J
Joe_Kelley
Guest
As I recall the parents broke the law when they employed the babysitter. I read that it was illegal for a Jew to employ a Catholic in the Papal States. That illegal act set the scene for what followed.
- Status
P
PJM
Guest
It’s a FAIRs of questions.
Allow me please to explain:
- Faith is always a FREE gift from God [with strings attached] It requires CONSENT of ones freewill.
- Because an infant cannot consent for themselves; the Church as COMMANDED and empowered by God: [Mt. 16:15-19 an Mt. 18:18 an John 3:5] requires a responsible person to do so on the behalf.
- Explaining Baptism ;
- Baptism , validly administered d received does remove ALL of ones sins as well as the
latent effects of sin empoweing one imedite aces to heaven IF ONE DIES BEFORE SINNING AGAIN. - Baptism ONLY errases al ofons sins commited BEFORE being Baptized
- Baptism has NO salvation effect on any and all sins commited AFTER Baptism
- Because Baptism effect ONLY sins Before the Sacrament is received
ther tools nd gaces become in an absolute sense necessary. 1 Jh. 1: 8-10; 1 Jn. 5: 16-17]
- Thus the Sacrament of Confession; the Most Holy Eucharist; Indullgences, works of Charity all have key roles in ones salvation.
- While salvation is possble outside of the CC [becaue of those things that bind us togeather]; it is nevertheles FAR more difficult due to the graces that flow through the Catholic Sacraments. VALID and licit only in the Catholic Communion of churches.
S
SteveVH
Guest
Many times it is a cultural thing. I have been present at many baptisms in my Church. Many times none of us recognize the parents at all and never see them again. They may “promise” to bring the child up Catholic, but the reality is the child will have the same view as the parents. Sadly, it is due mostly to ignorance and poor catechises. There really is no point in being baptized if you have no intention of living out your baptism within the life of the Church.
G
gerhardd
Guest
JonNC: “I guess my confusion is over how an infant confesses his/her catholic faith.”
Luther explains “how” in his Sermon for the 3rd Sunday after Epiphany, “For the baptizer asks whether the child believes, and the answer for the child is: Yes. And he asks whether it desires to be baptized, and the answer for the child is again: Yes, Now nobody is baptized for the child, but it is baptized itself. Therefore it must also believe itself, or the sponsors must speak a falsehood, when for it they say: I believe. Furthermore, the baptizer declares that it is born anew, has forgiveness of sins, is freed from the devil, and as a sign of this he puts on it a white garment, and deals with it in every way as with a new, holy child of God: all of which would necessarily be untrue, if the child had not its own faith. Indeed, it would be better never to baptize a child, than to trifle and juggle with God’s Word and sacrament, as if he were an idol or a fool.”
JonNC: “What I’m saying is that an LCMS pastor, for example, is part of the synod, and is accountable to it.”
No, the LCMS is an advisory body only. The LCMS may render an opinion regarding baptism but the pastor is not bound to obey that opinion.
Kaninchen: “What on earth does ‘sectarian Jew’ mean, by the way?”
A follower of a sect of Jewish teachers who reject Christ.
Kaninchen: “Christian sectarian interpretations of something I see as meaningless in the first place aside, if somebody had done the same thing to one of my children, I might consider an action for minor physical assault but nothing more.”
Then, why would you employ a Catholic babysitter when you know their Canon permits them to baptize dying children without parental consent?
Joe Kelley: “As I recall the parents broke the law when they employed the babysitter. I read that it was illegal for a Jew to employ a Catholic in the Papal States. That illegal act set the scene for what followed.”
It’s an evil law that prohibits Jews from employing Catholics. The parents and the babysitter sinned by not obeying the evil law. Their sins, however, in no way justify the evil act of the Pope in stealing a child from his parents.
PJM: "Allow me please to explain:
Thank you for your version of THEE truth. It appears the Catholic Anabaptist Canon is based on a very high opinion of human power and works and a very low opinion of the power and significance of Holy Baptism: Since men and babies sin greatly and frequently both before and after baptism, baptism actually saves no one unless they are fortunate enough to be baptized at the moment of their death.
