가톨릭 신앙생활 Q&A 코너

68. The Recipients of Baptism

68. 세례를 받는 자들

1. Baptism is necessary for each person. All mankind are required to be baptized. Without baptism, there is no salvation. For baptism makes a person a member of Christ, through whom alone salvation can be attained.

1. 세례는 각 인격(person)에게 필요합니다. 모든 인류는 세례를 받는 것이 요구됩니다. 세례 없이, 구원은 있지 않습니다.(*) 이는 세례가 한 인격을, 오직 그분만을 통하여 구원이 이루어질 수 있는 분이신, 그리스도의 한 지체(a member)로 만들기 때문입니다.

[내용 추가 일자: 2015년 5월 25일]

-----

(*) 번역자 주: 본인의 탓이 아니면서, (i) 예수 그리스도의 가르침을 알 수 없었던 시절 혹은 장소에서 살았던 자들에게, 혹은 (ii) 예수 그리스도의 가르침을 알지 못하는 시절 혹은 장소에서 살고 있는 자들에게, 그리스도교 세례 없이 구원이 있지 않다는 주장은 이 명제로부터 논리적 참으로서 결코 도출될 수 없음에 반드시 주목하라.

이에 대하여서는, 아래에 있는, 성 토마스 아퀴나스(St. Thomas Aquinas)의 신학 대전(Summa Theologica), IIIa, q68, Article 2. Whether a man can be saved without Baptism? 의 On the contrary 를 꼭 읽도록 하라. 

그리고, 많이 부족한 죄인인 필자의 생각에, 바로 이 성 토마스 아퀴나스의 가르침에 근거하여 제2차 바티칸 공의회(1962-1095년)에서 가톨릭 보편 교회 교도권이 구체적으로 공표한 것으로 생각되는, 소위 말하는, "익명의 그리스도인" 가르침에 대하여서는, 예를 들어, 다음의 글들을 또한 꼭 읽도록 하라:

http://ch.catholic.or.kr/pundang/4/518.htm

http://ch.catholic.or.kr/pundang/4/602.htm

-----

[이상, 내용 추가 끝]

2. To be saved, a man must have at least the baptism of desire. Baptism of blood has all the sacramental power of baptism of water, except for the imprinting of the character, and it remits all sin and the penalties due to sin. Baptism of desire remits sin and the eternal penalty due to it, but does not remit all the temporal penalty due.

2. 구하여지기 위하여(to be saved), 사람은 적어도 화세(火洗, the baptism of desire)를 가져야만 합니다. 혈세(血洗, the baptism of blood)는, 인호의 각인(the imprint of the character)을 제외하고, 수세(水洗, the baptism of water)의 성사적 힘 모두를 가지며, 그리고 이 세례는 죄와 죄에 기인하는 벌들 모두를 사합니다(remits). 화세(火洗)는 죄와 죄에 기인하는 영벌(eternal penalty)을 사하나, 그러나 응분의 잠벌(temporal penalty due) 모두를 사하지 못합니다.

3. Since baptism is necessary for salvation, it should be conferred promptly on infants, both because of the danger of death, and because infants have no ability to elicit a desire for baptism. Adults who wish to be baptized should be put through a time of instruction and probation so that they may receive the sacrament with understanding, reverence, and the firm will to discharge with fidelity the duties of the Christian life. Still, if adults be well instructed and disposed, they should not be made to wait for baptism. Nor should adult baptism be deferred during sickness, especially when there is danger of death.

3. 세례는 구원을 위하여 필요하기에, 세례는, 죽음의 위험 때문, 그리고 유아(infants)들이 세례를 받고자 하는 바람(desire)을 끌어낼(elicit) 능력을 가지지 못하기 때문, 이들 둘 다의 이유 때문에, 유아들에게 즉시 수여되어야만 합니다. 세례를 받기를 원하는 성장한 이(adults)들은, 그들이 그리스도인의 삶에 대한 이해(understanding), 공손한 태도(reverence), 그리고 그리스도인의 삶의 의무들을 충실하게 이행하고자 하는 확고한 의지(firm will)와 함께 이 성사를 받아들일 수 있도록 하기 위하여, 교육과 보호 관찰의 일정 기간(a time of instruction and probation)을 경험하게 하여야만 합니다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 성장한 이들이 잘 교육받았고 그리고 준비되었다면, 그들이 세례를 기다리도록 해서는 아니 됩니다. 또한 성장한 이들의 세례는 병 든 동안에, 특별히 죽음의 위험이 임박할 때에, 미루어져서는 아니 됩니다.

4. An adult sinner who has no repentance and no intention of abandoning his sin is not to be baptized. A sinner who is repentant and well resolved should be baptized.

4. 전혀 회개하지 않으며 그리고 자신의 죄를 포기할 의향이 전혀 없는, 성장한 이인 죄인(an adult sinner)은 세례를 받게 하여서는 아니 됩니다. 회개하는 그리고 충분히 결심한(well resolved) 죄인은 마땅히 세례를 받아야 합니다.

5. No kind of penance or work of satisfaction is to be imposed on an adult who is baptized, for baptism takes away all sin and all punishment due to sin. To impose a penance at baptism would be to dishonor the Passion and Death of Christ which make full satisfaction for all the sins of the person baptized.

5. 어떤 종류의 참회(penance) 혹은 보속 행위(work of satisfaction)도 세례를 받게 되는 성장한 이(an adult)에게 의무로서 부과되어서는 결코 아니 되는데, 이는 세례가 모든 죄와 죄에 기인하는 모든 벌을 제거하기 때문입니다. 세례에서 어떤 고해를 의무로서 부과하는 것은, 세례를 받는 자의 모든 죄들를 넉넉하게 속죄하는, 그리스도의 수난과 죽음이라는 명예를 손상시킬 것입니다. 

6. An adult who is to be baptized must have some sorrow for his sins, but he is not required to confess them, beyond the general confession implied in the words of the ritual, by which he renounces Satan and all his works and pomps.

6. 세례를 받게 될 성장한 이는 자신의 죄들에 대하여 다소의 후회/뉘우침(some sorrow)을 가져야 하나, 그러나 그는, 그것에 의하여 그가 사탄(Satan)과 그자의 일들 및 허식적인 것(pomps)들 모두를 포기하는, 세례 예식서(the ritual)의 단어(the words)들에 함축된 일반 고해(general confession)를 넘어서, 자신의 죄들을 고백하라고(confess) 요구되지 않습니다(is not required).(*)

-----
(*) 번역자 주:
(1) 따라서 우리는 죄들에 대한 고백(confession)이 세례의 "전제 조건", 즉 "필요 조건"이 아님을 알 수 있다. 이와 관련하여, 위의 제3항과 아래의 제8항의 가르침을 또한 참조하라.
(2) "후회/뉘우침(sorrow)" 이라는 신학적 용어의 정의(definition)는 다음의 글에 있다:
http://ch.catholic.or.kr/pundang/4/soh/1294.htm
-----

7. An adult to be baptized must have the intention of being baptized. Such a person seeks baptism at the hands of the Church; he asks to receive it; hence he expresses his intention of receiving it.

7. 세례를 받게 될 성장한 이(an adult)는 세례를 받고자 하는 의향을 가져야만 합니다. 그러한 자는 교회로부터 세례를 추구하며(seeks), 그리고 그는 그것을 받을 것을 청하며(asks), 그리하여 그 결과 그는 그것을 받고자 하는 자신의 의향을 표현합니다(expresses).

