Define Born again

[Fiat]

Dear Exrc:

Your definition of “born-again” is as follows:
**

Born again:

The instantaneous birth of ones spirit, upon the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Also, the reversal of the damage caused by the first Adam,( i.e.) which was instantaneous spiritual death upon the act of one sin. Essentially becomming spiritually alive. **

Do you think this birth of one’s spirit is the result of mental opinion? (Does my question deviate too much from the purpose of this thread?)

Actually, your definition of born again doesn’t seem very objectionable. The terms are still vague enough that I’m not really sure what you mean.

Fiat

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

I know it’s been said before, but the disagreement doesn’t seem at all to be on WHAT being born again is but rather on HOW it happens.

Paul explains that this happens in water baptism:

“we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death. We were indeed buried with him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might live in newness of life (Romans 6:3-4)”.

In baptism we die with Christ and are raised to new life. This happens “indeed”, not “symbolically”. We are baptized “into” Christ and those who are “in” Christ are a new creation (2 Cor 5:17).

We’d all agree that being “born again” is to be made a “new creation in Christ”. Scripture always and only equates this with water baptism. Never ever does scripture equate being made a new creation (born again, rebirth, regeneration) with anything other than water baptism…ever.

So the real topic of this thread isn’t really what the definition of “born again” is. We all agree on that. The topic is how this rebirth take place.

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[dcdurel]

He taught we first receive this grace at baptism.

as long as they are repentant and reject sin and satan and intend to follow Jesus and His Church then they are saved by the grace of salvation they receive at baptism.

after they have been saved, they must obey God to constantly renew this grace and grow in this grace and keep this grace. Thus **we need both faith and obedience to God to receive and keep the grace of justification. **

Please give me Scripture verses that show these assertions to be true!

I quoted many about the necessity to obey God already. I will now quote some verses on baptism. But, remember, there is nothing in Scripture that is perfectly clear. That is why Protestants, who try to follow Scripture alone cannot agree on a single teaching, even though they pray and study and have been trying for over 500 years.
I gave you what the Church teaches, and I can give scriptural verses which are in line with that teaching and which show evidence of that teaching. But there are NO scripture verses which are perfectly clear and explicit. If there were, all Protestant denominations would have a teaching they can agree upon. But they don’t.

Remember, basic Church teachings came from the apostles, who learned from God. Basic Church teachings don’t come from the bible. How could they, when the Church was teaching and preaching before a word of the New Testament was written.
Thus, I will show scriptural verses which are a “witness” to the teaching, and which “illuminate” the teaching. This is what the Church uses scripture for. The Church does not use scripture as a proof, but as a witness to what has always been taugtht.
Remember, there are no clear explict teachings in scripture, which is why Protestants can’t agree on any teaching.

He taught we first receive this grace at baptism.
Jesus said to the leaders who would preach the Gospel, “he who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16)
He did not say, he who believes OR is baptized, but AND is baptized. Baptism is required. Thus, evidence that salvation is first received when baptized.

  "The like figure whereunto [even] **baptism doth also

now save us** (not the putting away of the filth of the
flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by
the resurrection of Jesus Christ," ( 1 Peter 3:21)
The meaning of Peter’s statement, “Baptism now saves you,” is clear from the context of the passage. He’s referring to the sacrament of water baptism, because he says eight people were saved through water. Baptism does not save us by removing dirt from our bodies. The merely physical effects of pouring water in baptism are unimportant. What counts is the action of the Holy Spirit though baptism, for in it we “pledge . . . a good conscience toward God,” (that is, we make a baptismal pledge of repentance) and are saved “by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

“Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name
of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” (Acts 2:38)
and be baptized" It did not say “OR” be baptized. Both are necessary for the remission of sins, salvation. We also receive the Holy Ghost at baptism. “…and
ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

  "Not by works of righteousness which we have done,

but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of
regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost." (Titus 3:5)
We are both washed of regeneration (regenerate means
to be made new, to be born again) and renewed of the Holy
Ghost only at baptism. We are saved by grace only at
baptism. Here Paul uses the word “saved” as he always
does, except for two times, to refer to the beginning of
salvation when we are first saved from our sins, not final
salvation.

