Aquinas on Christ's Baptism (ST III q.39 a.6–8): The Dove, Whether It Was Real, and the Father's Voice

Orientation #

He begins mid-question at article 6 of q. 39 and works straight through articles 7 and 8, ending by noting that “question four begins a new part” — i.e. he is about to move on (he says q. 40 is a new part of the treatise). The previous class treated q. 39, aa. 4–6 (why the Jordan, why the heavens opened) and the next opens q. 40 on Christ’s manner of life. (prev. lecture)

The class, in order #

1. The four objections to the dove (“unsuitably… the Holy Spirit is said to descend”) #

Article 6: whether the Spirit ought to have descended on Christ baptized in the form of a dove.

1. The Spirit dwells in man by grace; Christ had the fullness of grace from his conception (“full of grace and truth”, John) — “he wasn’t getting grace at that time, was he? No.”
2. The Son is said to “come down” by the Incarnation, emptying himself, taking the form of a slave — an aside for philosophers: Scripture here uses form for the nature of a thing. But the Spirit was not incarnate, so “descent” is unsuitable of him.
3. Christ’s baptism should be an exemplar of ours; in ours there is no visible mission of the Spirit. (He jokes about the baby present: no dove appeared over her.)
4. All receive from Christ’s fullness (John 1), but the Spirit came on the apostles as fire, not a dove; so fire would be fitting here too.

Sed contra: Luke 3 — the Spirit came down “in a bodily species as a dove upon him.”

2. The body of the article: it pertains to the mystery of the baptized (“all who are baptized… receive the Holy Spirit”) #

With Chrysostom: what was done in Christ’s baptism belongs to the mystery of all who would afterwards be baptized; all so baptized receive the Spirit “unless they accede to this in a fictitious way” (nisi ficte accedant) — John’s word, “He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 3). Student: does nisi ficte mean the forced? Answer: rather those who go through the motions without belief — sacrilege; the example offered is Jews in Spain feigning conversion so as not to be expelled, and he insists that was not, strictly, forced baptism.

3. Reply to objection 1, and a digression on dividing the Creed (“absurdissimum est”) #

Reply: with Augustine (De Trinitate XV), it is most absurd to say Christ at thirty received the Holy Spirit; as he came to baptism without sin, so not without the Spirit — if John was filled from the womb, what of Christ, whose very conception of flesh was not carnal but by the Holy Spirit? What was prefigured in his baptism was his body, the Church, in which the baptized receive the Spirit.

Digression, raised by a student, on two divisions of the articles of faith: (a) by Father/Son/Holy Spirit, (b) by divinity and humanity of Christ. He argues the division into two is more theological: on the threefold division you must put creation with the Father and sanctification/glorification with the Spirit, which is by appropriation. Appropriation has its reason — leading from what is more known to us — but is not as fundamental: creation and glorification are works of the whole Trinity, and that is better respected in the twofold division. Sign of this: in the Summa creation is taken up not under God the Father but after the whole Trinity, among the works of God; the Prima Pars treats divine nature, Trinity, operations, the Tertia Pars the human nature of Christ. He notes the Athanasian Creed and the Fourth Lateran Council use this division; and the Creed’s “Father Almighty, Creator” needs the explanation by appropriation.

Asides: Thomas’s three points of meditation — God and his works, your soul and its works, how the two may be joined. And Augustine on Christ’s being thirty: thirty is three times ten — belief in the Trinity plus obedience to the Ten Commandments, the whole Christian life, i.e. dogmatic and moral theology. “I think that’s beautiful.”

4. Reply to objection 2: how the Spirit “descends” without becoming a dove (“not because the substance… is seen”) #

With Augustine (De Trinitate II), four contrasts to place the dove:

• not the substance of the Spirit seen, which is invisible;
• not a creature assumed into the unity of a divine person — the Spirit is not called a dove as the Son is called man;
• not like John’s vision of the slain Lamb (Apoc. 5:6), which was in the spirit through spiritual images of bodies — “about that dove, no one ever doubted but that it was seen by eyes”;
• not like “the rock was Christ” (1 Cor. 10), where an already existing creature got the name from its action. This dove existed suddenly to signify and then ceased to be — like the flame in the bush to Moses.

