FOURTH ARTICLE [III, Q. 38, Art. 4]

Whether Christ Alone Should Have Been Baptized with the Baptism of

John?

Objection 1: It would seem that Christ alone should have been

baptized with the baptism of John. For, as stated above (A. 1), "the

reason why John baptized was that Christ might receive baptism," as

Augustine says (Super Joan., Tract. xiii). But what is proper to

Christ should not be applicable to others. Therefore no others should

have received that baptism.

Obj. 2: Further, whoever is baptized either receives something from

the baptism or confers something on the baptism. But no one could

receive anything from the baptism of John, because thereby grace was

not conferred, as stated above (A. 3). On the other hand, no one

could confer anything on baptism save Christ, who "sanctified the

waters by the touch of His most pure flesh" [*Mag. Sent. iv, 3].

Therefore it seems that Christ alone should have been baptized with

the baptism of John.

Obj. 3: Further, if others were baptized with that baptism, this was

only in order that they might be prepared for the baptism of Christ:

and thus it would seem fitting that the baptism of John should be

conferred on all, old and young, Gentile and Jew, just as the baptism

of Christ. But we do not read that either children or Gentiles were

baptized by the latter; for it is written (Mk. 1:5) that "there went

out to him . . . all they of Jerusalem, and were baptized by him."

Therefore it seems that Christ alone should have been baptized by

John.

_On the contrary,_ It is written (Luke 3:21): "It came to pass, when

all the people were baptized, that Jesus also being baptized and

praying, heaven was opened."

_I answer that,_ For two reasons it behooved others besides Christ to

be baptized with the baptism of John. First, as Augustine says (Super

Joan., Tract. iv, v), "if Christ alone had been baptized with the

baptism of John, some would have said that John's baptism, with which

Christ was baptized, was more excellent than that of Christ, with

which others are baptized."

Secondly, because, as above stated, it behooved others to be prepared

by John's baptism for the baptism of Christ.

Reply Obj. 1: The baptism of John was instituted not only that Christ

might be baptized, but also for other reasons, as stated above (A.

1). And yet, even if it were instituted merely in order that Christ

might be baptized therewith, it was still necessary for others to

receive this baptism, in order to avoid the objection mentioned above.

Reply Obj. 2: Others who approached to be baptized by John could not,

indeed, confer anything on his baptism: yet neither did they receive

anything therefrom, save only the sign of penance.

Reply Obj. 3: This was the baptism of "penance," for which children

were not suited; wherefore they were not baptized therewith. But to

bring the nations into the way of salvation was reserved to Christ

alone, who is the "expectation of the nations," as we read Gen.

49:10. Indeed, Christ forbade the apostles to preach the Gospel to

the Gentiles before His Passion and Resurrection. Much less fitting,

therefore, was it for the Gentiles to be baptized by John.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 262 / 654 题