 

[dcdurel]

In Ephesians 5:26 Paul says of the Church. “That he
might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by
the word.”
When the members of the church are saved, they are
sanctified and cleansed of their sins. Paul says this
occurs by the “washing of water.” Washing of the water
only occurs at baptism. We are sanctified, (receive
sanctifying grace) and so saved from our sins at baptism.

Heb 10:22 let us draw near to God with a
sincere heart in full assurance of
faith, having our hearts sprinkled
to cleanse us from a guilty
conscience and having our bodies
washed with pure water.
One form of baptism is with sprinkled water, which then by God’s grace cleanses us from a guilty conscience.

 "And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye

are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the
Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor. 6:11)
The only time we are washed and sanctified by the
Spirit of God in the name of the Lord Jesus is at baptism.
The grace of baptism is merited by the death of Christ on
his cross, when He redeemed us by the washing of his blood.
But this grace by which we are saved is applied to us at
baptism.

 "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into

death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by
the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in
newness of life." (Rom. 6:4)
We cannot walk in newness of life if we have not been
saved. But Paul says we are buried by baptism into death
so we also should walk in newness of life. Again the clear
evidence that we are saved at baptism.

 When someone hears the true Gospel and believes in

Jesus, he will then be saved, because the true Gospel says
we must be baptized to get to heaven. To believe in Jesus
means to believe what he taught. Jesus taught that we are
saved from our sins at baptism. Jesus says we have to be
“born again of water and the Spirit” and “He that believeth
and is baptized shall be saved.”
Peter said, “Save yourselves from this untoward
generation. Then they that gladly received his word were
baptized.” (Acts 2:40,41)

In Acts 16:31 Paul says to the jailor who had not
heard the gospel and believed the teachings of Jesus,
“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved,
and thy house.” Since God’s word says we are saved at
baptism we would expect the jailor and his household to be
baptized after they heard the Gospel. That is exactly what
happened. “And they spake unto him the word of the Lord,
and to all that were in his house.16:33 And he took them
the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and
was baptized, he and all his, straightway.” (Acts 16:32,33)
So, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt
be saved”, meant, believe what the Lord Jesus Christ says,
and thou shalt be saved when baptized. It does not mean,
thou shalt be saved from the fires of hell, that is, final
salvation. For that would contradict all the other
scriptures which are evidence that we can lose our
salvation by serious or mortal sin. Also it would mean
that no one is saved until he dies. But St.Paul says to
the Ephesians, “For by grace are ye saved through faith.”
The Ephesians had already believed and were baptized, so he
says, “are ye saved”, not “ye will be saved”.

 

[dcdurel]

Some followers of Martin Luther will say. Doesn’t St.
Paul say, in Rom. 10:9, " That if thou shalt confess with
thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart
that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be
saved." Doesn’t this contradict all the teachings about
being saved at baptism? Not really. Because if you are
converted and reject your previous false beliefs to believe
what Jesus taught, then naturally you will believe His
doctrines on baptism, and therefore you will be baptized,
hence saved.
Others will say, doesn’t St. Paul say, in Rom 10:13,
“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall
be saved.”
They say “see, we just have to call on Jesus to save us,
and we are saved.”
Not true. To “call upon the name of the Lord”, does
not mean to audibly call out Jesus’s name. No where in the bible does it say that we are saved the very moment we call out Jesus’ name. The “name of the Lord”, does not mean the name “Jesus”. It means the authority of God, and all He represents. The police say, “stop in the name of the Law”,
to mean “stop by the authority of the Law.” Jesus said to baptize in “the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.” But when we baptize, we don’t say, I baptize you “in the name of Jesus,” etc., but “in the name of the Son”
because “in the name of the Son” means by the authority of the Son, not His literal name. We don’t say in the names (plural) of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, but only the name (singular) of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, because we are speaking of one authority, God.
That is why in Acts 22:16, Ananias told Paul after his
conversion, “And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be
baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of
the Lord.”
We call “upon the name of the Lord” that is, His
authority, at baptism. And notice, was Paul saved from his sins the moment he
first believed, when he was knocked to the ground? No, it was not until he was baptized that he received the grace to “wash away thy sins”

 

[John1717]

dennisknapp:

You do not understand. I do not except sola scriptura therefore I need not use only Scripture to justify my beliefs.

