Tertia Pars
Lecture 93: Christ's Baptism: Suitability, Necessity, and Timing

Transcript
================================================================================

Now I've got another question on the baptism of Christ, huh? It's very, very thorough, right? I love to see these references to Jerome and to Chrysostom and so on, and Augustine, right? It shows that Thomas is not coming out of the blue. He seems to have inherited the mind of Chrysostom and the mind of Augustine, as Cajetan says, right? In fact, he so venerated the Church Fathers that he seems to have inherited the mind of them all, right? Yes, I mean, like that, Aristotle, he so kind of venerated the philosophers before him, right? Even though they were in many ways mistaken, you know, that he seems to have inherited what was good in all of them. In that seventh book of wisdom I was reading this morning there, he's kind of refuting Plato, you know, but without Plato's mistakes, he wouldn't have come to see what he did, huh? Then we're not to consider about the baptizing of Christ, huh? You're still getting Christ into the world, right? About this four things are asked. I didn't know that. Eight things, I mean, yeah, eight things are asked. First, whether Christ ought to be, what, baptized, huh? Secondly, whether he ought to be baptized by the baptism of John. Third, about the time of his baptism, huh? Fourth, about the place. Fifth, about this, that the heavens are open to him, huh? That's what I expect for Claire and Maria, but I mean, for how about Christ, I mean, the heavens are open for him. Sixth, about the Holy Spirit appearing in the, what, form of a dove, huh? And whether that dove was a true, what, animal. And then eight, about the voice of the paternal testimony, right? As we read in the Odyssey, you know, it's beautiful. The way they're praising, you know, the rule of Odysseus, who was a king, right? Over his people there. Of course, now they're being rather bad to his house, you know, in his absence for ten years. But he says more than many times, you know, he was kind like a father. Just the way Homer sees those things so well. Yeah. That's why you say, you know, we say, our father who art in heaven held, be thy name, thy kingdom come. You know, why don't we call him a king, you know? Because the father is a name of what? Of mercy, right? Corresponds, therefore, better to hope, right? I mean, Homer, in a sense, has seen it, right? He was kind, like a father. It says more than once, you know, it's kind of a, why are you treating his house this way, you know? Okay, so we're down to Article 1 now. Whether it was suitable that Christ be baptized, huh? Well, obviously it wasn't, huh? How could it be? What would be your first thing, you know? Well, why should the Word of God made flesh, right? Full of grace and truth, be baptized, huh? Well, let's see what the Master says here. To the first one goes forward thus. It seems that it was not suitable for Christ to be baptized, huh? For to be baptized is to be, what? Washed, is it? But Christ did not belong to Christ to be washed, in whom there was no impurity, huh? No sin, huh? Therefore, it seems that Christ did not need, or is not befitting for Christ to be baptized, huh? It was indecorous. Moreover, Christ received circumcision that he might fulfill the law. Well, but baptism doesn't pertain to the law. Therefore, he ought not to be baptized, huh? Yeah, I put you in your place, yeah. Moreover, the first mover in every genus is immobile according to that motion that he's a cause of. Just as the heavens, which is the first thing, altering the qualities of things, is not itself alterable, right? But Christ is the, what? First one baptizing, according to that. The one upon whom you see the Holy Spirit descending and remaining. He is the one who baptized, right? Therefore, Christ ought not to be, what? It's not suitable to be baptized, huh? But against all this is what is said in Matthew chapter 3, that Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, that he might be baptized by him. I don't know, all these years when I heard about the baptism, I never had it explained in church of you. I never had it explained in church. You know, what is this baptism of Christ, you know? And how does it differ from the baptism we receive and so on? We actually, we might have an occasion for a little more. Since our epiphany is not so much the coming of the Three Kings, but it's the baptism of Christ. So our liturgy has to develop a whole lot. We have a whole season of epiphany, so. I'm surprised. He's going to guess three reasons here. I answer it should be said that it was suitable that Christ be baptized, huh? First, because, as Ambrose says upon Luke, the Lord was, what, baptized, not wishing to be cleansed, right? But to cleanse the waters, right, huh? That washed through the, what, flesh of Christ, who did not know sin, right, huh? They might have the force of, what, baptism, yeah. That he left them, what, sanctified, huh? Afterwards, those who should be baptized, right? That's interesting, right? I mean, there's contact