The Great Heresies [Open]

From Christianity’s beginnings, the Church has been attacked by those introducing false teachings, or heresies.

The Bible warned us this would happen. Paul told his young protégé, Timothy, "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths" (2 Tim. 4:3–4).

Heresy is an emotionally loaded term that is often misused. It is not the same thing as incredulity, schism, apostasy, or other sins against faith. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him" (CCC 2089).

To commit heresy, one must refuse to be corrected. A person who is ready to be corrected or who is unaware that what he has been saying is against Church teaching is not a heretic.

A person must be baptized to commit heresy. This means that movements that have split off from or been influenced by Christianity, but that do not practice baptism (or do not practice valid baptism), are not heresies, but separate religions. Examples include Muslims, who do not practice baptism, and Jehovah’s Witnesses, who do not practice valid baptism.

Finally, the doubt or denial involved in heresy must concern a matter that has been revealed by God and solemnly defined by the Church (for example, the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the sacrifice of the Mass, the pope’s infallibility, or the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary).

It is important to distinguish heresy from schism and apostasy. In schism, one separates from the Catholic Church without repudiating a defined doctrine. An example of a contemporary schism is the Society of St. Pius X—the "Lefebvrists" or followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre—who separated from the Church in the late 1980s, but who have not denied Catholic doctrines. In apostasy, one totally repudiates the Christian faith and no longer even claims to be a Christian.

With this in mind, let’s look at some of the major heresies of Church history and when they began.

The Circumcision heresy may be summed up in the words of Acts 15:1: "But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brethren, ‘Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.’"

Many of the early Christians were Jews, who brought to the Christian faith many of their former practices. They recognized in Jesus the Messiah predicted by the prophets and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. Because circumcision had been required in the Old Testament for membership in God’s covenant, many thought it would also be required for membership in the New Covenant that Christ had come to inaugurate. They believed one must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic law to come to Christ. In other words, one had to become a Jew to become a Christian.

But God made it clear to Peter in Acts 10 that Gentiles are acceptable to God and may be baptized and become Christians without circumcision. The same teaching was vigorously defended by Paul in his epistles to the Romans and the Galatians—to areas where the Circumcision heresy had spread.

"Matter is evil!" was the cry of the Gnostics. This idea was borrowed from certain Greek philosophers. It stood against Catholic teaching, not only because it contradicts Genesis 1:31 ("And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good") and other scriptures, but because it denies the Incarnation. If matter is evil, then Jesus Christ could not be true God and true man, for Christ is in no way evil. Thus many Gnostics denied the Incarnation, claiming that Christ only appeared to be a man, but that his humanity was an illusion. Some Gnostics, recognizing that the Old Testament taught that God created matter, claimed that the God of the Jews was an evil deity who was distinct from the New Testament God of Jesus Christ. They also proposed belief in many divine beings, known as "aeons," who mediated between man and the ultimate, unreachable God. The lowest of these aeons, the one who had contact with men, was supposed to be Jesus Christ.

Montanus began his career innocently enough through preaching a return to penance and fervor. His movement also emphasized the continuance of miraculous gifts, such as speaking in tongues and prophecy. However, he also claimed that his teachings were above those of the Church, and soon he began to teach Christ’s imminent return in his home town in Phrygia. There were also statements that Montanus himself either was, or at least specially spoke for, the Paraclete that Jesus had promised would come (in reality, the Holy Spirit).

The Sabellianists taught that Jesus Christ and God the Father were not distinct persons, but two aspects or offices of one person. According to them, the three persons of the Trinity exist only in God’s relation to man, not in objective reality.

Arius taught that Christ was a creature made by God. By disguising his heresy using orthodox or near-orthodox terminology, he was able to sow great confusion in the Church. He was able to muster the support of many bishops, while others excommunicated him.

Arianism was solemnly condemned in 325 at the First Council of Nicaea, which defined the divinity of Christ, and in 381 at the First Council of Constantinople, which defined the divinity of the Holy Spirit. These two councils gave us the Nicene creed, which Catholics recite at Mass every Sunday.

