Tertia Pars
84. The Creed's Articles on Christ's Humanity; John's Baptism: Why It Continued and Why Its Recipients Were Baptized Again
Class of 2010-03-11
https://berquistcourse.com/course/theology/13-tertia-pars/084-the-creeds-articles-on-christs-humanity-johns-baptism-why/

[0:00] In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of, the Holy Spirit. Amen. Thank you, God. Thank you, guardian angels. Thank you, Thomas Aquinas.

[0:12] God, our enlightenment, guardian angels lights of our minds, or illuminate our images and arouse us to consider more correctly. Saint Thomas Aquinas, angelic doctor. Help us to understand what you have written. Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. It's kind of funny to come back to the distinction here of the articles of faith in the creed, but that they have according to the divinity of Christ and humanity of Christ.

[0:45] As I mentioned, there Thomas gives two ones that they had one was into two sevens, right? And then another one into two sixes, right? Of course, seven is the symbol of wisdom, right? And six, of course, is the first perfect number, right? So you divide into two, which is fine, but now you've got six. You can't divide into six. Okay. Now the six articles on the divinity of Christ.

[1:15] I would myself divide them into three. Right. You have one article about the divinity, right? The divine nature. Then two articles on the what? Trinity. And then three articles on the what? On the activities, you know, creation, sanctification, glorification. I rather like that one, two, three because those are the parts of

[1:41] six that add up to six, right? That's why it's perfect number. But now, in the six ones here on the humanity of Christ, would you divide these into two or three? Two. I'm going to do two. I do incarnation, something, death, and the soul,

[2:01] and then. Okay. Yeah. Now remember my rule. Now it's two or three or both, right? And I would actually divide them into two and also divide them into three. Okay. Now, the kind of the beginning for me to divide it into two is in the Psalm eight. You know that Psalm. It's kind of early Psalm, and it's kind of nice the Psalm because it begins by, "uh O Lord, our God of what's your name of all the earth to be.

[2:39] Exalted, and magic of the heavens, of the mouths and bees, and so, on. So it's kind of talks about the divinity of Christ first, right? And then it says, "and what is man and the son of man?" And then it says what?

[2:53] No less than the angels, and of course St. Paul, I guess, You know, and in St. John refer that to Christ. So you have the three articles of descent and the three articles of what Ascent? Ascent, yeah. And Thomas himself says sometimes explicitly that the suffering and death is, in a way, meriting the what Resurrection and the descent into hell, the ascension. To some extent, the incarnation and the second coming also correspond to each other insofar as he came in a very humble way and he comes back again in a glorious way, right?

[3:40] So this of course, fits in with the idea that he humbles himself should be exalted, right? And it fits in with the way that Mary speaks in the

[3:52] Magnificat, right? He has regarded the lowness, right? So because of her humility, he is now going to what do great things for her? He exalts her. So that's a division then into two, right? The three articles of ascent and the three of what

[4:16] descent and the three of ascent, right? Okay. Now is a way also dividing these into three, right? I'm kind of influenced by the way it's presented in the Te Deum, right? And of course, like Article Eight, the first part of the Te Deum is what praising God, right? With the angels and the apostles and the prophets and the martyrs and the whole church, right, and so on.

[4:50] So you have the divinity in a sense, right? And then the next part of the Te Deum touches upon this, right? But it begins by recalling that he's the Son of God, right? So we know what's going on, right? And then it speaks of these things, right? And the first thing it speaks of is the incarnation, right? Is coming into this world. And then when he suffered and died, it speaks of what he opened the kingdom of what heaven.

[5:21] So that it makes some sense to put these four together, right? He came into this world for the sake of redeeming us, right? And he's going to primarily and most fully redeem us by suffering and death in the cross, and through that he opens up the kingdom of heaven, right? And so in this second part, which includes four, right? You would divide the suffering and death against the these three, right?

[5:51] And when Thomas talks about these three, sometimes he goes back to the famous division of the Greek philosophers. Which you find in Socrates or Plato or Aristotle, where they divide all the goods of man into what three: the goods of the soul, the goods of the body, and the exterior goods, right? And then, by kind of an Anaxagorean division, right, the descendant to hell, he gave them the what the beatific vision, so he gave them the good of their soul, not of their body.