8. To receive grace, the person to be baptized must have faith. But even in the absence of faith, a person who intends to be baptized and undergoes the rite of baptism, is actually baptized, and is marked with the sacramental character.

8. 은총을 받기 위하여, 세례를 받게 될 이는 믿음(faith)을 가져야 합니다. 그러나 심지어 믿음(faith)이 없을 때에도, 세례를 받는 것을 의도하며 그리고 세례 예식을 경험하는 이는 현실태적으로(actually) 세례를 받게 되며, 그리고 성사적 인호로써 표시됩니다. 

9. Since infants are in original sin, they need baptism. For a person capable of incurring the guilt of sin, even original sin, is capable of receiving grace. Hence, infants are to be baptized. Not only does baptism confer its wondrous and indispensable benefits on the souls of children, but it also sets them in the way of Christian living at the very beginning of their lives, and thus gives greater assurance of their persevering than would be the case if their baptism were deferred.

9. 유아(infants)들은 원죄(original sin) 상태에 있기에, 그들은 세례를 필요로 합니다. 이는 죄의, 심지어 원죄의, 결점에 빠질 여지가 있는 자는 은총을 받을 여지가 있기 때문입니다. 따라서, 유아들은 세례를 받아야 합니다. 세례는 그것의 경이로운 그리고 필수불가결한 혜택들만을 자녀들의 영혼들에 수여하는 것이 아니라, 또한 그들의 삶들의 바로 그 시초에 그리스도인의 삶의 방식 안에 그들을 설정하며, 그리하여 그 결과, 그들의 세례가 늦추어졌을 때에 그러하였을 경우보다, 그들을 보호함에 있어서의 더 커다란 보증을 제공합니다.

10. Children of Jews and other unbelievers are not to bebaptized without their parents' consent. By natural justice, young children are under the rule and control of their parents. Besides, baptism is not conferred, according to the usage of the Church, on those who will have no normal opportunity of living the Christian life in conformity with the obligation imposed in baptism.

10. 유다인들과 다른 믿지 않는 자들의 자녀들은 그들의 부모들의 동의 없이 세례를 받게 하여서는 아니 됩니다. 자연적 정당성(natural justice)에 의하여, 어린 자녀들은 그들의 부모들의 규제와 통제 아래에 있습니다. 게다가, 세례는, 교회의 관습에 따르면, 세례에서 지워지는(imposed) 의무와의 일치 안에서 그리스도인의 삶을 살아 갈 정상적인 기회를 가지지 못할 자들에게 수여되지 않습니다.

11. A child cannot be baptized while it is yet in its mother's womb. {-This is no longer true. Modern methods in medicine and surgery make it feasible to convey water to the child in the womb, so that the baptism is at least probably valid. Such a baptism is licitly conferred, under conditions set by church law, when the child is unlikely to have a normal birth, or to live until birth.-}

11. 아직 자신의 어머니의 태 중에 있는 아이는 세례를 받을 수 없습니다. {- 이것은 더 이상 사실이 아닙니다. 의학 및 의술(medicine and surgery)에 있어 현대의 방법들은 태 중의 아이에게 세례수(洗禮水, the water)를 전달하는 것을 가능하게 하며, 그 결과 세례는 적어도 아마도 유효할 것입니다. 그러한 세례는, 해당 아이가 정상적인 출생을 할 가능성이 없거나, 혹은 출생 때까지 살아 있을 가능성이 없을 때에, 교회 법에 의하여 설정된 조건들 하에서, 합법적으로 수여됩니다. -}

12. Insane and imbecile persons are to be baptized, like infants, in the faith of the Church. A person who, during his normal life, manifests no desire to receive baptism, is not to bebaptized if he becomes insane. Yet an insane person may have lucid intervals during which he desires to be baptized; he is not to be refused. If he lapses into madness before the sacrament can be administered, the person baptizing should wait for the next period of sanity; if such an interval is not likely to recur, or if death threatens, the sacrament should be administered at once, despite the madness of the recipient. A person who is sane, but weak-minded, is to be treated as a normal person.

12. 정신 이상자들 혹은 정신 박약자들은(insane or imbecile persons), 유아들처럼, 교회의 믿음 안에서, 세례를 받게 되어야 할 것입니다. 자신의 정상적인 삶 동안에 세례를 받고자 하는 바람(desire)을 전혀 표명하지 않은 자는, 그가 정신 이상이 되었을 때에, 세례를 받게 하여서는 아니 됩니다. 그럼에도 불구하고 어떤 정신 이상인 자가 자신이 세례를 받고싶어하는 명료한 기간들을 가질 수도 있으며, 그리고 그는 거부되어서는 아니 됩니다. 세례 성사가 집전되기 전에 그가 미친 상태에 빠진다면, 세례 집전자는 다음의 제정신인 시기를 기다려야 하며, 그러나 그러한 기간이 다시 발생하지 않을 것 같거나, 혹은 죽음이 위협한다면, 세례를 받는 자의 미친 상태에도 불구하고, 이 성사는 즉시 집전되어야 합니다. 제정신의 그러나 우유부단한(weak-minded) 자는 정상적인 자로서 다루어져야 할 것입니다.

우리말 번역문 출처: http://club.catholic.or.kr/tourofsumma
영어본 원문 출처: http://www.catholictheology.info/summa-theologica/summa-part3.php?q=462

====================

출처 1: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4068.htm
출처 2: http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0023/__PER.HTM

출처 3: http://www.logicmuseum.com/authors/aquinas/summa/Summa-III-66-72.htm#q68a2sc

신학 대전 IIIa

Question 68. Those who receive Baptism

질문 68. 세례를 받는 자들

We have now to consider those who receive Baptism; concerning which
there are twelve points of inquiry:

우리는 이제 세례를 받는 자들에 대하여 고찰하여야 하며, 이것과 관련하여 질문에 있어서의 열두 개의 요지들이 다음과 같이 있습니다:

1. Are all bound to receive Baptism?
2. Can a man be saved without Baptism?
3. Should Baptism be deferred?
4. Should sinners be baptized?
5. Should works of satisfaction be enjoined on sinners that have been baptized?
6. Is Confession of sins necessary?
7. Is an intention required on the part of the one baptized?
8. Is faith necessary?
9. Should infants be baptized?
10. Should the children of Jews be baptized against the will of their parents?
11. Should anyone be baptized in the mother's womb?
12. Should madmen and imbeciles be baptized?

Article 1. Whether all are bound to receive Baptism?

Objection 1. It seems that not all are bound to receive Baptism. For Christ did not narrow man's road to salvation. But before Christ's coming men could be saved without Baptism: therefore also after Christ's coming.

Objection 2. Further, Baptism seems to have been instituted principally as a remedy for original sin. Now, since a man who is baptized is without original sin, it seems that he cannot transmit it to his children. Therefore it seems that the children of those who have been baptized, should not themselves be baptized.

Objection 3. Further, Baptism is given in order that a man may, through grace, be cleansed from sin. But those who are sanctified in the womb, obtain this without Baptism. Therefore they are not bound to receive Baptism.

On the contrary, It is written (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Again it is stated in De Eccl. Dogm. xli, that "we believe the way of salvation to be open to those only who are baptized."