Pelagius denied that we inherit original sin from Adam’s sin in the Garden and claimed that we become sinful only through the bad example of the sinful community into which we are born. Conversely, he denied that we inherit righteousness as a result of Christ’s death on the cross and said that we become personally righteous by instruction and imitation in the Christian community, following the example of Christ. Pelagius stated that man is born morally neutral and can achieve heaven under his own powers. According to him, God’s grace is not truly necessary, but merely makes easier an otherwise difficult task.

After Augustine refuted the teachings of Pelagius, some tried a modified version of his system. This, too, ended in heresy by claiming that humans can reach out to God under their own power, without God’s grace; that once a person has entered a state of grace, one can retain it through one’s efforts, without further grace from God; and that natural human effort alone can give one some claim to receiving grace, though not strictly merit it.

This heresy about the person of Christ was initiated by Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, who denied Mary the title of Theotokos (Greek: "God-bearer" or, less literally, "Mother of God"). Nestorius claimed that she only bore Christ’s human nature in her womb, and proposed the alternative title Christotokos ("Christ-bearer" or "Mother of Christ").

Orthodox Catholic theologians recognized that Nestorius’s theory would fracture Christ into two separate persons (one human and one divine, joined in a sort of loose unity), only one of whom was in her womb. The Church reacted in 431 with the Council of Ephesus, defining that Mary can be properly referred to as the Mother of God, not in the sense that she is older than God or the source of God, but in the sense that the person she carried in her womb was, in fact, God incarnate ("in the flesh").

There is some doubt whether Nestorius himself held the heresy his statements imply, and in this century, the Assyrian Church of the East, historically regarded as a Nestorian church, has signed a fully orthodox joint declaration on Christology with the Catholic Church and rejects Nestorianism. It is now in the process of coming into full ecclesial communion with the Catholic Church.

Monophysitism originated as a reaction to Nestorianism. The Monophysites (led by a man named Eutyches) were horrified by Nestorius’s implication that Christ was two people with two different natures (human and divine). They went to the other extreme, claiming that Christ was one person with only one nature (a fusion of human and divine elements). They are thus known as Monophysites because of their claim that Christ had only one nature (Greek: mono = one; physis = nature).

Orthodox Catholic theologians recognized that Monophysitism was as bad as Nestorianism because it denied Christ’s full humanity and full divinity. If Christ did not have a fully human nature, then he would not be fully human, and if he did not have a fully divine nature then he was not fully divine.

This heresy arose when a group of people known as iconoclasts (literally, "icon smashers") appeared, who claimed that it was sinful to make pictures and statues of Christ and the saints, despite the fact that in the Bible, God had commanded the making of religious statues (Ex. 25:18–20; 1 Chr. 28:18–19), including symbolic representations of Christ (cf. Num. 21:8–9 with John 3:14).

Catharism was a complicated mix of non-Christian religions reworked with Christian terminology. The Cathars had many different sects; they had in common a teaching that the world was created by an evil deity (so matter was evil) and we must worship the good deity instead.

The Albigensians formed one of the largest Cathar sects. They taught that the spirit was created by God, and was good, while the body was created by an evil god, and the spirit must be freed from the body. Having children was one of the greatest evils, since it entailed imprisoning another "spirit" in flesh. Logically, marriage was forbidden, though fornication was permitted. Tremendous fasts and severe mortifications of all kinds were practiced, and their leaders went about in voluntary poverty.

Protestant groups display a wide variety of different doctrines. However, virtually all claim to believe in the teachings of sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone"—the idea that we must use only the Bible when forming our theology) and sola fide ("by faith alone"— the idea that we are justified by faith only).

The great diversity of Protestant doctrines stems from the doctrine of private judgment, which denies the infallible authority of the Church and claims that each individual is to interpret Scripture for himself. This idea is rejected in 2 Peter 1:20, where we are told the first rule of Bible interpretation: "First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation." A significant feature of this heresy is the attempt to pit the Church "against" the Bible, denying that the magisterium has any infallible authority to teach and interpret Scripture.

The doctrine of private judgment has resulted in an enormous number of different denominations. According to The Christian Sourcebook, there are approximately 20-30,000 denominations, with 270 new ones being formed each year. Virtually all of these are Protestant.