[6:26] Resurrection gives us the good of the body, although it's not that alone, but the person, and then the exterior good, good place to be, to ascend to heaven. So it's kind of beautiful, right? And then the second coming is kind of quite distinct from each other. And they were kind of, you know, we've got to react to all this and face our judgment, so on, right? So you divide into three: the incarnation, his suffering and death, and the consequent becomes one of that, and then his second coming.

[7:00] And then this middle part here, you divide one against three, so that way you follow the rule of what two or three, right? And

[7:13] the two divisions kind of bring out something different about those six mysteries. Right. The first one brings out, you know, that he humbles himself, to be exalted, right? And it talks about reference to Christ himself, right? The effect of the first three and the connection of the last three in that principle. But here you have what kind of his purpose of coming, right? Being brought out more clearly, right?

[7:39] Okay. And so I would divide it both into two and into what three, right? But if you look at the great Te Deum, it mentions this explicitly, and then suffering and death, and then it doesn't mention these, you know, one by one, but he opened the kingdom of heaven as a result of that when he had suffered, you know, die, and then mentions this explicitly. So it suggests this division, right?

[8:10] So I divide both into two and into what three, huh? It's a beautiful thing that Te Deum, because then the last part is like a reenactment of the what our Father. It's a little bit different, but it's basically following the order of the Our Father, and just like the

[8:30] the what do you call it, Sanctificamini, you know. Oh, the Anima Christi. Anima Christi, yeah, that kind of follows the order of the Our Father, right? You know, so you kind of see like what Augustine says that that really says it all. The Our Father, right? Everything you can reasonably ask for in the order in which you should ask for is there in the Our Father, right?

[8:55] And these great prayers, you know. But it's beautiful too because you're going in sense from the profession of faith in the divinity of God, and then in the humanity of Christ, right? And you follow that by hope, which is tied up with prayer, right? So I'm very impressed with the Te Deum, right? And uh, these are attributed to Ambrose and Augustine. I guess that's not regarded as authentic now, but it's certainly got a certainly got a great deal of prestige in the church, right?

[9:28] Have you said, indeed? No, we don't have that. They have they have a hymn. I I don't know how ancient it is, but it's something about paraphrasing. Mm-hmm. But I who's that? They just took the hymn and put it to the marinade. That's what I thought. Most of the words are the same. Well, it's a paraphrase. It's a he just wanted to put it to music. So, however, it worked. with the music. The music is traditional.

[10:11] Okay, but we're still back in Christ getting into the world, right? And none of this is being considered the baptism and so on. So up to Article Five here. To the fifth one goes forward. Thus, it seems that the baptism of John ought to have what come to an end, ceased after Christ was baptized. Huh? For it is said in John chapter one verse thirty-one that he might be made known to Israel.

[10:45] And kind of this, I have come baptizing in the water. But Christ, being baptized, was sufficiently made known both through the testimony of John himself and by the descent of the what dove, and also by the testimony of the paternal what voice. Therefore, it seems that afterwards the baptism of John should not what

[11:15] endure. Yeah. Okay, you got the Trinity there, right? Get Christ, and you got the dove, and you got the paternal voice. And Thomas, I think you're going to just say to this, well, not sufficiently manifested.

[11:36] Not everybody was there, et cetera. Moreover, Augustine himself says upon John that Christ was baptized, and the baptism of John what ceased. Not going to say, not right away though. Therefore, it seems that John, after Christ was baptized, ought not to baptize. Huh? Moreover, the baptism of John was preparatory for the baptism of Christ, but the baptism of Christ began at once after Christ was what baptized, because by the touch of his most clean and most pure flesh, he what gave a regenerative power to the waters, huh?

[12:25] As the great what Bede says, huh? I think it's Bede, New Augustine, didn't he? I think he did. He'd be much, he'd be later. It's amazing the books got around in those days without any. Yeah. Printing press without any. I guess they had a lot of monks to copy them. Yeah. Therefore, and some of them were beautiful too, you know, with the beautiful handwriting. Therefore, it seems that the baptism of John would have ceased when Christ was baptized.

