Gay Episcopal Bishop to Preach at San Francisco Catholic Parish

Catholic Culture ^ | 11/22/11

[marshmallow]

A notoriously 'gay-friendly' parish in San Francisco has invited an openly homosexual Episcopalian cleric to lead an Advent Vespers service.

Most Holy Redeemer parish asked Bishop Otis Charles, a retired Episcopalian prelate, to lead the November 30 service. After serving as the Bishop of Utah from 1971 to 1993, he publicly announced that he is homosexual. Divorced from the mother of his 5 children, he solemnized a same-sex union in 2004.

[Rashputin]

Thank you.

I once went through each book that any of the "reformers" wanted to throw out back during their break with the Catholic Church and it's amazing how each one has something in it that clearly contradicts the claims of those in revolt against the Church. They claimed to have various reasons for wanting to shed some books, but it's pretty clear that they knew their own new doctrines were clearly refuted in Scripture somewhere in those books. It's interesting to hunt down where that is because it's often in what are now lesser known and referred to places.

And thank you for a great number of good posts in a great many threads. Being an infant Catholic, I learn a from you and several others and look forward to seeing what you have to say about things.

Regards

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

1. John baptized as a “type or shadow” of the Christian baptism for the forgiveness of sins and receiving the Holy Spirit that was to come.
2. because John’s baptism was a type or shadow, it didn’t place one in Christ, remit sins, nor give the Holy Spirit, therefore one needed to have Christian baptism that Peter preached in Acts 2:38.
3. Jesus was baptized as He explained “ to fulfill all righteouness”. The baptism marked the ceremonial beginning of His public ministry and gave us a picture of the One True God ( Father, Son and Holy Spirit )

[MarkBsnr]

so, what is a REAL CATHOLIC TO MAKE OF ALL THIS?? one of two things:

1. either they are “phony” catholics who have no clue what the Faith is and know what they “think” they know by reading other anti-catholic articles or posts. or, 2. they actually were Catholic at one point and have such a hatred for the Faith that they willingly cooperate in evil by spreading these “untruths”

you tell me which one is true.

Quid est veritas? To these guys anyway, who sow weeds and claim that they are wheat.

[MarkBsnr]

Thank you.

You are most welcome.

I once went through each book that any of the "reformers" wanted to throw out back during their break with the Catholic Church and it's amazing how each one has something in it that clearly contradicts the claims of those in revolt against the Church. They claimed to have various reasons for wanting to shed some books, but it's pretty clear that they knew their own new doctrines were clearly refuted in Scripture somewhere in those books. It's interesting to hunt down where that is because it's often in what are now lesser known and referred to places.

True. It wasn't just a matter of randomly deselecting Scripture.

And thank you for a great number of good posts in a great many threads. Being an infant Catholic, I learn a from you and several others and look forward to seeing what you have to say about things.

A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.

[MarkBsnr]

1. John baptized as a “type or shadow” of the Christian baptism for the forgiveness of sins and receiving the Holy Spirit that was to come.
2. because John’s baptism was a type or shadow, it didn’t place one in Christ, remit sins, nor give the Holy Spirit, therefore one needed to have Christian baptism that Peter preached in Acts 2:38.
3. Jesus was baptized as He explained “ to fulfill all righteouness”. The baptism marked the ceremonial beginning of His public ministry and gave us a picture of the One True God ( Father, Son and Holy Spirit )

Yeah, but Christ didn't come for Christians, remember? He only Incarnated in order to be the forerunner for Paul.

[daniel1212]

Readers understand that the respondent failed to differentiate between what is being responded to from http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2811552/posts?page=2935#2935 and his own response.

[rzman21]

Most Catholics who leave usually were not well-educated about why they believe what they believe or are swept up by the cheerfulness and friendliness of many Protestant Churches.

I can tell you the lack of community at my local Roman-rite parish drove me to the nearest Byzantine Catholic parish because they had a sense of community.

I became Catholic in spite of my personal experiences in the Protestant Church, not because of them. I wanted to know more and verify that the claims of the “Reformation” were based on historical truth.

Protestants become Catholics or Eastern Orthodox because they want to know more and because they start realizing that the “Reformation” was as much about politics as about anything else.

Reading Luther made me sick to my stomach because his works were filled with hate and vulgarity. I couldn’t possibly see how his revolution was from God.

The Archdiocese of Washington has an interesting analysis about why Catholics become Evangelicals:
Concern over the numbers of those who leave the Catholic Church, and those who have simply stopped practicing any faith, has been a consistent discussion on this blog. I recently came across an article by Fr. Thomas Reese SJ. who cites some recent Pew Survey results on why Catholics leave. I will admit that I do not share a lot of Fr. Reese’s views of the Church. Nevertheless, the data he shares is good and, while I do not agree with some of his conclusions, his article is thought provoking.

I will provide excerpts here. You can read his full article here: Hidden Exodus.

Of those who leave the Church, half simply stop practicing any faith. Forty percent go to Protestant denominations and 10 percent to non-Christian religions. Reese focuses his article on those who go to Protestant denominations. His remarks are in bold, italic black, my remarks are in plain text red.

The number of people who have left the Catholic church is huge. To be fair, that is because the Church is huge. There are over 70 million (at least nominal Catholics) and that number is still growing (due mostly to immigration) Even a small percentage of that number is large. Also, to be fair, Protestant, even Evangelical denominations also loose a large number of adherents, close in percentage to the Catholic experience. That said, it still remains that an alarming number of Catholics are leaving the Church.

The U.S. Religious Landscape Survey by the Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life has put hard numbers on the anecdotal evidence: One out of every 10 Americans is an ex-Catholic. If they were a separate denomination, they would be the third-largest denomination in the United States, after Catholics and Baptists. One of three people who were raised Catholic no longer identifies as Catholic.

Any other institution that lost one-third of its members would want to know why. But the U.S. bishops have never devoted any time at their national meetings to discussing the exodus. Nor have they spent a dime trying to find out why it is happening.

Agreed. This has not been enough on the radar at the USCCB. Here in the Archdiocese Washington we have recently become more serious about the problem and doing some pretty significant things to focus anew on keeping Catholics connected and evangelizing. But at the national level there does seem to be an eerie silence as hundred of Catholic parishes are being closed, Catholic schools likewise. Where is the reflection, study and teaching on this matter. What is the plan to re-engage the Catholic faithful and get them to return to Mass. How have we let weekly Mass attendance slip to 27%, according to recent CARA studies.

Pew’s data shows that those leaving the church are not homogenous. They can be divided into two major groups: those who become unaffiliated and those who become Protestant. Almost half of those leaving the church become unaffiliated and almost half become Protestant.

Why do people leave the Catholic church to become Protestant?
The principal reasons given by people who leave the church to become Protestant are

that their “spiritual needs were not being met” in the Catholic church (71 percent)
they “found a religion they like more” (70 percent).
Eighty-one percent of respondents say they joined their new church because they enjoy the religious service and style of worship of their new faith.

In other words, the Catholic church has failed to deliver what people consider fundamental products of religion: spiritual sustenance and a good worship service. And before conservatives blame the new liturgy, only 11 percent of those leaving complained that Catholicism had drifted too far from traditional practices such as the Latin Mass.

