non per nostram cooperationem, cum non cognoscat eum Ecclesia, nec sit de foro Ecclesiae. In secundo statu, quia notus est Deo et Ecclesiae, remedium potest habere a Deo, cooperante adiutorio alieno, non suo. In tertio statu, cum sit omnibus modis notus, scilicet Deo et sibi et Ecclesiae, potest omnibus his modis adiuvari, ut non tantum Deus sua virtute faciat, sed adiuvet fides aliena quantum ad Sacramentum et fides et devotio propria. — Prima igitur sanctificatio est per divinam voluntatem et pertinet ad singulare privilegium. Secunda vero est per legem datam, sicut patet in circumcisione, patet etiam in baptismate, cum dictum est Ioannis tertio6p150: Nisi quis renatus fuerit etc. Tertia est per legem inditam, quam Deus indidit, ut ad Deum recurrat homo petere veniam pro offensa. — Et prima quidem est paucorum, ut puta illorum quos deputat ad aliquod magnum officium, et est praeter legem communem. Ita enim decrevit divina iustitia, ut, quantum est de lege communi, non relevetur qui cecidit, nisi aliqua dispositio occurrat; et parvulus quidem, sicut per alium cecidit, ita potest per alium relevari disponendo, ut puta per fidem alienam; adultus autem per propriam, sicut per propriam voluntatem peccavit. — Quia vero in utero non potest per fidem alienam vel per7p150 Sacramentum adiuvari, quoniam non est de foro Ecclesiae nec nobis notus; et hoc decrevit Deus de lege communi: ideo nullus in ventre purificatus est nisi de privilegio speciali. Quoniam igitur baptismus respicit legem communem et legem datam; ideo non debet quis8p150 in utero baptizari. Et haec ratio communis est omnibus Sacramentis secundum omne tempus.
Ad argumenta:
Ad 1. Et patet responsio ad illud quod obiicitur de sanctificatione. Concedo enim quod Deus posset dare gratiam, si vellet, parvulo; sed per Sacramentum baptismi vel aliud9p150 ecclesiasticum non debet fieri, non quia maius sit, sed quia alius est modus, qui non competit illi statui.
Ad 2. Ad illud quod obiicitur, quod Deus pronior est ad miserandum; dicendum, quod verum est; sed tamen cum misericordia currit iustitia: et ideo, quia iustitia dictabat, ut aliqua satisfactio, vel aliquod praeparatorium fieret sibi pro parvulo, ideo ante non remittebat culpam; tamen non continet misericordiam suam in ira1p151; quia hoc ipsum, quod conservat in utero et praeparat remedium extra, misericordiae est: et si retribuisset Adae secundum peccatum suum, totam posteritatem eius delesset.
The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation; Quaracchi restarts footnote numbering on each printed page, so the apparatus is grouped by page (p.149: notes 1–7; p.150: notes 1–9; p.151 note 1 belongs to this quaestio's reply Ad 2).
I. Haec quaestio est de infantibus nullo modo natis. De natis secundum aliquam partem corporis consule casuistas. — Conclusio in genere constat. Etiam S. Thomas reiicit rationes a S. Bonav. reprobatas. — De sanctificatis in utero cfr. hic dub. I.
De hac I. quaestione: Alex. Hal., p. IV. q. 8. m. 7. a. 1. § 2. i. 4. — Scot., IV. Sent. d. 4. q. 3. — S. Thom., hic q. a. 1; S. III. q. 68. a. 11. — B. Albert., de hac et seq. q. hic a. 9. — Petr. a Tar., hic q. 2. a. 1. — Richard. a Med., de hac et seq. q. hic a. 2. q. 1. — Durand., hic q. 1. — Dionys. Carth., hic q. 1.
---
Article I. On the suitability on the part of the one to be baptized.
Question I. Whether anyone can be baptized in the womb.
Concerning the first [article] two things are asked. First it is asked, whether anyone can be baptized in the womb, just as [he can be] sanctified. Second, whether those sanctified in the womb ought to be baptized.
