Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Forest Keeper; Dr. Eckleburg
Also see in the Summa:

Whether children should be baptized?

Now children contract original sin from the sin of Adam; which is made clear by the fact that they are under the ban of death, which "passed upon all" on account of the sin of the first man, as the Apostle says in the same passage (Romans 5:12). Much more, therefore, can children receive grace through Christ, so as to reign in eternal life. But our Lord Himself said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Consequently it became necessary to baptize children, that, as in birth they incurred damnation through Adam so in a second birth they might obtain salvation through Christ.

[...]

The spiritual regeneration effected by Baptism is somewhat like carnal birth, in this respect, that as the child while in the mother's womb receives nourishment not independently, but through the nourishment of its mother, so also children before the use of reason, being as it were in the womb of their mother the Church, receive salvation not by their own act, but by the act of the Church.


7,180 posted on 05/25/2006 12:00:43 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6820 | View Replies ]


To: annalex; jo kus
[From "Whether children should be baptized?"] But our Lord Himself said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Consequently it became necessary to baptize children, that, as in birth they incurred damnation through Adam so in a second birth they might obtain salvation through Christ.

Well, my version does not use the word "again" until verse 7. Here is the KJV:

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

This is a pretty big difference, as your version strongly implies that being born again is both by water and of the Spirit. Neither my, nor the KJV version share that conclusion at all. Ours say clearly that there are two births, one of "water", whatever that means, and two, of the Spirit. I don't know what version you're using. ... The "Consequently" drawn by the author was clearly made with a foregone conclusion in mind. So, IF 10 assumptions are taken as true, then I suppose the "consequently" would follow.

The spiritual regeneration effected by Baptism is somewhat like carnal birth, in this respect, that as the child while in the mother's womb receives nourishment not independently, but through the nourishment of its mother, so also children before the use of reason, being as it were in the womb of their mother the Church, receive salvation not by their own act, but by the act of the Church.

I know these are not your words, but "salvation ... by the act of the Church". This is the stuff of one of the meanest things I could say to you, and yet New Advent proclaims it openly. :) I don't get it.

P.S. I'm sorry you didn't get to the beach, and it's good to have you back. :) I'm going to be road-tripping myself (Orlando) in about two weeks, so we'll see what kind of luck I have beach-wise. If you were sharing the gospel with hippos in San Diego, then for sure they were Republican hippos. Since they live so close to the border, I would be interested in their take on the House and Senate immigration bills currently headed for conference. Do San Diego hippos believe in amnesty? :)

7,296 posted on 05/29/2006 9:04:50 AM PDT by Forest Keeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7180 | View Replies ]

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