3. Η αγνοειτε, etc.: Βαπτιζειν her includes the idea of immersion. When the
candidate for baptism was totally immersed (according to ancient custom) in the
baptismal water, he was symbolically drowned and buried, and thus the baptismal
rite was a symbol of the death and burial of Jesus. The coming forth from among
the water was a symbol of the Resurrection of Christ . . . . Chrysostom says: “What
the cross and the tomb were for Christ, Baptism has become for us.”
To be baptised into Christ (εις Χριστον Ιησουν, not in Christo Jesu, but in
Christum Jesum) is to be baptised into community of life and grace with
Him. “Unto His Death” means—so as to die His death, or to die as He died.
The community of life with Jesus into which
men are baptised is the Unio mystica.
That union is not a mere harmony of mind and will with Christ, but a real union
which the Sacrament of Baptism produces. In virtue of that union the baptised
are really “in Christ” (Cf. viii. 1;
1 Cor. i. 30; xii. 13; Eph. v. 30; Gal. iii. 27; John xv. 1 ff, etc.)
Being baptised into the death (εις θανατον—not in morte) of Christ, implies that the baptised are really dead to
sin through the union with the dying Christ effected ex opera operato by Baptism.
The manner in which Paul puts the question in
v. 3 suggests that the idea of the
mystic death and resurrection of the baptised was a familiar feature of the
Christian teaching of the time. This is borne out by Col. ii. 12; iii. 1-3; 1
Pet. iv. 1 f, etc. It is to be noted, of course, that dying with Christ, being
buried with Him, and being raised up with Him are merely different aspects of
one event. In fact, they all occur together in the infusion of sanctifying
grace Cf. 1 Cor. vi. 11.
4. Συνεταφημεν ουν, etc. It seems best to take εις τον
θανατον immediately
with δια του βαπτισματος
(not with συνεταφημεν). Possibly αυτου should be supplied after θανατου from v. 3. The sense would be, then, that we have been buried with Him through
the baptism-unto-death, or through the baptism-unto-His-death.
After death and burial we rise up, like
Christ, to a new life—to walk in a new life Christ was raised up from the dead “by
the glory of the Father”—i.e., by the
glorious power, the omnipotence of the Father (Cf. ii. 11 f).
In raising Christ from the dead the glory and
majesty of God were most strikingly manifested (Cf. John xi. 40). The “glory of the Father” may also be intended
here to suggest the glory to which Christ returned by Hi Resurrection, and the “glory”
of the Christian life (cf. ii. 7-10;
viii. 19; ix. 23, etc.) as a participation in the life of the Risen Christ.
As Christ was raised up to a glorious life,
so we, too, have been raised up by baptism from the death of sin to an utterly
new life (“newness of life” is stronger than “new life”), which is to be lived
(“that we may walk about” = that we may “live,” or “conduct ourselves”) in union
with the Risen or Pneumatic Christ. In that new life the problem of conduct (περιπατησωμεν) continues, for, though Sin has
no longer a royal or tyrannical power over the justified, disorderly
concupiscence still remains, and has to be kept in subjection (Gal. v. 16-17;
Col. iii. 5 ff); and there is the possibility of relapse into the death of sin.
This excludes every theory that tends to ascribe a “magical” or “quasi-magical”
effect to the Sacrament of Baptism.
5. Ει γαρ συμφυτοι, etc.: συμφυτοι does not occur elsewhere in the
New Testament; it is to be regarded as derived from συμφυειν—not (as Vulgate, complantati, implies) from συμφυτευειν: the word does not mean “engrafted,”
but “grown together into one.” Probably αυτω (or τω Χριστω) should be supplied”—“grown together with Him.” We have become
His associates τω ομοιωματι του θανατου αυτου—i.e., “by a death like
His,” or “by the ‘copy,’ or ‘image’ (i.e.,
Baptism in its aspect of immersion) of His death.” τω ομοιωματι is an instrumental dative.