The real truth is that babies inherit an inborn evil will that is totally bound to Satan. This hereditary evil will is so great and horrible that only for the sake of the Lord Christ it can be covered and forgiven before God in the baptized and believing baby.
Baptism is more than just a one-time event. Baptism promises eternal salvation and the forgiveness of all sins. Rather than trust in impure human works of penance, the priest’s work of the mass, indulgences, and works of charity, we should trust in Christ’s work alone received in His blessed Sacrament of Holy Baptism.
Luther explains “how” in his Sermon for the 3rd Sunday after Epiphany, “For the baptizer asks whether the child believes, and the answer for the child is: Yes. And he asks whether it desires to be baptized, and the answer for the child is again: Yes, Now nobody is baptized for the child, but it is baptized itself. Therefore it must also believe itself, or the sponsors must speak a falsehood, when for it they say: I believe. Furthermore, the baptizer declares that it is born anew, has forgiveness of sins, is freed from the devil, and as a sign of this he puts on it a white garment, and deals with it in every way as with a new, holy child of God: all of which would necessarily be untrue, if the child had not its own faith. Indeed, it would be better never to baptize a child, than to trifle and juggle with God’s Word and sacrament, as if he were an idol or a fool.”
JonNC: “What I’m saying is that an LCMS pastor, for example, is part of the synod, and is accountable to it.”
No, the LCMS is an advisory body only. The LCMS may render an opinion regarding baptism but the pastor is not bound to obey that opinion.
Kaninchen: “What on earth does ‘sectarian Jew’ mean, by the way?”
A follower of a sect of Jewish teachers who reject Christ.
Kaninchen: “Christian sectarian interpretations of something I see as meaningless in the first place aside, if somebody had done the same thing to one of my children, I might consider an action for minor physical assault but nothing more.”
Then, why would you employ a Catholic babysitter when you know their Canon permits them to baptize dying children without parental consent?
Joe Kelley: “As I recall the parents broke the law when they employed the babysitter. I read that it was illegal for a Jew to employ a Catholic in the Papal States. That illegal act set the scene for what followed.”
It’s an evil law that prohibits Jews from employing Catholics. The parents and the babysitter sinned by not obeying the evil law. Their sins, however, in no way justify the evil act of the Pope in stealing a child from his parents.
PJM: "Allow me please to explain:
- Faith is always a FREE gift from God [with strings attached] It requires CONSENT of ones freewill.
- Because an infant cannot consent for themselves; the Church as COMMANDED and empowered by God: [Mt. 16:15-19 an Mt. 18:18 an John 3:5] requires a responsible person to do so on the behalf.
- Explaining Baptism ;
- Baptism , validly administered d received does remove ALL of ones sins as well as the
latent effects of sin empoweing one imedite aces to heaven IF ONE DIES BEFORE SINNING AGAIN. - Baptism ONLY errases al ofons sins commited BEFORE being Baptized
- Baptism has NO salvation effect on any and all sins commited AFTER Baptism
- Because Baptism effect ONLY sins Before the Sacrament is receivedther tools nd gaces become in an absolute sense necessary. [1 Jh. 1: 8-10; 1 Jn. 5: 16-17]
- Thus the Sacrament of Confession; the Most Holy Eucharist; Indullgences, works of Charity all have key roles in ones salvation.
- While salvation is possble outside of the CC [becaue of those things that bind us togeather]; it is nevertheles FAR more difficult due to the graces that flow through the Catholic Sacraments. VALID and licit only in the Catholic Communion of churches.
Thank you for your version of THEE truth. It appears the Catholic Anabaptist Canon is based on a very high opinion of human power and works and a very low opinion of the power and significance of Holy Baptism: Since men and babies sin greatly and frequently both before and after baptism, baptism actually saves no one unless they are fortunate enough to be baptized at the moment of their death.
The real truth is that babies inherit an inborn evil will that is totally bound to Satan. This hereditary evil will is so great and horrible that only for the sake of the Lord Christ it can be covered and forgiven before God in the baptized and believing baby.
Baptism is more than just a one-time event. Baptism promises eternal salvation and the forgiveness of all sins. Rather than trust in impure human works of penance, the priest’s work of the mass, indulgences, and works of charity, we should trust in Christ’s work alone received in His blessed Sacrament of Holy Baptism.