I answer that, Men are bound to that without which they cannot obtain salvation. Now it is manifest that no one can obtain salvation but through Christ; wherefore the Apostle says (Romans 5:18): "As by the offense of one unto all men unto condemnation; so also by the justice of one, unto all men unto justification of life." But for this end is Baptism conferred on a man, that being regenerated thereby, he may be incorporated in Christ, by becoming His member: wherefore it is written (Galatians 3:27): "As many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ." Consequently it is manifest that all are bound to be baptized: and that without Baptism there is no salvation for men.

Reply to Objection 1. At no time, not even before the coming of Christ, could men be saved unless they became members of Christ: because, as it is written (Acts 4:12), "there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved." But before Christ's coming, men were incorporated in Christ by faith in His future coming: of which faith circumcision was the "seal," as the Apostle calls it (Romans 4:11): whereas before circumcision was instituted, men were incorporated in Christ by "faith alone," as Gregory says (Moral. iv), together with the offering of sacrifices, by means of which the Fathers of old made profession of their faith. Again, since Christ's coming, men are incorporated in Christ by faith; according to Ephesians 3:17: "That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts." But faith in a thing already present is manifested by a sign different from that by which it was manifested when that thing was yet in the future: just as we use other parts of the verb, to signify the present, the past, and the future. Consequently although the sacrament itself of Baptism was not always necessary for salvation, yet faith, of which Baptism is the sacrament, was always necessary.

Reply to Objection 2. As we have stated in I-II, 81, 3, ad 2, those who are baptized are renewed in spirit by Baptism, while their body remains subject to the oldness of sin, according to Romans 8:10: "The body, indeed, is dead because of sin, but the spirit liveth because of justification." Wherefore Augustine (Contra Julian. vi) proves that "not everything that is in man is baptized." Now it is manifest that in carnal generation man does not beget in respect of his soul, but in respect of his body. Consequently the children of those who are baptized are born with original sin; wherefore they need to be baptized.

Reply to Objection 3. Those who are sanctified in the womb, receive indeed grace which cleanses them from original sin, but they do not therefore receive the character, by which they are conformed to Christ. Consequently, if any were to be sanctified in the womb now, they would need to be baptized, in order to be conformed to Christ's other members by receiving the character.

Article 2. Whether a man can be saved without Baptism?

Objection 1. It seems that no man can be saved without Baptism. For our Lord said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." But those alone are saved who enter God's kingdom. Therefore none can be saved without Baptism, by which a man is born again of water and the Holy Ghost.

Objection 2. Further, in the book De Eccl. Dogm. xli, it is written: "We believe that no catechumen, though he die in his good works, will have eternal life, except he suffer martyrdom, which contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism." But if it were possible for anyone to be saved without Baptism, this would be the case specially with catechumens who are credited with good works, for they seem to have the "faith that worketh by charity" (Galatians 5:6). Therefore it seems that none can be saved without Baptism.

Objection 3. Further, as stated above (1; 65, 4), the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation. Now that is necessary "without which something cannot be" (Metaph. v). Therefore it seems that none can obtain salvation without Baptism.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Super Levit. lxxxiv) that "some have received the invisible sanctification without visible sacraments, and to their profit; but though it is possible to have the visible sanctification, consisting in a visible sacrament, without the invisible sanctification, it will be to no profit." Since, therefore, the sacrament of Baptism pertains to the visible sanctification, it seems that a man can obtain salvation without the sacrament of Baptism, by means of the invisible sanctification.

이와는 달리, 아우구스티노(Augustine)는 "어떤 이들은 가시적 성사(visible sacraments)들 없이 비가시적 성화(invisible sanctification)를 이미 받았으며, 그리고 그들에게 도움이 됩니다만(to their profit); 그러나 비록, 비가시적 성화 없이, 한 개의 가시적 성사를 주된 부분으로 가지는, 가시적 성화(visible sanctification)를 가지는 것이 가능하기는 하나, 그것은 장차 아무런 도움이 되지 않을 것입니다" 라고 말합니다(Super Levit. lxxxiv). 그러므로, 세례 성사가 가시적 성화에 적절하기/처음부터 끝까지 유지되기(pertains to) 때문에, 한 사람(a man)은, 비가시적 성화에 의하여, 세례 성사 없이 구원을 획득할 수 있는 것 같습니다.

I answer that, The sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; as is the case with those who neither are baptized, nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacrament, in regard to those who have the use of the free-will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.

Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of "faith that worketh by charity," whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: "I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the grace he prayed for."

Reply to Objection 1. As it is written (1 Samuel 16:7), "man seeth those things that appear, but the Lord beholdeth the heart." Now a man who desires to be "born again of water and the Holy Ghost" by Baptism, is regenerated in heart though not in body. thus the Apostle says (Romans 2:29) that "the circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God."

Reply to Objection 2. No man obtains eternal life unless he be free from all guilt and debt of punishment. Now this plenary absolution is given when a man receives Baptism, or suffers martyrdom: for which reason is it stated that martyrdom "contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism," i.e. as to the full deliverance from guilt and punishment. Suppose, therefore, a catechumen to have the desire for Baptism (else he could not be said to die in his good works, which cannot be without "faith that worketh by charity"), such a one, were he to die, would not forthwith come to eternal life, but would suffer punishment for his past sins, "but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire" as is stated 1 Corinthians 3:15.

Reply to Objection 3. The sacrament of Baptism is said to be necessary for salvation in so far as man cannot be saved without, at least, Baptism of desire; "which, with God, counts for the deed" (Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 57).

Article 3. Whether Baptism should be deferred?

Objection 1. It seems that Baptism should be deferred. For Pope Leo says (Epist. xvi): "Two seasons," i.e. Easter and Whitsuntide, "are fixed by the Roman Pontiff for the celebration of Baptism. Wherefore we admonish your Beatitude not to add any other days to this custom." Therefore it seems that Baptism should be conferred not at once, but delayed until the aforesaid seasons.

Objection 2. Further, we read in the decrees of the Council of Agde (Can. xxxiv): "If Jews whose bad faith often "returns to the vomit," wish to submit to the Law of the Catholic Church, let them for eight months enter the porch of the church with the catechumens; and if they are found to come in good faith then at last they may deserve the grace of Baptism." Therefore men should not be baptized at once, and Baptism should be deferred for a certain fixed time.

Objection 3. Further, as we read in Isaiah 27:9, "this is all the fruit, that the sin . . . should be taken away." Now sin seems to be taken away, or at any rate lessened, if Baptism be deferred. First, because those who sin after Baptism, sin more grievously, according to Hebrews 10:29: "How much more, do you think, he deserveth worse punishments, who hath . . . esteemed the blood of the testament," i.e. Baptism, "unclean, by which he was sanctified?" Secondly, because Baptism takes away past, but not future, sins: wherefore the more it is deferred, the more sins it takes away. Therefore it seems that Baptism should be deferred for a long time.

On the contrary, It is written (Sirach 5:8): "Delay not to be converted to the Lord, and defer it not from day to day." But the perfect conversion to God is of those who are regenerated in Christ by Baptism. Therefore Baptism should not be deferred from day to day.

I answer that, In this matter we must make a distinction and see whether those who are to be baptized are children or adults. For if they be children, Baptism should not be deferred. First, because in them we do not look for better instruction or fuller conversion. Secondly, because of the danger of death, for no other remedy is available for them besides the sacrament of Baptism.