So he “descends” either by reason of the dove signifying him, or by reason of spiritual grace coming down to the creature. James 1:17, every gift descends from the Father of lights: the lights — of reason, of grace, of glory — come down because they are less full in us than in God. He likes the text because it shows the greatest gifts are lights; he admits, “I do it too much as a thinker.”

5. Reply to objection 3: why nothing visible in our baptism (“in the beginnings of spiritual things”) #

Chrysostom (on Matthew — he wavers: perhaps on John; “either way, Thomas thought that was a good trade Paris for”): at the beginnings of spiritual things sensible visions always appear, for those unable to grasp bodiless nature, so that when such things cease afterwards, men may take faith from what was once done. Hence the Spirit descended visibly on Christ so that his invisible descent on all the baptized might be believed.

Asides: the man at the intermission of DeMille’s Ten Commandments struck by the writing of the commandments — “he was right”, the sensible affected him as an argument would affect a sophisticated man. And Fr. Wagner asked what the angels think of our going to the moon: “probably not too impressed.” (Also the “Paris is worth a mass” story, attributed to Henry of Navarre / Henry IV; and a long aside on the baby with the Aristotle volume, McKeon edition, and on dogs’ attachment to their masters.)

6. Reply to objection 4: four reasons for the dove, and the seven gifts (“the dove is a simple animal”) #

1. The disposition required in the baptized, that he come not fictitiously: “the Holy Spirit flees the fiction of discipline” (Wisdom 1); the dove is simple, without astuteness or deceit — “be simple as doves” (Matt. 10:16).
2. The seven gifts, from Rabanus in the Catena on Matthew, each from a property of the dove:

• dwells by flowing streams, sees the hawk in the water and hides — wisdom: saints dwell by the flowing rivers of divine Scripture and evade the devil’s swoop;
• chooses the better grains — knowledge: saints choose sound positions to be nourished by (he says he nourishes himself on the Catena);
• nourishes other birds’ young — counsel: holy men nourish the little ones by teaching and example [transcript reads “imitators of the devil” — plainly a slip for something like imitators of Christ / the simple];
• does not tear with its beak — understanding: saints do not pervert good positions by tearing them, as heretics do;
• lacks gall — piety: saints lack irrational anger (digression on the English idiom “he’s got gall” = nerve, arrogance; “all gall divided into three parts”; Mayor Gall in his home town);
• nests in the caverns of the rock — fortitude: saints place their nest in the wounds of the dead Christ, the firm rock, their refuge and hope;
• has a groaning note — fear: saints delight in moaning for their sins. (Rabanus, an eighth-century monk, often quoted in the Catena. He warns: “We question you about those seven if you got them down.”)

3. The proper effect of baptism, remission of sins and reconciliation: the dove is mild, and in the deluge bore the olive branch announcing common tranquility (Chrysostom on Matthew); now it announces our liberation.
4. The common effect of baptism, the building up of ecclesiastical unity: Christ gave himself to present a glorious Church without stain or wrinkle (Ephesians 5); the dove is a friendly, gregarious animal — “one is my dove” (una est columba mea, Canticles 6).

Why fire on the apostles, for two reasons: (i) the fervor with which their hearts must be moved to preach Christ everywhere amid the world’s pressures — hence tongues of fire. Augustine on John: the Lord showed the Spirit visibly twice, in the dove on himself baptized, in fire on the disciples; simplicity there, fervor here — lest sanctified simplicity have guile, the dove; lest simplicity remain frozen, the fire; nor be troubled that the tongues are divided, for we know unity in the dove. (ii) Chrysostom: in baptism sins are forgiven, so mildness is shown in the dove; but where grace has been received there remains the time of judgment, signified by fire.

Aside: “when you give the sermon on this, you can go to this ad quartum” — little things to spice up a sermon.