E
Esdra
Guest
Well, I can’t help. This is what quite a few people from the Baptist background told me…Define “giving one’s life to Jesus”. I suspect that one who has given one’s life to Jesus would know better than to judge the faith of others.
For me Catholics are the same Christians than the Baptists. (Especially the Charismatic Movement and similar movements arising in the CC in the past 20 years - I luv them).
But I know from many Baptists that claim that Catholics are not Christians because they don’t have a personal relationship to Jesus and didn’t give Him their lives.
By the way: I never said that Baptists (at least not the majority) see ALL Catholics as non-Christians but mainly the Catholics only by name, which are plenty of in the world…
Many so called Catholics here in Europe have no idea about Jesus, never go to Church, don’t even know what is celebrated on Christmas, not to mention Easter etc…
Are they Christians in your opinion? At least they all call themselves Catholics and even write it in the gap where you have to fill in your religion (in official documents): Religion: Roman Catholic.
To be perfectly honest, when talking about THIS type of Catholics, I can well understand Baptists, Pentecostals etc. that they see the need to evangelize those “Catholics”.
Well, simply living a Christian life. - Following Jesus and try to do all he commanded us in the Holy Bible.
This doesn’t only involve going to mass or service on Sundays (and important for Evangelicals: having community after service, in Bible Study groups or in prayer evenings, but also to become a new person in Christ, like Paul writes in Romans, Chapter 8.
Do people live “a Christian life”, according to you? I would so no, most people live by far an absolutely non-Christian life. - This refers to Catholics, as well as some Protestants.
I have been a Baptist now for about a year, and I tell you, among Catholics I’ve never seen people like my Baptist brothers and sisters: They really try to live a Christian life, a holy life, just as it is commanded in the Holy Bible, especially the New Testament.
I have never seen such a love for Christ among Catholics than they have.
I also love my Lord and I am also giving my best to draw always nearer to him and try to live a Christian life.
Esdra
P
PJM
Guest
the thing with baptism as a “cultural event” is really interesting.
WOW! Communion, Baptism, Ect. are “social events?”… friend yor miles away from a correct understanding…
IF you’d actually care to understand the Mass amd WHY we beleive what we do, just PM me [PJM] and I’ll provide the education you failed to get.
In the USA Catholism is the LARGEST religion and FALLEN away catholics to our shame are the second largest religious group.
Love and prayers, my young friend.
Pat
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
At least they are baptized in teh Church that Jesus built, while others who are outside the Church claim to know what they are doing when they really dont. the Holy Church of God carries them and eventually they will repent and come into the Church. if you could view the Catholic Church like we Catholics do, you would be amazed. Disobedience to God is a grave offense, those outside the Church do not realize this.
E
Esdra
Guest
yeah, they are…
BUT what is this good for, if they are only Christians by name?
This was my point actually…
Up to now I have found no single “reborn Christian” that were only one by name. Most of them do love their Lord and have decided that he shall be the master of their life.
And as they really love him, like I also do, they try to do everything to fulfil Christ’s commandments (cf. Jn 14:15).
In Christ,
Esdra
P
PJM
Guest
***My dear friends in Christ;
Might I suggest that in Charity ones goes to the SOURCE rather than listen to folks incorrectly taught, and advocating positions of which there is no basis in facts.***
Might I suggest that in Charity ones goes to the SOURCE rather than listen to folks incorrectly taught, and advocating positions of which there is no basis in facts.***
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
Which commands? how about that one being in His Church and never leave no matter what?
how do you know if someone loves the Lord if you cannot see or know the hearts of man? if they really knew who our Lord is, they would seek the Truth in His Church.
would you say that David did not love God because he committed so many attrocities?
E
Esdra
Guest
Did I really leave the Church by joining the Baptists? Is there not still one Church united by Christ? There is, I tell you. Do we not all love Christ, no matter whether we know the Bible nearly by heart or hear God’s word during mass… I really don’t want to start a despute with you…
Well, I just know a heck lot of Catholics by name only. - And they don’t even try to follow the way of Jesus… Do they love Him then? - consider (again) Jn 14:15.
