Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are Catholics Born Again?
Catholic Educators ^ | Mark Brumley

Posted on 11/11/2005 5:51:08 AM PST by NYer

“Have you been born again?” the Fundamentalist at the door asks the unsuspecting Catholic. The question is usually a segue into a vast doctrinal campaign that leads many ill-instructed Catholics out of the Catholic Church. How? By making them think there is a conflict between the Bible and the Catholic Church over being “born again.”

To be honest, most Catholics probably do not understand the expression “born again.” Yes, they believe in Jesus. And yes, they try to live Christian lives. They probably have some vague awareness that Fundamentalists think being “born again” involves a religious experience or “accepting Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior.” Many cradle Catholics, too, have had their moments of closeness to God, even of joy over God's love and mercy. They may even have had “conversion experiences” of sorts, committing themselves to take their faith seriously and to live more faithfully as disciples of Jesus. But the cradle Catholic probably cannot pinpoint any particular moment in his life when he dropped to his knees and “accepted Jesus” for the first time. As far back as he can recall, he has believed, trusted and loved Jesus as Savior and Lord. Does that prove he has never been “born again”?

Not “the Bible way,” says the Fundamentalist. But the Fundamentalist is wrong there. He misunderstands what the Bible says about being “born again.” Unfortunately, few Catholics understand the biblical use of the term, either. As a result, pastors, deacons, catechists, parents and others responsible for religious education have their work cut out for them. It would be helpful, then, to review the biblical — and Catholic — meaning of the term “born again.”

"BORN AGAIN" THE BIBLE WAY

The only biblical use of the term “born again” occurs in John 3:3-5 — although, as we shall see, similar and related expressions such as “new birth” and ,regeneration” occur elsewhere in Scripture (Titus 3:5; 1 Pet 1:3, 23). In John 3:3, Jesus tells Nicodemus, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” The Greek expression translated “born again” (gennathei anothen) also means “born from above.” Jesus, it seems, makes a play on words with Nicodemus, contrasting earthly life, or what theologians would later dub natural life (“what is born of flesh”), with the new life of heaven, or what they would later call supernatural life (“what is born of Spirit”).

Nicodemus' reply: “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” (John 3:4). Does he simply mistake Jesus to be speaking literally or is Nicodemus himself answering figuratively, meaning, “How can an old man learn new ways as if he were a child again?” We cannot say for sure, but in any case Jesus answers, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, `You must be born again.”' (John 3:5-7).

Here Jesus equates “born again” or “born from above” with “born of water and the Spirit.” If, as the Catholic Church has always held, being “born of water and the Spirit” refers to baptism, then it follows that being “born again” or “born from above” means being baptized.

Clearly, the context implies that born of “water and the Spirit” refers to baptism. The Evangelist tells us that immediately after talking with Nicodemus, Jesus took his disciples into the wilderness where they baptized people (John 3:22). Furthermore, water is closely linked to the Spirit throughout John's Gospel (for instance, in Jesus' encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4:9-13) and in the Johannine tradition (cf. 1 John 5:7). It seems reasonable, then, to conclude that John the Evangelist understands Jesus' words about being “born again” and “born of water and the Spirit” to have a sacramental, baptismal meaning.

OTHER VIEWS OF "BORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT"

Fundamentalists who reject baptismal regeneration usually deny that “born of water and the Spirit” in John 3:5 refers to baptism. Some argue that “water” refers to the “water of childbirth.” On this view, Jesus means that unless one is born of water (at his physical birth) and again of the Spirit (in a spiritual birth), he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

A major problem with this argument, however, is that while Jesus does contrast physical and spiritual life, he clearly uses the term “flesh” for the former, in contrast to “Spirit” for the latter. Jesus might say, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of flesh and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God” — though it would be obvious and absurdly redundant to say that one must be born (i.e., born of flesh) in order to be born again (i.e., born of the Spirit). But using “born of water and the Spirit” to mean “born of the flesh and then of the Spirit” would only confuse things by introducing the term “water” from out of nowhere, without any obvious link to the term “flesh.” Moreover, while the flesh is clearly opposed to the Spirit and the Spirit clearly opposed to the flesh in this passage, the expression “born of water and the Spirit” implies no such opposition. It is not “water” vs. “the Spirit,” but “water and the Spirit.”

