Did John the Baptist get baptised?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ldsouza
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Correct, it was never doctrine, as all matters of faith & morals remain constant, never changing and always & forever true.
 
Spanner said:
I have to add my two cents in this string. When Mary visited Elizabeth and the babe in Elizabeth’s womb jumped for joy, it was at that time that John had the effects of original sin removed. John did not need to be baptized for this reason and also for the reason that he died before the redemption. I believe that you will find this to be part of Church reading and also expounded upon by the early Fathers.
Click to expand...
Interesting point Spanner!
 
Spanner said:
When Mary visited Elizabeth and the babe in Elizabeth’s womb jumped for joy, it was at that time that John had the effects of original sin removed. John did not need to be baptized for this reason
Click to expand...
…isn’t this the right answer, folks? Pretty sure that’s case closed. :hmmm:

However we go about answering the question “Did John the Baptist get baptized?”, the fact is always going to have to remain that John was cleansed from original sin while still in the womb. Pretty dang sure that’s just plain old traditional Catholic teaching. Now, maybe this sort of Baptism does represent an extraordinary 4th type of baptism outside the usual 3 kinds of baptism by water/desire/blood (something like the way in which we hope that God might cleanse unborn children from original sin)… or maybe we just don’t strictly consider that Baptism. I’m honestly not too sure about that particular point right now, but I am pretty darn sure that we do hold John to have been cleansed from original sin in the womb.

At any rate, here’s how New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia explains it:

“And it came to pass, that when Elizabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant” – filled, like the mother, with the Holy Ghost – “leaped for joy in her womb”, as if to acknowledge the presence of his Lord. Then was accomplished the prophetic utterance of the angel that the child should “be filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother’s womb”. Now as the presence of any sin whatever is incompatible with the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in the soul, it follows that at this moment John was cleansed from the stain of original sin. – John the Baptist …also recommended: Baptism
 
holy_moly said:
Limbo is no longer a concept taught/accepted by the church.
Click to expand...
Hi, friend.

Note well: Everything added by me in this thread is my opinion. Even quotations and cites are my opinion, because my use of the third party material may not be correct.

That being said…

The concept of Limbo wasn’t condemned. The Church will just refrain from teaching Limbo.

In fact, the Church can’t do away with Limbo. Why not? Because doing away with the consequence of no infant baptism would mean that ultimately the Sacrament of Baptism confers no benefit, or that there is no “state of Original Sin” in each of us – take your pick.

The logic of Limbo in the context of the salvation process is this…

When we are conceived, we are nothing but a free will connected to a glob of cells, each of which is an eating machine. As long as we are in the womb, the cells are well-fed and therefore happy.

But once the little guy pops out anf that cord is cut, a new regime prevails. All of those little cells begin screaming at the free will, “When do we eat?” As the infant matures, and self-awareness becomes more complex, the “wants” for the cells get more complex: “When do we eat?” “When will I be warm?” “When will they get rid of my diaper?” “When will I be entertained?” and so on.

Ultimately, each of us has about 6 trillion living cells, each of them screaming the same thing at the free will: “I want, I want, I want, I want, I want, I want.” That’s an awful lot of self-directed (name removed by moderator)ut.

This negative situation prevails PAST the age of reason, INTO ADULTHOOD. Free will has no chance, morality has no chance, and social order has no chance, unless there is something more.

That’s what the story of Adam and Eve portrays – Eve’s sin is a hypothetical portraying how every single human being will. handle every single moral decision in the absence of something more. (It’s not an incident in human history.) Without more, each of us is a sin machine. We are good for nothing.

That’s Original Sin.

Babies may be warm and cuddly, but in the end their crying means “feed me,” and they defecate. That’s it. And, without more, their potential is zero, PAST childhood into adulthood.

This is true of every single human being, that ever was, that ever will be, except Christ.

So, when God created us, He knew that a final ingredient was necessary – grace. That’s what Jesus paid for on the cross. That grace rains down from Heaven on all, now, and backwards into the past.

So, when Adam in the Garden of Eden story takes the fruit from Eve, that’s a picture of Christ taking our sinfulness upon Himself. In the Adam and Eve story, Adam is not a sinner. Eve is us. Adam is Christ. That’s why Paul calls Adam “a type of Him Who was to come.”

Now, because grace rains down upon us, it is available to be accepted by the will. It whispers to each of us, “Take a chance on me. Accept me. Take The Way, to friendship with God. Take a chance on me. Accept me. Take The Way, to friendship with God. Take a chance on me. Accept me. Take The Way, to friendship with God,” and so on.