of water in us, but in us it's cleansing us, right? And Christ is acting upon it. Yeah. The water is not doing anything for him, but he's doing something for the water. And therefore for us, huh? That's always, I find, the most interesting reason. It's interesting because that's the first reason, too, huh? Now Ambrose gets into the act, right? Who are the great doctors of the Western Church, huh? You always see Augustine, and Ambrose is one of them. Jerome. Great. Gregory the Great. And sometimes they add Leo, huh? And then we've got Chrysostom, I guess. He's one of the great doctors of the Eastern Church. Second, as Chrysostom says now, huh? We go to the Eastern Church, huh? The two young lungs are the thing. John Paul wanted us to breathe, you know? Secondly, as Chrysostom says upon Matthew, huh? Although Christ was not a, what? Sinner. Nevertheless, he took on a sinful, what? Nature. And the likeness of the flesh of sin, right? Took on mortal flesh, but not sin itself. On account of which, although he did not need baptism for himself, right? Nevertheless, in others, he had, what? The work of... Okay, nevertheless, in others, carnal nature had need, right? And just as Gregory Nazianza says, Christ was baptized that the whole old Adam might be, what? He immersed in, you know, kind of strange music in a sense, huh? How is it, what is it, basically? Is it much different from the church? Well, nobody seems to be saying that he'd taken on a body resembling the body that's of his descent, right? Yeah. And therefore, to teach fleshly nature, right, he underwent this, this is what this kind of a body needs, right? But it was more symbolic of it, you know, than, I mean, obviously he didn't need it himself, right? Is it more the idea of teaching us what to do? Yeah, something to give us an example of the need of our nature. Now, who's this guy, Guston? I've heard his name before. Third, he wished to be baptized, says, as Augustine says in the Sermon on the Epiphany. He said, well, not put you there. Because he wished to do what he commanded to be done by what? All, huh? And this is what he himself says. For thus it behooves us, right, to fulfill all, what, justice, huh? That's what he says to John, doesn't he? John is saying, you know, you shouldn't baptize him, you know. And for as Ambrose says upon Luke, huh, that this is justice, that what you want another to do, first he himself begins to do, right, huh? That by your example he might, what, exhort others, huh? Just what you want another to do. Yeah. Would quad ultram facere velis, V-E-L-I-S. Just after a quote, it gives 313. And then it's a quote. I thought it's not one of them. Yeah. So actually, the third one is more in terms of example, right? Yeah, it is. Okay. So what was the second one? I mean, in a sense, the second argument there, you know, in a sense you said, was it suitable that Christ died on the cross, well, many reasons for it, right, huh? But death is really the punishment for what? Sin. Sin, right? And Christ did not sin, right? But he had taken on this, what, flesh that came in some way from Adam, right, without sin, right? And therefore he underwent that which is, what, appropriate to a body with, what, sin, even though he didn't have sin. But he took under the likeness, right, of a body subject to, what, sin, because he took a body subject to the punishments, right, that we inherit from Adam through original sin, right? So that third argument, though, is more in giving an example there, right? Of course, they say sometimes, you know, a military officer has to, what, do what the man in the lion is supposed to do, right? And he has to show that, give that example, right? And then they are exhorted by his, what, his example, yeah. To the first, therefore, it should be said that Christ was not baptized, that he might be washed, but that he might wash. And that's tied up with the first reason he gives in the body of the article, right? To the second, huh? This doesn't pertain to the old law. Well, to the second, it should be said that Christ not only ought to fulfill those things which are of the old law, but also to begin those things which are of the, what, new law. And therefore, not only did he wish to be circumcised, but also to be, what, can make sense to that? Now, to the third, it should be said that Christ is the first one baptizing spiritually. And in this way, he was not baptized, but only in, what, water. So Christ would not receive the baptism we receive, would he? But he does receive this in water only. It's kind of a subtle thing, right? He already had the thing that was at, right? Yeah. It's full of grace and truth. Want to take a break now, or are you going to? Here, okay. Okay, so we're ready to start an article, right? Okay, the second one goes forward thus. It seems that Christ ought not to be baptized by the baptism of John, right? For the baptism of John was the baptism of penance. But penance did not belong to Christ, who had no sin. Therefore, it seems that he ought not to have been baptized by the baptism of John. Sounds like a good argument, doesn't