Yes, regarding our “worship service” (aka the Mass), I must say that the key point is not that it is or is not traditional or contemporary. The key point seems to be that Catholic liturgy generally seems sleepy. Sermons are short, often uninspired, filled with generalities and abstractions, and generally do seem to teach the Scripture effectively. Liturgies are often hurried, people do not seem all that happy, and generally seem relived when it is all over. Sometimes, in a typical Catholic Parish, it looks like every one just sucked a lemon. Frowns and distractions are common. One might conclude that a funeral was being celebrated more than a risen Lord, that the Church was a widow, rather than a bride.

It is interesting that, having served in African American Parishes most of my priesthood where liturgies are quite spirited, the most common remark that visitors make is, “Is this a Catholic Church?” To be sure we follow the rubrical norms exactly, it is the enthusiasm to which they refer. What does this say of the average parish?

And these remarks are not targeted at traditional liturgy which I also love. I have been to plenty of traditional Masses where people were awake and joyful. I’ve also been to contemporary masses where musicians et al. thought they we being relevant and behold, the congregation is sleepy and bored. And vice versa.

People, at least a lot of those who leave, really are hungry for a liturgy that is more vital and engaging. They are also hungry to be taught the Word of God. At least for those who leave for Protestant denominations, the “Say it in Seven” “Thought for the Day” Catholic approach to preaching does not nourish them or meet their spiritual needs. Perhaps one Mass in a parish could be tailored to those who are seeking a more substantial homily and are not insistent with being out in under an hour.

Dissatisfaction with how the church deals with spiritual needs and worship services dwarfs any disagreements over specific doctrines…..

People are not becoming Protestants because they disagree with specific Catholic teachings; people are leaving because the church does not meet their spiritual needs and they find Protestant worship service better.

[A]lmost two-thirds of former Catholics who join a Protestant church join an evangelical church. Catholics who become evangelicals and Catholics who join mainline churches are two very distinct groups. We need to take a closer look at why each leaves the church.

Fifty-four percent of both groups say that they just gradually drifted away from Catholicism.
Both groups also had almost equal numbers (82 percent evangelicals, 80 percent mainline) saying they joined their new church because they enjoyed the worship service.
But….a higher percentage of those becoming evangelicals said they left because their spiritual needs were not being met (78 percent versus 57 percent)….
They also cited the church’s teaching on the Bible (55 percent versus 16 percent) more frequently as a reason for leaving.
Forty-six percent of these new evangelicals felt the Catholic church did not view the Bible literally enough.
Thus, for those leaving to become evangelicals, spiritual sustenance, worship services and the Bible were key. They are leaving to get spiritual nourishment from worship services and the Bible.

Looking at the responses of those who join mainline churches also provides some surprising results.

For example, few (20 percent) say they left because they stopped believing in Catholic teachings…..
Thirty-one percent cited unhappiness with the church’s teaching on abortion and homosexuality, women, and divorce and remarriage
26 percent mentioned birth control as a reason for leaving.
Although these numbers are higher than for Catholics who become evangelicals, they are still dwarfed by the number (57 percent) who said their spiritual needs were not met in the Catholic church.
Those joining mainline communities also were more likely to cite dissatisfaction of the Catholic clergy (39 percent) than were those who became evangelical (23 percent).
Those who join mainline churches are looking for a less clerically dominated church.
What stands out in the data on Catholics who join mainline churches is that they tend to cite personal or familiar reasons for leaving more frequently than do those who become evangelicals. Forty-four percent of the Catholics who join mainline churches say that they married someone of the faith they joined, a number that trumps all doctrinal issues. Only 22 percent of those who join the evangelicals cite this reason.

Thus, those becoming evangelicals were more generically unhappy than specifically unhappy with church teaching, while those who became mainline Protestant tended to be more specifically unhappy than generically unhappy with church teaching.
http://blog.adw.org/2011/05/why-catholics-leave-%E2%80%93-a-recent-study-and-some-comments-from-two-different-perspectives/

[Lera]

Beware of what you would build the foundation of your faith on: the pillar and foundation of truth versus the foundation on sand. St. Paul is very explicit.

Don't worry I know who the ROCK is .
My foundation is built on the CORNERSTONE .

Isa 28:16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.


Psa 118:20 This gate of the LORD, into which the righteous shall enter.
Psa 118:21 I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation.
Psa 118:22 The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner.


Mat 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?


Mar 12:10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:
Mar 12:11 This was the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?


Luk 20:13 Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do? I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him.
Luk 20:14 But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.
Luk 20:15 So they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them?
Luk 20:16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they said, God forbid.
Luk 20:17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that is written, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner?
Luk 20:18 Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.


Act 4:8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel,
Act 4:9 If we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole;
Act 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
Act 4:11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Act 4:13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.


1Pe 2:6 Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
1Pe 2:7 Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
1Pe 2:8 And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.


Deu 32:1 Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear, O earth, the words of my mouth.
Deu 32:2 My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:
Deu 32:3 Because I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God.
Deu 32:4 He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.
Deu 32:5 They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.
Deu 32:6 Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?



Don't worry I know who the ROCK is .
My foundation is built on the CORNERSTONE .

I don't need the approval of a church who doesn't know who the ROCK is . I want nothing to do with a church that admits it worships the same deity as the muslims do.
I don't bow down to the moon god.

[rzman21]

It’s not a stretch from denying the real presence in the Eucharist to denying that the Bible teaches that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Protestant assumptions about grace are dead set behind gay theology and the silly idea that eating shrimp is on par with homosexual sex.

Evangelicals are all over the map on matters of both faith and morals, and base their positions on the Bible alone. Apostate Catholics, however, are just ignorant.

[rzman21]

Apologist Dave Armstrong has a good article about Catholics who become Protestants.
http://socrates58.blogspot.com/2004/03/another-lousy-catholic-convert-to.html

Tuesday, March 30, 2004
Another “Lousy Catholic” Convert to Protestantism

Share

We converts to Catholicism are often told that we didn’t understand Protestantism before we left it (and that was, of course, why we left — we were dupes of Rome and her nefarious, deceitful apologists because we were so stupid in the first place). In most conversion stories to Catholicism that I have seen, this isn’t the case at all.

In fact, the exact opposite is usually true: it was the commitment to Protestant Christianity and all that is good in it which made these inquirers study and ponder a further move into Catholicism, with its sacramentalism, Mariology, Tradition, papacy, etc. We saw the move as a simple progression upwards; not a reversal or revolution or rejection of what we had already learned. We were committed Protestants, “good” Protestants; who really believed in the system and tried to live it out.

In any event, the argument is made that we converted because we were either ignorant, or non-observant, already-compromised Protestants. We were never really part of the club: we had the smells and bells and attraction to mysticism and the goddess-Mary and a perverse desire to give up our mind and submit to every jot and tittle of the pope’s utterances (including when we should blow our nose and what color socks to wear in the morning) in our warped souls, and so were easy-pickin’s for Rome. I exaggerate, of course, but to read some cynical observations of Catholic converts, they aren’t all that different from this scenario.