[13:03] But again, this is what is said in John chapter three that Christ came into the land of Judea and baptized, and John was also what baptizing. Therefore, Christ,

[13:21] but Christ did not baptize before himself was baptized, right? Therefore, it seems that after Christ was baptized, still John was what baptizing. Well, he says, "I answer. It should be said that the baptism of John ought not to cease. Christ, what being baptized, and he's going to point out it on right away, right? Okay. First, because as Chrysostom says, if John ceased to what baptize right when Christ was what baptized, it would be thought that by zeal or by anger he did this.

[14:07] You can see very much human weakness, you know, and how this is necessary to overcome some of the bad effects of human weakness, and especially in the disciples of John. You know, when John sends disciples to Christ, you know, and you're the one, and some people thought you know John himself was in doubt. I don't think John was in doubt. And the the reasonable tradition you get in Thomas and in the church fathers is that he wanted his disciples right to yeah, and why I say a little bit that in the academic world, right?

[14:44] Right, you know, and where you get attached to a professor, you know, you kind of hold on to him, you know, even though somebody else is really what better or what greater, you know, that's kind of a a danger, right? Huh? And you see that in in disciples of John, he certainly was a good teacher, right? He certainly had a good influence upon them, but yeah, that was the passage where they approached John and said, "Hey, the one you baptize, he's baptizing over here now.

[15:15] Like, what do you think about that? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Try to get him going. Yeah. Should we? What are we supposed to do? We'll fight them or something? So like what Tom, or what Paul talks about, you know, I'm baptized by Apollo and you're baptized by Apollo. But you kind of see something about about fallen human nature, let's put it that way, huh? That we we are

[15:43] this is not good, you know, disorder, affection, yeah, yeah, yeah. Secondly, if he had ceased from baptism, right, huh? Christ baptizing, he would put his disciples into greater zeal for him, right? Okay.

[16:12] So he would give the impression, that Thomas or Aristotle says, but that the good man avoids not only evil action but even the appearance of evil action, right? And so that's kind of like the first argument there, isn't it? See that

[16:33] if John the Baptist stopped, it would seem to others, right, that he was an huff, you know. And and out of anger, in a sense, right? He had done this, huh?

[16:47] Because because he would be shown up by Christ or something. Yeah, yeah. And here that the disciples would be what you know behind him, you know, would be even more.

[17:04] Third, because persisting in baptizing, he sent his hearers to Christ, huh? And fourth, because as Bede says, the shadow of the old law, right, huh?

[17:21] Still remained, huh? Nor at the what? So the precursor ceases activity altogether until the truth is manifested, right, huh? Doesn't Augustine say somewhere you know that the old law could still be for a certain period of time followed, you know, even the new law come in? You find things like that in the church sometimes. You do, don't you? Some changes and they allow the old to continue for a while.

[17:54] That's like with Joshua when they entered the promised land. The manna didn't cease for a little while; it continued for a little while, even though they were in the promised land, they weren't in the desert anymore. They didn't need it. Yeah. But it continued for a while. That stuff. Because

[18:13] it's hard for men to adjust to change. I always remember, you know, when when the mass went into the vernacular, you know, from the Latin. I remember looking at kind of a popular Catholic magazine there, and at my aunt's house, and someone was writing in, and she'd been arguing with her neighbors all the time about Latin. They were Protestant neighbors, and now her whole thing was cut out from under her, you know.

[18:37] As if the mass had not been said in some other language, maybe than even Latin, before it was said in Latin, you know. But but that was kind of you know. But you're accustomed to having mass in Latin all the time, so it seemed like this is what belongs to. Yes.