On the other hand, adults have a remedy in the mere desire for Baptism, as stated above (Article 2). And therefore Baptism should not be conferred on adults as soon as they are converted, but it should be deferred until some fixed time. First, as a safeguard to the Church, lest she be deceived through baptizing those who come to her under false pretenses, according to 1 John 4:1: "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, if they be of God." And those who approach Baptism are put to this test, when their faith and morals are subjected to proof for a space of time. Secondly, this is needful as being useful for those who are baptized; for they require a certain space of time in order to be fully instructed in the faith, and to be drilled in those things that pertain to the Christian mode of life. Thirdly, a certain reverence for the sacrament demands a delay whereby men are admitted to Baptism at the principal festivities, viz. of Easter and Pentecost, the result being that they receive the sacrament with greater devotion.

There are, however, two reasons for forgoing this delay. First, when those who are to be baptized appear to be perfectly instructed in the faith and ready for Baptism; thus, Philip baptized the Eunuch at once (Acts 8); and Peter, Cornelius and those who were with him (Acts 10). Secondly, by reason of sickness or some kind of danger of death. Wherefore Pope Leo says (Epist. xvi): "Those who are threatened by death, sickness, siege, persecution, or shipwreck, should be baptized at any time." Yet if a man is forestalled by death, so as to have no time to receive the sacrament, while he awaits the season appointed by the Church, he is saved, yet "so as by fire," as stated above (2, ad 2).

Nevertheless he sins if he defer being baptized beyond the time appointed by the Church, except this be for an unavoidable cause and with the permission of the authorities of the Church. But even this sin, with his other sins, can be washed away by his subsequent contrition, which takes the place of Baptism, as stated above (Question 66, Article 11).

Reply to Objection 1. This decree of Pope Leo, concerning the celebration of Baptism at two seasons, is to be understood "with the exception of the danger of death" (which is always to be feared in children) as stated above.

Reply to Objection 2. This decree concerning the Jews was for a safeguard to the Church, lest they corrupt the faith of simple people, if they be not fully converted. Nevertheless, as the same passage reads further on, "if within the appointed time they are threatened with danger of sickness, they should be baptized."

Reply to Objection 3. Baptism, by the grace which it bestows, removes not only past sins, but hinders the commission of future sins. Now this is the point to be considered--that men may not sin: it is a secondary consideration that their sins be less grievous, or that their sins be washed away, according to 1 John 2:1-2: "My little children, these things I write to you, that you may not sin. But if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just; and He is the propitiation for our sins."

Article 4. Whether sinners should be baptized?

제4조. 죄인들이 세례를 받아야만 하는지요?

Objection 1. It seems that sinners should be baptized. For it is written (Zechariah 13:1): "In that day there shall be a fountain open to the House of David, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem: for the washing of the sinner and of the unclean woman": and this is to be understood of the fountain of Baptism. Therefore it seems that the sacrament of Baptism should be offered even to sinners.

Objection 2. Further, our Lord said (Matthew 9:12): "They that are in health need not a physician, but they that are ill." But they that are ill are sinners. Therefore since Baptism is the remedy of Christ the physician of our souls, it seems that this sacrament should be offered to sinners.

Objection 3. Further, no assistance should be withdrawn from sinners. But sinners who have been baptized derive spiritual assistance from the very character of Baptism, since it is a disposition to grace. Therefore it seems that the sacrament of Baptism should be offered to sinners.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Serm. clxix): "He Who created thee without thee, will not justify thee without thee." But since a sinner's will is ill-disposed, he does not co-operate with God. Therefore it is useless to employ Baptism as a means of justification.

이와는 달리, 아우구스티노(Augustine)는 다음과 같이 말합니다: "그대들 없이 그대들을 창조하셨던 당신께서는, 그대들 없이 그대들을 의롭게 하지 않으실 것입니다." (Serm. clxix). 그러나 죄인의 의지는 마음가짐에 있어 멀리(ill-disposed) 있기에, 그는 하느님과 협조하지 않습니다. 그러므로, 의화(justification)의 한 수단으로서 세례를 가하는(employ) 것은 아무 소용이 없습니다. 

I answer that, A man may be said to be a sinner in two ways. First, on account of the stain and the debt of punishment incurred in the past: and on sinners in this sense the sacrament of Baptism should be conferred, since it is instituted specially for this purpose, that by it the uncleanness of sin may be washed away, according to Ephesians 5:26: "Cleansing it by the laver of water in the word of life."

저는 다음과 같이 답변합니다: 사람은 두 가지 방식으로 죄인이라고 말해질 것입니다. 첫 번째, 과거에 발생하였던 벌의 얼룩과 빚 때문에, 그리고 이러한 의미에 있는 죄인들에 대하여 세례는 수여되어야만 하는데, 왜냐하면 이 성사가, "교회를 말씀과 더불어 물로 씻어 깨끗하게 하셔서" 라는 에페소서 5,26에 따라, 이 성사에 의하여 죄의 부정함이 닦아내어질 수도 있다는 바로 이 목적 때문에, 특별히 시행되기 때문입니다.

Secondly, a man may be called a sinner because he wills to sin and purposes to remain in sin: and on sinners in this sense the sacrament of Baptism should not be conferred. First, indeed, because by Baptism men are incorporated in Christ, according to Galatians 3:27: "As many of you as have been baptized in Christ, have put on Christ." Now so long as a man wills to sin, he cannot be united to Christ, according to 2 Corinthians 6:14: "What participation hath justice with injustice?" Wherefore Augustine says in his book on Penance (Serm. cccli) that "no man who has the use of free-will can begin the new life, except he repent of his former life." Secondly, because there should be nothing useless in the works of Christ and of the Church. Now that is useless which does not reach the end to which it is ordained; and, on the other hand, no one having the will to sin can, at the same time, be cleansed from sin, which is the purpose of Baptism; for this would be to combine two contradictory things. Thirdly, because there should be no falsehood in the sacramental signs. Now a sign is false if it does not correspond with the thing signified. But the very fact that a man presents himself to be cleansed by Baptism, signifies that he prepares himself for the inward cleansing: while this cannot be the case with one who purposes to remain in sin. Therefore it is manifest that on such a man the sacrament of Baptism is not to be conferred.

두 번째로, 사람은, 그가 죄를 짓고자 의도하고 그리고 죄 안에 머물러 있고자 작정하기 때문에, 죄인이라고 불릴 수도 있으며, 그리고 이러한 의미에 있는 죄인들에 대하여 세례성사는 수여되지 말하야만 합니다. 첫 번째, 실제로, 왜냐하면, "그리스도와 하나 되는 세례를 받은 여러분은 다 그리스도를 입었습니다" 라는 갈라티아서 3,27에 따라, 세례성사에 의하여 사람들이 그리스도와 결합되기 때문입니다. 그런데 사람이 죄를 짓고자 의도하는 한, "의로움과 불법이 어떻게 짝을 이룰 수 있겠습니까?" 라는 2코린토 6,14에 따라, 그는 그리스도께 결합될 수 없습니다. 그런 이유로 아우구스티노(Augustine)는 고해(Penance)에 대한 자신의 책 (Serm. cccli) 에서 다음과 같이 말합니다: "자유 의지를 사용하는 능력이 있는 어떤 사람도, 그가 자신의 이전의 삶에 대하여 회개하지(repent) 않는다면(except), 새로운 삶을 시작할 수 없습니다." 두 번째로, 그리스도의 그리고 교회의 위업들에는 쓸모없는 어떠한 것도 없어야 하기 때문입니다. 그런데 자신이 명해진 바로 그 목적(end)에 도달하지 못하는 것은 쓸모없으며, 그리고, 다른 한편으로, 죄를 짓고자 하는 의지를 가진 자 어느 누구도, 동시에, 세례성사의 목적인, 죄로부터 깨끗해질 수 없는데, 이는 이런 일은 두 개의 모순된 사물들을 결합하는 것일 것이기 때문입니다. 세 번째로, 성사적 표징(sacramental signs)들에 어떠한 그릇됨도 있지 말하야 하기 때문입니다. 그런데 어떤 표징(a sign)은, 만약에 나타내어지는 바로 그 사물에 이 표징이 대응하지 못한다면, 그릇된(false) 것입니다. 그러나 사람이 자기 자신을 세례에 의하여 깨끗하게 되고자 제시한다는 바로 그 사실은, 그가 내적인 씻음(inward cleansing)을 위하여 스스로 준비하고 있음을 나타내는데, 이와는 달리 죄에 머물러 있고자 작정하는 자에 대하여서는 이것은 그러한 경우가 아닙니다. 그러므로 그러한 사람에 대하여 세례성사가 수여되지 말하야만함은 명백합니다.