This is — for the most part — all a bunch of nonsense, of course (as those of us who are converts are well aware). But how often and how much do we hear about similarly ignorant converts from Catholicism to Protestantism? Did they really know their faith before they left it? Were they dupes of the anti-Catholic Protestant apologists and sophists? Or did they have an inexorable, irresistible attraction for private judgment and sola Scriptura in their souls from the beginning, and an irrational longing for whitewashed walls and plain clapboard churches and 90-minute hellfire-and-brimstone sermons and altar calls with the sinner’s prayer and the King James Version or interminable pentecostal worship sessions where the people say “Praise God” and “Hallelujah” and “Thank you Jesus” 742 times without engaging in “vain repetition” and the same person goes up front to get “saved” for the 6th time in seven weeks? See how silly the rhetoric sounds if we turn the tables?

If we can cast doubt on Catholic converts due to ignorance and compromise in their former faith-lives, why not apply the same standard to Protestant converts? Yes, why not? But, as I have shown here over and over, anti-Catholics are nothing if not admirers of double standards.

Now, I do wish to note that the Catholic Church bears a great deal of blame insofar as atrocious, abominable catechesis has been scandalously widespread for well over a generation now. Liberalism (along with many other cultural and sociological factors) has made ignorance and nominalism almost the norm.

Yet the individual remains responsible for his own soul, too (Catholics are not just a bunch of mindless clones: we must learn on our own also). A proper understanding of Catholicism is no further away than a couple of books (or even several solid, “meaty” articles): either apologetics or catechetical material. Now with the Internet it is even easier to learn. Within a solid week of study, anyone could have a working knowledge of what they are required to believe as a Catholic, and why they should believe it. And this is why I do what I do and am so passionately committed to it. The more educated Catholics are, the more likely they will remain Catholics, and confident, spiritually-thriving ones. The less-educated they are, the more likely they will leave the faith.

I shall now provide one example of a convert to Protestantism who was thoroughly ignorant of Catholicism, from Eric Svendsen’s NTRMin Board. Note well what has happened here! The bolding is added:

[Lera]

More on the ROCK

Deu 32:15 But Jeshurun waxed fat, and kicked: thou art waxen fat, thou art grown thick, thou art covered with fatness; then he forsook God which made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation.
Deu 32:16 They provoked him to jealousy with strange gods, with abominations provoked they him to anger.
Deu 32:17 They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not.
Deu 32:18 Of the Rock that begat thee thou art unmindful, and hast forgotten God that formed thee.
Deu 32:19 And when the LORD saw it, he abhorred them, because of the provoking of his sons, and of his daughters. Deu 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.
Deu 32:21 They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God; they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
Deu 32:22 For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set on fire the foundations of the mountains.
Deu 32:23 I will heap mischiefs upon them; I will spend mine arrows upon them.
Deu 32:24 They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust.
Deu 32:25 The sword without, and terror within, shall destroy both the young man and the virgin, the suckling also with the man of gray hairs.
Deu 32:26 I said, I would scatter them into corners, I would make the remembrance of them to cease from among men: Deu 32:27 Were it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy, lest their adversaries should behave themselves strangely, and lest they should say, Our hand is high, and the LORD hath not done all this.
Deu 32:28 For they are a nation void of counsel, neither is there any understanding in them.
Deu 32:29 O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end! Deu 32:30 How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had shut them up?
Deu 32:31 For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges. Deu 32:32 For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter:
Deu 32:33 Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.
Deu 32:34 Is not this laid up in store with me, and sealed up among my treasures?
Deu 32:35 To me belongeth vengeance, and recompence; their foot shall slide in due time: for the day of their calamity is at hand, and the things that shall come upon them make haste.
Deu 32:36 For the LORD shall judge his people, and repent himself for his servants, when he seeth that their power is gone, and there is none shut up, or left.
Deu 32:37 And he shall say, Where are their gods, their rock in whom they trusted,
Deu 32:38 Which did eat the fat of their sacrifices, and drank the wine of their drink offerings? let them rise up and help you, and be your protection.
Deu 32:39 See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.


1Sa 2:2 There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. 1Sa 2:3 Talk no more so exceeding proudly; let not arrogancy come out of your mouth: for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by him actions are weighed.

2Sa 22:1 And David spake unto the LORD the words of this song in the day that the LORD had delivered him out of the hand of all his enemies, and out of the hand of Saul: 2Sa 22:2 And he said, The LORD is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer; 2Sa 22:3 The God of my rock; in him will I trust: he is my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my high tower, and my refuge, my saviour; thou savest me from violence. 2Sa 22:4 I will call on the LORD, who is worthy to be praised: so shall I be saved from mine enemies.

2Sa 22:32 For who is God, save the LORD? and who is a rock, save our God? 2Sa 22:33 God is my strength and power: and he maketh my way perfect.


2Sa 22:47 The LORD liveth; and blessed be my rock; and exalted be the God of the rock of my salvation. 2Sa 22:48 It is God that avengeth me, and that bringeth down the people under me,

2Sa 23:1 Now these be the last words of David. David the son of Jesse said, and the man who was raised up on high, the anointed of the God of Jacob, and the sweet psalmist of Israel, said, 2Sa 23:2 The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. 2Sa 23:3 The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. 2Sa 23:4 And he shall be as the light of the morning, when the sun riseth, even a morning without clouds; as the tender grass springing out of the earth by clear shining after rain. 2Sa 23:5 Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow.

[metmom]

Fine.

You trust in baptism and Catholicism to save you.

I’ll keep trusting Jesus.

[rzman21]

St. John of Damacus comments on the scriptural teaching on baptism in his On The Orthodox Faith:
http://www.orthodox.net/fathers/exactiv.html#BOOK_IV_CHAPTER_IX
Concerning Faith and Baptism.
We confess one baptism for the remission of sins and for life eternal. For baptism declares the Lord’s death. We are indeed “buried with the Lord through baptism(8),” as saith the divine Apostle. So then, as our Lord died once for all, we also must be baptized once for all, and baptized according to the Word of the Lord, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit(9), being taught the confession in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Those(1), then, who, after having been baptized into Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and having been taught that there is one divine nature in three subsistences, are rebaptized, these, as the divine Apostle says, crucify the Christ afresh. For it is impossible, he saith, for those who were once enlightened, &c., to renew them again unto repentance: seeing they crucify to themselves the Christ afresh, and put Him to an open shame(2). But those who were not bap-

tized into the Holy Trinity, these must be baptized again. For although the divine ApoStle says: Into Christ and into His death were we baptized(3), he does not mean that the invocation of baptism must be in these words, but that baptism is an image of the death of Christ. For by the three immersions(4), baptism signifies the three days of our Lord’s entombment(5). The baptism then into Christ means that believers are baptized into Him. We could not believe in Christ if we were not taught confession in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit(6). For Christ is the Son of the Living God(7), Whom the Father anointed with the Holy Spirit(8): in the words of the divine David, Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows(9). And Isaiah also speaking in the person of the Lord says, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because He hath anointed me(1). Christ, however, taught His own disciples the invocation and said, Baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit(2). For since Christ made us for incorruption(3)(4), and we transgressed His saving command. He condemned us to the corruption of death in order that that which is evil should not be immortal, and when in His compassion He stooped to His servants and became like us, He redeemed us from corruption through His own passion. He caused the fountain of remission to well forth for us out of His holy and immaculate side(5), water for our regeneration, and the washing away of sin and corruption; and blood to drink as the hostage of life eternal. And He laid on us the command to be born again of water and of the Spirit(6), through prayer and invocation, the Holy Spirit drawing nigh unto the water(7). For since man’s nature is twofold, consisting of soul and body, He bestowed on us a twofold purification, of water and of the Spirit the Spirit renewing that part in us which is after His image and likeness, and the water by the grace of the Spirit cleansing the body from sin and delivering it from corruption, the water indeed expressing the image of death, but the Spirit affording the earnest of life.