Again, show me a Christian in the history of the Church prior to the 16th century that believed in sola scriptura and sola fide and will consider your position. I will not on the other hand consider an innovation and therefore a “tradition of men.”

It is not necessary to believe in “sola scriptura” to answer my questions!

During the last 1,700 years, the Roman Catholic Church has put to death hundreds of thousands she believed to be heretics – Jews, dissident Catholics, Protestants, anabaptists, Hussites, Lollards, Waldenses, Albigenses and many others in distant lands who refused to convert to the ‘one true church.’ Today, the Roman Catholic Church calls people who hold these very same opinions ‘separated brethren’ and teaches it is wrong to persecute on the basis of religious belief.

1. Which church is right? The church which killed those who dispute her teachings, or the church which treats other Christians – and even other religions – as alternative pathways to heaven?

2. Please tell me what your definition of grace is!

 

[dcdurel]

It is not necessary to believe in “sola scriptura” to answer my questions!

During the last 1,700 years, the Roman Catholic Church has put to death hundreds of thousands she believed to be heretics – Jews, dissident Catholics, Protestants, anabaptists, Hussites, Lollards, Waldenses, Albigenses and many others in distant lands who refused to convert to the ‘one true church.’ Today, the Roman Catholic Church calls people who hold these very same opinions ‘separated brethren’ and teaches it is wrong to persecute on the basis of religious belief.

1. Which church is right? The church which killed those who dispute her teachings, or the church which treats other Christians – and even other religions – as alternative pathways to heaven?

2. Please tell me what your definition of grace is!

Incorrect. The Church has never put any heretics to death. That was all goverments of various countries. And the Church never had a teaching in which heretics are to be put to death. The Church simply teaches heretics are to be excluded from the Church, excommunitcated, if you will. There never has been and never will be any teaching that heretics should be put to death.
Did some Catholics have that opinion. Of course. Some Catholics believe abortion is ok. But that is not Church teaching.

 

[Fiat]

Dear John1717:

I hope you’re not suggesting that Protestants have, throughout history, been shining examples of tolerance?!

In faith,
Fiat

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Originally Posted by John1717
He taught we first receive this grace at baptism.

as long as they are repentant and reject sin and satan and intend to follow Jesus and His Church then they are saved by the grace of salvation they receive at baptism.

after they have been saved, they must obey God to constantly renew this grace and grow in this grace and keep this grace. Thus **we need both faith and obedience to God to receive and keep the grace of justification. **

Please give me Scripture verses that show these assertions to be true!

We are saved by grace:

“By grace you have been saved (Eph 2:5,8)”

And baptism saves us:

"baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21)"

Therefore baptism MUST be a conduit of grace.

Once we are baptised “into” Christ:

“we [are] baptised into Christ Jesus (Romans 6:3)”

we MUST remain there:

“Remain in me, as I remain in you…anyone who does not remain in me will be thrown out like a branch and wither; people will gather them and throw them into a fire and theyu will be burned (John 15:4-6)”.

“And now, children, remain in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not be put to shame by him at his coming (1 John 2:28)”.

We are to persevere in the commandments of God AND in the faith (Rev 14:12), not one or the other because our works, without faith, are like filthy rags (Is. 64:6) but faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead (James 2:17). And it’s those who persevere to the end that will be saved (Mark 13:13).

In Christ,
Nancy

 

[John1717]

Catholic4aReasn:

We are saved by grace:

“By grace you have been saved (Eph 2:5,8)”

And baptism saves us:

"baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21)"

Therefore baptism MUST be a conduit of grace.

Once we are baptised “into” Christ:

“we [are] baptised into Christ Jesus (Romans 6:3)”

we MUST remain there:

No, faith saves us!

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast."

Romans 3:20, 28 - "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin…For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."

Galatians 2:16 - "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."

1 Cor.15:1 - 2 - "…I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved…"

*1 Peter 3:21 tells us, “*and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.**” Baptism represents a complete break with one’s past life. As the Flood wiped away the old sinful world, so baptism pictures one’s break from his old sinful life and his entrance into new life in Christ. Peter now applied to his readers the principle he set forth in verses 13-17 and illustrated in verses 18-20. He exhorted them to have the courage to commit themselves to a course of action by taking a public stand for Christ through baptism. The act of public baptism would “save” them from the temptation to sacrifice their good consciences in order to avoid persecution. For a first-century Christian, baptism meant he was following through on his commitment to Christ, regardless of the consequences.