Furthermore, the Greek of the text suggests that “born of water and the Spirit” (literally “born of water and spirit”) refers to a single, supernatural birth over against natural birth (“born of the flesh”). The phrase “of water and the Spirit” (Greek, ek hudatos kai pneumatos) is a single linguistical unit. It refers to being “born of water and the Spirit,” not “born of water” on the one hand and “born of the Spirit” on the other.

Another argument used by opponents of baptismal regeneration: “born of water and the Spirit” refers, correspondingly, to the baptism of John (being “born of water”) and the baptism of the Spirit (being “born of ... the Spirit”), which John promised the coming Messiah would effect. Thus, on this view, Jesus says, “Unless a man is born of water through John's baptism and of the Spirit through my baptism, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.”

We have already seen that, according to the Greek, “born of water and the Spirit” refers to a single thing, a single spiritual birth. Thus, the first half of the phrase cannot apply to one thing (John's baptism) and the second half to something else entirely (Jesus' baptism). But even apart from the linguistical argument, if “born of water” refers to John's baptism, then Jesus is saying that in order to be “born again” or “born from above” one must receive John's baptism of water (“born of water ...”) and the Messiah's baptism of the Spirit (“. . . and Spirit”). That would mean only those who have been baptized by John could enter the kingdom of God—which would drastically reduce the population of heaven. In fact, no one holds that people must receive John's baptism in order to enter the Kingdom — something now impossible. Therefore being “born of water . . .” cannot refer to John's baptism.

The most reasonable explanation for “born of water and the Spirit,” then, is that it refers to baptism. This is reinforced by many New Testament texts linking baptism, the Holy Spirit and regeneration. At Jesus' baptism, the Holy Spirit descends upon him as He comes up out of the water (cf. John 1:25-34; Matt 3:13-17; Mark 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22). Furthermore, what distinguishes John's baptism of repentance in anticipation of the Messiah from Christian baptism, is that the latter is a baptism with the Holy Spirit (Matt 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16; John 1:31; Acts 1:4-5).

Consequently, on Pentecost, Peter calls the Jews to “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins” and promises that they will “receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38), thus fulfilling the promise of John. Peter clearly teaches here that the “water baptism,” to which he directs the soon-to-be converts, forgives sins and bestows the Holy Spirit. Christian baptism, then, is no mere external, repentance-ritual with water, but entails an inner transformation or regeneration by the Holy Spirit of the New Covenant; it is a “new birth,” a being “born again” or “born from above.”

In Romans 6:3, Paul says, “Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life” (RNAB). Baptism, says Paul, effects union with the death and resurrection of Christ, so that through it we die and rise to new life, a form of “regeneration.”

According to Titus 3:5, God “saved us through the washing of regeneration (paliggenesias) and renewal by the Holy Spirit.” Opponents of baptismal regeneration argue that the text refers only to the “washing (loutrou) of regeneration” rather than the “baptism of regeneration.” But baptism is certainly a form of washing and elsewhere in the New Testament it is described as a “washing away of sin.” For example, in Acts 22:16, Ananias tells Paul, “Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling upon his name.” The Greek word used for the “washing away of sins” in baptism here is apolousai, essentially the same term used in Titus 3:5. Furthermore, since “washing” and “regeneration” are not ordinarily related terms, a specific kind of washing — one that regenerates — must be in view. The most obvious kind of washing which the reader would understand would be baptism, a point even many Baptist scholars, such as G.R. Beasley-Murray, admit. (See his book Baptism in the New Testament.)

In 1 Peter 1:3, it is stated that God has given Christians “a new birth to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” The term “new birth” (Gk, anagennasas, “having regenerated”) appears synonymous with “born again” or “regeneration.” According to 1 Peter 1:23, Christians “have been born anew (Gk, anagegennamenoi, “having been regenerated”) not from perishable but from imperishable seed, through the living and abiding word of God.” From the word of the Gospel, in other words.

Opponents of baptismal regeneration argue that since the “new birth” mentioned in 1 Peter 1:3 and 23 is said to come about through the Word of God, being “born again” means accepting the Gospel message, not being baptized. This argument overlooks the fact that elsewhere in the New Testament accepting the gospel message and being baptized are seen as two parts of the one act of commitment to Christ.