it? And moreover, the baptism of John, as Christendom says, was in the middle between the baptism of the Jews and the baptism of Christ. But the middle savors the nature of the extremes, huh? Since, therefore, Christ was not baptized by the Judaic baptism, nor also by his own, it seems that for a like reason, he ought not to be baptized by the baptism of what? John. Like as a mixture of what he was not baptized by, right? Moreover, everything that is best in human things ought to be attributed to Christ. But the baptism of John does not hold the highest place among baptisms. Therefore, it does not belong to Christ to be baptized by the baptism of what? John. But against this is what is said in Matthew 3, that Christ came to the Jordan, they might be baptized by John. Well, again, in the body article, Thomas is going to give three reasons, huh? I answer, it should be said, that as Augustine says upon John, The Lord baptized, huh? Baptized not by the baptism by which he was baptized. I'll keep saying that. I think this is true. When since he himself was baptized by what? He was baptized by his own baptism, right? It follows that he was not baptized by what? His own baptism. The word is in there, no? But by the baptism of John. And this was suitable, first on account of the condition of the baptism of John, who did not baptize in the Spirit, but only in water. Now, Christ did not need a spiritual baptism, who from the beginning of his conception was full of the grace of the Holy Spirit. This is clear from the things I said before. And this is the reason of what? Chrysostom. Second, as Bede says, he was baptized by the baptism of John, that by his own baptism, he might approve the baptism of John. Third, because as Gregory Nazianzen says, Christ, or Jesus, came to the baptism of John to what? Sanctify baptism? Or sanctify the what? The what is the baptism? What? Sanctity of the tools. Yeah. Kind of funny that first reason there, in a sense he's saying that there's not the same objection to the baptism of John as it would be to the baptism of Christ for Christ, right? Well, that's more or less removing an impediment to the suitability of his receiving order. The second reason is more affirmative. And he's what's really the third one, huh? Curious, wait, Thomas has ordered these, huh? In the previous article, the first argument was that he wanted not to be cleansed himself, but to cleanse the waters, right? That seems to correspond to the third argument here, right? So he's kind of removing the objection, right, to his being baptized by John. I don't know if they've explained that from the pulpit in my churches, I don't know. To the first, therefore, it should be said, the one about baptism of penance, right? That it has been said above, Christ was to be baptized, that he might, by his example, induce us to what? Baptism, huh? And therefore, in order that this inducing might be more efficacious, right? He wished to be baptized by baptism that manifest he did not need. That's kind of strange the way he says it. That men might accede to a baptism which they need, yeah? Sounds like it's the reverse. Is that what he's saying? Prince Ambrose says upon Luke, let no one refuse the washing of grace when Christ did not refuse the penance, yeah. It would make any sense for Christ to go to confession that he might, what, induce us to go to confession, right? Yeah. But he'll receive his own body and blood. I don't think he would do that, would he? Baptism, huh? Interesting. I guess this is the only sacrament that really, all the other sacraments seem to be ordered to the good of the individual, but in a certain way, Baptism is the good of the nature. I mean, it affects the individual. Yeah. But it's not even, it really was directed to the whole human nature. Well, it's the most necessary of the sacraments, right? I mean, when Christ sends them forth there at the end of the Gospel of Matthew, he doesn't speak of any sacraments except baptism, right? Which doesn't mean there aren't sacraments to be ordered, but that's the one mentioned there, right? Now, the next one was about the baptism being between the two baptisms, right? And neither one of those is the TBC, right? To the second, it should be said that the baptism of the Jews commanded in the law was only, what was that now? Yeah. Yeah, but I mean, what is the one that was commanded in the... Washed the hands all the time? And leprosy and so on. Well... So it was only figurative, right? But the baptism of John in some way was real insofar as it induced men that they abstain from sin. But the baptism of Christ had the efficacy of cleansing from sin and conferring what? Grace, huh? That's what the Hebrew says. And the gifts and sacrifices that are offered cannot affect the conscience of the worship of the dealing with food and drink and various ablutions. That's an amazing word of grief. Christ, however, neither needed to receive the remission of sins which were not in him, nor to receive grace with which he was full. But likewise, since he is truth itself, it did not belong to him that he, what? Undergo