Question Two. Whether during the Time of the Law of Nature there was any Sacrament Corresponding to Circumcision

385. Following on from the above I ask whether during the time of the law of nature there was any sacrament corresponding to circumcision.

386. It appears there was not:

Gratian Decretum p.3 d.3 ch.3, and it is from Gregory Moralia IV, preface n.3, “What the water of baptism does among us, was done among the ancients by faith alone for children or by virtue of sacrifice for adults;” therefore no sacrament.

387. Again, a sacrament can only be instituted immediately by God (it is plain in the question on the institution of a sacrament, nn.239-240). But it is not read that in the time of the law of nature (at least up to Abraham) God instituted any sacrament.

388. On the contrary:

Augustine Against Faustus 19.11, “Men can only be united together in the name of religion if they are bound to each other by communion in some signs or visible sacraments.”

I. To the Question

389. I reply:

At no time did God leave his worshippers without remedy necessary for salvation. But at every time after the fall the deletion of original sin was necessary for salvation. Therefore at any time there was some efficacious remedy for deleting original sin.

390. Now although it could be deleted in adults by a good interior movement, yet in children (in whom such a movement was impossible) it could not be deleted by their own act; therefore it was deleted by some act of others that was in reference to them or about them. But no one could be certain what act of another in reference to a child would suffice for him, namely for the child’s salvation, unless it was instituted by God. For no one can be certain that he attains salvation through something unless he is certain that God accepts it as sufficient for such a goal.

391. Since therefore God provides not only his adult worshippers with a remedy necessary for salvation but also their children (and this with a remedy of which the parents on behalf of their children could be certain), it follows that for the time of the law of nature God instituted some sign certain and efficacious for deletion of original sin.

392. And it is more probable that it was a sensible sign than only an intelligible one, because for the whole state of fallen nature sensible signs of spiritual realities are suited to man. Therefore it is reasonable that some sacrament, at least against original sin, existed in the time of natural law. But if there was some other sacrament at that time, as matrimony or something corresponding to another sacrament of the New Law, discussion of it will be given below in the treatment of those sacraments.

II. To the Initial Arguments

393. To the first argument [n.386] I say that Gregory does not understand by ‘faith alone’ a mere habit, nor perhaps merely an interior act, but a sensible exterior act making profession of faith, and this act could have sufficiently had the idea of a sacrament. And in this way is faith alone, that is, solitary faith without sacrifices, distinguished from faith professed in a sacrifice. And perhaps Gregory posited the first as sufficient for children if the profession was done in some mere words of invoking God, or of offering the child to God, but he posited that the second, namely faith with sacrifices, was necessary for adults.

394. To the second [n.387] the reply in one way is that God could have revealed such sacrament to one of the fathers, with whom he frequently spoke at that time, though to whom and when is not said in Scripture which passes, with succinctness enough, from Adam through to Abraham.

395. Or the reply could be that one gets expressly from Scripture that sacrifices pleased God at that time, and this would not be the case unless they had been instituted by God. Indeed the people of that time would be reputed vain and presumptuous if they had not performed such sacrifices by divine precept or inspiration: consider Genesis 4.3-7 about the sacrifice of Abel and Cain, Genesis 8.20-21 about the sacrifice of Noah after he left the ark, Genesis 14.18-20 about the sacrifice of Melchizedek “who was priest of the high God,” Genesis 15.9-21 about the sacrifice of Abraham dividing the heifer. And this was reasonable, because men at that time were prone to idolatry, as is plain from the so great multitude that turned aside to idolatry at that time. So, to prevent them turning aside to it, a fitting remedy was that God should institute for his worshippers sacrifices to be offered to him.

396. It is possible too that some determinate sacrifice would be a sacrament. For it is not contrary to the idea of a sacrifice that it or the offering of it should be a sacrament, and then one would, though indistinctly, have about such sacrament (in diverse places of Scripture) that it was instituted by God in the law of nature.