Galatians 3 and Cornelius - when do we receive The Holy Spirit?

[TaylorDonBarret]

From the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IV.
A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof
under the law of grace.

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a
translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of
grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our
Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected,
without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be
born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

From Galatians:

“The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so much for nothing?—if it really was for nothing. Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?”

From Acts:

“While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.”

Now, looking at the first text, from Trent, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit at Baptism.

But looking at the second two texts, from Galatians and Acts, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit when we first believe.

What do you think?

 

[PluniaZ]

Trent says, “And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected,
without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof”

Saint Thomas Aquinas elaborates on the three different types of baptism:

home.newadvent.org/summa/4066.htm#article11

So in answer to your question, we do receive the Holy Spirit “when we first believe” because we first believe when we desire baptism, which is one of the three kinds of baptism - the baptism of desire.

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

Trent says, “And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected,
without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof”

Saint Thomas Aquinas elaborates on the three different types of baptism:

home.newadvent.org/summa/4066.htm#article11

So in answer to your question, we do receive the Holy Spirit “when we first believe” because we first believe when we desire baptism, which is one of the three kinds of baptism - the baptism of desire.

That is the understanding we would have to take, wouldnt we?

But were the authors of Trent really intending for that exception, “or the desire thereof”, to actually, in reality, be the norm?

 

[pianistclare]

That is the understanding we would have to take, wouldnt we?

But were the authors of Trent really intending for that exception, “or the desire thereof”, to actually, in reality, be the norm?

The writers at ANY council address problems inherent to their times.
They never intend for us to pick apart every line.
Councils CLARIFY.

It’s not an either/or. It’s both/and.
The Holy Spirit can touch you daily if you are open to being inspired to do good.

 

[thistle]

From the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IV.
A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof
under the law of grace.

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a
translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of
grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our
Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected,
without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be
born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

From Galatians:

“The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so much for nothing?—if it really was for nothing. Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?”

From Acts:

“While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.”

Now, looking at the first text, from Trent, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit at Baptism.

But looking at the second two texts, from Galatians and Acts, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit when we first believe.

What do you think?

You receive the Holy Spirit when you are baptised. Baptism is done in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit!

 

[Todd977]

From Galatians:

“The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so much for nothing?—if it really was for nothing. Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?”

From Acts:

“While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.”

What do you think?

I think the phrase, “believing what you heard,” in Galatians refers to the entire process of Christian initiation, including the reception of the sacrament of baptism.

I think when Acts says, “the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard…the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentile,” it means that Cornelius and company received only the gift of speaking in tongues at that time. It does not mean that they also received justification, a different gift of the Holy Spirit, which is ordinary received in the sacrament of baptism. If they received the gift of justification when the Holy Spirit fell upon them, why were they later baptized? Baptism would have been superfluous.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

I think two people above gave the best answers: (1) I’m pretty sure Aquinas says Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit was an example of Baptism of Desire. The Church teaches that Baptism of Desire (or Confession of Desire) includes within it the desire to receive the physical Sacrament as soon as possible, which Cornelius did do. (2) Alternatively, it could mean Cornelius received a different grace that didn’t include Justification, so this also wouldn’t cause any conflicts.

 

[Reuben_J]

deleted - double posting.

 

[Reuben_J]

From the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IV.
A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof
under the law of grace.

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a
translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of
grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our
Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected,
without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be
born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

From Galatians:

“The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so much for nothing?—if it really was for nothing. Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?”

From Acts:

“While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.”

Now, looking at the first text, from Trent, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit at Baptism.

But looking at the second two texts, from Galatians and Acts, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit when we first believe.

What do you think?

At Baptism. We can have the Holy Spirit experience even without being baptized but it is in Baptism that we are given the indeletable mark of the Holy Spirit in our souls.

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

I think the phrase, “believing what you heard,” in Galatians refers to the entire process of Christian initiation, including the reception of the sacrament of baptism.

I think when Acts says, “the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard…the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentile,” it means that Cornelius and company received only the gift of speaking in tongues at that time. It does not mean that they also received justification, a different gift of the Holy Spirit, which is ordinary received in the sacrament of baptism. If they received the gift of justification when the Holy Spirit fell upon them, why were they later baptized? Baptism would have been superfluous.