or do? Yeah. What is only a, what? Figure, right? And therefore, it was more suitable that he be baptized by the middle baptism than the extremes, huh? Aren't you lies in the mean, huh? That's, that's not true, because he's got two vices here, but. It was interesting, he's full of grace and truth, as John says, and if he's full of grace, he doesn't receive the baptism of the new church, right? New law. So, and then, because he's, he's truth, he doesn't receive the figurative one, huh? So, that's kind of subtle way this carries on in. Now, why don't you do it the best, right? To the third, it should be said that baptism is a certain, what, spiritual remedy, right? And the more something is perfect, the less, uh, it needs, what, or it needs a lesser remedy, right? Yeah. Whence from this that Christ was maxime perfectus, most of all perfect. It was not, it was suitable that he be not baptized by the most perfect baptism, just as the one who is healthy does not need, what, efficacious medicine. This is giving me any of the reasons why he doesn't need our baptism, right? Simple to that. Let's go to the time of the baptism here now. To the third one goes forward thus. It seems that Christ was not baptized in a suitable time. For Christ was baptized for this reason, that by his example he might provoke others to baptism. But the faithful of Christ are praiseworthy baptized not only before the 30th year, but also in infantile age, like Claire or Maria. Therefore it seems that Christ ought not to be baptized at the age of 30, right? Moreover, Christ is not read to have taught or to have done miracles, right, before the baptism, right? But it would have been more useful to the world if he had taught for, what, a longer time? Beginning from his 20th year, or even before. It wasn't the temple there, right? It would have opened that at 12. Well, he should have been maybe at 12. Therefore it seems that Christ, who came for the utility of men, ought to have been baptized before his 30th year, right? That would have been encouraging us to wait, you know. Yeah. Moreover, the sign of wisdom, I suppose, divinely poured in, most ought to be manifest in Christ. Yes, but it was made known in Daniel in the time of his, what, childhood. According to that of Daniel 13, the Lord took on the, what, or raised up, I should say, the Holy Spirit of the junior boy, right? Whose name was Daniel. Therefore, much more should Christ in his youth or boyhood be baptized, right? Yeah. Teach. More where the baptism of John was ordered to the baptism of Christ is to an end. But the end is before, in intention, and afterwards, in being carried out. Therefore, either you have to first be baptized by John, or what? Past him. But again, this is what is said in Luke 3.21. It was brought about that when the, what, old people were baptized, and Jesus was baptized and praying. And Jesus was beginning around his 30th year, right? That's in the Gospel. Luke 3. I know it's a good way at this time, it's a beginning here. Okay. I answer, it should be said that Christ was suitably baptized in his 30th year. I can't say it just by this, Thomas. First, because Christ was baptized, as it were, from then, from that moment, right? Beginning to teach and to what? Preach, yeah? I think like Thomas in the commentary, you know, he has these two chapters there, the one where Christ is baptized in the chapter where he's tempted, right? And it's because the teacher has to be, what, crowned with the spiritual benefits, right? And then he has to be tried, you know, to make sure he's solid and so on. And then he can go out and teach, right? And, you know, what is it, Plato, you know, had this idea that they would take the young men and have a party for them, you know, and supply them with wine and so on. And then, unbeknownst to them, they were being watched, you know, and they would see those who drank moderately or could hold their liquor and so on. And then those who got silly and crazy. And then they know who to advance and who not to, right? So that's kind of, there should be some kind of a test before you give it a position of authority or to rule or to teach or something like that. So Christ was, you know, following this, you know, he had to be confirmed by the word, spiritually stamped, so to speak, and then tested by these things. Anyways, he says, but to this is required perfectionism, the ethos of perfect age, right, huh? Such as is that of 30 years, huh? Well, I'm way way beyond what I'm doing here. Yeah. Definitely. Laura Stelts says the mind is best at 49. Man, I got something to look forward to. Seven times seven. You know, seven is the age of reason, right? And, of course, as Thomas says, you know, the number by itself has the same signification, right? But kind of expanded on it, So, seven times seven is 49. Whence Genesis 41-46 it is read that Joseph was 30 years old when he began, what? Yeah. How do you have to be to be in the Senate? Do you have to be older than to be in other representatives? Who is it? I forget in the Constitution now. Do you have to be 30 to 500? I think