Reply to Objection 1. The words quoted are to be understood of those sinners whose will is set on renouncing sin.

Reply to Objection 2. The physician of souls, i.e. Christ, works in two ways. First, inwardly, by Himself: and thus He prepares man's will so that it wills good and hates evil. Secondly, He works through ministers, by the outward application of the sacraments: and in this way His work consists in perfecting what was begun outwardly. Therefore the sacrament of Baptism is not to be conferred save on those in whom there appears some sign of their interior conversion: just as neither is bodily medicine given to a sick man, unless he show some sign of life.

Reply to Objection 3. Baptism is the sacrament of faith. Now dead faith does not suffice for salvation; nor is it the foundation, but living faith alone, "that worketh by charity" (Galatians 5:6), as Augustine says (De Fide et oper.). Neither, therefore, can the sacrament of Baptism give salvation to a man whose will is set on sinning, and hence expels the form of faith. Moreover, the impression of the baptismal character cannot dispose a man for grace as long as he retains the will to sin; for "God compels no man to be virtuous," as Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii).

Article 5. Whether works of satisfaction should be enjoined on sinners that have been baptized?

Objection 1. It seems that works of satisfaction should be enjoined on sinners that have been baptized. For God's justice seems to demand that a man should be punished for every sin of his, according to Ecclesiastes 12:14: "All things that are done, God will bring into judgment." But works of satisfaction are enjoined on sinners in punishment of past sins. Therefore it seems that works of satisfaction should be enjoined on sinners that have been baptized.

Objection 2. Further, by means of works of satisfaction sinners recently converted are drilled into righteousness, and are made to avoid the occasions of sin: "for satisfaction consists in extirpating the causes of vice, and closing the doors to sin" (De Eccl. Dogm. iv). But this is most necessary in the case of those who have been baptized recently. Therefore it seems that works of satisfaction should be enjoined on sinners.

Objection 3. Further, man owes satisfaction to God not less than to his neighbor. But if those who were recently baptized have injured their neighbor, they should be told to make reparation to God by works of penance.

On the contrary, Ambrose commenting on Romans 11:29: "The gifts and the calling of God are without repentance," says: "The grace of God requires neither sighs nor groans in Baptism, nor indeed any work at all, but faith alone; and remits all, gratis."

I answer that, As the Apostle says (Romans 6:3-4), "all we who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in His death: for we are buried together with Him, by Baptism unto death"; which is to say that by Baptism man is incorporated in the very death of Christ. Now it is manifest from what has been said above (48, 2,4; 49, 3) that Christ's death satisfied sufficiently for sins, "not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world," according to 1 John 2:2. Consequently no kind of satisfaction should be enjoined on one who is being baptized, for any sins whatever: and this would be to dishonor the Passion and death of Christ, as being insufficient for the plenary satisfaction for the sins of those who were to be baptized.

Reply to Objection 1. As Augustine says in his book on Infant Baptism (De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i), "the effect of Baptism is to make those, who are baptized, to be incorporated in Christ as His members." Wherefore the very pains of Christ were satisfactory for the sins of those who were to be baptized; just as the pain of one member can be satisfactory for the sin of another member. Hence it is written (Isaiah 53:4): "Surely He hath borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows."

Reply to Objection 2. Those who have been lately baptized should be drilled into righteousness, not by penal, but by "easy works, so as to advance to perfection by taking exercise, as infants by taking milk," as a gloss says on Psalm 130:2: "As a child that is weaned is towards his mother." For this reason did our Lord excuse His disciples from fasting when they were recently converted, as we read in Matthew 9:14-15: and the same is written 1 Peter 2:2: "As new-born babes desire . . . milk . . . that thereby you may grow unto salvation."

Reply to Objection 3. To restore what has been ill taken from one's neighbor, and to make satisfaction for wrong done to him, is to cease from sin: for the very fact of retaining what belongs to another and of not being reconciled to one's neighbor, is a sin. Wherefore those who are baptized should be enjoined to make satisfaction to their neighbor, as also to desist from sin. But they are not to be enjoined to suffer any punishment for past sins.

Article 6. Whether sinners who are going to be baptized are bound to confess their sins?

제6조 세례를 받게 될 죄인들이 자신들의 죄들을 고백하도록 요구되는지요?

Objection 1. It seems that sinners who are going to be baptized are bound to confess their sins. For it is written (Matthew 3:6) that many "were baptized" by John "in the Jordan confessing their sins." But Christ's Baptism is more perfect than John's. Therefore it seems that there is yet greater reason why they who are about to receive Christ's Baptism should confess their sins.

Objection 2. Further, it is written (Proverbs 28:13): "He that hideth his sins, shall not prosper; but he that shall confess and forsake them, shall obtain mercy." Now for this is a man baptized, that he may obtain mercy for his sins. Therefore those who are going to be baptized should confess their sins.

Objection 3. Further, Penance is required before Baptism, according to Acts 2:38: "Do penance and be baptized every one of you." But confession is a part of Penance. Therefore it seems that confession of sins should take place before Baptism.

On the contrary, Confession of sins should be sorrowful: thus Augustine says (De Vera et Falsa Poenit. xiv): "All these circumstances should be taken into account and deplored." Now, as Ambrose says on Romans 11:29, "the grace of God requires neither sighs nor groans in Baptism." Therefore confession of sins should not be required of those who are going to be baptized. 

이와는 달리, 죄들의 고백은 뉘우침으로써 특징지어져야만 합니다(should be sorrowful): 이러한 방식으로 아우구스티노(Augustine)는 다음과 같이 말합니다: "이러한 여건들 모두는 고려되고 그리고 후회하게 되어야만 합니다." (De Vera et Falsa Poenit. xiv). 그런데, 암브로시오(Ambrose)는 로마서 11,29에 대하여 다음과 같이 말합니다: "하느님의 은총은 세례에서 한숨(sighs)들 혹은 신음소리(groans)들 어느 것도 요구하지 않습니다." 그러므로 죄들에 대한 고백은 세례를 받고자 하는 자들에 대하여 요구되지 말아야만 합니다(should not be required of). 