No, “believing what you heard” does not refer to the entire process of Christian initiation. It refers to this: Romans 10:9-10. As demonstrated in Acts with Cornelius.

The Church teaches that the infilling of The Holy Spirit automatically provides sanctifying grace, adoption as sons, regeneration, and justification. It is the Baptism of Desire.

But it does not bring about the indelible mark on the soul, nor does it allow for the other Sacraments. Only water Baptism does those two things. So water Baptism is not superfluous just because a person has experienced Baptism of Desire.

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

The writers at ANY council address problems inherent to their times.
They never intend for us to pick apart every line.
Councils CLARIFY.

It’s not an either/or. It’s both/and.
The Holy Spirit can touch you daily if you are open to being inspired to do good.

It sounds like you have a rather low view of the infallibility of a Church Council.

But I think we would have to have that view if we are going to interpret Trent according to the Biblical Testimony, wouldnt we?

“or the desire thereof” - this would include any sincere conversion to Jesus, such that justification would always be transmitted in conversion, and almost never in actual water Baptism, but almost always in Baptism of Desire.

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

it seems to me that Baptism of Desire is actually the ordinary form of justification while water Baptism is actually the more rare form.

if we are talking about the statistics.

 

[PluniaZ]

The baptism of desire is subjective. It depends on the secret intentions of the heart, which only God knows.

Water baptism is objective - it guarantees justification and the indwelling grace of the Holy Spirit.

That’s why Catholics only rely on the baptism of desire in the case of someone who dies while intending to be water baptized.

This is also what makes Catholicism so great. Our sacraments provide objective evidence that we are justified, absolved, and have received the new life of the Holy Spirit.

We don’t have to constantly agonize, “Do I really believe? Am I sincerely repentant? Was I really saved???”

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

Plunia, in your first post you admitted that we receive The Holy Spirit, and thus Baptism of Desire and justification, at the moment we believe in our hearts.

So you know well that the Church does not only admit Baptism of Desire for those who die before water Baptism.

Baptism of Desire happens the moment a person loves Jesus.

Yes, it is subjective. But for the person who has truly experienced the supernatural conversion and regeneration of The Holy Spirit, there is no question left in their mind about whether it was authentic or not. It literally rocks their world.

The question I have is regarding the Council of Trent and how we should interpret it in light of these facts. Because it seems to me that justification normally (statistically) happens at the moment of conversion - and this always prior to water Baptism. Thus, was it really accurate (and not just not false) for the Council to say that justification “cannot occur without water Baptism [or the desire thereof]” ?

I see the loop-hole, “or the desire thereof”, that allows for this understanding to be incorporated into the Council’s teachings. However, the teaching itself, would seem to point, on the face of it, in a different direction.

Would it not?

 

[twf]

it seems to me that Baptism of Desire is actually the ordinary form of justification while water Baptism is actually the more rare form.

if we are talking about the statistics.

Statistically, most Catholics are baptized and justified as infants.
You’re also cherry picking verses. What about other scenarios in the Acts where baptism clearly comes first? Takes Acts 8 for example.

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

Statistically, most Catholics are baptized and justified as infants.
You’re also cherry picking verses. What about other scenarios in the Acts where baptism clearly comes first? Takes Acts 8 for example.

Acts 8 would actually work against the position that The Holy Spirit is given in Baptism since they were already Baptized and still had not received The Holy Spirit until the Apostles came later on and placed hands on them and prayed for them.

The general theme of the NT is that people receive The Holy Spirit at the moment of conversion. In fact, it is impossible for a person to be genuinely converted (so that they love Christ) unless they be simultaneously filled with The Holy Spirit.

I am not denying the justifying effects of Baptism. But it seems to me that we must interpret the Council of Trent with these facts in mind. “Or the desire thereof” seems like a hermeneutical key for working all the pieces together.

 

[twf]

Acts 8 would actually work against the position that The Holy Spirit is given in Baptism since they were already Baptized and still had not received The Holy Spirit until the Apostles came later on and placed hands on them and prayed for them.