Adults who have reached the Age of Reason – culpable self-awareness – can achieve Baptism of Desire or Baptism of Blood by exercising their free wills and accepting grace that way. Voila: Baptism isn’t a make or break thing for them.

But, fetuses and babies and little kids can’t do that. They have no functional free will, at the culpability level. In a free will sense, “grace” is to “babies” as “color” is to someone “blind from conception.”

With no ability to accept grace, fetuses and babies and little kids remain enormously-beloved sin machines, totally innately unworthy of being in God’s presence.

The Sacrament of Baptism is not just the entrance to the Church. It is God’s chosen conduit to the grace curing our “sin macine” status, including for fetuses, babies and really young children.

If one of God’s little ones doesn’t get it, too bad – that little one remains an eating, defecating, demanding little “sin machine,” with six trillion cells screaming, “WHEN DO WE EAT!!! WHEN DO WE EAT!!! WHEN DO WE EAT!!!” at his or her free will.

There has to be a place for them to go if they die before Baptism, because Baptism IS essential – not just window dressing.

A Limbo-like place – the “basement of Heaven,” an okay place where God is present only to the limited extent that He is present on Earth, prsent-but-hidden – would be the just place for them to go.

I think that the Church made an error when they stopped teaching Limbo.

I think that Limbo is taught in Paul – it is the lowest of Paul’s Three Heavens.
 
Spanner said:
I have to add my two cents in this string. When Mary visited Elizabeth and the babe in Elizabeth’s womb jumped for joy, it was at that time that John had the effects of original sin removed. John did not need to be baptized for this reason and also for the reason that he died before the redemption. I believe that you will find this to be part of Church reading and also expounded upon by the early Fathers.
Click to expand...
Hi, friend.

Note well: Everything added by me in this thread is my opinion. Even quotations and cites are my opinion, because my use of the third party material may not be correct.

That being said…

This concept, that John the Baptist, while he wasn’t immaculately conceived, was “rendered immaculate” in the womb, is based on a bad translation of Luke’s Greek.

When “THE Holy Spirit” is referred to elsewhere in the New Testament Greek, the New Tesatament Greek definite article, “TOY,” pronounced “ho,” follows the reference to “Pneuma Hagios,” “Holy Spirit.”

The definite article is lacking in Luke 1:15. It does NOT say, “THE Holy Spirit.” It says, “[a] holy spirit.”

Christ Himself affirms John’s unimmaculate-and-unbaptized-equivalent state when Christ says that even the LEAST in the Kingdom of Heaven – in the New Testament Church – will be greater than John.

If John was immaculate when in the womb and when born, he would have been a Mary equivalent, and a baptized Catholic equivalent, and Christ would not have said about John what Christ said about John.
 
NotWorthy, if you happen to look at this thread, note well that Catholic after Catholic after Catholic believes these things about Catholic theology that black-heartedly-nasty “theology cops” who post in this website could call “HERESY! HERESY!” Here a few believe that John the Baptist, while not “immaculately conceived,” was “rendered immaculate” in the womb.

That’s not Catholic theology.

So, please do not “break-out into goose bumps” every time I take a position which seems against Catholic theology. When Rome backed-off the Limbo concept without condemning it, in my opinion Rome functionally backed-away from sound Catholic theology.
 
Hi Peter I tremble at the thought of replying to you! You have already told me that I do not have good theology, and I am quite sure I do not 🙂 I never studied it. However I think in a very simple manner and at the end of the day our Faith, Hope, and Charity IS very simple. WE complicate things by asking all these questions. I sometimes trip myself up by worrying about things, and all it does is make me unhappy.
If we have Faith is is only necessary to know the answers to questions, which are required to follow our Faith in accordance with the Word Of God as found in the Bible, and our Catechism, and as was taught to us by our parents and school.
If I had the answer to " did John the Baptist get Baptised" it would fill my curiosity, but since it is not an article of faith or clear in the Bible, it would not influnce, my Rosary, or Eurcharist in the morning 🙂
God Bless
 
mnealon1 said:
Hi Peter I tremble at the thought of replying to you! You have already told me that I do not have good theology, and I am quite sure I do not 🙂 I never studied it. However I think in a very simple manner and at the end of the day our Faith, Hope, and Charity IS very simple. WE complicate things by asking all these questions. I sometimes trip myself up by worrying about things, and all it does is make me unhappy.
If we have Faith is is only necessary to know the answers to questions, which are required to follow our Faith in accordance with the Word Of God as found in the Bible, and our Catechism, and as was taught to us by our parents and school.
If I had the answer to " did John the Baptist get Baptised" it would fill my curiosity, but since it is not an article of faith or clear in the Bible, it would not influnce, my Rosary, or Eurcharist in the morning 🙂
God Bless
Click to expand...
Hi.