Jansenius, bishop of Ypres, France, initiated this heresy with a paper he wrote on Augustine, which redefined the doctrine of grace. Among other doctrines, his followers denied that Christ died for all men, but claimed that he died only for those who will be finally saved (the elect). This and other Jansenist errors were officially condemned by Pope Innocent X in 1653.

Heresies have been with us from the Church’s beginning. They even have been started by Church leaders, who were then corrected by councils and popes. Fortunately, we have Christ’s promise that heresies will never prevail against the Church, for he told Peter, "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18). The Church is truly, in Paul’s words, "the pillar and foundation of the truth" (1 Tim. 3:15).

Blue-Duncan:

Catholics viewing all Protestant Traditions as the same

First, I want to thank you for the well written post and acknowledge that I appreciate you disclosing you are a Protestant in the Reformed-Calvinist tradition. I have found it generally to be the case here that many Protestants or non-Catholics don’t disclose which particular confession they belong too. As a consequence, Catholic posters here (and I have sometimes done this myself), lump all Protestants into the same confession. I have stated many times that Lutherans, Traditional-Anglicans and Reformed-Calvinist Protestants are easier to dialogue with as with those groups, you know what their positions are and thus can easily affirm what Catholics have in common with those groups, and on what issues we differ. So I again, I appreciate you disclosing you are of the Reformed Protestant Tradition.

With respect to my statement “it seems to many (including me) that Protestants start with St. Paul and interpret Christ and the Gospels from that context. This, from the Catholic perspective, is incorrect. The Catechism of the Catholic Church correctly points out, IMO, how the Sacred Scriptures should be interpreted and how the Bible was interpreted throughout Christian History.” I still hold to that position as most of the Protestant literature that one sees (and I have only lived in 3 states in the Southern U.S.), does in fact start with St. Paul and usually calls it the “Roman Road of salvation” The passage that most often starts the Protestant view of justification is Romans 3:28-30; and it is usually complemented by passages from Galatians and Ephesians.

In your first major paragraph, you stated that the Catholic Church focuses heavily on the Incarnation and sees the Church as an extension of the Incarnation. That is in an accurate statement. You also pointed out that Protestant Theology is more a “Cross Theology”. However, I think it is “more accurate” to say that Catholic theology does not make it an Incarnation Theology vs. Cross-Theology. Catholic Doctrine, all of it, connects the Doctrine of Incarnation with the Doctrine of the Cross. Sacraments are tied to both Incarnation and the Paschal Mystery (Passion, Death, Resurrection, etc). Pope Benedict’s great quote from his book Jesus of Nazareth where the Pope links Incarnation and Cross Together illustrates this point nicely:

Pope Benedict states “In this Chapter (Chapter 8 on the images in St. John’s Gospel) the theology of Incarnation and the Theology of the Cross come together; the two cannot be separated. There are thus no grounds for setting up and opposition between Easter theology of the Synoptics and St. Paul, on one hand, and St. John’s supposedly purely Incarnational theology, on the other. For the goal of the Word’s becoming-flesh spoken of by the prologue is precisely the offering of his body on the Cross, which the sacrament makes accessible to us”.

So Catholic doctrine develops everything from the person of Christ, and links Incarnation to the paschal mystery (Passion, Death, Resurrection, and Ascension) and all of Christ’s teachings in between the Doctrine of the Incarnation and Paschal mystery. Thus, Catholic Doctrine on the Church (ecclesiology) is connected to the person of Christ as the Church is The Body of Christ is a mystical communion that is both spiritual and earthly, both a Divine and human element. So, the Church is seen in reference to the body of Christ, who is a Divine Person with a Divine and human nature (c.f. Council of Chalcedon 451 AD).

The Catholic Doctrine of justification (soteriology) again is anchored on the person of Christ, Incarnation, life/teachings, and paschal mystery. We become united with God by his Grace, through his son Christ Jesus and the Holy Spirit. The process of “Theosis” starts at Baptism where the CCC states the Baptized person has become a New Creature, (see CCC para. 1265).