For from the beginning the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters(8), and anew the Scripture witnesseth that water has the power of purification(9). In the time of Noah God washed away the sin of the world by water(1). By water every impure person is purified(2), according to the law, even the very garments being washed with water. Elias shewed forth the grace of the Spirit mingled with the water when he burned the holocaust by pouring on water(3). And almost everything is purified by water according to the law: for the things of sight are symbols of the things of thought. The regeneration, however, takes place in the spirit: for faith has the power of making us sons (of God(4)), creatures as we are, by the Spirit, and of leading us into our original blessedness.

The remission of sins, therefore, is granted alike to all through baptism: but the grace of the Spirit is proportional to the faith and previous purification. Now, indeed, we receive the firstfruits of the Holy Spirit through baptism, and the second birth is for us the beginning and seal and security and illumination s of another life.

It behoves as, then, with all our strength to steadfastly keep ourselves pure from filthy works, that we may not, like the dog returning to his vomit(6), make ourselves again the slaves of sin. For faith apart from works is dead, and so likewise are works apart from faith(7). For the true faith is attested by works.

Now we are baptized(8) into the Holy Trinity because those things which are baptized have need of the Holy Trinity for their maintenance and continuance, and the three subsistences cannot be otherwise than present, the one with the other. For the Holy Trinity is indivisible.

The first baptism(9) was that of the flood for the eradication of sin. The second(1) was through the sea and the cloud: for the cloud is the symbol of the Spirit and the sea of the water(2). The third baptism was that of the Law: for every impure person washed himself with water, and even washed his garments, and so entered into the camp(3). The fourth(4) was that of John(5), being preliminary and leading those who were baptized to repent-once, that they might believe in Christ: I,

certainly return unto thee at this time hereafter, and Sarah thy wife shall have a son(6) ; and afterwards the Lord said to Him, I will not conceal from Abraham My servant the things that I will do(7) ; and again, Moreover the Lord said, The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is filled up, and their sins are exceeding great(8). Then after long discourse, which for the sake of brevity shall be omitted, Abraham, distressed at the destruction which awaited the innocent as well as the guilty, said, In no wise wilt Thou, Who judgest the earth, execute this judgment. And the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes(9). Afterwards when the warning to Lot, Abraham’s brother, was ended, the Scripture says, And the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire f rom the Lord out of heaven(1) ; and, after a while, And the Lord visited Sarah as He had said, and did unto Sarah as He had spoken, and Sarah conceived and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him(2). And afterwards, when the handmaid with her son had been driven from Abraham’s house, and was dreading lest her child should die in the wilderness for want of water, the same Scripture says, And the Lord God heard the voice of the lad, where he was, and the Angel of God child to Hagar out of heaven, and said unto her, What is it, Hagar? Fear not, for God hath heard the voice of the lad from the place where he is. Arise, and take the lad, and hold his hand, for I will make him a great nation(3).

26. What blind faithlessness it is, what dulness of an unbelieving heart, what headstrong impiety, to abide in ignorance of all this, or else to know and yet neglect it! Assuredly it is written for the very purpose that error or oblivion may not hinder the recognition of the truth. If, as we shall prove, it is impossible to escape knowledge of the facts, then it must be nothing less than blasphemy to deny them. This record begins with the speech of the Angel to Hagar, His promise to multiply Ishmael into a great nation and to give him a countless offspring. She listens, and by her confession reveals that He is Lord and God. The story begins with His appearance as the Angel of God; at its termination He stands confessed as God Himself. Thus He Who, while He executes the ministry of declaring the great counsel is God’s Angel, is Himself in name and nature God. The name corresponds to the nature; the nature is not falsified to make it conform to the name. Again, God speaks to Abraham of this same matter; he is told that Ishmael has already received a blessing, and shall be increased into a nation; I have blessed him, God says. This is no change from the Person indicated before; He shews that it was He Who had already given the blessing. The Scripture has obviously been consistent throughout in its progress from mystery to clear revelation; it began with the Angel of God, and proceeds to reveal that it was God Himself Who had spoken in this same matter.

27. The course of the Divine narrative is accompanied by a progressive development of doctrine. In the passage which we have discussed God speaks to Abraham, and promises that Sarah shall bear a son. Afterwards three men stand by him; he worships One and acknowledges Him as Lord. After this worship and acknowledgment by Abraham, the One promises that He will return hereafter at the same season, and that then Sarah shall have her son. This One again is seen by Abraham in the guise of a man, and salutes him with the same promise. The change is one of name only; Abraham’s acknowledgment in each ease is the same. It was a Man whom he saw, yet Abraham worshipped Him as Lord; he beheld, no doubt, in a mystery the coming Incarnation. Faith so strong has not missed its recognition; the Lord says in the Gospel, Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad(4). To continue the history; the Man Whom he saw promised that He would return at the same season. Mark the fulfilment of the promise, remembering meanwhile that it was a Man Who made it. What says the Scripture? And the Lord visited Sarah. So this Man is the Lord, fulfilling His own promise. What follows next? And God did unto Sarah as He had said. The narrative calls His words those of a Man, relates that Sarah was visited by the Lord, proclaims that the result was the work of God. You are sure that it was a Man who spoke, for Abraham not only heard, but saw Him. Can you be less certain that He was God, when the same Scripture, which had called Him Man, confesses Him God? For its words are, And Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, and at the set time of which God had spoken to him. But it was the Man who had promised that He would come. Believe that He was nothing more than man; unless, in fact, He Who came was God and Lord. Connect the incidents. It was, confessedly, the Man who promised that He would come that Sarah might con-

and omnipotence and truth and wisdom and justice, he will find all things smooth and even, and the way straight. But without faith it is impossible to be saved(2). For it is by faith that all things, both human and spiritual, are sustained. For without faith neither does the farmer(3) cut his furrow, nor does the merchant commit his life to the raging waves of the sea on a small piece of wood, nor are marriages contracted nor any other step in life taken. By faith we consider that all things were brought out of nothing into being by God’s power. And we direct all things, both divine and human, by faith. Further, faith is assent free from all meddlesome inquisitiveness(4).