Francis of Assissi had faith like yours. That’s good enough for God, I’m sure.

But some of us like to “look under the rock.” God made us “codebreakers,” so to speak. We like to know the answer to the question, “What is the Matrix?” (ha-ha).
 
The Catholic Church teaches that the Creator of the universe and all within it is God with absolute divine powers. In the practical sense, it is God, Who is in charge of salvation and what is necessary to achieve it. We need to keep in mind that God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism, but God, Himself, with absolute divine power, is not bound by His Sacraments.

Regarding children who have died without Baptism, the Catholic Church entrusts them to the mercy of the One Who designed Baptism. Remember Jesus’ tenderness toward children. “Let the Children come to Me…” (CCC # 1257-1261)
 
Peter_Dawson said:
Hi, friend.

Note well: Everything added by me in this thread is my opinion. Even quotations and cites are my opinion, because my use of the third party material may not be correct.

That being said…

.
Click to expand...
I wonder what the Catholic Church teaches since Baptism is related to original sin.
 
Matthew 11:11 "Truly, I say to you, among those born f women, there has risen up no one greater than John the Baptist, yet he who is least in the Kingdom of Heaven (the New Testament, inaugurated by Christ, the divine gift of grace makes the least of those who faithfully receive it, greater than the greatest in the earlier dispensation. Once the work of our Redemption is accomplished, God’s grace will also be extended to the Just of the Old Alliance. Thus the greatness of John the Baptist, the precursor and the Last of the Prophets, will be enhanced by the dignity of being made a “son of God”

Sounds like those who died after the Redemption and were exposed to God’s Grace (Sacraments) surpassed those of the Old Testament in the Kingdom of God… However, as St.Faustina explains, God’s Mercy is forever…and so at the end of time, God’s Mercy will be applied to those of the Old Testament and God’s Mercy and Justice will be witnessed by all of those from Adam to the last person on earth.

Granny D
 
Isn’t the whole point of baptism to be rightly called a child of God?
Who is arguing that John the Baptist was not a child of God?
 
Our Blessed Mother was CONCEIVED without sin…but John the Baptist was BORN without sin… however, he was still under the O.T.

I agree with the statement that God has made known to us the necessity of Baptism for Salvation, but God is not limited to the Sacraments… and His Mercy endures forever.

Little children who have suffered the ultimate rejection and horror of abortion, will be given the opportunity to forgive their parents and abortionists…and however God does it… they will be given a chance to CHOOSE ETERNAL LIFE.

Granny D
 
Am I correct or not?

Isn’t baptism the entrance to the title of being a child of God or is it not?
 
Granny_D said:
Our Blessed Mother was CONCEIVED without sin…but John the Baptist was BORN without sin… however, he was still under the O.T.

I agree with the statement that God has made known to us the necessity of Baptism for Salvation, but God is not limited to the Sacraments… and His Mercy endures forever.

Little children who have suffered the ultimate rejection and horror of abortion, will be given the opportunity to forgive their parents and abortionists…and however God does it… they will be given a chance to CHOOSE ETERNAL LIFE.

Granny D
Click to expand...
Oh, sheesh! Now you’re doing it, Granny! Come on! That “immaculate John the Baptist” stuff isn’t Catholic theology!
 
John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb of his mother… could not have happened if he did not have his Original Sin taken away at that time…

Granny D
 
Peter_Dawson said:
Oh, sheesh! Now you’re doing it, Granny! Come on! That “immaculate John the Baptist” stuff isn’t Catholic theology!
Click to expand...
This thread is not was John the Baptist immaculate- this thread was “Did John the Baptist get baptised?”

Can I get an answer to my questions from catholics here about the points I have raised?
 
Granny_D said:
John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb of his mother… could not have happened if he did not have his Original Sin taken away at that time…

Granny D
Click to expand...
Perhaps he was not the only one, certainly Mary was also in perhaps even a more special way considering it would be her womb to carry Christ.

Heavy stuff there.

But, I am simply asking about the baptism here.

I have provided 2 reasons to believe he had baptism, one would be of God’s “providence”?
By choosing him in the womb for ministry of the forerunner of Christ and a prophet.
The other by his bloody death, standing firm in his love for God in spite of the risks.
His witness to both are in your holy scriptures. Both are miracles, and the catholic church requires 2 miracles for sainthood. Or am I confused?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top