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2.htm#art1

So the purpose of the Incarnation is to restore the image of man when God created him. So, here is a point that both Catholic and Eastern Orthodox doctrine differs with much of the Protestant theology on the “nature of humanity”. In Genesis, God created man and woman in his image. So, humans were created in the Divine image (c.f. Gen 1:27). God looked at his creation, which included man and woman and found it “very good” (c.f. Gen 1: 31). Of course we see in Genesis chapter 3, the fall of man. Of course, this fall was not part of God’s plan that death and sin would enter the world. Thus, if you go back to Gen 1:27, God created us in “the Divine image”, one can see that death and sin are not part of our nature and not part of God’s plan. Because of original sin (Genesis Chapter 3), sin and death entered the world and those are attacks on our “true nature” that God originally created. So, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox theology does not use “sinful nature” for this is rooted in one of Calvin’s 5 Points called “Totally Depraved” or man is totally evil. Rather, Catholic’s see man as “wounded by original sin and fallen from the original stature he had in Genesis 1”, but not totally sinful and not Totally depraved.

So through the Incarnation, Christ takes on our full human nature, only without sin, and through his passion, death, and resurrection, Christ restores/transforms humanity back into the original “Divine image” (c.f. Gen 1:27) that we were originally created. This is how Catholics and Eastern Orthodox understand Justification/Salvation, as oppose to the Legalist/forensic/imputed salvation/justification of the Calvinistic theology. So from this context, the passages in the Gospels where Christ commands man to live in faith and love become part of the Catholic doctrine of justification. For example, the parables of the wise and foolish builders (c.f. Mt 7:24-27); the two sons (c.f. Mt 21:28-32); the good Samaritan (c.f. Lk 10-25-37); the talents (c.f. Mt 25:14-30, the sheep and the goats (c.f. Mt 25:31-46). And, all of what I stated above is because of God’s Grace. (see CCC 1987-1989, which I have linked)

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sect1chpt3art2.htm

Sola Scriptura vs. The Church with Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition

IMO, all of your next paragraphs are essentially a post that is advocating “Sola Scriptura”. You post is well written, but obviously I don’t agree with Sola-Scriptura. As the CCC states the word of God is a person, and that person is Christ Jesus (CCC 65).

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect1chpt2.htm

Now the Bible is also the “Word of God” and so is all the doctrines taught by the Church. All of this flows from the incarnate word made flesh, Christ Jesus, who is God’s final word. So I have to disagree with the last two paragraphs of that state that it is through scripture alone that we should look for guidance on moral questions and we should be hesitant to look elsewhere. It is here where the Church, which Christ founded (c.f. Mt 16:16-19), which St. Paul states is the “pillar and foundation of truth” (c.f. 1 Tim 3:15) and which is Christ’s body (c.f. 1 Cor: 12-14); his bride (c.f. Eph 5: 26-27) and the “temple of the living God” (c.f. Eph 2: 19-22), and to which the scriptures belong to (i.e. The Church came first and the Scriptures are the Church’s book), speaks on moral questions that scripture does not directly deal with.

Again, one can’t find a direct statement in the Bible that condemns the following: 1) Abortion, 2) euthanasia, 3) Human cloning, 4) embryonic stem cell research, and most recently, this crazy George Orwellian legislation where the U.K. is going to allow human/animal embryos to be joined to create hybrid life. The Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, is the instrument through which Christ can speak to those issues, IMO.

As for your statements on the Reformed view of sacraments, I think your article does show that Reformed Protestants have a more orthodox doctrine and respect for the sacraments than some of the other Protestant groups such as the Baptist, Pentecostals, etc. Your post on sacraments was again, well written, and there is much in it that Catholics would have no problem with. I think the difference between the Catholic view and the Reformed is that the sacraments are in Catholic Doctrine: an outward sign that gives grace. St. Augustine defined a sacrament as “the visible form of invisible grace and as a sign of a sacred thing”. As St. Thomas Aquinas wrote Sacraments are visible signs of invisible things that makes humanity holy.