In Mark 16:16, for instance, Jesus says, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned.” “Believing”, i.e., accepting the Gospel, entails accepting baptism, which is the means by which one “puts on Christ” (Gal. 3:27) and is buried and raised with him to new life (Rom 6:3-5; Gal 2:12). Acts 2:41 says of the Jewish crowd on Pentecost, “Those who accepted his message were baptized . . .” It seems reasonable to conclude that those whom 1 Peter 1:23 describes as “having been born anew” or regenerated through the “living and abiding word of God” were also those who had been baptized. Thus, being “born of water and the Spirit” and being “born anew” through “the living and abiding word of God” describe different aspects of one thing — being regenerated in Christ. Being “born again” (or “from above”) in “water and the Spirit” refers to the external act of receiving baptism, while being “born anew” refers to the internal reception in faith of the Gospel (being “born anew” through “the living and abiding word of God”).

Moreover, baptism involves a proclamation of the Word, which is part of what constitutes it (i.e., “I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”). To accept baptism is to accept the Word of God. There is no need, then, to see the operation of the Word of God in regeneration as something opposed to or separated from baptism.

Some Fundamentalists also object that being “born again” through baptismal regeneration contradicts the Pauline doctrine of justification by grace through faith. Implicit here is the idea that Christian baptism is a mere “human work” done to earn favor before God. In fact, Christian baptism is something that is done to one (one is baptized — passive), not something one does for oneself. The one who baptizes, according to the Bible, is Jesus Himself by the power of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 1:33). It makes no more sense to oppose baptism and faith in Christ to one another as means of regeneration than it does to oppose faith in Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit to one another. There is no either/or here; it is both/and.

THE CATHOLIC VIEW OF BEING "BORN AGAIN"

Following the New Testament use of the term, the Catholic Church links regeneration or being “born again” in the life of the Spirit to the sacrament of baptism (CCC, nos. 1215,1265-1266). Baptism is not a mere human “work” one does to “earn” regeneration and divine sonship; it is the work of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, which, by grace, washes away sin and makes us children of God. It is central to the Catholic understanding of justification by grace. For justification is, as the Council of Trent taught, “a translation from that state in which 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” (Session 6, chapter 4). Baptism is an instrumental means by which God graciously justifies — that is, regenerates — sinners through faith in Jesus Christ and makes them children of God.

Catholic teaching is not opposed to a “religious experience” of conversion accompanying baptism (of adults) — far from it. But such an “experience” is not required. What is required for baptism to be fruitful (for an adult) is repentance from sin and faith in Christ, of which baptism is the sacrament (CCC, no. 1253). These are grace-enabled acts of the will that are not necessarily accompanied by feelings of being “born again.” Regeneration rests on the divinely established fact of incorporation and regeneration in Christ, not on feelings one way or the other.

This point can be driven home to Evangelicals by drawing on a point they often emphasize in a related context. Evangelicals often say that the act of having accepted Christ as “personal Savior and Lord” is the important thing, not whether feelings accompany that act. It is, they say, faith that matters, not feelings. Believe by faith that Christ is the Savior and the appropriate feelings, they say, will eventually follow. But even if they do not, what counts is the fact of having taken Christ as Savior.

Catholics can say something similar regarding baptism. The man who is baptized may not “feel” any different after baptism than before. But once he is baptized, he has received the Holy Spirit in a special way. He has been regenerated and made a child of God through the divine sonship of Jesus Christ in which he shares. He has been buried with Christ and raised to new life with Him. He has objectively and publicly identified himself with Jesus' death and resurrection. If the newly baptized man meditates on these things, he may or may not “feel” them, in the sense of some subjective religious experience. Nevertheless, he will believe them to be true by faith. And he will have the benefits of baptism into Christ nonetheless.

A "BORN AGAIN" CHRISTIAN?

When Fundamentalists call themselves “born again Christians,” they want to stress an experience of having entered into a genuine spiritual relationship with Christ as Savior and Lord, in contradistinction to unbelief or a mere nominal Christianity. As we have seen, though, the term “born again” and its parallel terms “new birth” and “regeneration” are used by Jesus and the New Testament writers to refer to the forgiveness of sins and inner renewal of the Holy Spirit signified and brought about by Christ through baptism.