And that anyone can be baptized in the womb is shown thus.
1. The grace of sanctification is greater than baptismal grace; but the infant in the womb is capable of the grace of sanctification, as is clear in the case of John the Baptist and Jeremiah: of John, in Luke chapter one1: He shall be filled with the Holy Spirit even from his mother's womb. If therefore the infant in the womb is capable of the grace of sanctification, it seems likewise that [he is capable] also of baptismal grace.
2. Likewise, God is more inclined to have mercy than to condemn2; but the infant in the womb is capable not only of guilt, but also of punishment: therefore it seems that God ought to prepare a remedy in the womb. But the remedy against original guilt is baptism: therefore it seems that a man can be baptized in the womb.
On the contrary:
1. Augustine says, and it is found in the text [of the Master]3: « No one can be reborn before he is born »; but to be baptized is to be reborn: therefore one cannot be baptized before he is born.
2. Likewise, original guilt is contracted from the corrupted flesh4: therefore so long as the infant is joined to the corrupted flesh, he is joined to the cause of the disease, since he is always nourished by menstrual blood: therefore one ought not be purified in the place of infection unless he is separated [from it]: therefore he ought not be baptized before he is born and separated from the mother.
3. Likewise, baptism is an exterior Sacrament5, as is every other Sacrament: therefore no one is capable of baptism unless he comes forth into the light outwardly: he is therefore not baptizable so long as he lies hidden in the womb.
Conclusion. Baptism cannot be given to those existing in the womb.
I respond: For the understanding of the foregoing it must be noted that the reason why someone is not purified nor baptized in the womb is the divine institution, which has so instituted it. But the reason for the divine institution is assigned [as one] of fittingness, not of necessity, since it could indeed be otherwise, if God willed. And according to different [authors] more and different fittingnesses are assigned.
For there were those who said that the reason is taken on the part of the equity of the divine judgment, which6 « justifies neither infant nor adult without some little punishment; and therefore there had to be done something penal concerning the infant in order that he might be justified; and this, they say, was so at all times. » — But this reason does not seem fitting, because it is not general. For in the time of the law of nature, as Gregory says7, they were justified by the faith of the parents alone. Moreover, granted that an infant be baptized in warm or tepid water, it would rather be a comfort to him than a punishment, and so this reason does not suffice.
Others there were who said that the reason is taken on the part of the Sacrament. For since in original sin both the flesh is infected and the soul deformed; therefore the Sacrament of baptism has two things, namely water and the Spirit, as Damascene says8, and in a certain way there is there a purification and a generation of flesh and spirit: and therefore it presupposes not only the birth in the womb, which is in the infusion of the soul, but also the birth from the womb, which is in the coming-forth. — And this reason indeed is good, but particular, because it does not avail for the remedy of the law of nature, which did not regard the infant's flesh9.
And there were yet others who took the reason on the part of guilt. For since original guilt is contracted from the infected flesh and from the flesh of the parents according to the act of generation; the whole time of generation and of feeding from that infected flesh, as for instance from menstrual blood, is a time assigned to sin, not to remedy: and therefore it is necessary beforehand that the infant be separated from the mother's flesh, and that the whole action of generation be completed, before the blessing supervenes, since that whole [time] is the time of malediction. — And this reason indeed is good, except that it would also be repugnant to sanctification, since there grace cleansing from original guilt is given.
And there were fourth ones, who said that the reason is on the part of grace. For since it belongs to grace to give ordered being and it belongs to grace to regenerate; and ordered being presupposes distinct being10, and to be reborn presupposes to be born: therefore it is necessary that before baptism the infant be born, so that he be perfectly born according to the flesh, and be also distinct, since so long as he is in the womb, he is joined to the womb by the umbilical cord, whence he receives nourishment. — And this reason indeed is good, especially because it accords with and takes its origin from the words of the Saints11; yet by this reason it could still be shown that the infant ought not be sanctified in the womb, just as neither [ought he] to be baptized.
