Did John the Baptist Receive Sanctifying Grace?

[Sirach2]

I have read your paragraph several times, but I’m drawing a blank.

What you seem to be saying is that sanctifying grace bestowed through the indwelling of the Holy Spirit should have guaranteed those in the OT to enter the beatific vision upon their death, rather than wait until the Resurrection.

Is that it?

 

[Sirach2]

Mornings are always a bit clearer, so I may understand you somewhat better now.

Are you knowledgable about Cathoic teaching on “baptism of desire?” God’s perogative and mercy may have ordained that some of the O.T. prophets et al were justified by this means. If so, can any of us say with certainty that they did not receive sanctifying grace at that moment?

When those who are to be justified understand themselves to be sinners, turn themselves from the fear of God’s judgment, and are raised to hope, trusting that God will help them, they begin to love Him as the fountain of all righteousness, and are moved to hate and detest their sins. This brings them or any of us the actuality of our initial justification, which is received either when baptism takes place or before, through the baptism of desire.

Your difficulty, and in some ways mine, too, seems to rest with dogmtic assurance that their baptism of desire bestowed sanctifying grace which enables one’s entrance into heaven. The Church seems to confirm that it does. Our study will need to clarify that the grace these O.T. personages received was more than just ‘gratuitous grace’ by which they spoke prophetically through the Holy Spirit and worked supernatural signs. Did they receive baptism of desire, IOW, by which they would be infused with Sgrace?

[St. Thomas answers](SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The division of grace (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 111) Article 5, I answer that …) in Chapter 5:
**I answer that **…] But sanctifying grace ordains a man immediately to a union with his last end, whereas gratuitous grace ordains a man to what is preparatory to the end; i.e. by prophecy and miracles and so forth, men are induced to unite themselves to their last end. And hence sanctifying grace is nobler than gratuitous grace.
Nevertheless, it is my belief that St. John the Baptist and Jeremiah received sanctifying grace as St. Thomas taught. I’m not able to help you with anything beyond this, B.H.

 

[Sirach2]

I almost forgot (geesh, I’m getting chatty! )

Even with the certain knowledge that these OT prophets/saints did receive BOD and Sgrace, they still could not enter heaven until Jesus opened the way through his passion and death.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I almost forgot (geesh, I’m getting chatty! )

Even with the certain knowledge that these OT prophets/saints did receive BOD and Sgrace, they still could not enter heaven until Jesus opened the way through his passion and death.

I don’t think we need to explicitly posit BOD with the OT Just because Circumcision remitted Or Sin and apparantly bestowed SG. (One may of course see this as a Baptism of Desire though present Jews would probably consciously disagree ).

 

[Jerry-Jet]

If Jeremiah and john the Baptist were sanctified in the womb–did they ever sin after they were born.

I thought that when you were baptized you received sanctifying grace–that wouldn’t mean that you couldn’t sin after baptism.

I can conceive of John the Baptist and Jeremiah receiving baptism of desire in the womb.

Jesus said about John the Baptist–“there is no one born of women greater than you but even the least in the kingdom of heaven is better than you.”

This would be true when Jesus said it because the only creatures in heaven at that time when Jesus said that were the angels–heaven hadn’t been opened by Jesus to the just of the Old Testament yet.

I guess that John the Baptist could have been considered better than Jeremiah because he prepared the way for our Lord.

Answer me this: wouldn’t Mary be greater than either John the Baptist or Jeremiah–both of them were conceived in sin and then sanctified but Mary was conceived without sin and was Full of grace–meaning Mary was not subject to concupiscence while even though they were sanctified in the womb–they were still born with concupiscence.

I look at John the Baptist and Jeremiah as both receiving the grace to experience baptism of desire before Jesus died on the cross. Maybe John the Baptist and Jeremiah–just like others in the Old Testament had to be made PERFECT in all respects and that means beyond sanctifying grace before Jesus could open heaven to them?

Maybe they had to HEAR the word form the WORD Himself Jesus just as St. Peter said about Jesus that after death “he preached to the spirits in prison”?

 

[Sirach2]

If Jeremiah and john the Baptist were sanctified in the womb–did they ever sin after they were born.

HI Jerry,
The Holy Spirit bestowed the singular privilege of sinlessness only upon Mary. To what degree either of these holy men sinned, we just don’t know. But I would imagine they at least comitted imperfections that are common to the holiest of purified saints.

I look at John the Baptist and Jeremiah as both receiving the grace to experience baptism of desire before Jesus died on the cross. Maybe John the Baptist and Jeremiah–just like others in the Old Testament had to be made PERFECT in all respects and that means beyond sanctifying grace before Jesus could open heaven to them?

We are not privy to HOW the Holy Spirit sanctified them in their wombs, but we believe this because God has revealed it to us in his Word. For these infants to have received baptism of desire, they would need intelligence to make that choice – which they did not possess in the womb. So we are left to ponder that in some mysterious way, the Holy Spirit sanctified them before birth.

Again, because they were sanctified in the womb, they would not need B.O.D. later in life.