you have to be 30, don't you? Could it be 40? To be a senator? A senator is supposed to be more ways, yeah. I don't know. Was it president at 40? No, I don't know about president when I speak. I don't know how old was 10. He was about 45. Yeah, but I think it was, yeah. Anyway, it would be interesting if it was 30, I'd have to check off the Constitution. I can't speak here without the, I can't hear you. So anyway, Joseph was 30 years old when he took on the rule of Egypt, right? Likewise, in the second book of Kings, it's read of David that he was 30 years when he began to rule. So these are figures in Christ, aren't they? And Ezekiel, in the 30 year, began to prophesy, right? So he gives three examples here of it. Yeah, priest, prophet, and king, yeah. He's got a prophet and a king and then Joseph. Yeah. Secondly, because, as Christendom says upon Matthew, it would be, what, in the future that after the baptism of Christ, the law began to, what, come to an end, right? And therefore, in this age, Christ came to baptism, who was able to, what, take on all sins, that the law being observed, no one could say that therefore he dissolved it because he was not able to, what, fulfill it, huh? Yeah, he dissolved like that. He had lived to the age of 30 to prove that he was fulfilled the law. Yeah, he was saying, you know, that he could observe the law and therefore he didn't dissolve it because he couldn't observe it. I mean, the same thing was he saying, isn't it? He came to all sins. Oh, well, that's not, maybe they, he came, therefore this age Christ came to baptism, which he was able to, now. Is it Christ, or are you talking about the age yet? Is that the question or what? Christ was able to fulfill the law and abolish it? But what was the law that was fulfilling? Oh, the whole of the law. Okay, I see. As opposed to skipping over circumcision and so on, going right into baptism. Yeah. Just a fulfillment of everything. He did everything and all. He felt it rather than just saying, oh, you're all dispensed on it because he did it. Third, because through this, that Christ was baptized in a perfect age, is given to be understood that baptism brings forth, what? Perfect men, right? According to that in Ephesians chapter 4, until we, what? Come together all in the unity of faith and the knowledge of the Son of God in a, what? Perfect men. Perfect man in the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ. Whence also the propriety of the number seems to pertain to this. For the number 30 arises from the leading of 3 into 10, right? Through 3 is understood the faith of the Trinity and through 10 the fulfillment of the commandments of the law. And in these two consists of perfection of what? 3 times 10. So is little Claire Maria going to be perfect now when she gets baptized? Well, in some way, yeah. The most innocent of us all there, huh? Baptism. Look, they say, you know, that we will resurrect at the age of 30, right? And so that must be the perfect age, right? For how to resurrect at the age of 30, huh? Remember back when I was 30 now, what was that? What age do they are a dean of man anyway? We just have a couple deepens here now. I think, let's see, 26 is the number of canon law now. It used to be down to 26 and young. I was a dean. They observed it. I made sure. I made sure. I made sure. So you're okay. Look at the Constitution. I guess 25 and 30, I think, does it age? Anyways, you've got to be older for the Senate, you know? Wasn't there probably Teddy Kennedy who just got turning 30 or something when he tried to succeed his brother and there was kind of a... God rest his immortal soul. Saying there's no fool like an old fool. Old before your time. What do you mean? Old before your wise. You know what I had was screaming in the house the other day. I saw Barton on the TV. That's not true. You know he's retiring or whatever. Yeah, he is. Yeah, he's finished, I think. So, it must be the perfect age. That's the age we rise at. That's what convinces me. So Clara Maria will be 30 there, figuratively, thinking. To the first, therefore, it should be said that as Gregory Nazianza says, Christ was not baptized as if he needed, what? Creation. Nor was any danger eminent for him by deferring his, what? Baptism, right, huh? But to anybody else, right? It's not a little danger, right, huh? If he goes forth in this light, not clothed with the vestment of, what? Encryption, which is grace. And therefore, it is good, and although it is good after baptism to guard or keep one's cleanliness, right, it is nevertheless, what? Better, huh? Potsis? As he says, Gregory. For some time to be, what? A little bit of the spirit? Potsis? Then to lack grace. The chief of the danger there, right, huh? Shakespeare's day, it was customary to baptize him the third day after their birth. That's why, you know, they don't have a record of Shakespeare's day of birth, but they do have a record of his day of, what? Baptism. So to go back three days, that's the day he died on. Oh, really? Yeah. So they always talk about that in, you know, Buddhist there, I mean, Cassius there