And therefore it must be said that the reason is to be taken on the part of the sacramental remedy. For since the sacramental remedy regards the operation of the Church; and the operation of the Church does not extend to the infant except outside the womb: therefore at no time, neither by the faith of the parents nor by any Sacrament, is the infant justified before he is born, as far as the common law is concerned; for God decreed to save the child through the Sacrament, or through something which is in place of the Sacrament.
For the understanding of this it must be noted that a threefold state is distinguished in man after the infusion of the soul: the first is in the womb; the second outside the womb in the state of infancy; the third in the state of adult nature. In the first state he is manifest to God; in the second he is manifest to us; in the third he is manifest to himself. — In the first state, therefore, since he is known to God alone, he can by His will5p150 be sanctified, not by our cooperation, since the Church does not know him, nor is he of the Church's forum. In the second state, since he is known to God and to the Church, he can have a remedy from God, with the cooperation of another's help, not his own. In the third state, since he is known in all ways, namely to God and to himself and to the Church, he can be aided in all these ways, so that not only God by His own power may act, but another's faith may aid as regards the Sacrament, and his own faith and devotion [may aid]. — The first sanctification, therefore, is by the divine will and pertains to a singular privilege. The second indeed is by the law given, as is clear in circumcision, and is clear also in baptism, since it was said in John chapter three6p150: Unless someone be reborn etc. The third is by the law implanted, which God implanted, so that man might have recourse to God to ask pardon for an offense. — And the first indeed is of few, as for instance of those whom He assigns to some great office, and it is beyond the common law. For divine justice has so decreed that, as far as the common law is concerned, he who has fallen is not relieved unless some disposition occurs; and the infant indeed, just as he fell through another, so can he be relieved through another by being disposed, as for instance through another's faith; but the adult [is relieved] through his own, just as he sinned through his own will. — But since in the womb he cannot be aided through another's faith or through the7p150 Sacrament, since he is not of the Church's forum nor known to us; and this God decreed by the common law: therefore no one is purified in the womb except by a special privilege. Since therefore baptism regards the common law and the law given; therefore one ought not8p150 be baptized in the womb. And this reason is common to all the Sacraments at every time.
To the arguments:
To 1. And the response to that which is objected concerning sanctification is clear. For I concede that God could give grace, if He willed, to the infant; but through the Sacrament of baptism or any other9p150 ecclesiastical [thing] it ought not be done, not because [sanctification] is greater, but because it is another mode, which does not befit that state.
To 2. To that which is objected, that God is more inclined to have mercy; it must be said that it is true; but nonetheless mercy runs together with justice: and therefore, because justice dictated that some satisfaction, or some preparatory thing be done for him on the infant's behalf, therefore He did not remit the guilt beforehand; yet He does not withhold His mercy in anger1p151; for this very thing, that He preserves [him] in the womb and prepares a remedy outside, is of mercy: and if He had repaid Adam according to his sin, He would have destroyed his whole posterity.
I. This question is about infants in no way born. Concerning those born according to some part of the body, consult the casuists. — The conclusion is established in general. Even St. Thomas rejects the reasons reproved by St. Bonaventure. — Concerning those sanctified in the womb, see here doubt I.
On this first question: Alexander of Hales, part IV, q. 8, m. 7, a. 1, § 2, i. 4. — Scotus, IV Sent., d. 4, q. 3. — St. Thomas, here q. a. 1; Summa III, q. 68, a. 11. — Bl. Albert, on this and the following question, here a. 9. — Peter of Tarentaise, here q. 2, a. 1. — Richard of Middleton, on this and the following question, here a. 2, q. 1. — Durandus, here q. 1. — Dionysius the Carthusian, here q. 1.
---
- 1Vers. 15. — Edd. post matris suae addunt De Ieremia: Antequam exires de vulva, sanctificavi te [Ier. 1, 5.].Verse 15. — The editions, after matris suae ("of his mother's [womb]"), add Concerning Jeremiah: Before you came forth from the womb, I sanctified you [Jer. 1:5].