Of course he did. He just did human mistakes, also referred to as sins.
But he asked God for forgivness and He forgave him as often as he asked Him to.
That’s so great about our religion Christianity! We are saved through Christ Jesus and if we really repent he forgives us our sins, no matter how big they are.
in Christ,
Esdra
Just as a followup to our dialogue here, from the LCMS website:
lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2220
Jon
G
gerhardd
Guest
Jon: “So, a Lutheran pastor begins the practice of rebaptizing, are you saying that the LCMS would only advize him not to? And he could continue to claim he is an LCMS pastor? 
”
Yes, yes. The LCMS may remove an Anabaptist pastor from its roster but the LCMS cannot remove a man from his pastorate at a LCMS congregation. A human institution may not remove a man from a divine office.
Jon quotes LCMS.org: "At the same time, Lutherans believe that God has instituted the office of pastor for the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments on behalf of* and with accountability to the church*
Accountability to the church not to the LCMS. The church calls pastors and the church removes pastors. The LCMS has no power to remove the pastor of any LCMS congregation for any cause whatsoever.
The churches of the LCMS may and should remove a congregation with an Anabaptist pastor from their communion. However, the LCMS itself is a human institution with no authority whatsoever over any divine institution or any divine office.
”Yes, yes. The LCMS may remove an Anabaptist pastor from its roster but the LCMS cannot remove a man from his pastorate at a LCMS congregation. A human institution may not remove a man from a divine office.
Jon quotes LCMS.org: "At the same time, Lutherans believe that God has instituted the office of pastor for the preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments on behalf of* and with accountability to the church*
Accountability to the church not to the LCMS. The church calls pastors and the church removes pastors. The LCMS has no power to remove the pastor of any LCMS congregation for any cause whatsoever.
The churches of the LCMS may and should remove a congregation with an Anabaptist pastor from their communion. However, the LCMS itself is a human institution with no authority whatsoever over any divine institution or any divine office.
K
Kaninchen
Guest
Kaninchen: “What on earth does ‘sectarian Jew’ mean, by the way?”
gerharddA follower of a sect of Jewish teachers who reject Christ.
Goodness and there I was thinking I was Jewish rather than ‘sectarian Jewish’!
Apart from being rather insulting, is this a common idea amongst your sect?
Kaninchen: “Christian sectarian interpretations of something I see as meaningless in the first place aside, if somebody had done the same thing to one of my children, I might consider an action for minor physical assault but nothing more.”
gerhardd: Then, why would you employ a Catholic babysitter when you know their Canon permits them to baptize dying children without parental consent?
Well, there’s a lot more to the ‘Affair’, as I said, including her motivations and what it was she actually did.
As to whether a babysitter might have done such a thing to one of my daughters, to a Christian the child would have been baptised, to me the child would have merely gotten wet. The only reason for the ‘Affair’ was that the law allowed/encouraged the kidnapping of Jewish children in the Papal States, fortunately I don’t live in such a society.
gerharddA follower of a sect of Jewish teachers who reject Christ.
Goodness and there I was thinking I was Jewish rather than ‘sectarian Jewish’!
Apart from being rather insulting, is this a common idea amongst your sect?
Kaninchen: “Christian sectarian interpretations of something I see as meaningless in the first place aside, if somebody had done the same thing to one of my children, I might consider an action for minor physical assault but nothing more.”
gerhardd: Then, why would you employ a Catholic babysitter when you know their Canon permits them to baptize dying children without parental consent?
Well, there’s a lot more to the ‘Affair’, as I said, including her motivations and what it was she actually did.
As to whether a babysitter might have done such a thing to one of my daughters, to a Christian the child would have been baptised, to me the child would have merely gotten wet. The only reason for the ‘Affair’ was that the law allowed/encouraged the kidnapping of Jewish children in the Papal States, fortunately I don’t live in such a society.
S
StrawberryJam
Guest
Any religious person who would kidnap a child or arrange a baptism for them without parent permission is a religious terrorist.
Any religion that would allow or encourage the kidnapping of children from other religions is abominable.