I answer that, Confession of sins is twofold. One is made inwardly to God: and such confession of sins is required before Baptism: in other words, man should call his sins to mind and sorrow for them; since "he cannot begin the new life, except he repent of his former life," as Augustine says in his book on Penance (Serm. cccli). The other is the outward confession of sins, which is made to a priest; and such confession is not required before Baptism. First, because this confession, since it is directed to the person of the minister, belongs to the sacrament of Penance, which is not required before Baptism, which is the door of all the sacraments. Secondly, because the reason why a man makes outward confession to a priest, is that the priest may absolve him from his sins, and bind him to works of satisfaction, which should not be enjoined on the baptized, as stated above (Article 5). Moreover those who are being baptized do not need to be released from their sins by the keys of the Church, since all are forgiven them in Baptism. Thirdly, because the very act of confession made to a man is penal, by reason of the shame it inflicts on the one confessing: whereas no exterior punishment is enjoined on a man who is being baptized.

저는 다음과 같이 답변합니다: 죄들에 대한 고백은 두 겹(twofold)입니다. 그 하나는 하느님을 향하여 내면적으로(inwardly) 이루어지며, 그리고 죄들에 대한 그러한 고백은 세례 전에 요구됩니다, 달리 말하여, 사람은 자신의 죄들을 생각해 내야 하며 그리고 그들에 대하여 뉘우쳐야만 하는데, 이는, 아우구스티노가 고해(Penance)에 대한 자신의 책(Serm. cccli)에서 말하듯이, "그는, 자신의 이전의 삶에 대하여 회개하지(repent) 않는다면(except), 새로운 삶을 시작할 수 없기 때문입니다." 다른 하나는, 사제를 향하여 하게 되는, 죄들에 대한 외면적 고백(outward confession)이며, 그리고 그러한 고백은 세례 전에 요구되지 않습니다. 첫 번째, 이러한 고백은, 그것이 집전자라는 인격에게 향하게 되기에, 세례 전에 요구되지 않는, 모든 성사들의 문인, 고해성사에 속하기 때문입니다. 두 번째로, 사람이 사제에게 외면적 고백을 하는 이유가 자신의 죄들로부터 그를 사면해 주고(absolve), 그리고 그를, 위에서 (제5조) 서술하였듯이, 세례를 받는 자에게 의무로서 부과되지 말아야만 하는, 보속(satisfaction)의 일들에 묶을 수도 있음에 있기 때문입니다. 더구나, 세례를 받게 될 자들은 교회의 열쇠들에 의하여 자신들의 죄들로부터 석방되어야 할 필요가 없는데, 이는 모든 것 자체가(them) 세례에서 용서되기 때문입니다. 세 번째로, 어떤 사람에게 하게 되는 고백의 바로 그 행위가 형벌에 상당하며, 수치의 이유에 의하여 그러한 행위가 고백을 하는 자에게 상처를 가하기 때문인데, 이러한 까닭으로 어떠한 외적인 처벌(exterior punishment)도 세례를 받을 사람에게 의무로서 부과되지 않습니다.
  
Therefore no special confession of sins is required of those who are being baptized; but that general confession suffices which they make when in accordance with the Church's ritual they "renounce Satan and all his works." And in this sense a gloss explains Matthew 3:6, saying that in John's Baptism "those who are going to be baptized learn that they should confess their sins and promise to amend their life."

그러므로 죄들에 대한 어떤 특별한 고백도 세례를 받을 자들에 대하여 요구되지 않으며, 다만 교회의 예식과 일치하여 그들이 "사탄과 그의 일들 모두를 끊을" 때에 그들이 하는 바로 그 일반 고해(general confession)이면 충분합니다. 그리고 바로 이러한 의미에 있어, 어떤 주석은, 세례자 요한의 세례에서 "세례를 받게 될 자들은, 그들이 자신들의 죄들을 고백하여야 하고 그리고 자신들의 삶을 바로잡아야만 함을, 배웁니다" 라고 말함으로써, 마태오 복음서 3,6에 대하여 설명합니다.

If, however, any persons about to be baptized, wish, out of devotion, to confess their sins, their confession should be heard; not for the purpose of enjoining them to do satisfaction, but in order to instruct them in the spiritual life as a remedy against their vicious habits.

그러나 세례를 곧 받게 될 자 누구든지, 신심에 기인하여, 자신들의 죄들을 고백하기를 원한다면, 그들의 고백은 들어주어야만 하는데, 이는 그들에게 보속을 행할 것을 의무로서 부과하기 위한 목적 때문이 아니라, 자신들의 나쁜 습관들에 반하는 어떤 치료로서 영적인 생명 안에서 그들을 가르치기 위하여서 입니다. 

Reply to Objection 1. Sins were not forgiven in John's Baptism, which, however, was the Baptism of Penance. Consequently it was fitting that those who went to receive that Baptism, should confess their sins, so that they should receive a penance in proportion to their sins. But Christ's Baptism is without outward penance, as Ambrose says (on Romans 11:29); and therefore there is no comparison.

Reply to Objection 2. It is enough that the baptized make inward confession to God, and also an outward general confession, for them to "prosper and obtain mercy": and they need no special outward confession, as stated above.

Reply to Objection 3. Confession is a part of sacramental Penance, which is not required before Baptism, as stated above: but the inward virtue of Penance is required.

Article 7. Whether the intention of receiving the sacrament of Baptism is required on the part of the one baptized?

Objection 1. It seems that the intention of receiving the sacrament of Baptism is not required on the part of the one baptized. For the one baptized is, as it were, "patient" in the sacrament. But an intention is required not on the part of the patient but on the part of the agent. Therefore it seems that the intention of receiving Baptism is not required on the part of the one baptized.

Objection 2. Further, if what is necessary for Baptism be omitted, the Baptism must be repeated; for instance, if the invocation of the Trinity be omitted, as stated above (66, 9, ad 3). But it does not seem that a man should be rebaptized through not having had the intention of receiving Baptism: else, since his intention cannot be proved, anyone might ask to be baptized again on account of his lack of intention. Therefore it seems that no intention is required on the part of the one baptized, in order that he receive the sacrament.

Objection 3. Further, Baptism is given as a remedy for original sin. But original sin is contracted without the intention of the person born. Therefore, seemingly, Baptism requires no intention on the part of the person baptized.

On the contrary, According to the Church's ritual, those who are to be baptized ask of the Church that they may receive Baptism: and thus they express their intention of receiving the sacrament.

I answer that, By Baptism a man dies to the old life of sin, and begins a certain newness of life, according to Romans 6:4: "We are buried together with" Christ "by Baptism into death; that, as Christ is risen from the dead . . . so we also may walk in newness of life." Consequently, just as, according to Augustine (Serm. cccli), he who has the use of free-will, must, in order to die to the old life, "will to repent of his former life"; so must he, of his own will, intend to lead a new life, the beginning of which is precisely the receiving of the sacrament. Therefore on the part of the one baptized, it is necessary for him to have the will or intention of receiving the sacrament.

Reply to Objection 1. When a man is justified by Baptism, his passiveness is not violent but voluntary: wherefore it is necessary for him to intend to receive that which is given him.

Reply to Objection 2. If an adult lack the intention of receiving the sacrament, he must be rebaptized. But if there be doubt about this, the form to be used should be: "If thou art not baptized, I baptize thee."

Reply to Objection 3. Baptism is a remedy not only against original, but also against actual sins, which are caused by our will and intention.

Article 8. Whether faith is required on the part of the one baptized?

Objection 1. It seems that faith is required on the part of the one baptized. For the sacrament of Baptism was instituted by Christ. But Christ, in giving the form of Baptism, makes faith to precede Baptism (Mark 16:16): "He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved." Therefore it seems that without faith there can be no sacrament of Baptism.