Every action, therefore, and performance of miracles by Christ are most great and divine and marvellous: but the most marvellous of all is His precious Cross. For no other thing has subdued death, expiated the sin of the first parent(5), despoiled Hades, bestowed the resurrection, granted the power to us of contemning the present and even death itself, prepared the return to our former blessedness, opened the gates of Paradise(6), given our nature a seat at the right hand of God, and made us the children and heirs of God(7), save the Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. For by the Cross s all things have been made right. So many of us, the apostle says, as were baptized into Christ, were baptized into His death(9), and as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ(1). Further Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God(2). Lo! the death of Christ, that is, the Cross, clothed us with the enhypostatic wisdom and power of God. And the power of God is the Word of the Cross, either because God’s might, that is, the victory over death, has been revealed to us by it, or because, just as the four extremities of the Cross are held fast and bound together by the bolt in the middle, so also by God’s power the height and the depth, the length and the breadth, that is, every creature visible and invisible, is maintained(3).

This was given to us as a sign on our forehead, just as the circumcision was given to Israel: for by it we believers are separated and distinguished from unbelievers. This is the shield and weapon against, and trophy over, the devil. This is the seal that the destroyer may not touch you(4), as saith the Scripture. This is the resurrection of those lying in death, the support of the standing, the staff of the weak, the rod of the flock, the safe conduct of the earnest, the perfection of those that press forwards, the salvation of soul and body, the aversion of all things evil, the patron of all things good, the taking away of sin, the plant of resurrection, the tree of eternal life.

So, then, this same truly precious and august tree(5), on which Christ hath offered Himself as a sacrifice for our sakes, is to be worshipped as sanctified by contact with His holy body and blood; likewise the nails, the spear, the clothes, His sacred tabernacles which are the manger, the cave, Golgotha, which bringeth salvation(6), the tomb which giveth life, Sion, the chief stronghold of the churches and the like, are to be worshipped. In the words of David, the father of God(7), We shall go into His tabernacles, we shall worship at the place where His feet stood(8). And that it is the Cross that is meant is made clear by what follows, Arise, O Lord, into Thy Rest (9). For the resurrection comes after the Cross. For if of those things which we love, house and couch and garment, are to be longed after, how much the rather should we long after that which belonged to God, our Saviour(1), by means of which we are in truth saved.

Moreover we worship even the image of the precious and life-giving Cross, although made of another tree, not honouring the tree (God forbid) but the image as a symbol of Christ. For He said to His disciples, admonishing them, Then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in Heaven(2), meaning the Cross. And so also the angel of the resurrection said to the woman, Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth which was crucified(3). And the Apostle said, We preach Christ crucified(4). For there are many Christs and many Jesuses, but one crucified. He does not say speared but crucified. It behoves us, then, to worship the sign of Christ(5). For wherever the sign may be, there also will He be. But it does not behove us to worship the material of which the image of the Cross is composed, even though it be gold or precious stones, after it is destroyed, if that should happen. Everything, therefore, that is dedicated to God we worship, conferring the adoration on Him.

The tree of life which was planted by God in Paradise pre-figured this precious Cross.

For since death was by a tree, it was fitting that life and resurrection should be bestowed by a tree(6). Jacob, when He worshipped the top of Joseph’s staff, was the first to image the Cross, and when he blessed his sons with crossed hands(7) he made most clearly the sign of the cross. Likewise(8) also did Moses’ rod, when it smote the sea in the figure of the cross and saved Israel, while it overwhelmed Pharaoh in the depths; likewise also the hands stretched out crosswise and routing Amalek; and the bitter water made sweet by a tree, and the rock rent and pouring forth streams of water(9), and the rod that meant for Aaron the dignity of the high priesthood(1): and the serpent lifted in triumph on a tree as though it were dead(2), the tree bringing salvation to those who in faith saw their enemy dead, just as Christ was nailed to the tree in the flesh of sin which yet knew no sin(3). The mighty Moses cried(4), You will see your life hanging on the tree before your eyes, and Isaiah likewise, I have spread out my hands all the day unto a faithless and rebellious people(5). But may we who worship this(6) obtain a part in Christ the crucified. Amen.

[rzman21]

Once again here is the Evangelical idea of salvation:

[metmom]

Catholicism makes getting saved way too complicated.

Acts 16:30-32 30Then he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household." 32And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

Born Again : Baptism in the Early Fathers

---

Jesus told Nicodemus, “You must be born again” (John 3:7). What did our Lord mean?

Modern Fundamentalist and Evangelical Christians, while agreeing with Catholic Christians that a spiritual regeneration by the Holy Spirit (or the “new birth”) is necessary for salvation (e.g. John 3:3-8; 2 Cor 5:17; Titus 3:5), generally disagree that the Sacrament (or what some call “ordinance”) of Baptism is the means by which the Holy Spirit regenerates and saves the person, and all sins committed prior to Baptism are forgiven and washed away by the power of Christ (John 3:5; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom 6:1ff; 1 Cor 6:11; Gal 3:27; Eph 5:26f; Col 2:11ff; 1 Peter 3:21; etc). There are exceptions of course (such as Evangelical Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists, and Church of Christ groups who hold some form of “baptismal regeneration” — and certain of these practice infant Baptism, as do most Reformed or Calvinist Christians).

Many of these modern Fundamentalists and Evangelicals suggest that accepting or “receiving Christ” as one’s “personal Lord and Savior” by faith alone is what our Lord meant in John chapter 3. The Sacrament of Baptism is seen as merely a “symbolic” gesture with no inherent spiritual efficacy.

Catholics, while not denying the importance of the “personal relationship” with Jesus Christ (you cannot get much more personal than receiving Christ in the Holy Eucharist) and clearly emphasizing a holy life after Baptism, understand the Gospel text on “born again” as a reference to the Sacrament of Baptism. Catholics note our Lord’s words that one must be “born of WATER AND THE SPIRIT” as clearly equated by Jesus himself with the phrase “born again” (compare verses John 3:3,5,7). The surrounding context of the first four chapters of John’s Gospel also show that by “water and the Spirit” that water BAPTISM is what our Lord meant (cf. John 1:29ff; 3:22ff; 4:1ff), which Sacrament was instituted by Christ himself at the Great Commission where he commanded Baptism in the name of the Blessed Trinity (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16). This is shortly followed by St. Peter the Apostle’s command to be baptized in order to receive the forgiveness of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Catholics accept the plain and literal meaning of the biblical texts.

The Catholic understanding of Baptism is also the unanimous teaching of the earliest Christians who immediately followed the apostles. Every Christian, all the Church Fathers, bishops, and saints who lived after the apostles (and some while the apostles were still alive) interpreted our Lord’s words in John chapter 3 that to be “born again” and “born of water and the Spirit” refers to the Sacrament of Baptism. There are no exceptions. And Protestant scholars frankly admit this fact (note the relevent sections on Baptism in Reformed/Presbyterian scholar Philip Schaff’s History of the Christian Church, Anglican scholar J.N.D. Kelly’s Early Christian Doctrines, and Lutheran scholar Jaroslav Pelikan’s The Christian Tradition).

Philip Schaff (Presbyterian/Reformed) —

“This ordinance [Baptism] was regarded in the ancient church as the sacrament of the new birth or regeneration, and as the solemn rite of initiation into the Christian Church, admitting to all her benefits and committing to all her obligations....Its effect consists in the forgiveness of sins and the communication of the Holy Spirit.