 

[dennisknapp]

John1717:

Catholic4aReasn:

We are saved by grace:

“By grace you have been saved (Eph 2:5,8)”

And baptism saves us:

"baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21)"

Therefore baptism MUST be a conduit of grace.

Once we are baptised “into” Christ:

“we [are] baptised into Christ Jesus (Romans 6:3)”

we MUST remain there:

No, faith saves us!

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast."

Romans 3:20, 28 - "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin…For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law."

Galatians 2:16 - "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."

1 Cor.15:1 - 2 - "…I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved…"

*1 Peter 3:21 tells us, “*and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.**” Baptism represents a complete break with one’s past life. As the Flood wiped away the old sinful world, so baptism pictures one’s break from his old sinful life and his entrance into new life in Christ. Peter now applied to his readers the principle he set forth in verses 13-17 and illustrated in verses 18-20. He exhorted them to have the courage to commit themselves to a course of action by taking a public stand for Christ through baptism. The act of public baptism would “save” them from the temptation to sacrifice their good consciences in order to avoid persecution. For a first-century Christian, baptism meant he was following through on his commitment to Christ, regardless of the consequences.


Again with the Scripture throwing. We do not except you interpretation of Scripture so why do you continue to use it against us?

No one had your interpretation of baptism until the 16th century or later, so the burden of proof is on YOU to show why the whole Church up to that time was wrong–from 100 AD to 1500 AD.

You stated:

**1. Which church is right? The church which killed those who dispute her teachings, or the church which treats other Christians – and even other religions – as alternative pathways to heaven? **

Did you read dcdurel’s response? I think he answered it pretty well. He said, “Incorrect. The Church has never put any heretics to death. That was all goverments of various countries. And the Church never had a teaching in which heretics are to be put to death. The Church simply teaches heretics are to be excluded from the Church, excommunitcated, if you will. There never has been and never will be any teaching that heretics should be put to death.
Did some Catholics have that opinion. Of course. Some Catholics believe abortion is ok. But that is not Church teaching.”

Also the Catholic Church does not teach alternative pathways to heaven–only one pathway–Christ Jesus.

"2. Please tell me what your definition of grace is!"

CCC 1996 states, Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to His call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life."

Peace

 

[Catholic4aReasn]

Hi John!

John1717:

No, faith saves us!

Certainly it does, but not alone. As God’s word says “faith of itself, if is does not have works, is dead” (“of itself” means “alone”)and “see how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2: 17, 24).

Ephesians 2:8-9 - "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast."

We are saved through faith BY grace. Salvation is not a result of works. I thought that had already been established.

Romans 3:20, 28 - "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin…For we maintain that a man is justified by faith

apart from works of the Law."

I wasn’t speaking of works of the law, I was speaking of the “love your neighbor” sort of works that James was referring to. Works of the Mosaic law aren’t really gernaine to this discussion.

Galatians 2:16 - "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works

of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified."

Same as above. Works of the Mosaic law aren’t at issue here. I’m referring only to the works of Christian behavior.

1 Cor.15:1 - 2 - "…I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved…"

Not by this gospel alone.

1 Peter 3:21 tells us, "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

" Baptism represents a complete break with one’s past life. As the Flood wiped away the old sinful world, so baptism pictures one’s break from his old sinful life and his entrance into new life in Christ. Peter now applied to his readers the principle he set forth in verses 13-17 and illustrated in verses 18-20. He exhorted them to have the courage to commit themselves to a course of action by taking a public stand for Christ through baptism. The act of public baptism would “save” them from the temptation to sacrifice their good consciences in order to avoid persecution. For a first-century Christian, baptism meant he was following through on his commitment to Christ, regardless of the consequences. *
**
I understand what you’re saying here, but it’s at odds with what Jesus taught his apostles and what they passed down to the first generations of Christians. The idea that baptism is a mere picture is a relatively new Christian teaching and therefore, necessarily, a teaching of men. What Jesus taught his apostles who in turn taught others was that baptism actually DOES something. The holy Spirit acts through it. Yes, it symbolizes a washing but it doesn’t ONLY symbolize it, it actually does what it symbolizes.
**
I think it’s a common misunderstanding that Catholics believe that the mere act of baptism saves or that the water saves. It’s entirely an action of the holy Spirit. God saves, not water, but God always works through his creation, in this case, water.