Some commentators read ομοιωματι with συμφυτοι—“grown together to a death like
His” (So Chrysostom, Aquinas, Estius, Lietzmann, etc.: cf. Vulgate), but this through it is the grouping that immediately
suggests itself, seems less reasonable than the construction above accepted.
Having become associates of Christ by a death
like His, or by the copy of His death (= Baptism), it follows that we shall be
the associates of Christ also by a Resurrection like His, or by the “copy” of
His Resurrection (i.e., Baptism in
its aspect of emergence from the baptismal water): τω ομοιωματι is to be understood in the second
half of the verse, for αναστασεως cannot be made to depend on συμφυτοι.
The future εσομεθα does not imply that we are not
already associated with Christ through a Resurrection like His. It is the
future of logical inference—both antecedent and consequent referring to what
happens in Baptism: If it is certain—as it is—that we are made associates (one)
with Christ by a death like His, it is equally certain that we are made one
with Him by a Resurrection like His. The Resurrection referred to is that which
takes place in Baptism—not, as some commentators assert—the General
Resurrection. The use of the future (εσομεθα) may, however, be due, to some extent, to
Paul’s desire to suggest that the new life is a process, and that it must be
maintained by a steady effort. This thought is also contained in the following verse.
The simul
of the Vulgate is due to a reading αμα—which is less well supported than αλλα.
6. Τουτο γινωσκοντες: The phrase can be rendered “Now we know
(and we ought to take the knowledge to heart and conform our conduct to it)
this.” The τουτο is what
follows. In the “we” Paul puts himself with his readers: the knowledge in question
is shared by all Christians (Cf. Gal.
ii. 16).
The “old man” is the man of the pre-Baptism
period, unregenerate man, the “fleshly ego” of vii. 14. That old man has been
crucified with Christ (“con-crucified”)—i.e.,
he has been united with the death of Christ on the Cross (Cf. Gal. ii. 19, Χριστω συνεσταυρωμαι). The dying with Christ is the “being
baptised into Christ’s death (Cf.
Gal. vi. 14).
When Christ died for us on the cross He died
after the fashion of a criminal, for “He was made a curse for us” (Gal. iii.
13; c. Rom. viii. 3; 2 Cor. v. 21). He
offered Himself as a ransom (αντιλυτρον) for us (1 Tim. Ii. 6), so that in Christ
unregenerate man in general was nailed to the cross. But this mystic
con-crucifixion unregenerate man was given up to death so that “the body of Sin”
should be reduced to impotence (καταργηθη) to the end that we should no longer be
slaves to sin. The ινα clause and the genitive of the infinitive, του μηκετι δουλευειν
ημας, indicate
purpose.
The σωμα της αμαρτιας is the body as the subject of concupiscence,
and the instrument of sin. It is here the same as the παλαιος ανθρωπος συν
ταις πραξεσιν αυτου (Col. iii. 9): when it is dead in baptism,
it can no longer be used in the service of sin . . . With the “body of sin”
compare “the body of this death” (vii. 24). The duty of avoiding slave-service
to Sin is another reminder of the still enduring ethical problems of the life
of the justified. Note that Sin is here again “Queen Sin” (the personification
of Sin is found in the Old Testament in Sirach xxxvii. 10). Even though Sin’s
medium, or weapon, or instrument it put out of action, Sin may reacquire
control: hence the need of constant effort (2) (Cf. Col. iii. 1-3) to walk in the “newness of life.” The Vulgate et ultra non serviasmus ought, of
course, to be ut ultra, etc. The
Vulgate simul crucifixus est is not
so vivid as the Greek. (Patrick
Boylan, St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans:
Translation and Commentary [Dublin: M.H. Gill and Son, Ltd., 1934, 1947], 97-100.
Note: When Boylan says baptism is not “magical,” he means it does not mean one’s
salvation is eternally secure, not that he is rejecting baptismal regeneration,
per the context)