in the play, right? What day is this, you know, the last battle there, you know, it's not his birthday. And I guess, well, this is when I came in, this is when I'm going to go out, huh? That's kind of, you know, it feels, it's remarkable about Shakespeare himself, right? He goes out on the day he came in, huh? The world's number is not going to come in. Yeah, yeah. You're going in and you're coming in. Kind of, there's a circle in the reality, there's a circle, huh? I agree to say, happy man who can join the end of his life to the beginning of it, right? Pierce brings out the biography, one of the last things that he kind of woke up and he was like, he saw his life, oh, over here. And it's like the last thing he said, as he's going out, he grits it like he's coming in. I can't remember how to quote that. And somewhere else, he used that as a drunk quote from, he said, my end is my beginning. And I kind of think, Pierce makes that connection. But he had his birthday? No, no, but he's in that same way. I know. That's another thing, it's a little aside, but I mean, I mean, the Odyssey there, you know, and of course, there's a lot about going back over the wine dark sea to the beloved land of your father's, But that everybody wants to go back to his home, you know? Yeah. And, you know, you find, you know, that they all of a sudden refer to heaven as our patria, right? So we're, you know, back in the Holy Queen, you know, we're in our exile, right? That's a common image, but you kind of see this in Homer, you know, this idea that this is what's going back, you know? This is one of the great, I was going to call it, dissolution, but it's something of realization that you get. What's mature is that you can't go back to your home, at least here in this world. Everybody kind of wants to go back to their childhood, the happiness of innocence and all residence, right? And you're all moving toward it. Well, my friend, Washington Irving, you know, coming back to the United States after 17 years, and you're up there, you know, and didn't know what to expect, you know, but you want to come back. Okay. Okay, we did a second objection, right? Okay. Now, why didn't he start teaching? Why didn't he give such a short teaching career? To second, it should be said that the utility which came from Christ to men is especially through faith and what? Humility. Interesting. To both of which, it was valuable that Christ did not begin to teach in his, what, youth nor in his, what, adolescence, in his boyhood or in his adolescence, but in a perfect age, right? For faith, because through this is shown in him true humanity, right? Who through the, what, increments of time progressed bodily and lest this progression be thought to be fantastic, right, or imaginative. He did not wish to manifest his wisdom and his virtue before the perfect age of his, what, body. I guess, don't they say that? I think I read that, that they say our body keeps growing until about the age of 30. Start helping that out. I mean, you start losing, right? It grows in a different way. Yeah, yeah. I mean, you know, maybe, you know, before that you did most of your growth, but you keep on the body still growing up until about the age of 30. It's kind of maturing, yeah. It's still maturing. I mean, not just declining, but I think it's mature. Yeah, yeah. So that would be kind of an argument for this, being the perfect body age, at least, right? It's a solid mind and a solid body. Solid body. That is something, yeah. Because here he's talking about, you want to, what, manifest his wisdom and his virtue before the perfect age of the body, right? To humility of her, lest before the perfect age, someone, what, assumed, presumptuous is always a container of pride, right? Yeah. The great of pralate and the office of what? Teaching, huh? Just reading about the character I didn't know, I think about William Walker in American history. And he graduated summa cum laude from the University of Nashville there, his home state at the age of 14, I think it was. And then, but he became, you know, kind of a, I guess the word filibuster meant really originally a, what, kind of a pirate, right? And so he was influenced by the, you know, conquest of the Mexican War, right, and so on. And he gathered a bunch of people together, right? And he went down to Baja, California and seized power, right, down there, declaiming themselves as independence and so on. And then he tried to invade the mainland there, Mexico, and he got repulsed, finally. So, back in that stage, you know. Then a few years later, he goes down to Nicaragua and he overcomes and takes over the capital and so on. And he gets recognized by President Franklin Pierce as governor of Nicaragua. And then, of course, you know, the different countries come in with their armies, you know. He's forced out of Nicaragua, right? So, then, you know, the third time he goes back, you know, a few years later, he goes back and has his eyes and he goes to Honduras, right? And then, you know, finally he gets pushed out of Honduras and they turn him over to the Honduras