Objection 2. Further, nothing useless is done in the sacraments of the Church. But according to the Church's ritual, the man who comes to be baptized is asked concerning his faith: "Dost thou believe in God the Father Almighty?" Therefore it seems that faith is required for Baptism.

Objection 3. Further, the intention of receiving the sacrament is required for Baptism. But this cannot be without right faith, since Baptism is the sacrament of right faith: for thereby men "are incorporated in Christ," as Augustine says in his book on Infant Baptism (De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i); and this cannot be without right faith, according to Ephesians 3:17: "That Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts." Therefore it seems that a man who has not right faith cannot receive the sacrament of Baptism.

Objection 4. Further, unbelief is a most grievous sin, as we have shown in the II-II, 10, 3. But those who remain in sin should not be baptized: therefore neither should those who remain in unbelief.

On the contrary, Gregory writing to the bishop Quiricus says: "We have learned from the ancient tradition of the Fathers that when heretics, baptized in the name of the Trinity, come back to Holy Church, they are to be welcomed to her bosom, either with the anointing of chrism, or the imposition of hands, or the mere profession of faith." But such would not be the case if faith were necessary for a man to receive Baptism.

I answer that, As appears from what has been said above (63, 6; 66, 9) Baptism produces a twofold effect in the soul, viz. the character and grace. Therefore in two ways may a thing be necessary for Baptism. First, as something without which grace, which is the ultimate effect of the sacrament, cannot be had. And thus right faith is necessary for Baptism, because, as it appears from Romans 3:22, the justice of God is by faith of Jesus Christ.

Secondly, something is required of necessity for Baptism, because without it the baptismal character cannot be imprinted And thus right faith is not necessary in the one baptized any more than in the one who baptizes: provided the other conditions are fulfilled which are essential to the sacrament. For the sacrament is not perfected by the righteousness of the minister or of the recipient of Baptism, but by the power of God.

Reply to Objection 1. Our Lord is speaking there of Baptism as bringing us to salvation by giving us sanctifying grace: which of course cannot be without right faith: wherefore He says pointedly: "He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved."

Reply to Objection 2. The Church's intention in Baptizing men is that they may be cleansed from sin, according to Isaiah 27:9: "This is all the fruit, that the sin . . . should be taken away." And therefore, as far as she is concerned, she does not intend to give Baptism save to those who have right faith, without which there is no remission of sins. And for this reason she asks those who come to be baptized whether they believe. If, on the contrary, anyone, without right faith, receive Baptism outside the Church, he does not receive it unto salvation. Hence Augustine says (De Baptism. contr. Donat. iv): "From the Church being compared to Paradise we learn that men can receive her Baptism even outside her fold, but that elsewhere none can receive or keep the salvation of the blessed."

Reply to Objection 3. Even he who has not right faith on other points, can have right faith about the sacrament of Baptism: and so he is not hindered from having the intention of receiving that sacrament. Yet even if he think not aright concerning this sacrament, it is enough, for the receiving of the sacrament, that he should have a general intention of receiving Baptism, according as Christ instituted, and as the Church bestows it.

Reply to Objection 4. Just as the sacrament of Baptism is not to be conferred on a man who is unwilling to give up his other sins, so neither should it be given to one who is unwilling to renounce his unbelief. Yet each receives the sacrament if it be conferred on him, though not unto salvation.

Article 9. Whether children should be baptized?

Objection 1. It seems that children should not be baptized. For the intention to receive the sacrament is required in one who is being baptized, as stated above (Article 7). But children cannot have such an intention, since they have not the use of free-will. Therefore it seems that they cannot receive the sacrament of Baptism.

Objection 2. Further, Baptism is the sacrament of faith, as stated above (39, 5; 66, 1, ad 1). But children have not faith, which demands an act of the will on the part of the believer, as Augustine says (Super Joan. xxvi). Nor can it be said that their salvation is implied in the faith of their parents; since the latter are sometimes unbelievers, and their unbelief would conduce rather to the damnation of their children. Therefore it seems that children cannot be baptized.

Objection 3. Further, it is written (1 Peter 3:21) that "Baptism saveth" men; "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the examination of a good conscience towards God." But children have no conscience, either good or bad, since they have not the use of reason: nor can they be fittingly examined, since they understand not. Therefore children should not be baptized.

On the contrary, Dionysius says (Eccl. Hier. iii): "Our heavenly guides," i.e. the Apostles, "approved of infants being admitted to Baptism."

I answer that, As the Apostle says (Romans 5:17), "if by one man's offense death reigned through one," namely Adam, "much more they who receive abundance of grace, and of the gift, and of justice, shall reign in life through one, Jesus Christ." Now children contract original sin from the sin of Adam; which is made clear by the fact that they are under the ban of death, which "passed upon all" on account of the sin of the first man, as the Apostle says in the same passage (Romans 5:12). Much more, therefore, can children receive grace through Christ, so as to reign in eternal life. But our Lord Himself said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Consequently it became necessary to baptize children, that, as in birth they incurred damnation through Adam so in a second birth they might obtain salvation through Christ. Moreover it was fitting that children should receive Baptism, in order that being reared from childhood in things pertaining to the Christian mode of life, they may the more easily persevere therein; according to Proverbs 22:5: "A young man according to his way, even when he is old, he will not depart from it." This reason is also given by Dionysius (Eccl. Hier. iii).

Reply to Objection 1. The spiritual regeneration effected by Baptism is somewhat like carnal birth, in this respect, that as the child while in the mother's womb receives nourishment not independently, but through the nourishment of its mother, so also children before the use of reason, being as it were in the womb of their mother the Church, receive salvation not by their own act, but by the act of the Church. Hence Augustine says (De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i): "The Church, our mother, offers her maternal mouth for her children, that they may imbibe the sacred mysteries: for they cannot as yet with their own hearts believe unto justice, nor with their own mouths confess unto salvation . . . And if they are rightly said to believe, because in a certain fashion they make profession of faith by the words of their sponsors, why should they not also be said to repent, since by the words of those same sponsors they evidence their renunciation of the devil and this world?" For the same reason they can be said to intend, not by their own act of intention, since at times they struggle and cry; but by the act of those who bring them to be baptized.

Reply to Objection 2. As Augustine says, writing to Boniface (Cont. duas Ep. Pelag. i), "in the Church of our Saviour little children believe through others, just as they contracted from others those sins which are remitted in Baptism." Nor is it a hindrance to their salvation if their parents be unbelievers, because, as Augustine says, writing to the same Boniface (Ep. xcviii), "little children are offered that they may receive grace in their souls, not so much from the hands of those that carry them (yet from these too, if they be good and faithful) as from the whole company of the saints and the faithful. For they are rightly considered to be offered by those who are pleased at their being offered, and by whose charity they are united in communion with the Holy Ghost." And the unbelief of their own parents, even if after Baptism these strive to infect them with the worship of demons, hurts not the children. For as Augustine says (Cont. duas Ep. Pelag. i) "when once the child has been begotten by the will of others, he cannot subsequently be held by the bonds of another's sin so long as he consent not with his will, according to" Ezekiel 18:4: "'As the soul of the Father, so also the soul of the son is mine; the soul that sinneth, the same shall die.' Yet he contracted from Adam that which was loosed by the grace of this sacrament, because as yet he was not endowed with a separate existence." But the faith of one, indeed of the whole Church, profits the child through the operation of the Holy Ghost, Who unites the Church together, and communicates the goods of one member to another.