Most likely, the O.T. prophets and holy servants of God were sanctified by B.O.D.
We ought not to delve into things beyond our understanding, but just accept God’s word as it was given to us.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Jerry-Jet:
If Jeremiah and john the Baptist were sanctified in the womb–did they ever sin after they were born.
JJ why would they be different from any other Saint? They obviously received extra privileges from God but then, they were called to unusual ministries.
Apart from the fact (as far as I can tell) that we are free to believe or not whether they were truly freed from OS in the womb, they still had free choice (and suffered from ) concupiscence.

I thought that when you were baptized you received sanctifying grace–that wouldn’t mean that you couldn’t sin after baptism. Yes that is standard Catholic teaching.

I can conceive of John the Baptist and Jeremiah receiving baptism of desire in the womb. Why do we have to go there if through a singular (almost) act of grace we know for certain that OS was remitted by God outside the usual means. I am not sure we may posit BOD until age of reason but maybe I am wrong. (It is interesting that I believe Aquinas maintains Jesus had the use of reason at birth).

Jesus said about John the Baptist–“there is no one born of women greater than you but even the least in the kingdom of heaven is better than you.” This would be true when Jesus said it because the only creatures in heaven at that time when Jesus said that were the angels–heaven hadn’t been opened by Jesus to the just of the Old Testament yet.
I have seen a number of understandings of this phrase but this one is new. I believe we are to best understand “the kingdom of heaven” as that realm where God reigns by knowledge of His Will through Jesus - meaning “heaven” as a place is little more than a symbol thereof. John the Baptist did not know Jesus as his closest followers were to come to know Him - especially after the sending of the Paraclete.

Answer me this: wouldn’t Mary be greater than either John the Baptist or Jeremiah–both of them were conceived in sin and then sanctified but Mary was conceived without sin and was Full of grace–meaning Mary was not subject to concupiscence while even though they were sanctified in the womb–they were still born with concupiscence.
It may be helpful to distinguish two senses of the word “greater” in this context. In the order of nature the greatest creature is probably Lucifer. In the order of supernature (i.e. substantial participation in the Godhead through sanctifying grace) we are probably talking the Virgin Mary. (Jesus would be ruled out because there is a bit of a difficulty in calling him a “creature”. In one sense He could be so called (just as Mary can be called the “Mother of God” even though the Divine Nature is eternal and not conceived/born) but in another more proper sense He plainly could not.)
We need to be careful about using the phrase “conceived in sin” as this usually refers to a sinful personal act of the (unmarried?) parents rather than the innocent child conceived without personal sin (but in a state of original sin).
Re “Full of grace” we cannot tell from the Bible alone what exactly that may mean (just as we do not know from the Bible alone what “filled with the Holy Spirit” exactly meant re John the Baptist as the phrases are ambiguous.) It is Church tradition which has over the centuries “filled in the blanks” as it were.

Maybe they had to HEAR the word form the WORD Himself Jesus just as St. Peter said about Jesus that after death “he preached to the spirits in prison”? yes I believe you are right and this ties in with what I suggested above. John the Baptist did not really know Jesus despite the fact he may well have respected him as the foretold Messiah. Only by hearing Jesus’s own self-proclamation (to see me is to see the Father etc) would he really know - and even the Apostles only really knew Jesus after His Resurrection.

 

[runningdude]

…
I can conceive of John the Baptist and Jeremiah receiving baptism of desire in the womb. Why do we have to go there if through a singular (almost) act of grace we know for certain that OS was remitted by God outside the usual means. I am not sure we may posit BOD until age of reason but maybe I am wrong. (It is interesting that I believe Aquinas maintains Jesus had the use of reason at birth).

John the Baptist would have been cleansed not by baptism of desire, but by the personal act of Christ the Child, when both were in utero.

Jesus said about John the Baptist–“there is no one born of women greater than you but even the least in the kingdom of heaven is better than you.” This would be true when Jesus said it because the only creatures in heaven at that time when Jesus said that were the angels–heaven hadn’t been opened by Jesus to the just of the Old Testament yet.
I have seen a number of understandings of this phrase but this one is new. I believe we are to best understand “the kingdom of heaven” as that realm where God reigns by knowledge of His Will through Jesus - meaning “heaven” as a place is little more than a symbol thereof. John the Baptist did not know Jesus as his closest followers were to come to know Him - especially after the sending of the Paraclete.
…

Maybe they had to HEAR the word form the WORD Himself Jesus just as St. Peter said about Jesus that after death “he preached to the spirits in prison”? yes I believe you are right and this ties in with what I suggested above. John the Baptist did not really know Jesus despite the fact he may well have respected him as the foretold Messiah. Only by hearing Jesus’s own self-proclamation (to see me is to see the Father etc) would he really know - and even the Apostles only really knew Jesus after His Resurrection.

John the Baptist had an intimate knowledge of his cousin since his 6th month of existence. This is why he, as an unborn child, leaped for join when he recognized Jesus’ Mother. The only reason we really know of why John did not become a priest was an early intervention on Hared’s part…

 

[Blue_Horizon]

John the Baptist had an intimate knowledge of his cousin since his 6th month of existence. This is why he, as an unborn child, leaped for join when he recognized Jesus’ Mother.

RD I think this interpretation is a bridge too far given the limited facts. Neither does it seem to explain why JB was not “in the Kingdom” if he did have such complete knowledge of Jesus as you suggest.