The general theme of the NT is that people receive The Holy Spirit at the moment of conversion. In fact, it is impossible for a person to be genuinely converted (so that they love Christ) unless they be simultaneously filled with The Holy Spirit.

I am not denying the justifying effects of Baptism. But it seems to me that we must interpret the Council of Trent with these facts in mind. “Or the desire thereof” seems like a hermeneutical key for working all the pieces together.

I wouldn’t read the passage so literally. Remember, we shouldn’t expect the Acts to have the same level of theological precision that we expect of late medieval and modern Church documents. There was a great deal of development of doctrine between the time of the Acts and the time of Trent. Theological language was not precise in the first century. What exactly do we see in Acts 8? The Apostles lay hands on the newly baptized to confer the gift of the Holy Spirit…that sounds a lot like Confirmation. The Church teaches that Confirmation seals and completes baptism. I don’t think we should assume that these individuals didn’t encounter the Holy Spirit in some sense prior to that moment…He guided them to conversion and repentance…He came upon them in baptism… but the fullness of the Holy Spirit was given to them through the sacrament of confirmation by the Apostles.

 

[JonNC]

From the Council of Trent:

CHAPTER IV.
A description is introduced of the Justification of the impious, and of the Manner thereof
under the law of grace.

By which words, a description of the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a
translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of
grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our
Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected,
without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof, as it is written; unless a man be
born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.

From Galatians:

“The only thing I want to learn from you is this: Did you receive the Spirit by doing the works of the law or by believing what you heard? Are you so foolish? Having started with the Spirit, are you now ending with the flesh? Did you experience so much for nothing?—if it really was for nothing. Well then, does God supply you with the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?”

From Acts:

“While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they invited him to stay for several days.”

Now, looking at the first text, from Trent, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit at Baptism.

But looking at the second two texts, from Galatians and Acts, it would seem that we receive The Holy Spirit when we first believe.

What do you think?

Why would we consider this either/or? An infant receives the Spirit at Baptism, which is the beginning of faith. Someone not baptized can receive the Spirit by hearing the word.

 

[twf]

I wouldn’t read the passage so literally. Remember, we shouldn’t expect the Acts to have the same level of theological precision that we expect of late medieval and modern Church documents. There was a great deal of development of doctrine between the time of the Acts and the time of Trent. Theological language was not precise in the first century. What exactly do we see in Acts 8? The Apostles lay hands on the newly baptized to confer the gift of the Holy Spirit…that sounds a lot like Confirmation. The Church teaches that Confirmation seals and completes baptism. I don’t think we should assume that these individuals didn’t encounter the Holy Spirit in some sense prior to that moment…He guided them to conversion and repentance…He came upon them in baptism… but the fullness of the Holy Spirit was given to them through the sacrament of confirmation by the Apostles.

To elaborate I don’t see it as either/or. There are different modes of receiving the Spirit. We receive the Spirit at both baptism and confirmation and both leave an indelible mark. Yet clearly the Spirit draws the non baptized to reptenance in the first place. The Acts doesn’t get into the moment of justification as Trent does.

 

[TaylorDonBarret]

Why would we consider this either/or? An infant receives the Spirit at Baptism, which is the beginning of faith. Someone not baptized can receive the Spirit by hearing the word.

I agree with both of these things. My question has more to do with the logic behind the Council fathers at Trent in putting Baptism up front, to the degree that they say,

“the Justification of the impious is indicated,-as being a translation, from that state wherein man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace, and of the adoption of the sons of God, through the second Adam, Jesus Christ, our Saviour. And this translation, since the promulgation of the Gospel, cannot be effected, without the laver of regeneration, or the desire thereof,”

Based on this passage, one would naturally be led to assume that, under normal circumstances, it is impossible for a person to be justified (filled with The Holy Spirit), unless they are water Baptized.

The ‘loop-hole’ that would allow us to make sense of the evangelical reality that converts are always filled with The Holy Spirit at the moment of sincere faith and conversion, is that little addition on the end… “of the desire thereof.”

But it would seem much more accurate if the Council fathers would have just went with the general theme of the NT which says that justification (being filled with The Holy Spirit) occurs at the moment of sincere faith and conversion.