In Catholic doctrine, sacraments are said to be Efficacious, which means that the sign conveys what is signifies. However, the Catechism (CCC) makes it very clear that the effectiveness of the sacraments is absolutely dependent upon Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit (CCC 1114-1116).

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect1chpt1art2.htm

And, here again is where Incarnational theology and Paschal-Mystery theology come together in Catholic Sacramental theology. Again, a visible sign of an invisible Grace that makes/transforms humanity into a saint (i.e. makes Holy). Further, I believe the entire Bible, when read through the principle of Typology, which was the method of the Church Fathers, clearly points to Sacraments.

The CCC discusses Typology in section 128. Typology is the Catholic view of reading Sacred Scripture as a unified whole, with the person of Christ as the center. Thus, Catholic theology sees OT persons and events as prefigurements or “types” of persons and events that occur in the NT. So, King David prefigures Christ the King of the new Israel. So I would like to look at Baptism using the Catholic Biblical principle of Typology

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect1chpt2.htm

Recall that in Catholic Doctrine, sacraments consists of two parts (a) Matter and (b) Form,.The Matter (sign) relates to the Physical elements while the Form relates to the Words. Both are essential for a sacrament to be valid. For example, Baptism, the Matter is Water and the Form is in the Trinitarian Formula “I baptize you in the Name of the Father, son, holy spirit.

Now, with respect to Water, Pope Benedict writes in Jesus of Nazareth (pp.238-239) that water is the primordial element of life. Its first form is the spring, water that bursts from the earth. A second form is living water or flowing water, the rivers. In Israel, it is the river Jordan that gives life to the land. On the other hand, in connection with Jesus’s Baptism, there is symbolism of danger as rivers are also deep so descent into it can result in death. The final form is the sea. I is a power that evokes admiration; its majesty calls forth amazement. Above all, though, it is feared in its guise as the counterpart to the earth, the domain of human life. The Crossing of the Red Sea was above all a symbol of salvation for Israel, but of course it also points to the danger that proved to be the destiny of the Egyptians. If Christians consider the crossing of the Red Sea as a prefiguring of Baptism, there in the immediate foreground is the symbolism of death. It becomes an image of the mystery of the Cross. In order to be reborn, man must first enter with Christ into the “Red Sea”, plunge with him down into death, in order to attain new life with the risen Lord.

So, when Catholics go to a Baptismal Liturgy, they will see this Typological use of scripture play out. For example, the Baptismal Liturgy draws on passages where water is important. In Gen 1:2, we see where the Spirit of God is moving over the waters at creation, which connects water to being a element that is life giving. In Gen 9: 1-17, water is seen in two ways, Water is used to wipe out the Earth (The flood), but through the water the Ark (prefiguring Christ and the Church), Noah and his family are saved. So, here water both destroys and gives life. In Exodus 14:20-21, etc, we see Moses and the people of Israel escape bondage by crossing through the water. At the same time, the water washes away the Egyptian army, which had enslaved Israel (God’s people). Later we see the people of God crossing the river Jordan to the promise land (c.f. Joshua 4) and this crossing is referred to as a “pass over”

Recall that as CCC para. 129 reminds us, Christians therefore read the Old Testament in the light of Christ crucified and risen. Such typological reading discloses the inexhaustible content of the Old Testament; but it must not make us forget that the Old Testament retains its own intrinsic value as Revelation reaffirmed by our Lord himself. Besides, the New Testament has to be read in the light of the Old. Early Christian catechesis made constant use of the Old Testament. As an old saying put it, the New Testament lies hidden in the Old and the Old Testament is unveiled in the New (St. Augustine see CCC 129 footnote 107).

Using the Typological principles described above, Catholic theology now looks at Baptism in the New Testament in reference to the person of Christ, and as a fulfillment of the promises of the OT. Thus, Catholic theology again starts with the Gospels and Christ to set the foundation for Catholic Baptismal theology and the epistles will be an explanation of that theology to the early Christians, but always with the point of reference back to the person of Christ.