[18:55] It belongs to the very nature, I mean, the very essence of the mass, right? It must be said in Latin. That's not really true, is it? That's to be the joke, you know. The French people down in New England—they would send their kids up to Quebec to be educated because they lose the faith unless they're educated in French. As

[19:15] if you couldn't, you know, quite be educated in the faith except in French, right? And so I just wonder about myself sometimes. You know, certain prayers I learned in Latin. I have to see them in Latin. I can't see them in English. And to

[19:45] the second, it should be okay. The first one he says to the first. Therefore, it should be said that although Christ was manifested by his baptism, right, he was not yet what fully Fully uh manifested by his baptism. and therefore it was still necessary that John was baptized

[20:07] The second should be said that the baptism, Christ being baptized, the baptism of John did cease, as Augustine says, right? Not, however, right away, it stopped him, but when he was jailed. When's Chrysostom, right? And notice in that body the text there, the first three were taken from Chrysostom, I guess, and the fourth one from Bede. There's Chrysostom showing up again. So Thomas was, as you know, was trading the city of Paris for Chrysostom's thing.

[20:44] on, I don't know it was on John or Matthew, one of the two. I estimate that an account of this was allowed the death of John, right? That he being taken out from the middle, Christ most of all began to what preach, that all affection multitude might be transferred to Christ, and not further would what there would be people divided by what the Judaica, yeah, yeah. But again, you see there the humanity.

[21:19] I mean, just hopeless, hopeless that way, you know. Hopeless. Now I said, in the academic world, people who came and stayed under some person of some fame or not, what it was, and they got attached to that person and his teaching, you know, they never get out of that, right? They're they're

[21:40] as some people say, you know, that's why it doesn't do much good for professors to get together because they already, you know, committed themselves to some school or something, you know. So we got to influence them. We got to have a have a young student or something. You know, he's coming in, doesn't hasn't been exposed to any of these charlatans, you know.

[22:01] But once you've been formed by some charlatan, then then you're you're you're charlatan for the rest of your life. There's no way out. I mean, that's very strong what Chrysostom was saying, right? Permit the death of John and get him out of the way. We got to get him out of the way. The Trinity is saying. I mean, that's kind of strange, isn't it?

[22:32] At least to send him into exile or something, get him out of the way some way, but but strange. To the third it should be said that the baptism of John was preparatory. Not only for this that Christ Himself would be baptized, but that others would what exceed to the baptism of Christ, which was not yet fulfilled, Christ being what baptized.

[23:16] Now next article here. To the sixth, one proceeds thus: It seems that those baptized by the baptism of John ought not to be what baptized by the baptism of what Christ.

[23:36] First, because John was not less than the apostles, because about him is written that among those born of woman there is not arose a greater than John the Baptist. So he's pretty high up. That's John the Baptist.

[24:04] But those who were baptized by the apostles are not what baptized again, but only as they are added to them the imposition of hands.

[24:17] Ah, that some were what only baptized by Philip in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then the apostles, to wit, Peter and John, placed the hands upon them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it seems that those baptized by John ought not to be baptized by the baptism of Christ.

[24:42] Moreover, the apostles were baptized by the baptism of John, but there were some, but some of them were disciples of John. That is clear in John chapter one. But the apostles did not seem to have been baptized by the baptism of Christ, for it is said in John four two that Christ that Jesus did not baptize, but his what disciples. Therefore, it seems that the those baptized by the baptism of John were not to be baptized by the baptism of what Christ.

[25:29] Moreover, less is the one who is baptized than the one who baptizes. But John himself is not written about him, not read about John, and that he was baptized what by the baptism of Christ. Therefore, much less those who were what baptized by John. That's kind of a tough argument. Much less would they need then to be what baptized by the baptism of Christ.

[26:05] Moreover, Acts nineteen, it is said that Paul found some of the disciples and said to them, "Um, yeah, did you receive the Holy Spirit Yeah did you receive the Holy Spirit believing? But they said neither the Holy Spirit, not even if the Holy Spirit is, have we heard, right?

[26:27] He said, therefore, in whom were you baptized? And they said, in the baptism of John. Whence they were baptized again in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ. It seems, therefore, that because they did not know the Holy Spirit, it was necessary for them to what be baptized again, as Jerome says upon the book of Joel, and the epistle about the man of one wife, and Ambrose in the book about the Holy Spirit.

[27:02] But some were baptized by the baptism of John who had the full knowledge of the Trinity, and therefore they were not to be baptized again by the baptism of Christ. Glad we got Thomas around here because I hate to be having my students give you these objections and expecting me to answer them. I

[27:33] told you at the time we were trying to make out a text of Albert. He's got kind of crazy Latin, you know it didn't make too much sense. So finally brought him to Kasurik. You know, he looked at the text for a while. You know, Finally got up, you know, and he probably put his hand and coat on, and waiting for him to say something. and says, "I can see why you have difficulty with that, he said.

[27:54] and he walked out. That was it. Well, at least you can see. Moreover, Romans ten upon that. This is the word of faith that we what preach. The gloss of Augustine says, "Huh? Whence is this power of water that it touches the body and washes the heart? Except the word what making this not because it is said, but because it is what believed. So even the baptism of the little grandchild, the parents have got to have the faith, right?

[28:48] Those who propose the little one for baptism, right? From which it is clear that the power of baptism depends upon faith, but the form of the baptism of John signifies the faith in which we are baptized. For it says, for Paul says in Acts chapter nineteen that John baptized by the baptism of penance the people. Saying in the one who was to come after him that they might believe, right?

[29:20] This is in Jesus. Therefore, it seems not necessary that those who were baptized by the baptism of John should be again baptized by the baptism of what? Christ.

[29:35] But against all this is what Augustine says upon John: that those who were baptized by the baptism of John was necessary that they be baptized by the baptism of the Lord.

[29:57] Answer: It should be said now that according to the opinion of the Magister, Peter Lombard, in the fourth book of the Sentences, those who were baptized by John, not knowing the Holy Spirit to be, right, and placing their hope in his baptism, afterwards were baptism baptized by the baptism of Christ, huh? Those who did not, however, place their hope in the baptism of John and believed the Father and the Son, the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, they were not afterwards baptized, but only was their imposition of the or placing upon of the hands by the apostles made upon them that they received in the what Holy Spirit.

[30:51] The tradition here now, huh? This book, the Sentences here, which was kind of standard text there for several centuries, and this he says is true as regards the what first part, which is confirmed by many what authorities, huh? But as regards the second part, penitus irrationabile it's holy, I guess, huh? irrationabile what is said, huh?

[31:33] First, because the baptism of John did neither what conferred grace nor did it impress a character, right? But it was only in water, as he himself says in Matthew three, right?

[31:55] Whence the faith or the hope of the one baptized, which one had in Christ, is not able to what supply this defect? huh? Secondly, because when in a sacrament is omitted what is of the necessity of the sacrament. Not only is it what necessary to supply what was missing, but is necessary for the whole to be renewed.

[32:35] Is of the necessity of the baptism of Christ that it come about not only in water, but also in the what Holy Spirit, according to that of John chapter three. Unless you are reborn from water and the Holy Spirit, you are not able to come into the kingdom of God.

[33:00] Whence those who were baptized only in water by the baptism of John, not only was what to be supplied what was lacking, in that there be given to them the Holy Spirit the imposition of hands. But also that they again be totally baptized in water and the Holy Spirit. I suppose you mentioned the Holy Spirit there as kind of a appropriation. I think because you appropriate, you know, the giving of grace to the Holy Spirit, like we're saying in in the Apostles' Creed, you know, where you divide it into three of it according to the Trinity, right?

[33:45] Then the Holy Catholic Church Communion of Saints the sins are attributed to the what Holy Spirit is put under the Holy Spirit there. So the fact it's not being graced, being given by this baptism of John, right, fits together with the Holy Spirit not being there, right, huh?

[34:18] Now what about this text here in Acts eight, right? To the first, therefore, should be said that as Augustine says upon John, therefore, after what?

[34:38] Yeah, because he did not give the baptism of Christ, right, but his own. But what is given by Peter? And something is given by what Jude, is that the other apostle? It is of Christ, huh? And therefore, if those whom Jude baptized should not be what again,

[35:12] for the baptism is such as it is in the one in whose power it is given, not such as the one ministry is given. And therefore, it is that those who were baptized by Philip the deacon, who gave the baptism of Christ, should not again be baptized, huh? But they receive the what imposition of hands through the apostles, just as those baptized by what priests are confirmed by what.

[35:50] If I understand the reply, there he's saying that they were already being baptized, right? But there is kind of a confirmation, right? Because of some defect in understanding maybe the sacrament or something. I don't know. A little obscure, the answer to that They're talking about the sacrament of confirmation because in the Eastern churches it goes along with baptism. It's just that in the West, they... I mean, it's still a second sacrament, but it's performed at the same time.

[36:22] Yeah. Maybe this is the sense he's saying there's actually two sacraments going on. Well, we use the term "confirmantur per episcopos. you know, It doesn't seem to be talking about a different sacrament there. You know, but just the first sacrament is being in some way what registered, right? And

[36:42] confirmed by. What was the defect in the first one? Again, they didn't have the right to believe. Well, they didn't. They didn't know about the Holy Spirit, right? Yeah, and they were baptized. That's a question that comes up in a lot of scholastics, is because in the Acts of Apostles, it talks a lot, a number of times, about they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

[37:11] Well, I thought we were supposed to be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, Holy Spirit. So what's this all about? But he's saying that it would have been, it would have found its origin from Christ, certainly through the Holy Spirit. Yeah. Received that's the baptism of Christ that received. So whatever might not have been clear in the in their understanding of the sacrament. That's why they were supposed to receive imposition or something I guess Because Thomas does say somewhere else, you know, he's talking about these that by kind of special dispensation of the Holy Spirit, they could baptize in the name of Christ rather than in the name of the Father and Son.

[37:46] The Holy Spirit was stuck in three stages. Yeah. But apparently that was done at the same. time. That's an old joke. It looks like that. Like in the Eucharist, you know, we received the body and blood of our Lord, but also his soul and even his divinity. Then, right? Yeah. But by so you might not realize that you know I'm receiving the body and blood of our Lord.

[38:19] I didn't know I was receiving his divinity? Well, yes, you were. But you know, my understanding of what I'm receiving here is imperfect. I've had I once had a discussion with somebody about that. They were insisting that no, if the priest says it's the body of Christ, that's all you get. Oh. You're not getting the blood. Is when you receive from the chalice, that's receiving blood. But you get the body over here, you get blood.

[38:45] I said, well, if that's the case, then he's dead. His body was separated. Yeah. Yeah. So someone might not know that, right? His imperfect understanding of the sacrament but it doesn't make the sacrament invalid. Himself, yeah. Or

[39:02] someone saying, "No, the priest forgave you my sins. " Was it the priest or was it Christ? I think it was the priest. I don't think Christ was in the. No, he said, "I absolved you. " That's it. So I wouldn't say the person is not forgiven, but there's a defect in your understanding. So think

[39:47] about about matrimony. You know, did the priest marry you, or did you marry yourself? What does the church do if a if a couple of Catholics get married before a a justice of the peace? You know. You say it's a lack of canonical form which invalidates what they've done. Yeah. So I think, and that's yeah, I wouldn't. Well, they haven't received a sacrament, obviously, but are they married?

[40:22] Yeah. So what does the church say? You know. Yeah, that's I have to look that up. We're not doing marriage cases, but it's valid. So yeah, Father Nesis might be willing. to address it He did a lot of things. I know they can be rectified without too much trouble. Yeah, I know. Would they, you know, go and and make their their promises and so on before a priest, or would there there be something to something to confirm it, right, or make it?

[40:52] You know. Yeah. I guess they call it validation or something. Yeah. And how they do that, if they can just have a priest witness that. Yeah. I think so, but. They spring up during at the some point in mass, and the priest calls them up. It's like we were just sitting there, and the couple just jumped up, went over there, and they got their their marriage blessed, and they came back and said, "Oh, what just happened?

[41:20] " Thank you, marriage. Okay. So my father, Thomas. No one will notice. No one will notice. Second one. Okay, what about these ones? Huh? Christ didn't baptize, it says, right? These guys, then we're not. The second should be said that as Augustine says to Seleucianum, huh? Ah. We understand the disciples of Christ to have been what baptized, huh? Whether. By baptism of John as some think, or what is more believable, right?