7. Article 7: was it a true dove? (“that dove… was not a true animal”) #

Objections: (1) Luke says “as a dove”, i.e. by likeness, so not a true dove; (2) God does nothing in vain, and since the dove came only to signify and then passed away (Augustine, De Trinitate II), a true dove would be in vain, a likeness sufficing; (3) properties of a thing lead to knowledge of its nature, so a true dove’s properties would signify the dove’s nature, not the Spirit’s effects. He remarks that Augustine too beats these things to a pulp, not only Thomas. He notes a footnote giving Ambrose the contrary: descendit Spiritus Sanctus in specie non in veritate columbae — “so we’re following Augustine rather than Ambrose.”

Sed contra: Augustine, De agone christiano — we do not say only that Christ had a true body while the Spirit appeared fallaciously; both bodies were true.

Respondeo: it does not befit the Son, who is the Truth of the Father, to use a fiction, so he took a true and not a fantastic body; and since the Spirit is the Spirit of Truth (John 16), he formed a true dove in which he appeared, though he did not assume it into the unity of his person. Augustine adds: it was no more difficult for the omnipotent God who made the universe from nothing to make a true dove’s body without the generating parents than to make a true body in Mary’s womb without male seed — bodily creation serves God’s command and will in both.

Replies: (1) “in the likeness of a dove” excludes not the dove’s truth but an appearing in the form of his own substance; (2) not superfluous, because by the dove’s truth the truth of the Spirit and of his effects is signified — “so much for these bird lovers”; (3) the dove’s properties in the same way signify the dove’s nature and designate the Spirit’s effects: because the dove naturally has such properties, it can signify the Spirit — “it’s like metaphor: the real thing is the basis for this metaphorical signification.”

Aside: the doves of St. Mark’s Square, Venice sinking (a centimetre, or half, a year).

8. Article 8: the Father’s voice (“this is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased”) #

Objections: (1) Son and Spirit, appearing sensibly, are said to be sent visibly; but the Father cannot be sent, since being sent implies proceeding from another (Augustine, De Trinitate II) — therefore he ought not to appear either. He flags the gap: “but what can appear without being sent?” (2) A voice signifies the word conceived in the heart; but the Father is not the Word, the Son is. (3) Christ did not begin to be Son of God at baptism — he was such from conception — so the voice belonged rather to his nativity.

Sed contra: Matthew 3, the voice from heaven.

Respondeo: Christ’s baptism, being the exemplar of ours, ought to show what is accomplished in ours; and our baptism is sanctified by the invocation and power of the Trinity — “baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 28:19). Hence Jerome: in Christ’s baptism the mystery of the Trinity is shown — the Lord baptized in his human nature, the Spirit in the habit of a dove, the Father’s voice testifying. So the Father too is fittingly declared by a voice. (Aside on docete omnes gentes: the text says “teach all nations”, not “make disciples”, and that saying is only in Matthew.)

9. The three replies (“able to appear, but not able to be sent visibly”) #

1. Visible mission adds to appearing the authority or source of the sender; the Son and the Spirit, who are from another, both appear and are sent visibly; the Father, who is from no one, can appear but cannot be sent visibly. He remarks you do not find the Father said to be sent in Scripture, but Christ says he will send the Holy Spirit from the Father.
2. The Father is shown in the voice only as its author, as speaking through it; and since it is proper to the Father to produce the Word, which is to speak, he is most suitably made known through a voice, which signifies a word — and the voice attests the Word’s sonship. Just as the dove’s form is not the Spirit’s nature, and the human species is not the nature of the Son of God, so the voice does not pertain to the nature of the Word or of the Father speaking: “you have neither heard his voice nor seen his form” (John 5), through which, as Chrysostom says on John, he leads them little by little into philosophical dogma [he notes the footnote: not “philosophers” in our sense — some Fathers call the Gospel Christian philosophy], showing that neither voice nor species is what God is, but he is above figures and species. The voice, like the dove and like the human nature assumed, was produced by the whole Trinity; yet in that voice the Father alone is declared as speaking, as the Son alone assumed human nature and the Spirit alone is shown in the dove — clear from the book On Faith, to Peter (he notes it is not Augustine’s but Fulgentius’s). Aside: “that’s why I sometimes call him the speaker of the house.”
3. Christ’s divinity ought not to be made known to all at his nativity, but hidden in the defects of infancy; at his perfect age, when he must teach, do miracles, and convert men, the Father’s testimony made his teaching more credible — “the Father who sent me, he gives testimony about me” (John 5). And especially at baptism, through which men are reborn as adopted sons, since adopted sons are conformed to the likeness of the natural Son (Romans 8:29). Hilary on Matthew: from what was completed in Christ we know that after the washing of water the Holy Spirit flies upon us, and by the adoption of the paternal voice we become sons of God.