“Justin [Martyr] calls baptism ‘the water-bath for the forgiveness of sins and regeneration,’ and ‘the bath of conversion and the knowledge of God.’ “It is often called also illumination, spiritual circumcision, anointing, sealing, gift of grace, symbol of redemption, death of sins, etc. Tertullian describes its effect thus: ‘When the soul comes to faith, and becomes transformed through regeneration by water and power from above, it discovers, after the veil of the old corruption is taken away, its whole light. It is received into the fellowship of the Holy Spirit; and the soul, which unites itself to the Holy Spirit, is followed by the body.’ ....”From John 3:5 and Mark 16:16, Tertullian and other fathers argued the necessity of baptism to salvation....The effect of baptism...was thought to extend only to sins committed before receiving it. Hence the frequent postponement of the sacrament [Procrastinatio baptismi], which Tertullian very earnestly recommends....” (History of the Christian Church, volume 2, page 253ff)

“The views of the ante-Nicene fathers concerning baptism and baptismal regeneration were in this period more copiously embellished in rhetorical style by Basil the Great and the two Gregories, who wrote special treatises on this sacrament, and were more clearly and logically developed by Augustine. The patristic and Roman Catholic view on regeneration, however, differs considerably from the one which now prevails among most Protestant denominations, especially those of the more Puritanic type, in that it signifies not so such a subjective change of heart, which is more properly called conversion, but a change in the objective condition and relation of the sinner, namely, his translation from the kingdom of Satan into the kingdom of Christ....Some modern divines make a distinction between baptismal regeneration and moral regeneration, in order to reconcile the doctrine of the fathers with the fact that the evidences of a new life are wholly wanting in so many who are baptized. But we cannot enter here into a discussion of the difficulties of this doctrine, and must confine ourselves to a historical statement.” [patristic quotes follow] “In the doctrine of baptism also we have a much better right to speak of a -consensus patrum-, than in the doctrine of the Holy Supper.” (History of the Christian Church, volume 3, page 481ff, 492)

Paul Enns (Dispensational/Baptist, Th.D. Dallas Theological Seminary) —

“Justin Martyr suggests Isaiah 1:16-20 refers to Christian baptism, apparently suggesting that this rite produces the new birth (1 Apol 61).....Very early in the Christian church, prominence was given to the rite of baptism so that many, in effect, taught baptismal regeneration. Justin Martyr taught that, to obtain the remission of sins, the name of the Father should be invoked over the one being baptized (1 Apol 61)...Although this concept was not as emphatic among the apostolic Fathers, it became increasingly so in the following centuries. Augustine, for instance, taught that original sin and sins committed before baptism were washed away through baptism. For that reason he advocated baptism for infants.” (The Moody Handbook of Theology [1989], page 415, 427)

J.N.D. Kelly (Anglican patristic scholar) —

“From the beginning baptism was the universally accepted rite of admission to the Church; only ‘those who have been baptized in the Lord’s name’ may partake of the eucharist [Didache 9:5]....As regards its significance, it was always held to convey the remission of sins....the theory that it mediated the Holy Spirit was fairly general....The Spirit is God Himself dwelling in the believer, and the resulting life is a re-creation....”

“Speculation about baptism in the third century revolves around its function, universally admitted hitherto, as the medium of the bestowal of the Spirit. Infant baptism was now common, and this fact, together with the rapid expansion of the Church’s numbers, caused the administration of the sacrament to be increasingly delegated by bishops to presbyters....We observe a tendency to limit the effect of baptism itself to the remission of sins and regeneration, and to link the gift of the Spirit with these other rites [Chrismation, Confirmation, and the laying on of hands — detailed analysis from the ante-Nicene Fathers on Baptism follows].....

“From these general considerations we turn to the particular sacraments. Cyril of Jerusalem provides a full, if not always coherent, account of the conception of baptism which commended itself to a fourth-century theologian in Palestine. The name he applies to the rite is ‘baptism’ or ‘bath’ [Greek provided along with references]. It is ‘the bath of regeneration’ in which we are washed both with water and with the Holy Spirit. Its effects can be summarized under three main heads. First, the baptized person receives the remission of sins, i.e. all sins committed prior to baptism. He passes from sin to righteousness, from filth to cleanliness; his restoration is total....Secondly, baptism conveys the positive blessing of sanctification, which Cyril describes as the illumination and deification of the believer’s soul, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the putting on of the new man, spiritual rebirth and salvation, adoption as God’s son by grace, union with Christ in His resurrection as in His suffering and death, the right to a heavenly inheritance....Thirdly, and closely connected with this, baptism impresses a seal [Greek provided] on the believer’s soul. Just as the water cleanses the body, the Holy Spirit seals [Greek] the soul. This sealing takes place at the very moment of baptism....and as a result of it the baptized person enjoys the presence of the Holy Spirit....These ideas are fairly representative of Greek and Latin teaching about baptism in the fourth and fifth centuries.” [detailed analysis from the post-Nicene Fathers on Baptism follows] (Early Christian Doctrines, page 193ff, 207ff, 428ff)

Jaroslav Pelikan (Lutheran patristic scholar) —

“Although references to the doctrine of baptism are scattered throughout the Christian literature of the second and third centuries, only one extant treatise from the period is devoted exclusively to the subject, that of Tertullian. And the most succinct statement by Tertullian on the doctrine of baptism actually came, not in his treatise on baptism, but in his polemic against Marcion....Tertullian argued that none of the four basic gifts of baptism could be granted if that dualism [of Marcion] were maintained. The four gifts were: the remission of sins, deliverance from death, regeneration, and bestowal of the Holy Spirit...It is noteworthy that Tertullian, regardless of how much a Montanist he may have been at this point, was summarizing what the doctrine of the church was at his time — as well as probably before his time and certainly since his time. Tertullian’s enumeration of the gifts of baptism would be difficult to duplicate in so summary a form from other Christian writers, but those who did speak of baptism also spoke of one or more of these gifts. Baptism brought the remission of sins; the doctrine of baptism was in fact the occasion for many of the references to forgiveness of sins in the literature of these centuries [references to Cyprian, Hippolytus, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Justin Martyr, Hermas].”

“With deliverance from death came a new life and regeneration. The phrase ‘washing of regeneration’ in Titus 3:5 was synonymous with ‘the baptism of regeneration.’ [references to Methodius of Olympus, Tertullian, Cyprian, and Origen].”

“Tertullian’s summary of these four gifts makes it clear ‘that by the end of the second century, if not fifty years earlier, the doctrine of baptism (even without the aid of controversy to give it precision) was so fully developed that subsequent ages down to our own have found nothing significant to add to it’ [citing Evans].” (The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, volume 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition 100-600, pages 163ff)

William Webster, a former Catholic turned Evangelical, in his 1995 book The Church of Rome at the Bar of History, freely admits the unanimous position of the Church Fathers as to what is called “baptismal regeneration” :

“The doctrine of baptism is one of the few teachings within Roman Catholicism for which it can be said that there is a universal consent of the Fathers....From the early days of the Church, baptism was universally perceived as the means of receiving four basic gifts: the remission of sins, deliverance from death, regeneration, and the bestowal of the Holy Spirit.” (Webster, page 95-96)

Let us take a look at the writings of the earliest Christians on the Sacrament of Baptism, baptismal regeneration, and infant baptism. All the major Church Fathers are covered through the fifth century.

---

THE EPISTLE OF BARNABAS (c. A.D. 70)

Now let us see if the Lord has been at any pains to give us a foreshadowing of the waters of Baptism and of the cross. Regarding the former, we have the evidence of Scripture that Israel would refuse to accept the washing which confers the remission of sins and would set up a substitution of their own instead [Jer 22:13; Isa 16:1-2; 33:16-18; Psalm 1:3-6]. Observe there how he describes both the water and the cross in the same figure. His meaning is, “Blessed are those who go down into the water with their hopes set on the cross.” Here he is saying that after we have stepped down into the water, burdened with sin and defilement, we come up out of it bearing fruit, with reverence in our hearts and the hope of Jesus in our souls. (11:1-10)

---

THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS (c. A.D. 140)

“I have heard, sir,” said I, “from some teachers, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.” He said to me, “You have heard rightly, for so it is.” (The Shepherd 4:3:1-2)

They had need [the Shepherd said] to come up through the water, so that they might be made alive; for they could not otherwise enter into the kingdom of God, except by putting away the mortality of their former life. These also, then, who had fallen asleep, received the seal of the Son of God, and entered into the kingdom of God. For, [he said,] before a man bears the name of the Son of God, he is dead. But when he receives the seal, he puts mortality aside and again receives life. The seal, therefore, is the water. They go down into the water dead [in sin], and come out of it alive. (ibid 9:16:2-4)

---

ST. JUSTIN MARTYR (inter A.D. 148-155)

Whoever is convinced and believes that what they are taught and told by us is the truth, and professes to be able to live accordingly, is instructed to pray and to beseech God in fasting for the remission of their former sins, while we pray and fast with them. Then they are led by us to a place where there is water; and there they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn: In the name of God, the Lord and Father of all, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they receive the washing with water. For Christ said, “Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” ...The reason for doing this, we have learned from the Apostles. (The First Apology 61)

---

ST. THEOPHILUS OF ANTIOCH (c. A.D. 181)

Moreover, those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration — all who proceed to the truth and are born again and receive a blessing from God. (To Autolycus 2:16)

---

ST. IRENAEUS (c. A.D. 190)

“And [Naaman] dipped himself...seven times in the Jordan” [2 Kings 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: “Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Fragment 34)

---

TERTULLIAN (inter A.D. 200-206)

A treatise on our sacrament of water, by which the sins of our earlier blindness are washed away and we are released for eternal life will not be superfluous.....taking away death by the washing away of sins. The guilt being removed, the penalty, of course, is also removed.....Baptism is itself a corporal act by which we are plunged in water, while its effect is spiritual, in that we are freed from sins. (On Baptism 1:1; 5:6; 7:2)

...no one can attain salvation without Baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says: “Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life.” (On Baptism 12:1)

---

ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (ante A.D. 202)

When we are baptized, we are enlightened. Being enlightened, we are adopted as sons. Adopted as sons, we are made perfect. Made perfect, we become immortal....”and sons all of the Most High” [Psalm 82:6]. This work is variously called grace, illumination, perfection, and washing. It is a washing by which we are cleansed of sins; a gift of grace by which the punishments due our sins are remitted; an illumination by which we behold that holy light of salvation — that is, by which we see God clearly; and we call that perfection which leaves nothing lacking. Indeed, if a man know God, what more does he need? Certainly it were out of place to call that which is not complete a true gift of God’s grace. Because God is perfect, the gifts He bestows are perfect. (The Instructor of Children 1:6:26:1)

---

RECOGNITIONS OF CLEMENT (c. A.D. 221)

But you will perhaps say, “What does the baptism of water contribute toward the worship of God?” In the first place, because that which has pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because when you are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so ...you shall be able to attain salvation; but otherwise it is impossible. For thus has the true Prophet [Jesus] testified to us with an oath: “Verily, I say to you, that unless a man is born again of water....he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Recognitions 6:9)

---

ORIGEN (post A.D. 244)

Formerly there was Baptism, in an obscure way....now, however, in full view, there is regeneration in water and in the Holy Spirit. Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God as He Himself says: “My flesh is truly food, and My blood is truly drink” [John 6:55]. (Homilies on Numbers 7:2)

The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit. (Commentaries on Romans 5:9)

---

ST. CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE (c. 200 - 258 A.D.)

But afterwards, when the stain of my past life had been washed away by means of the water of re-birth, a light from above poured itself upon my chastened and now pure heart; afterwards through the Spirit which is breathed from heaven, a second birth made of me a new man... Thus it had to be acknowledged that what was of the earth and was born of the flesh and had lived submissive to sins, had now begun to be of God, inasmuch as the Holy Spirit was animating it. (To Donatus 4)

[When] they receive also the Baptism of the Church...then finally can they be fully sanctified and be the sons of God...since it is written, “Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (Letters 71[72]:1)

[It] behooves those to be baptized...so that they are prepared, in the lawful and true and only Baptism of the holy Church, by divine regeneration, for the kingdom of God...because it is written, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (Letters 72[73]:21)

---

SEVENTH COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE (c. A.D. 256)

And in the gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with his divine voice, saying, “Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” ...Unless therefore they receive saving Baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ.

---

APHRAATES THE PERSION SAGE (inter A.D. 336-345)

For from Baptism we receive the Spirit of Christ. At that same moment in which the priests invoke the Spirit, heaven opens, and He descends and rests upon the waters; and those who are baptized are clothed in Him. For the Spirit is absent from all those who are born of the flesh, until they come to the water of re-birth; and then they receive the Holy Spirit....in the second birth, that through Baptism, they receive the Holy Spirit. (Treatises 6:14)

---

ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM (c. A.D. 350)

If any man does not receive Baptism, he does not have salvation. The only exception is the martyrs, who, even without water, will receive the kingdom....for the Savior calls martyrdom a Baptism (cf. Mark 10:38) ...Bearing your sins, you go down into the water; but the calling down of grace seals your soul and does not permit that you afterwards be swallowed up by the fearsome dragon. You go down dead in your sins, and come up made alive in righteousness. (Catechetical Lectures 3:10,12)

Since man is of a twofold nature, composed of body and soul, the purification also is twofold: the corporeal for the corporeal and the incorporeal for the incorporeal. The water cleanses the body, and the Spirit seals the soul....When you go down into the water, then, regard not simply the water, but look for salvation through the power of the Holy Spirit. For without both you cannot attain to perfection. It is not I who says this, but the Lord Jesus Christ, who has the power in this matter.

And He says, “Unless a man be born again” — and He adds the words “of water and of the Spirit” — “he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” He that is baptized with water, but is not found worthy of the Spirit, does not receive the grace in perfection. Nor, if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water, shall he enter the kingdom of heaven.

A bold saying, but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it.

(Catechetical Lectures 3:4)

---

ST. BASIL THE GREAT (c. A.D. 330 - 379)

For prisoners, Baptism is ransom, forgiveness of debts, death of sin, regeneration of the soul, a resplendent garment, an unbreakable seal, a chariot to heaven, a protector royal, a gift of adoption. (Sermons on Moral and Practical Subjects: On Baptism 13:5)

This then is what it means to be “born again of water and Spirit” : just as our dying is effected in the water [Rom 6:3-4; Col 2:11-13], our living is wrought through the Spirit. In three immersions and in an equal number of invocations the great mystery of Baptism is completed in such a way that the type of death may be shown figuratively, and that by the handing on of divine knowledge the souls of the baptized may be illuminated. If, therefore, there is any grace in the water, it is not from the nature of water but from the Spirit’s presence there. (On the Holy Spirit 15:35)

---

ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN (c. A.D. 333 - 397)

The Lord was baptized, not to be cleansed Himself but to cleanse the waters, so that those waters, cleansed by the flesh of Christ which knew no sin, might have the power of Baptism. Whoever comes, therefore, to the washing of Christ lays aside his sins. (Commentary on the Gospel of Luke 2:83)

The Church was redeemed at the price of Christ’s blood. Jew or Greek, it makes no difference; but if he has believed, he must circumcise himself from his sins [in Baptism — Col 2:11-13] so that he can be saved...for no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the sacrament of Baptism....”Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (On Abraham 2:11:79,84)

You have read, therefore, that the three witnesses in Baptism are one: water, blood and the Spirit [1 John 5:8]: and if you withdraw any one of these, the sacrament of Baptism is not valid. For what is the water without the cross of Christ? A common element with no sacramental effect. Nor on the other hand is there any mystery of regeneration without water: for “unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” (On the Mysteries 4:20)

---

ST. GREGORY OF NAZIANZ (c. A.D. 330 - 389)

Baptism is God’s most beautiful and magnificent gift....We call it gift, grace, anointing, enlightenment, garment of immortality, bath of rebirth, seal, and most precious gift. It is called gift because it is conferred on those who bring nothing of their own; grace since it is given even to the guilty; Baptism because sin is buried in the water; anointing for it is priestly and royal as are those who are anointed; enlightenment because it radiates light; clothing since it veils our shame; bath because it washes; and seal as it is our guard and the sign of God’s Lordship. (Orations on Holy Baptism 40:3-4; PG 36, 361C cited in CCC [1216])

Do you have an infant child? Allow sin no opportunity; rather, let the infant be sanctified [i.e. baptized] from childhood. From his most tender age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Do you fear the seal because of the weakness of nature? O what a pusillanimous mother, and of how little faith! ....Give your child the Trinity, that great and noble Protector. (Orations on Holy Baptism 40:17)

---

ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM (c. A.D. 344 - 407)

Behold, they thoroughly enjoy the peacefulness of freedom who shortly before were held captive. They are citizens of the Church who were wandering in error. They have their lot in righteousness who were in the confusion of sin. For not only are they free, but holy also; not only holy, but righteous too; not only righteous, but sons also; not only sons, but heirs as well; not only heirs, but brothers even of Christ; not only brothers of Christ, but also co-heirs; not only co-heirs, but His very members; not only His members, but a temple too; not a temple only, but likewise the instruments of the Spirit.

You see how many are the benefits of Baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins; but we have enumerated ten honors. For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by sin [or though they do not have personal sins] so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be His members. (Baptismal Catecheses quoted by Augustine in Contra Iulianum 1:6:21)

---

APOSTOLIC CONSTITUTIONS (c. A.D. 400)

Be ye likewise contented with one Baptism alone, that which is into the death of the Lord [Rom 6:3-4; Col 2:11-13]...he that out of contempt will not be baptized shall be condemned as an unbeliever and shall be reproached as ungrateful and foolish. For the Lord says, “Except a man be baptized of water and of the Spirit, he shall by no means enter into the kingdom of heaven.” And again, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (6:3:15)

---

ST. JEROME (c. A.D. 415)

This much you must know, that Baptism forgives past sins, but it does not safeguard future justice, which is preserved by labor and industry and diligence, and depends always and above all on the mercy of God. (Dialogue Against the Pelagians 3:1)

---

ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO (c. A.D. 354 - 430)

By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive....gives also the most hidden grace of His Spirit to believers, grace which He secretly infuses even into infants....It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call Baptism itself nothing else but “salvation” and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else but “life.”

Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the Churches of Christ hold inherently that without Baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture too.

If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this....The Sacrament of Baptism is most assuredly the Sacrament of regeneration.

(Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 c. A.D. 412)

It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated....when that infant is brought to Baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the infant so presented is reborn. For it is not written, “Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents” or “by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him,” but: “Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit.” The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated in one Adam.” (Letters 98:2 c. A.D. 408)

Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ — it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of Baptism. For He that said, “If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven,” made an exception for them in that other statement in which He says no less generally, “Whoever confesses Me before men, I too will confess him before My Father, who is in heaven” [Matt 10:32]. (City of God 13:7 c. A.D. 420)

---

ST. FULGENCE OF RUSPE (c. A.D. 524)

From that time at which our Savior said: “If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven,” no one can say, without the sacrament of Baptism, except those who, in the Catholic Church, without Baptism pour out their blood for Christ, receive the kingdom of heaven and eternal life. Anyone who receives the sacrament of Baptism, whether in the Catholic Church or in a heretical or schismatic one, receives the whole sacrament...

[But one outside the Church] must, therefore, return to the Church, not so that he might receive again the sacrament of Baptism, which no one dare repeat in any baptized person, but so that he may receive eternal life in Catholic society, for the obtaining of which no one is suited who...remains estranged from the Catholic Church. (The Rule of Faith 43)

These articles originally appeared in the August 1992 and October 1994 issues of THIS ROCK magazine (under the column “The Fathers Know Best”) with commentary by Church historians edited and added by Phil Porvaznik.

---

Back to Apologetics Articles

Back to Home Page

About | Apologetics | Philosophy | Spirituality | Books | Audio | Links

from philvaz.com

i showed verse after verse where the Scriptures explain the doctrine of baptism.

above, i show what the Church the Apostles left behind received from them.

if you want to believe no one correctly understood what baptism is for 16 centuries, go ahead.

[rzman21]

The Protestant Confessions of Faith show this stark differences.

The Westminster Confession says this about Holy Communion: VII. Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament,[13] do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.[14]

While the Lutheran Augsburg Confession says: Of the Supper of the Lord they teach that the Body and Blood of Christ are truly present, and are distributed 2] to those who eat the Supper of the Lord; and they reject those that teach otherwise.

And the Baptist Confession of Faith says: Worthy receivers, outwardly taking the visible elements in this ordinance, also receive them inwardly and spiritually by faith, truly and in fact, but not carnally and corporally, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of His death. The body and blood of Christ is not present corporally or carnally but it is spiritually present to the faith of believers in the ordinance, just as the elements are present to their outward senses. Yet all say scripture alone teaches what they claim it does.

[rzman21]

I don’t bow down to the moon god.

>>Catholics don’t either.

[rzman21]

Catholicism makes getting saved way too complicated.

>Perhaps the truth is more complicated than the Gospel according to William of Ockham teaches you.

Faith without works is dead.

James 2:24
Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

[one Lord one faith one baptism]

“moon god”

LOL! that’s a new one, i’ll have to add it as #11 to my list of “untruths” told about the Faith.

the devil never sleeps, does he?