Reply to Objection 3. Just as a child, when he is being baptized, believes not by himself but by others, so is he examined not by himself but through others, and these in answer confess the Church's faith in the child's stead, who is aggregated to this faith by the sacrament of faith. And the child acquires a good conscience in himself, not indeed as to the act, but as to the habit, by sanctifying grace.

Article 10. Whether children of Jews or other unbelievers be baptized against the will of their parents?

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.

Article 11. Whether a child can be baptized while yet in its mother's womb?

Objection 1. It seems that a child can be baptized while yet in its mother's womb. For the gift of Christ is more efficacious unto salvation than Adam's sin unto condemnation, as the Apostle says (Romans 5:15). But a child while yet in its mother's womb is under sentence of condemnation on account of Adam's sin. For much more reason, therefore, can it be saved through the gift of Christ, which is bestowed by means of Baptism. Therefore a child can be baptized while yet in its mother's womb.

Objection 2. Further, a child, while yet in its mother's womb, seems to be part of its mother. Now, when the mother is baptized, whatever is in her and part of her, is baptized. Therefore it seems that when the mother is baptized, the child in her womb is baptized.

Objection 3. Further, eternal death is a greater evil than death of the body. But of two evils the less should be chosen. If, therefore, the child in the mother's womb cannot be baptized, it would be better for the mother to be opened, and the child to be taken out by force and baptized, than that the child should be eternally damned through dying without Baptism.

Objection 4. Further, it happens at times that some part of the child comes forth first, as we read in Genesis 38:27: "In the very delivery of the infants, one put forth a hand, whereon the midwife tied a scarlet thread, saying: This shall come forth the first. But he drawing back his hand, the other came forth." Now sometimes in such cases there is danger of death. Therefore it seems that that part should be baptized, while the child is yet in its mother's womb.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Ep. ad Dardan.): "No one can be born a second time unless he be born first." But Baptism is a spiritual regeneration. Therefore no one should be baptized before he is born from the womb.

I answer that, It is essential to Baptism that some part of the body of the person baptized be in some way washed with water, since Baptism is a kind of washing, as stated above (Question 66, Article 1). But an infant's body, before being born from the womb, can nowise be washed with water; unless perchance it be said that the baptismal water, with which the mother's body is washed, reaches the child while yet in its mother's womb. But this is impossible: both because the child's soul, to the sanctification of which Baptism is ordained, is distinct from the soul of the mother; and because the body of the animated infant is already formed, and consequently distinct from the body of the mother. Therefore the Baptism which the mother receives does not overflow on to the child which is in her womb. Hence Augustine says (Cont. Julian. vi): "If what is conceived within a mother belonged to her body, so as to be considered a part thereof, we should not baptize an infant whose mother, through danger of death, was baptized while she bore it in her womb. Since, then, it," i.e. the infant, "is baptized, it certainly did not belong to the mother's body while it was in the womb." It follows, therefore, that a child can nowise be baptized while in its mother's womb.

Reply to Objection 1. Children while in the mother's womb have not yet come forth into the world to live among other men. Consequently they cannot be subject to the action of man, so as to receive the sacrament, at the hands of man, unto salvation. They can, however, be subject to the action of God, in Whose sight they live, so as, by a kind of privilege, to receive the grace of sanctification; as was the case with those who were sanctified in the womb.

Reply to Objection 2. An internal member of the mother is something of hers by continuity and material union of the part with the whole: whereas a child while in its mother's womb is something of hers through being joined with, and yet distinct from her. Wherefore there is no comparison.

Reply to Objection 3. We should "not do evil that there may come good" (Romans 3:8). Therefore it is wrong to kill a mother that her child may be baptized. If, however, the mother die while the child lives yet in her womb, she should be opened that the child may be baptized.

Reply to Objection 4. Unless death be imminent, we should wait until the child has entirely come forth from the womb before baptizing it. If, however, the head, wherein the senses are rooted, appear first, it should be baptized, in cases of danger: nor should it be baptized again, if perfect birth should ensue. And seemingly the same should be done in cases of danger no matter what part of the body appear first. But as none of the exterior parts of the body belong to its integrity in the same degree as the head, some hold that since the matter is doubtful, whenever any other part of the body has been baptized, the child, when perfect birth has taken place, should be baptized with the form: "If thou art not baptized, I baptize thee," etc.

Article 12. Whether madmen and imbeciles should be baptized?

Objection 1. It seems that madmen and imbeciles should not be baptized. For in order to receive Baptism, the person baptized must have the intention, as stated above (Article 7). But since madmen and imbeciles lack the use of reason, they can have but a disorderly intention. Therefore they should not be baptized.

Objection 2. Further, man excels irrational animals in that he has reason. But madmen and imbeciles lack the use of reason, indeed in some cases we do not expect them ever to have it, as we do in the case of children. It seems, therefore, that just as irrational animals are not baptized, so neither should madmen and imbeciles in those cases be baptized.

Objection 3. Further, the use of reason is suspended in madmen and imbeciles more than it is in one who sleeps. But it is not customary to baptize people while they sleep. Therefore it should not be given to madmen and imbeciles.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Confess. iv) of his friend that "he was baptized when his recovery was despaired of": and yet Baptism was efficacious with him. Therefore Baptism should sometimes be given to those who lack the use of reason.

I answer that, In the matter of madmen and imbeciles a distinction is to be made. For some are so from birth, and have no lucid intervals, and show no signs of the use of reason. And with regard to these it seems that we should come to the same decision as with regard to children who are baptized in the Faith of the Church, as stated above (9, ad 2).

But there are others who have fallen from a state of sanity into a state of insanity. And with regard to these we must be guided by their wishes as expressed by them when sane: so that, if then they manifested a desire to receive Baptism, it should be given to them when in a state of madness or imbecility, even though then they refuse. If, on the other hand, while sane they showed no desire to receive Baptism, they must not be baptized.

Again, there are some who, though mad or imbecile from birth, have, nevertheless, lucid intervals, in which they can make right use of reason. Wherefore, if then they express a desire for Baptism, they can be baptized though they be actually in a state of madness. And in this case the sacrament should be bestowed on them if there be fear of danger otherwise it is better to wait until the time when they are sane, so that they may receive the sacrament more devoutly. But if during the interval of lucidity they manifest no desire to receive Baptism, they should not be baptized while in a state of insanity.

Lastly there are others who, though not altogether sane, yet can use their reason so far as to think about their salvation, and understand the power of the sacrament. And these are to be treated the same as those who are sane, and who are baptized if they be willing, but not against their will.

Reply to Objection 1. Imbeciles who never had, and have not now, the use of reason, are baptized, according to the Church's intention, just as according to the Church's ritual, they believe and repent; as we have stated above of children (9, ad Objection). But those who have had the use of reason at some time, or have now, are baptized according to their own intention, which they have now, or had when they were sane.

Reply to Objection 2. Madmen and imbeciles lack the use of reason accidentally, i.e. through some impediment in a bodily organ; but not like irrational animals through want of a rational soul. Consequently the comparison does not hold.

Reply to Objection 3. A person should not be baptized while asleep, except he be threatened with the danger of death. In which case he should be baptized, if previously he has manifested a desire to receive Baptism, as we have stated in reference to imbeciles: thus Augustine relates of his friend that "he was baptized while unconscious," because he was in danger of death (Confess. iv).