- 2Cfr. tom. II. pag. 784, nota 6, verba Augustini. — Pro miserandum cod. K miserendum. In solut. edd. cum pluribus codd. eandem lectionem habent.Cf. vol. II, p. 784, note 6, the words of Augustine. — For miserandum codex K [reads] miserendum. In the solution the editions, with several codices, have the same reading.
- 3Hic c. 3.Here, chapter 3.
- 4Vide II. Sent. d. 31. a. 2. q. 1. seqq.See II Sent., d. 31, a. 2, q. 1 ff.
- 5Cod. aa visibile. Idem cod. tam in hoc arg. quam in praecedenti plura mutat et addit, quae nullius sunt valoris.Codex aa [reads] visibile ("visible"). The same codex, both in this argument and in the preceding one, changes and adds many things, which are of no value.
- 6Codd. H Z qua.Codices H and Z [read] qua.
- 7Libr. IV. Moral. in praefat. c. 3. Vide supra lit. Magistri, d. I. c. 8, et Comment. ibid. p. II. a. 1. q. 2.Book IV of the Morals, in the preface, c. 3. See above the text of the Master, d. 1, c. 8, and the Commentary there, part II, a. 1, q. 2.
- 8Libr. IV. de Fide orthod. c. 9: Quoniam enim duplex homo, ex anima et corpore, duplicem dedit nobis purgationem, per aquam et Spiritum: Spiritu quidem quod secundum imaginem et similitudinem est renovante, aqua autem per Spiritus gratiam corpus a peccato purgante et a corruptione liberante etc.Book IV, On the Orthodox Faith, c. 9: For since man is twofold, of soul and body, He gave us a twofold purgation, by water and Spirit: by the Spirit indeed renewing that which is according to the image and likeness, but by the water, through the grace of the Spirit, purging the body from sin and freeing it from corruption, etc.
- 9Nam, ut paulo superius dictum est, sola fide parentum parvuli iustificabantur.For, as was said a little above, infants were justified by the faith of the parents alone.
- 10Cfr. tom. III. pag. 638, nota 7.Cf. vol. III, p. 638, note 7.
- 11Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 3. — Post consonal in cod. bb secunda manus addit rationi.See here the text of the Master, c. 3. — After consonat in codex bb a second hand adds rationi.
- 5p150Cod. Z potestatem.Codex Z [reads] potestatem ("power").
- 6p150Vers. 5. — De circumcisione cfr. Gen. 17, 10. seqq. — Pro dictum est edd. dictum sit. Eaedem edd. aliquanto superius post sed addunt etiam. Inferius post legem communem in cod. F subiungitur Secunda est multorum.Verse 5. — Concerning circumcision cf. Gen. 17:10 ff. — For dictum est the editions [read] dictum sit. The same editions, somewhat above, after sed add etiam. Below, after legem communem, in codex F is appended Secunda est multorum ("The second is of many").
- 7p150Cod. X nec per, codd. H K, omisso vel per, pro Sacramentum substituunt Sacramento, cod. T Sacramenti.Codex X [reads] nec per; codices H and K, omitting vel per, substitute for Sacramentum the word Sacramento; codex T [reads] Sacramenti.
- 8p150Plurimi codd. omittunt quis. Deinde post baptizari Vat. addit nec potest.Most codices omit quis. Then after baptizari the Vatican [edition] adds nec potest ("nor can he be").
- 9p150Cod. aa vel aliquod Sacramentum.Codex aa [reads] vel aliquod Sacramentum ("or any [other] Sacrament").
- 1p151Psalm. 76, 10: Aut obliviscetur misereri Deus? aut continebit in ira sua misericordias suas? — Inferius pro peccatum cod. aa meritum.Psalm 76:10: Or will God forget to be merciful? Or will He in His anger shut up His mercies? — Below, for peccatum codex aa [reads] meritum ("merit"). [The "below" reference points to a word in Quaestio II, q.v.]