How, then, should a Catholic answer the question, “Have you been born again?” An accurate answer would be, “Yes, I was born again in baptism.” Yet leaving it at that may generate even more confusion. Most Fundamentalists would probably understand the Catholic to mean, “I'm going to heaven simply because I'm baptized.” In other words, the Fundamentalist would think the Catholic is “trusting in his baptism” rather than Christ, whereas the informed Catholic knows it means trusting in Christ with whom he is united in baptism.

The Catholic, then, should do more than simply point to his baptism; he should discuss his living faith, trust and love of Christ; his desire to grow in sanctity and conformity to Christ; and his total dependence on Christ for salvation. These are integral to the new life of the Holy Spirit that baptism bestows. When the Fundamentalist sees the link between baptism and the Holy Spirit in the life of his Catholic neighbor, he may begin to see that St. Paul was more than figurative when he wrote, “You were buried with Christ in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col 2:12).


TOPICS: Activism; Apologetics; Catholic; Charismatic Christian; Current Events; Ecumenism; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant; Ministry/Outreach; Religion & Culture; Theology; Worship
KEYWORDS: baptism; bible; bornagain; catholics; scripture; spirit
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 701-702 next last
To: x5452

The Jesuits (Society of Jesus) is a religous order that got lost in the 60's. They run a lot of "Catholic In Name Only" universities that charge out the rump only to pollute young minds with dissent. 57chevy's parents should ask for their money back.

My sincerest apologies to Fr. Pacwa of course. Their are a lot of great Jesuits, unfortunately they are mostly already in heaven. Campion might have more details for you.


241 posted on 11/11/2005 12:49:08 PM PST by Nihil Obstat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: Nihil Obstat
Fr. John Hardon was a fine Jesuit. He'll make a fine Beatus and a fine saint someday, God willing.

Most of the Jesuit colleges in the U.S. are well off the wagon. Creighton U. in Omaha is still somewhat Catholic. Fordham and Georgetown are horror shows, IMO.

242 posted on 11/11/2005 12:51:44 PM PST by Campion (Truth is not determined by a majority vote -- Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: 57chevypreterist

Good for you!

I went to mass and discovered Jesus. We both have had important, Christ-centered religious experiences. I will not denigrate yours, if you don't belittle mine.


243 posted on 11/11/2005 12:51:59 PM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: 57chevypreterist

How is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit related to "Popery" as you call it? Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the rejection of His mercy.

No offense, but it sounds like you found your way into a stack of Jack Chick comic books.


244 posted on 11/11/2005 12:52:21 PM PST by Rutles4Ever ("Fizellas! Looks like you guys are up to no good. Well, THIS gang used to be like that TOO, 3, 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Nihil Obstat

Jesuit spirituality at its best leads men to being saints...at it's worst, we get scandal.


245 posted on 11/11/2005 12:53:03 PM PST by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: SoothingDave
"God is a big punching bag who takes whatever we do to Him in stride?"

And how did you arrive at this conclusion? I plainly stated that God creates in us a new heart and spirit to follow Him. We don't punch anything unless 1) God has guide us to punch something or 2) we are in sin in which God will chastised us.

246 posted on 11/11/2005 12:55:54 PM PST by HarleyD (1 John 5:1 - "everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Campion brought up the Popery, not me!

And I get a hoot out of Chick tracts, even though some of the theology presented therein is error.


247 posted on 11/11/2005 12:58:03 PM PST by 57chevypreterist (Remember, your orthodoxy was once heresy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 244 | View Replies]

To: Campion

As it says in Corinthians:

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God."

Paul makes the distinction between what we are to men, and what God views us as. I might be a Jew or a Gentile to man, but to God (and Paul), I am a member of the one Body of Christ. I may have once stolen, but in God's eyes, I am no thief, because of Christ's glorious redemption of me. If you apply the verse the way that you wish to, no one who has ever done any of those things can enter heaven. No one who has ever coveted, or been drunk, or stolen anything, or fooled someone. If I apply the verse that way, then I am eternally and hopefully secured to hell, for there is no provision for Grace in that statement.


248 posted on 11/11/2005 12:58:54 PM PST by madconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: All

It's been great; it's been fun; gotta run! I'm out of time.

Enjoy the weekend, and enjoy your worship of God this Sunday.

Blessings to you all.


249 posted on 11/11/2005 12:59:56 PM PST by 57chevypreterist (Remember, your orthodoxy was once heresy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
"Man cooperates either through his own faith or through the faith of others "

Well, I'll congratulate you because you're the first Catholic who hasn't tried to skirt this issue. Where precisely did you get your faith from?