In Christ,
Nancy **
*

 

[John1717]

Catholic4aReasn:

We are saved by grace:

“By grace you have been saved (Eph 2:5,8)”

And baptism saves us:

**"**baptism now saves you (1 Peter 3:21)"

Therefore baptism MUST be a conduit of grace.

Once we are baptised “into” Christ:

“we [are] baptised into Christ Jesus (Romans 6:3)”

we MUST remain there:

“Remain in me, as I remain in you…anyone who does not remain in me will be thrown out like a branch and wither; people will gather them and throw them into a fire and theyu will be burned (John 15:4-6)”.

“And now, children, remain in him, so that when he appears we may have confidence and not be put to shame by him at his coming (1 John 2:28)”.

We are to persevere in the commandments of God AND in the faith (Rev 14:12), not one or the other because our works, without faith, are like filthy rags (Is. 64:6) but faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead (James 2:17). And it’s those who persevere to the end that will be saved (Mark 13:13).

In Christ,
Nancy

1 Timothy 2:15 states, *“But women will be saved through childbearing - if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety” *Using your logic, this must mean that only women who bear children will be saved!

 

[John1717]

dcdurel:

Incorrect. The Church has never put any heretics to death. That was all goverments of various countries. And the Church never had a teaching in which heretics are to be put to death. The Church simply teaches heretics are to be excluded from the Church, excommunitcated, if you will. There never has been and never will be any teaching that heretics should be put to death.
Did some Catholics have that opinion. Of course. Some Catholics believe abortion is ok. But that is not Church teaching.

Ever read about the Inquisition?
:tsktsk:

 

[John1717]

dennisknapp:

Again with the Scripture throwing. We do not except you interpretation of Scripture so why do you continue to use it against us?

No one had your interpretation of baptism until the 16th century or later, so the burden of proof is on YOU to show why the whole Church up to that time was wrong–from 100 AD to 1500 AD.

You stated:

**1. Which church is right? The church which killed those who dispute her teachings, or the church which treats other Christians – and even other religions – as alternative pathways to heaven? **

Did you read dcdurel’s response? I think he answered it pretty well. He said, “Incorrect. The Church has never put any heretics to death. That was all goverments of various countries. And the Church never had a teaching in which heretics are to be put to death. The Church simply teaches heretics are to be excluded from the Church, excommunitcated, if you will. There never has been and never will be any teaching that heretics should be put to death.
Did some Catholics have that opinion. Of course. Some Catholics believe abortion is ok. But that is not Church teaching.”

Also the Catholic Church does not teach alternative pathways to heaven–only one pathway–Christ Jesus.

"2. Please tell me what your definition of grace is!"

CCC 1996 states, Grace is favor, the free and undeserved help that God gives us to respond to His call to become children of God, adoptive sons, partakers of the divine nature and of eternal life."

Peace

I guess you have never read about the Inquisition either!

:tsktsk:

 

[dennisknapp]

I guess you have never read about the Inquisition either!

:tsktsk:

Please give EVIDENCE of an offical Dogmatic Church document which stated that it is ok to kill a heretic.

Have you ever heard of Michael Servetus? I believe those people in Geneva and Calvin had him put to death for not holding to their beliefs. There is blood on the hand of both sides during that period of history–Protestant and Catholic. This does not make it right, but you need to look at it in historical context.

Also, please look into the history of the Huguenots.

 

[cyprian]

Jesus did not recieve sacramental baptism,but rather that all things might be fulfilled. John’s baptism was one of repentance. In baptism, we enter into the passion death and ressurection, which is what Jesus was saying when he said "so all things might be fullfilled(necessary). Notice that repentance at that point(after) changes and now we have water And sprit working together in an efficacious manner. Jesus was (is) God and didn’t need sacramental Baptism. Others through no fault of their own(today) who truly seek God and don’t have the means to recieve sacramental baptism(mitigating circumstance) can also be saved. There are though many rooms in the heavenly Fathers house. I wonder.
Peace and Love

 

[John1717]

Please give EVIDENCE of an offical Dogmatic Church document which stated that it is ok to kill a heretic.

