Dist. 3
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/3/q/bon-sent-IV-d3-p1-littera
----------------------------------------
### DISTINCTION III.

#### Part I.

### Chap. I. *What baptism is.*

After these things it must be seen what baptism is, and what is its form, and when it was instituted, and the cause of its institution. — Baptism is called an immersion, that is, an exterior washing of the body performed under a prescribed form of words. For if a washing is done without the word, there is no Sacrament there, but when the word is joined to the element a Sacrament comes to be; not indeed that the element itself becomes the Sacrament, but the washing performed in the element. Whence Augustine: «By the word baptism is consecrated; take away the word, and what is water but water? the word is joined to the element, and it becomes a Sacrament. Whence comes this so great power of water, that it touches the body and washes the heart, except by the working of the word? not because it is spoken, but because it is believed. For even in the word itself one thing is the passing sound, another is the abiding power». In two things, therefore, the Sacrament of baptism consists, namely in the word and the element. Therefore, even if other things are lacking, which were instituted for the adornment of the Sacrament, it is for that no less a true and holy Sacrament, if the word be there and the element. For in this Sacrament and in others some things are wont to be done for the adornment and seemliness of the Sacrament, others pertaining to the substance and cause of the Sacrament. Of the substance of this Sacrament are the word and the element; the rest pertain to its solemnity.

### Chap. II. *On the form of baptism.*

But what is that word, by whose being joined to the element the Sacrament comes to be? The Truth teaches you, who, handing down the form of this Sacrament, says to the disciples: *Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.* The invocation of the Trinity, therefore, is called the word, by which baptism is consecrated; and this is the form of words, under which baptism is handed down. Whence Zacharias the pope to Boniface the bishop says: «It was most firmly prescribed in the Synod of the Angles, that whoever should have been immersed without the invocation of the Trinity, would not have the Sacrament of regeneration»; which is altogether true, that if anyone be immersed in the font of baptism without the invocation of the Trinity, he is not a perfect Christian, unless he be baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit».

### Chap. III. *That the Apostles baptized in the name of Christ.*

Nevertheless it is read in the Acts of the Apostles that the Apostles baptized in the name of Christ; but in this name, as Ambrose explains, the whole Trinity is understood: «For it is understood, when you say Christ, both the Father, by whom he was anointed, and he himself who was anointed, and the Holy Spirit, by whom he was anointed». Whence Nicholas the pope to the inquiries of the Bulgars: «You assert that many have been baptized by a certain Jew; and you ask what is to be done thereupon. These indeed, if they be baptized in the name of the holy Trinity, or in the name of Christ, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, are baptized; for it is one and the same thing, as the holy Ambrose explains».

### Chap. IV. *Whether baptism can be conferred in the name of the Father, or of the Holy Spirit.*

Here it is asked whether baptism would be true, if it were said in the name of the Father only, or of the Holy Spirit, as when it is said in the name of Christ. Ambrose seems to say that, if the mystery of the Trinity be held by faith, and only one person be named, the Sacrament is full; and conversely, if the three be named, and one of them not be rightly thought of, the mystery is made void. For he says thus: «Where the Sacrament of baptism is not full, neither a beginning nor any species of baptism is reckoned. But it is full, if you confess the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. If you deny one, you overthrow the whole. And just as you may comprehend one in speech, either the Father, or the Son, or the Holy Spirit, but by faith deny neither the Father nor the Son nor the Holy Spirit; the Sacrament of faith is full; so also, even though you say the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, yet diminish the power of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, the whole mystery is void». «When it is said in the name of Christ, by the unity of the name the mystery is fulfilled; nor is the Spirit separated from the baptism of Christ, because Christ baptized in the Spirit».

«Now let us consider whether, just as in the name of Christ we read the Sacrament of baptism to be full, so also, when the Holy Spirit alone is named, nothing is lacking to the fullness of the mystery. Let us follow reason: he who has said one has signified the Trinity; if you say Christ, you have designated both the Father, by whom the Son was anointed, and him who was anointed, the Son, and the Spirit, by whom he was anointed. For it is written: *This Jesus of Nazareth, whom God anointed with the Holy Spirit.* And if you say the Father, you equally indicate his Son and the Spirit of his mouth, if only you also comprehend it with the heart. And if you say the Spirit, you have named God the Father, from whom he proceeds, and the Son, whose Spirit he is. Whence, that authority may be joined to reason, the Lord says: *But you shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit.* By which he indicates that we can rightly be baptized in the Holy Spirit».

From these things you have clearly understood that in the name of Christ true baptism is conferred; where it seems nonetheless to be insinuated that true baptism can be given in the name of the Father only, or of the Holy Spirit, provided that he who baptizes hold the faith of the Trinity, which Trinity is understood in each of these names. But if anyone, believing perversely and intending to introduce error, name only one of the three, he has not fulfilled the mystery. And as to what he says, that, the three being named, the mystery is void, if the one baptizing diminish the power of the Father or of the Son or of the Holy Spirit, that is, think ill of the power of any of these, not believing the one power of the three; this is to be understood of him who neither intends nor believes that he baptizes, who not only lacks faith, but also has not the intention of baptizing. — He, therefore, who baptizes in the name of Christ, baptizes in the name of the Trinity, which is understood there. It is safer, however, to name the three persons there, so that it be said: in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; not in the names, but in the name, that is in the invocation or in the confession of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit; for the whole Trinity is invoked there, that it may work invisibly there of itself, just as outwardly visibly through the minister. But if it be said in the names, there is no Sacrament there, because the form of baptism is not preserved.

#### Part II.

### Chap. V. *On the institution of baptism.*

Concerning the institution of baptism, when it began, there are various estimations. Some say that baptism was then instituted, when Christ said to Nicodemus: *Unless one be born again of water and the Holy Spirit* etc. Others say that the institution of baptism was made, when he said to the Apostles: *Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.* But he said this to them after the resurrection, commanding them concerning the calling of the gentiles, whom before the passion he had sent two by two to preach in Judea and to baptize, saying: *Go not into the way of the gentiles.* Baptism, therefore, was already instituted, because they baptized and preached at the same time. But if it is asked in what form they then baptized; it can well be said: in the name of the Trinity, namely in that form, in which they afterwards baptized the gentiles; which can be understood to have been handed down before the passion, although it is not written. Christ, therefore, did not first hand down that form then, when he sent them to evangelize the gentiles; but the one he had handed down before, sending them into Judea, he afterwards repeated, when he sent them to the gentiles. — More fittingly, therefore, is the institution said to have been made, when Christ was baptized by John in the Jordan; which he dispensed, not because he willed to be cleansed, since he was without sin, but because «by the contact of his clean flesh he conferred a regenerative power on the waters», so that whoever should afterwards be immersed, the name of the Trinity being invoked, might be purged from sins. Then, therefore, was the baptism of Christ instituted, in which the Trinity, whose mystery became known there, inwardly baptizes man.

### Chap. VI. *Why it is done in water only.*

But this Sacrament is celebrated only in water, not in any other liquid, as Christ says: *Unless one be born again of water* etc. And therefore it is uniformly prescribed that it be done in water, so that it may be understood that «just as water washes away the filth of the body and of garments, so baptism, by cleansing, wipes away the stains of the soul and the filth of vices». Or else, that poverty might excuse no one; which could happen, if it were done in wine and oil, and that a material common for baptizing might be found among all. Which the water signified, that flowed from the side of Christ, just as the blood was the sign of the other Sacrament. Therefore baptism cannot be consecrated in any other liquid but in water.

### Chap. VII. *On immersion, how often it ought to be done.*

But concerning immersion, if it is asked precisely how it ought to be done; we answer: either once, or three times, according to the varying custom of the Church.

Whence Gregory: «Concerning the threefold immersion of baptism nothing truer can be answered than what you yourselves have perceived; because in one faith the diverse custom of the holy Church does no harm. For since in three subsistences there is one substance, it can in no way be reprehensible to immerse an infant in baptism either thrice, or once, because both in three immersions the Trinity of persons, and in one the singularity of the Godhead can be designated. But we, who immerse three times, also signify the sacrament of the three-day burial». — According to this it is permitted to immerse not only thrice, but also once only. Yet it is permitted to immerse once only there, where such a custom of the Church exists. But if anyone begin to do this, where such a custom does not exist, or assert that one ought to immerse once only, he makes himself reprehensible. Whence Haymo: «Cyprian abounded in his own sense, when he immersed little ones once in baptism; who diligently fulfilled what he understood, abounding in good works, although in this he unknowingly transgressed. But because he abounded in good works, afterwards, being corrected by God, he abounded in a higher sense, immersing them three times». — Behold, you have it, that he transgressed who immersed once; but this for the reason that the custom of that Church was otherwise, or because it asserted that only one immersion was to be made. Concerning the threefold immersion Augustine says: «After we promised to believe, we immersed our heads a third time in the sacred font, which order of baptizing is celebrated with a twofold signification of the mystery. For rightly were you immersed a third time, who received baptism in the name of the Trinity. Rightly immersed a third time, because you received baptism in the name of Christ, who on the third day rose from the dead. For that thrice-repeated immersion expresses the type of the Lord's burial». — It is established, therefore, that those to be baptized ought to be immersed three times; and yet if they be immersed only once, they receive true baptism. And he who immerses only once does not sin, unless the custom of the Church oppose, or assert that it ought to be done in this way only.

### Chap. VIII. *When circumcision lost its power.*

It is also wont to be asked, whether circumcision lost its power at once from the institution of baptism. — To which we say that in the death of Christ all the legal observances were brought to an end. From that time, therefore, circumcision lost its power, so that afterwards it did not profit; rather it harmed its observers, but until the offering of the true victim it was able to profit. For if before the passion the legal observances had had their end, he would not, as that was at hand, have eaten the old pasch with the disciples.

### Chap. IX. *On the cause of the institution of baptism.*

But the cause of the institution of baptism is the renewal of the mind, so that man, who through sin had been old, may by the grace of baptism be renewed, which comes about by the laying aside of vices and the conferring of virtues. For thus does each one become a new man, when, sins being abolished, he is adorned with virtues. The abolition of sins drives out foulness, the addition of virtues brings adornment, and this is the res of this Sacrament, namely interior cleanness. If it is asked whether baptism opened heaven, which circumcision did not open; we say that neither baptism nor circumcision opened to us the entrance of the kingdom, but the victim of the Saviour, which, had it been offered at the time of circumcision, the men of that time would have entered the kingdom. The res, therefore, of this Sacrament is justification.