250 posted on 11/11/2005 1:00:40 PM PST by HarleyD (1 John 5:1 - "everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Knitting A Conundrum

Right as always, Knitting. God bless Father Pacwa for holding firm. Father Hardon is a sure saint too.

Hopefully Benedict XVI will keep them on a shorter leash.


251 posted on 11/11/2005 1:00:45 PM PST by Nihil Obstat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 245 | View Replies]

To: HarleyD
And how did you arrive at this conclusion?

You said you don't need to maintain your fellowship with God. I just find that a stunning comment. If you have to work at maintaining fellowship with others, why wouldn't your relationship with God be even more important.

Clearly you're not a robot. Yes, God gives us a new Spirit with a desire to follow Him. But He also leaves us free to choose.

SD

252 posted on 11/11/2005 1:02:24 PM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 246 | View Replies]

To: Dionysiusdecordealcis; Rutles4Ever
Do you truly not know how we explain cooperation or are you just baiting us?

Yes we've been round this before but no one has ever answered my question. Rutles4Ever was the first Catholic that I have ever heard tell me what "cooperation" meant and it is exactly my point-"man's faith". I can't even find it on newadvent.

253 posted on 11/11/2005 1:03:52 PM PST by HarleyD (1 John 5:1 - "everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: madconservative
Paul makes the distinction between what we are to men, and what God views us as.

??? Huh? "Fornicators and adulterers shall not inherit the Kingdom of Heaven." How do you understand that having anything to do with "what we are to men"? What we are to men has nothing do with our eternal destiny, yet Paul just made a clear statement about the eternal destiny of those who die unrepentant of those grave sins.

Such were some of you

Past tense. They've repented of those sins, but you aren't truly repenting of something if you continue to do it.

254 posted on 11/11/2005 1:04:44 PM PST by Campion (Truth is not determined by a majority vote -- Pope Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: madconservative
No one who has ever coveted, or been drunk, or stolen anything, or fooled someone. If I apply the verse that way, then I am eternally and hopefully secured to hell, for there is no provision for Grace in that statement.

No one who continues in drunkeness, thievery, tomfoolery, etc. will be saved.

SD

255 posted on 11/11/2005 1:05:49 PM PST by SoothingDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: 57chevypreterist

Right, because Catholics are normally ignorant, but a statement like this is REALLY ignorant...???


256 posted on 11/11/2005 1:07:40 PM PST by jcb8199
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: madconservative
If you apply the verse the way that you wish to, no one who has ever done any of those things can enter heaven. No one who has ever coveted, or been drunk, or stolen anything, or fooled someone. If I apply the verse that way, then I am eternally and hopefully secured to hell, for there is no provision for Grace in that statement.

This is why the Apostles and their successors were given the power to forgive (or not forgive) sins. Through the sacrament of penance, that grace you speak of is imparted to the penitent. What you're saying is that God decides to shield His eyes from what you really are because of Christ's sacrifice on the Cross. But then, God would be lying to Himself, and He cannot do that. God, through the sacrifice of Christ, and thus, the establishment of the Christ provides the means of cleansing through the sacrament. I mean, what kind of God would leave me in muck so and throw a sheet over me so He doesn't have to witness my sinfulness. God loves me more than that. He'd rather we were separated until the point I actually become cleansed by His grace. The TRUTH, it sets you free, you know...

257 posted on 11/11/2005 1:08:56 PM PST by Rutles4Ever ("Fizellas! Looks like you guys are up to no good. Well, THIS gang used to be like that TOO, 3, 4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 248 | View Replies]

To: 57chevypreterist

We worship God, we honor/adore Mary. I think people diminish the value of Mary--she was the MOTHER OF CHRIST. She was the one who told Him to do His first miracle! I mean, seriously, it is not worship to see her value--she was His mother. Don't forget "Honor your father and mother." Christ honored Mary, so Catholics do, too. Not worship...


258 posted on 11/11/2005 1:09:26 PM PST by jcb8199
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: 57chevypreterist

And since all of us are followers of Christ, we never sin, or forget self-control...


259 posted on 11/11/2005 1:10:26 PM PST by jcb8199
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: 57chevypreterist

Why wait till Sunday?


260 posted on 11/11/2005 1:10:41 PM PST by x5452
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 701-702 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson