Judge Bork, baptized at 76

U.S. News & World Report ^ | 7/22/03 | Paul Bedard With David LaGesse

[nickcarraway]

It may be a little late to start for most, but Robert Bork, the former Supreme Court nominee who has written books decrying the decline of Western culture, has just been baptized. Rev. C. John McCloskey, who represents the conservative and activist Opus Dei arm of the Roman Catholic Church and oversaw the baptism, said, "I can confirm that he was received in the Catholic Church." Bork, a scholar with the conservative American Enterprise Institute, was raised a Protestant and had called himself a "generic Protestant." He was known more for his conservative legal views, which some Democrats used to shoot down his court nomination during the Reagan administration.

In a brief interview, he said that years of "conversations and reading" led him to baptism at McCloskey's small Catholic Information Center chapel on K Street near the White House. "There's more to talk about than you can put in a brief story." He called himself a regular Catholic who attends Sunday mass, not an Opus Dei member.

He said talks with and recommendations from the priest, as well as attending church with his wife, Mary Ellen Bork, a former nun, helped pave the way to the ceremony.

Bork's sponsors were Kate O'Beirne, a conservative media star, and John O'Sullivan, head of UPI.

Lots of other prominent Catholics were there, such as columnist and speechwriter Peggy Noonan, herself a convert.

McCloskey has made several other high-level conversions of conservatives, bringing into the Catholic Church conservative columnist Robert Novak and Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas.

The best part of getting baptized at 76, said Bork: "If you get baptized at my age, all of your sins are forgiven. And that's very helpful."

According to Archdiocese of Washington Communications Director Susan Gibbs, Msgr. William Awalt, the longtime pastor of the Borks, baptized the judge, confirmed him and gave him First Communion. Father McCloskey celebrated the Mass, along with Msgr. Peter Vaghi, pastor of St. Patrick's.

[mdmathis6]

I was reading from my Bible..not from any-thing that happened 1300years after the Western Church split from the Eastern church, with the western church declaring itself as the ONLY BODY AS TO WHOM GOD GRANTED AUTHORITY ON EARTH!

Chewbacca was saying that it is the baptism of the heart and the empowering of the Holy Spirit on the inside of a man's heart with a subsequent change of behaviour that are the true marks of a man's Salvation. I dare say many Baptists as well as Catholics may not be saved for they may have substituted outer rituals for true inner life (In order not to have that inner life ruled by God...a pride thing!).

Are you familiar with the parable of the sower of the seed? The seed that fell on the good ground reproduced some 30,60, then 100 fold. Each one of those seeds produced a parent plant that in turn produced multiple other seeds. This was not just about individuals who were saved but also about the multiple GOD breathed institutions that would arise thru history to organize the spreading of the Gospel and to give solace and succour to the faithful OF WHICH THE WESTERN NOW CALLED ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH WAS TO BE ONE OF MANY!

THE CHURCH IS NOT ABOUT ONE VATICAN RULED BUREAUCRACY...but about about a tiny mustard seed that grew and grew...

Heaven resists the complications men would ascribe to her!

[Galatians513]

How about churches that baptize in the name of Jesus Christ, rather than Father, Son, Holy Ghost? I don't mean Oneness Pentecostals...

[NYer]

Interesting article ...

Catholicism Is The Answer (by Bud Macfarlane Jr.)

Extract:

The Conversion of Protestant Ministers to Catholicism. What started as a trickle with Scott Hahn in the 1980s is now a steady stream of hundreds of conversions. Many or most of our best preachers and apostolic leaders were once anti-Catholic Protestants.

[Coleus]

If so, does the Catholic Church not recognize the legitimacy of his prior baptism? >>>>>

I think they do. Maybe this was done as a ceremonious occasion and he received the other sacraments along with it: Eucharist and Confirmation or maybe he was never baptized, who knows.

[Coleus]

Thanks for the ping

Welcome to our family Judge Bork!

He married a former nun and I thought he was already a practicing Catholic. Incidentally, two Jews in the media converted to Catholicism also: Dick Morris and Robert Novak.

[Coleus]

We have a few married priests with children in our diocese, they were once protestant (mainly Episcopal) ministers.

[LivingNet]

The thief on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized, but was saved nevertheless.

I wish my Christian brethren would give up on this "thief on the cross" argument. It is a horrible argument to make for these reasons:
1. Yes salvation is by faith in Jesus. But not that Jesus is or even that he is God. It is by faith in a very specific thing.
2. That thing is the gospel message (I Cor 15:1-4)
3. The gospel is that "Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and rose again"
4. Faith/Salvation in the church age/Christian era requires believe in those 3 things (death for my sins, burial, resurrection).
5. The thief on the cross did not believe any of those 3 parts of the gospel as none of them had even happened yet.
6. Yes the thief on the cross was saved by faith but the faith of the Old Testament Theology/era/dispensation. There was no baptism as part of the Old Testament (Jewish) salvation/theology. The bible says "Abraham believed God and it was counted to him as righteousness" (note - this was before his circumcision - Paul makes a huge point about this in the whole chapter of Romans 4).
7. Baptism is part of the New Testament/Christian/Church age theology and in EVERY single case in the bible was administered after faith/belief in the gospel. Also in every case in the Bible it was done immediately after belief (not weeks, months, etc. later - it is a travesty to make people go through a 13 week membership class before they can be baptised).