G
gerhardd
Guest
Kaninchen: “Apart from being rather insulting, is this a common idea amongst your sect?”
No, not at all. I just thought the term would be descriptive of people living in the Papal States who were followers of Jewish teachers who rejected Christ. If you prefer Jewish, I’ll use that term instead. I apologize for any offense.
Kaninchen: “As to whether a babysitter might have done such a thing to one of my daughters, to a Christian the child would have been baptised, to me the child would have merely gotten wet.”
The Anabaptist sectarians would agree with you.
Kaninchen: “The only reason for the ‘Affair’ was that the law allowed/encouraged the kidnapping of Jewish children in the Papal States, fortunately I don’t live in such a society.”
In societies where Catholic sectarians control the government, forced baptism/kidnapping of non-Catholic children remains a distinct possibility. The Canon law of Catholic Church has not changed.
No, not at all. I just thought the term would be descriptive of people living in the Papal States who were followers of Jewish teachers who rejected Christ. If you prefer Jewish, I’ll use that term instead. I apologize for any offense.
Kaninchen: “As to whether a babysitter might have done such a thing to one of my daughters, to a Christian the child would have been baptised, to me the child would have merely gotten wet.”
The Anabaptist sectarians would agree with you.
Kaninchen: “The only reason for the ‘Affair’ was that the law allowed/encouraged the kidnapping of Jewish children in the Papal States, fortunately I don’t live in such a society.”
In societies where Catholic sectarians control the government, forced baptism/kidnapping of non-Catholic children remains a distinct possibility. The Canon law of Catholic Church has not changed.
G
gerhardd
Guest
StrawberryJam: “Any religious person who would kidnap a child or arrange a baptism for them without parent permission is a religious terrorist.
Any religion that would allow or encourage the kidnapping of children from other religions is abominable.”
In all civilized nations, parents determine whether their children are baptized and/or receive a Christian education. In Papal States, parents forfeit these religious rights. Canon Law sanctions the forced baptism and the forced Christian education of baptized children against the will of parents.
Canon 868 §2: “An infant of Catholic parents or even of non-Catholic parents is baptized licitly in danger of death even against the will of the parents.” If the baptized infant recovers, Canon Law stipulates that the child who was forcibly baptized now has a right to a Christian education. Canon 217: “Since they are called by baptism to lead a life in keeping with the teaching of the gospel, the Christian faithful have the right to a Christian education by which they are to be instructed properly to strive for the maturity of the human person and at the same time to know and live the mystery of salvation.”
In his territories, the Pope wields two swords: the authority of the church to baptize and to teach and the power of government to forcibly baptize, to forcibly educate, and to forcibly take children away from any parent who resists him. All this stems from the Pope’s desire to knock Christ off His throne. The Pope will not trust Almighty Christ to baptize His dying elect children. The Pope will not trust Almighty Christ to keep His elect children in their baptismal faith. But the Pope must rule in Christ’s stead by doing things that Christ has commanded him not to do.
Any religion that would allow or encourage the kidnapping of children from other religions is abominable.”
In all civilized nations, parents determine whether their children are baptized and/or receive a Christian education. In Papal States, parents forfeit these religious rights. Canon Law sanctions the forced baptism and the forced Christian education of baptized children against the will of parents.
Canon 868 §2: “An infant of Catholic parents or even of non-Catholic parents is baptized licitly in danger of death even against the will of the parents.” If the baptized infant recovers, Canon Law stipulates that the child who was forcibly baptized now has a right to a Christian education. Canon 217: “Since they are called by baptism to lead a life in keeping with the teaching of the gospel, the Christian faithful have the right to a Christian education by which they are to be instructed properly to strive for the maturity of the human person and at the same time to know and live the mystery of salvation.”
In his territories, the Pope wields two swords: the authority of the church to baptize and to teach and the power of government to forcibly baptize, to forcibly educate, and to forcibly take children away from any parent who resists him. All this stems from the Pope’s desire to knock Christ off His throne. The Pope will not trust Almighty Christ to baptize His dying elect children. The Pope will not trust Almighty Christ to keep His elect children in their baptismal faith. But the Pope must rule in Christ’s stead by doing things that Christ has commanded him not to do.
- Status