authorities and firing squads. That's in it, right? But he, you know, started off quick, you know. He's at the age of 14, summa cum laude, right? Then he traveled around Europe, you know, and went to medical schools and then he came back and practiced medicine and got bored with that. Then he went and practiced law and got bored with that. His fiancée died in a cholera epidemic, you know, so she didn't have any woman holding him down, you know. These crazy things. But you don't realize these things, huh? What was his name? William Walker. Oh, okay. Yeah. I didn't even know about him. I just read about him the other day. What age did he die at? Oh, he'd be... He's pretty young. He's pretty young. I know what year he was now. So is this early 20th century? No, no. This would be in the 1840s, 1850s, around that time. When he was doing this, yeah. Huh. They had created, you know, manifest destiny, in other words, had been invented, you know. Yeah. You know, he's getting cylinders, you know, especially to go. So I realized how those things were. That guy, that younger guy that they found in the caves in Afghanistan. Giant water. Giant water. Yeah, well, I don't know. Giant water. He was an American. He was interested to know what the Muslims and the soldiers found in the caves and so on. I don't know what happened to him. He was arrested for jail or air for treatment or whatever. So that's kind of interesting, huh, that Christ, we know from his being in the temple that he could have done this, obviously, at that age, right? And Dominic's new board, that better. Yeah. But that would have detracted from what? True humanity. From our belief in this true humanity, right? Yeah. It would be too shocking, right? And then, but then give the example of humility, right? Mm-hmm. Rather than seizing, it would be, it would take on the role of teaching too early, right? Or miracle working. That's what the, the apocryphal gospel is opposed to, you know, when he was a child and he made the clay prayer and he would say, well, or some child was nasty so he struck him dead, you know. That's a little too much. Okay. That's when I was dead. That was the right. Now, the third objection was comparing Christ to Daniel, right, huh? Okay. To the third, it should be said that Christ is proposed to men as an example of all, right? Of all men, huh? And therefore, it is necessary to be shown in him that which belongs to all according to the common, what? Law. That to it, in a perfect age, he would, what? Teach, huh? But as Gregory Nazianza says, it is not a law of the church what happens, what? Rarely, huh? Just as one, what? Swell, does not make a, what? Yeah. Of course, that's what, that's what, Aristotle uses that same, yeah. But to some, through the, what? Or from a special dispensation according to the, what? Reason of divine wisdom. It has been conceded that apart from the common law that before a, what? Perfect age, they had the office of reciting or of teaching. Yeah, those two things that he spoke of before in terms of his humility, right? Mm-hmm. As, what? Solomon, right? Mm-hmm. So Solomon at an early age. Yeah. And Daniel. And what? Jeremiah. Jeremiah. Jeremiah. He's from the womb, yeah. Or actually, I was just saying, what do you say? You know, Daniel's a boy was prophesying, huh? Quite the man, that Daniel's. Mm-hmm. Joseph and David and Ezekiel were following the common law, right? Yeah. Yeah. The ones of David getting his body there. I just remember that passage, yeah. You know, the virtue of the core. That Joseph, Joseph, yeah, David and Ezekiel, yeah. He's getting the reason now why in this respect, David and Ezekiel and so on foreshadowed Christ rather than these guys here. Not the common ways. I think the Senate is 30, I'll have to check it again, but it must be. And 25, I think, is for the house. Yeah, I wonder how common it is to have. Some of the representatives that young. Yeah, 25. Yeah. How often it happened. Yeah. How often it happened. I'm not rotten enough. Okay. To the fourth, it should be said that Christ ought to be the first and the last baptized by John. Because, as Ecclesiastes says upon Matthew, Christ, for this, was baptized that he might confirm the preaching and the baptism of John, right? and that he might receive testimony from John. But, there would not be believed the testimony of John except after many had been baptized by him, right? And therefore, he had not to be the first to be baptized by John, right? And likewise, neither the last, huh? Because, as he himself adds, just as the light of the sun does not, what? Wait from the fallen of the... That's the sunset star, I suppose, the... But, it proceeding, it goes forth, and by its light it obscures the, what? The head. Thus, also, Christ did not expect that John would, what? Of course, but, he did not wait exactly until John Right. But he's still teaching and baptizing him, period, huh? So that the sun doesn't wait until the setting of the morning's time. Mm-hmm. Morning's up. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. That's stopping on some sort of the rest of it.