[42:22] By the baptism of Christ. Maybe not all Christ. What the apostles were all baptized by John. Maybe not. Some of them were his disciples, right?

[42:34] Nor was the ministry of baptizing lacking. That they would have what. Baptized servants to whom others. Would be what baptized, huh? Who was not lacking in the. Yeah On the service to wash their feet Yeah.

[43:05] I know one of the Syriac fathers talks about. this is kind of interesting, but he sees that the washing of feet on Holy Thursday was our Lord's baptizing them Yeah, that's what he's saying,isn't he that Christ would not be below the dignity of Christ, or unheard of him for him to engage in baptizing the apostles. If he wash your feet If he did that, yeah, that's more humble to wash the feet than to baptize.

[43:43] So, I mean, is that meant to know that to say that Christ didn't baptize anybody, or they didn't baptize those who were ministers? to others to baptize. Yeah, but you w that he was not going on baptizing the multitudes, he's leaving that to the apostles, right?

[44:03] Huh? You know, it's a little different thing here where uh they appoint these deacons, you know, to feed the thing, and he says, you know, we we got more important things to do. And the but that doesn't mean that they didn't feed them before they decided they had to divide the task and and appoint some people to do that, so that they could give their time to preaching and so on full time.

[44:34] Mm-hmm. Yeah, prayer and the ministry of the word. Yeah, yeah. I've seen this bishop there got the the Galen Award there from Human Life International. But I mean, you know, he was you know, seeing a person in each of these women who wanted to confess their sins about abortion, so on. Yeah, really, really a very impressive bishop, you know. Who is here in the states? No, Malaysia is in Malaysia.

[45:04] Yeah. He said he did what? Well, I mean, he personally will talk to each of them who want to. You know, as you see, you know, abortionists who have, converted and so on.

[45:22] But no, it's a bishop. might eventually, you know, if he has too many people coming to him, he might give that up and appoint other people to to hear the confessions and so on. And so he says he doesn't do it, but they do it, you know. So, that doesn't mean he didn't do it at all in the beginning, right? Mm-hmm. So like Moses when he was judging all these cases that were brought to him.

[45:46] Yeah. eventually appointed judges. Yeah, 70, yeah, yeah. Okay. Uh, third objection here now. John's not. It's not read that John was baptized by the baptism of Christ. Then you get to heaven, I guess. Didn't make it To the third, it should be said that as Chrysostom says upon Matthew.

[46:15] Through this, that Christ, when John said, "I what, ought to be baptized by you?" Huh. Answered, "sine modo, let it be." Be for now. Yeah, he showed because afterwards Christ what, baptized John.

[46:36] And this, he says that this, is what, in some of the apocryphal books. Okay. But it is certain, as Jerome says upon Matthew, that just as Christ was baptized in water by John, so John was baptized by Christ in the what, Spirit.

[47:08] I should think that John would have been baptized by Christ, now. But maybe he didn't let his disciples no. Given the human weakness, right? Yeah.

[47:42] Now four here is again about those who haven't heard of the Holy Spirit, huh? But some of those who are baptized by John, he says, even that, huh?

[48:02] To the fourth, it should be said that that is not the whole reason wherefore those were what baptized after the baptism of John, because they didn't know what the Holy Spirit, but because they were what, Baptized By the baptism of Christ. Simple enough. You must see that, says Thomas. You must see that. There's a

[48:29] story told in Thomas's life, you know, where he came someplace and some young student there, you know, was giving all these objections, you know, and and he was kind of scandalized that the student should be so. But Thomas is very calm. There, he talks to the guy, you know, and eventually shows him all of his mistakes, you know, and so on. Okay.

[48:54] Now the fifth objection, huh? Again, the text there, right? That John baptized those who what. In the one who is going to come, right? Okay. To the fifth, it should be said, as Augustine says against Faustum, our sacraments are signs of a what? Present grace. The sacraments, however, of the old law were signs of a future grace. That's a nice little distinction, huh? Whence from this that John baptized in the name of the one to come, right?

[49:45] Is given to be understood that he did not give the baptism of Christ, which is a sacrament of the what? New law, right? It's like a sacrament of the old law, in a sense. Okay.