His words #

• form — used in the Philippians text for the nature of a thing (“form of God”, “form of a slave”); “a very nice text for us philosophers”.
• nisi ficte — “unless they accede in a fictitious way”: going through the motions without belief, a sacrilege, not a forced baptism.
• appropriation — attributing to one Person what is in fact a work of the whole Trinity, as a way of making the Person known to us through what is more known.
• absurdissimum est — Augustine’s “it is most absurd” (that Christ received the Spirit at thirty).
• dole — he asks and the class answers: deceit [ed.: dolus].
• gall — the dove lacks gall; he turns to the English idiom, “nerve”, arrogance, the mark of irrational anger.
• tenaria / Catena — the Catena Aurea [ASR garble], the Golden Chain, which he “nourishes himself with”.
• in specie non in veritate columbae — Ambrose’s contrary opinion in the footnote.
• visible mission vs. appearing — mission adds the authority of the sender; hence the Father appears but is not sent.
• speaker of the house — his nickname for the Father, as the one declared in the voice.

Texts #

Read in class

• Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae III, q. 39, a. 6 (objections, sed contra, body, four replies)
• Summa Theologiae III, q. 39, a. 7 (whether the dove was a true animal)
• Summa Theologiae III, q. 39, a. 8 (the voice of the Father)
• Augustine, De Trinitate II and XV; De agone christiano
• Rabanus Maurus, in the Catena Aurea on Matthew (the seven properties of the dove)

Mentioned

• Luke 3; Matthew 3; Matthew 10:16; Matthew 28:19; John 1; John 5; John 16; 1 Corinthians 10; Ephesians 5; James 1:17; Romans 8:29; Wisdom 1; Canticles 6; Apocalypse 5:6
• Chrysostom, on Matthew (or on John); Jerome; Hilary on Matthew; Ambrose; Fulgentius, On Faith, to Peter
• Athanasian Creed; Fourth Lateran Council; Summa Theologiae Prima Pars and Tertia Pars structure

His questions #

• Was Christ receiving grace or the Holy Spirit at his baptism? No — he had the fullness of grace from his conception; it is most absurd to say he received the Spirit at thirty.
• Which division of the articles of faith is more theological, the threefold or the twofold? The twofold, because creation, sanctification and glorification are works of the whole Trinity, and the threefold division reaches them only by appropriation.
• Why does nothing visible appear in our baptism? At the beginnings of spiritual things sensible signs appear, so that afterwards, when they cease, men may believe from what was once done.
• Why a dove on Christ and fire on the apostles? The dove for simplicity, the seven gifts, the mildness of forgiveness and the unity of the Church; fire for the fervor of preaching and for the judgment that remains after grace.
• Was that dove a true animal? Yes — the Spirit of Truth does not deceive; God could form a true dove without generation, as he formed a true body in Mary without seed.
• If the dove is a real dove, how can its properties signify the Spirit? Precisely because it naturally has those properties it can signify the Spirit — the real thing is the basis of the metaphorical signification.
• Can the Father be sent? Can he appear? He cannot be sent, since mission implies procession from another; but he can appear, and he did, in a voice.
• Why the voice rather than something else, and why at the baptism rather than the nativity? A voice signifies a word, and producing the Word is proper to the Father; and his divinity was to be hidden in infancy but attested when he began to teach and when men are reborn as adopted sons.