In Mark 1:10, we see Jesus Baptized in the river Jordan and the Holy Spirit anointing Christ. If we go back to Gen 1:2, when the water was present at creation, we see that water is now present at the “new creation” in Christ (c.f. CCC 1224). St. Paul uses this image when he states “therefore, anyone who is of Christ; he is a new creation, the old has passed away, behold the new has come” (c.f. 2 Cor 5:17).

Later, St. Mark makes the connection between Baptism and the Cross. We see Christ telling the Apostles “The cup that I drink, you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized” (c.f. Mk 10: 39). So Christ himself is making a link between Baptism and the Cross. The CCC para. 1225 clearly teaches that Christian Baptism finds is foundation and source in the person of Christ and his Cross:

http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt2sect2.htm#art1Note”;

So the Theology of the Cross is important for Baptism as St Paul reminds us when he states “Do you not know that all of you that have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death” (c.f. Romans 6:3). So Water, as a sign, reminds of the Scriptures where water destroyed (e.g. the earth in the flood, the Egyptian army, etc) which represent sin and death, but through that water with Christ, we have been given new life (water is also life giving) and Christ uses the image of water in that context in numerous places when speaking to Nicodemus (c.f. John 3: 5) and the Samaritan women at the well (c.f. John Chapter 4). St. Paul continues in Romans stating “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 the newness of life” (c.f. Rom 6:4).

St. Paul continues this strong Baptismal theology that is connected with Christ’s paschal mystery in Colossians. St. Paul writes “In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ. You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead” (c.f. Col 2: 11-12). So after describing Baptism as replacing circumcision, Christians are now incorporated into the “new covenant” which is Christ paschal mystery. St. Paul writes “If you died with Christ to the elemental powers of the word, why do you live as if you still belong to the world” (c.f. Col 2:20). St. Paul moves on to Chapter 3 telling Christians that they have been raised with Christ and thus should seek what is above and avoid doing evil, and he lists vices that are sinful (c.f. Col 3: 1-4). He continues by stating that since the Colossians are baptized, the old nature has been destroyed and a they are a new nature: “do not lie to one another, seeing that you have put off the old nature with its practices and have put on the new nature, which is being renewed in knowledge after the image of its Creator” (c.f. Col. 3: 9-10).

So in Baptism we die to our old self and are a new creation and have put on a new nature through the Grace of God. Accordingly, God’s Grace gives renews and transforms our fallen nature to live according to God’s will as sons and daughters and too imitate the eternal Son of God, Christ Jesus. Waters of Baptism signify both death (as we saw in the OT), but also Life (as we saw in the OT). So when we are Baptized, the old nature is destroyed and the Grace of God restores our human nature into the nature of Christ incarnation. Again, drawing from St. Paul in his letter to the Ephesians, Chapter 4 where he describes the unity of the Body (Church) and Baptism (c.f. Eph 4: 1-6), he closes that letter by describing the effects on Christians who have been baptized when he states “Put off you old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts and be renewed in the spirit of your minds and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (c.f. Eph 4: 22-24).

So, the Catholic Church sees the both example of Christ, who allowed himself to be Baptized and then commanded his disciples to baptize (Mt 28), and thus from Pentecost onward, Baptism has been part of the Church. The Catholic Church’s Liturgy points to all the signs of the OT and Christ’s command by including the following Liturgical Rites, which include 1) Sign of the Cross, 2) Announcing God’s Word, 3) Anointing with Oil, 4) Blessing of the Water and the Actual Baptism which is done by either Immersion or Pouring water (e.g. Didache AD 90-95) and saying I baptize you in the Name of the Father, son, holy spirit. Catholic theology sees Baptism is the only sure way to salvation since God’s Grace is given to the Baptized person; but those who suffer for the faith even unbaptized can be saved, in ways only known to God. In Catholic doctrine, two basic Graces from Baptism are a) remission of sin and b) new birth in the Holy Spirit. This new birth in the spirit makes one a new creation (i.e. restores our human nature back to the Divine image we were created in Genesis), incorporates them into the church and leaves an indelible mark on that person.

In closing, I think an honest reading of the Early Church Fathers, staring with the Didache (ca 90-95 AD) supports the Catholic understanding of Baptism and Sacraments.

Regards

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.