The thief on the cross has nothing to do with the baptism arguments/studies.

[DannyTN]

Catholics do recognize Baptism by Desire-wanting Jesus into your life.

I'm sorry, I thought that said "do not". Yes, when a person accepts Jesus and asks for his death to cover their sins, they are baptised in the Holy Spirt. It's that baptism that saves not the water baptism which is a sign of obedience.

[D Rider]

I know that baptism is a testimony of faith in Jesus Christ. But I do have one question:

Is baptism required for salvation? Or is salvation required for baptism?

[DannyTN]

"7. Baptism is part of the New Testament/Christian/Church age theology and in EVERY single case in the bible was administered after faith/belief in the gospel. Also in every case in the Bible it was done immediately after belief (not weeks, months, etc. later - it is a travesty to make people go through a 13 week membership class before they can be baptised)."

It's still the faith that saves, that results in the spirit baptism. It's not the water baptism that saves, it's merely a sign of obedience.

And if you not my last post on this thread, I misread Haole's post, who in a sense had agreed with me.

[ELS]

Re: Bork - Better late than never!

[mdmathis6]

I know what it says in the Bible. John the Baptist baptized those repentant ones with water. He said Christ would baptize with fire....so I the thief was........ baptized..with Christ's Holy spirit Fire...with his blood poured out for the complete remission(pay back to God) of the thief's sins. Had the thief survived, he might have been baptized with water, symbolizing the burial of the old man and the rising up of the new resurrected man, per the command of Chist and the early church.

This is why many sects use immersion...not only because the early Greek texts of scripture used the greek term baptizmo(or dunking, immersion, literally burial under water), but because of this emphasis of dying to the old sinful man and the rising up of the new resurrected man. Sprinkling and pouring is also recognized by these same sects because some who are frail or infirm couldn't handle the immersion.

Baptism is both a recognition and symbol of what our past was and what our future is going to be as believers. The cleansing of our sins was done by Jesus Christ's blood sacrifice alone! His resurrection seals the deal by THE demonstration of God's POWER OVER DEATH! By undergoing Baptism, you are telling all publically that you are following Christ's exhortation of laying down one's life, taking up one's cross and following him.

[mdmathis6]

Apparently the Eastern church had some of the same thoughts as those who came 1500 years later..hence the first major schism.

[DannyTN]

"Is baptism required for salvation? Or is salvation required for baptism? "

There are two baptisms, baptism in the Spirit and baptism by water.

Baptism in the spirit is a result of salvation. It occurs when one accepts Jesus through prayer. Baptism by water is a testimony of faith and an act of obedience.

If one isn't willing to be baptised then you have to question if they are repentant. But it's the faith and the resulting baptism by the spirit that saves, not the water baptism.

[Eva]

I'll be watching for a Peggy Noonan article on this story.

[BibChr]

"If you get baptized at my age, all of your sins are forgiven. And that's very helpful."

Golly, that's sad!

Dan
How Can I Know God?

[Campion]

It's that baptism that saves not the water baptism which is a sign of obedience.

Then why does 1 Peter 3:21 say flatly that water baptism saves? Not apart from faith, of course -- nobody believes that, including Catholics -- but integral to faith.

There are a lot of personal theological opinions on this thread that are not consistent with Scripture.

[Campion]

There are two baptisms, baptism in the Spirit and baptism by water.

Baptism in the spirit is a result of salvation. It occurs when one accepts Jesus through prayer. Baptism by water is a testimony of faith and an act of obedience.

Except that the Bible says its a good deal more than that.

'Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.'--Acts 22:16

Why are people complaining that Judge Bork says of baptism exactly what Ananias, a man sent by God to convert Paul (!!) said of baptism -- that it washes away sins?

As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?"--Acts 8:36

Philip didn't correct the eunuch's (supposed) theological error. He baptized him. With water. The wet kind.

[Campion]

Golly, that's sad!

Golly, that's unBiblical!

[mdmathis6]

Look at the whole scripture in context not just a little verse lifted out of it. If water Baptism saved then the repentant thief on the cross could not have been saved. The accepted process back then was to acknowledge Christm ask for his forgiveness for your sins, ask him in to your life and then get water baptzed. Acts 8:26 thru 39 describes such a conversion model. Philip is preaching to a Ethiopian Eunuch. The Ethiopian askes him what "hinders" him to be baptized. Philip replies "If you believe with all your heart, you may." The eunuch answered and said "I believe that Jesus Christ is the SON OF GOD" Then Philip Baptized the Eunuch.

See...so easy a child could understand it, hence the complicated arguements from the "ADULTS"...(we love to choak on gnats and swallow camels...don't we...ADULTS?!)

Heaven resists the complexities that men ascribe to her!