Have you ever heard of Michael Servetus? I believe those people in Geneva and Calvin had him put to death for not holding to their beliefs. There is blood on the hand of both sides during that period of history–Protestant and Catholic. This does not make it right, but you need to look at it in historical context.

Also, please look into the history of the Huguenots.

The following is from the *Directorium Inquisitorum, *published in Rome, October 1584, by the command of the Cardinals Inquisitors General; dedicated to Pope Gregory XIII; translation by J.P. Callender, *Illustrations of Popery, *New York, 1838. Numbers have been added for index referencing.

1. 
   *]“All believers in Christ, by the necessity of salvation, are subject to the Roman Pontiff, who carries the two swords, and judges all, but he is judged by no man. We declare, say, define, and pronounce, that subjection to the Roman Pontiff is necessary to salvation” (pp, 34,35).
   *]"He is a heretic who does not believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches. A heretic merits the pains of fire. By the Gospel, the canons, civil law, and custom, heretics must be burned" (pp. 148,169).
   *]“He is a heretic who deviates from any article of faith” (p. 143).
   *]“Confessors must not absolve those who keep books which are condemned… He who writes books of heresy shall be adjudged a heretic. He who retains prohibited books shall be deemed a favourer of heretics” (pp. 92,93).
   *]“They who bury persons knowing them to be excommunicated, or their receivers, defenders, or favourers, shall not be absolved unless they dig up the corpse; and the place shall be deprived of the usual immunities of sepulture” (p. 104).
   *]“A heretic may be accused and condemned after death” (p. 146).
   *]“The property of heretics after their death shall be seized” (p. 151).
   *]“For the suspicion alone of heresy, purgation is demanded” (p. 156).
   *]“Magistrates who refuse to take the oath for defence of the faith, shall be suspected of heresy. It must be required of temporal lords to expel heretics. The church may demand the aid of the secular power against both things and persons” (p. 159,176).
   *]“Wars may be commenced by the authority of the church. Indulgences for the remission of all sin belong to those who are signed with the cross for the persecution of heretics” (p. 160).
   *]“The Pope can enact new articles of faith. The definitions of Popes and Councils are to be received as infallible” (p. 168).
   *]"Every individual may kill a heretic’ (p. 175).
   *]“All persons may attack any rebels to the church, and despoil them of their wealth; and slay them, and bum their houses and cities” (pp. 176,177).
   *]“Persons who betray heretics shall be rewarded. But Priests who give the sacrament or burial to heretics shall be excommunicated” (p. 178).
   *]“They who favour their relatives who are heretics, shall not receive for that cause any milder punishment” (p. 180). “The penalty of perpetual incarceration may be mitigated by the Inquisitors” (p. 181).
   *]“Those who are subject to a master or governor, or prince, who has become a heretic, are released from their fidelity. A wife may separate herself from her excommunicated or heretical husband. Children of heretics are discharged from parental authority” (p. 182).
   *]“Heretics may be forced to profess the Roman faith” (p. 193),
   *]“The crime of heresy is not extinguished by death” (p. 196).
   *]“The testimony of a heretic is admitted on behalf of a Papist, but not against him” (p.198).
   *]"A whole city must be burnt on account of the heretics who live in it. Whoever pleases may seize and kill any heretics" (p. 199).
   *]“Witnesses in a cause of heresy may be forced to bear testimony, and they sin mortally if they abscond” (p. 204).
   *]“A heretic, as he sins in all places, may everywhere be judged” (p. 207).
   *]“A person contracting marriage with a heretic shall be punished, because it is favouring a heretic” (p. 210).
   *]“Heretics must be sought after, and be corrected or exterminated. Heretics enjoy no privileges in law or equity” (p. 212).
   *]“The goods of heretics are to be considered as confiscated from the perpetration of the crime. All alienations of property by heretics before their condemnation are invalid. Inquisitors are not bound to restore the price of the property which is seized in the hands of those who purchased from heretics” (p. 213).
   *]“Prelates or Inquisitors may torture witnesses to obtain the truth” (p. 218).
   
   Is this what you were looking for?
   :bigyikes:

 

[dennisknapp]

John1717:

The following is from the Directorium Inquisitorum, published in Rome, October 1584, by the command of the Cardinals Inquisitors General; dedicated to Pope Gregory XIII; translation by J.P. Callender, *Illustrations of Popery, *New York, 1838. Numbers have been added for index referencing.

1. 
   *]“All believers in Christ, by the necessity of salvation, are subject to the Roman Pontiff, who carries the two swords, and judges all, but he is judged by no man. We declare, say, define, and pronounce, that subjection to the Roman Pontiff is necessary to salvation” (pp, 34,35).
   *]“He is a heretic who does not believe what the Roman Hierarchy teaches. A heretic merits the pains of fire. By the Gospel, the canons, civil law, and custom, heretics must be burned” (pp. 148,169).
   *]“He is a heretic who deviates from any article of faith” (p. 143).
   *]“Confessors must not absolve those who keep books which are condemned… He who writes books of heresy shall be adjudged a heretic. He who retains prohibited books shall be deemed a favourer of heretics” (pp. 92,93).
   *]“They who bury persons knowing them to be excommunicated, or their receivers, defenders, or favourers, shall not be absolved unless they dig up the corpse; and the place shall be deprived of the usual immunities of sepulture” (p. 104).
   *]“A heretic may be accused and condemned after death” (p. 146).
   *]“The property of heretics after their death shall be seized” (p. 151).
   *]“For the suspicion alone of heresy, purgation is demanded” (p. 156).
   *]“Magistrates who refuse to take the oath for defence of the faith, shall be suspected of heresy. It must be required of temporal lords to expel heretics. The church may demand the aid of the secular power against both things and persons” (p. 159,176).
   *]“Wars may be commenced by the authority of the church. Indulgences for the remission of all sin belong to those who are signed with the cross for the persecution of heretics” (p. 160).
   *]“The Pope can enact new articles of faith. The definitions of Popes and Councils are to be received as infallible” (p. 168).
   *]"Every individual may kill a heretic’ (p. 175).
   *]“All persons may attack any rebels to the church, and despoil them of their wealth; and slay them, and bum their houses and cities” (pp. 176,177).
   *]“A whole city must be burnt on account of the heretics who live in it. Whoever pleases may seize and kill any heretics” (p. 199).
   *]“Witnesses in a cause of heresy may be forced to bear testimony, and they sin mortally if they abscond” (p. 204).
   *]“A heretic, as he sins in all places, may everywhere be judged” (p. 207).
   *]“A person contracting marriage with a heretic shall be punished, because it is favouring a heretic” (p. 210).
   *]“Heretics must be sought after, and be corrected or exterminated. Heretics enjoy no privileges in law or equity” (p. 212).
   *]“The goods of heretics are to be considered as confiscated from the perpetration of the crime. All alienations of property by heretics before their condemnation are invalid. Inquisitors are not bound to restore the price of the property which is seized in the hands of those who purchased from heretics” (p. 213).
   *]“Prelates or Inquisitors may torture witnesses to obtain the truth” (p. 218).
   
   Is this what you were looking for?
   :bigyikes:

1. 
   I asked for an official Dogmatic Church document. A document taken from an anti-Catholic book does not constitute an Official Dogmatic document.
   
   The 16th century was bloody on both sides and this was not right, but hind-sight is 20/20. You need to look at this period in HISTORICAL context. If we were to judge both sides on the horrible things that happened no one would be justified in being called a Christian.
   
   Take the Catholics in England during the reign of Elizebeth I. They were tortured, their lands were taken, they had no rights as English citizens because to be English was equated with being Protestant. No Catholic could raise their own child, they were taken away and educated in a Protestant household at the Catholic parents expense.
   
   Catholics could not worship in public. Priest were imprisoned and burned.
   
   Ever hear of the 12 Days of Christmas? It is a Catholic Cathechism in Code to avoid persecution–look it up.
   
   Peace

 

[Church_Militant]

John1717:

Is this what you were looking for?
:bigyikes:

[/indent]

It might be if we didn’t already know that it’s a spurious document in a publication put out by anti-Catholic bigots. Don’t be so freakin’ gullible…try REAL Catholic writings. But you won’t…you’d rather follow what MEN tell you about the truth than discover it for yourself. I wouldn’t want to be the guys who created that false witness right there at their judgement.