John the Baptist born without original sin??

  • Thread starter Thread starter carol_marie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
John the Baptist was filled with the Spirit in his mothers womb. This much we KNOW.

How to interperate that infilling is a matter of theological speculation.

Could it be the Anointing like unto the OT Prophets? Very possible and that would not excluded God cleansing John of sin. The Lord cleansed Isaiah of his sin. Was not John greater than Isaiah?

It could have been the same infilling with the Spirit that happens when one is regenerated/born again. That would certainly INCLUDE being cleansed of sin.

In either case it is not contrary to Christian teaching for John the Baptist to be free from sin. Isn’t that Gods plan for all of us? Didn’t He die to free us from sin?
 
40.png
tru_dvotion:
If the Baptist’s original sin would have been washed away, than the Holy Spirit would have washed away the original sin from the soul of every Old Testament prophet and Catholic saint as well. This makes virtually no sense to me. Unless I am corrected by someone with authority, real and not perceived, I will not accept this.
Click to expand...
One of the effects of Baptism is the removal of Original Sin. So YES it has been done to ALL Catholics. And as I mentioned in another Post, Isaiah was cleansed, PURGED as it were, of sin. Remember NOBODY enters the Kingdom without the new birth, without being freed from sin.

Isa 6:7 And he laid it upon my mouth, and said, Lo, this hath touched thy lips; and thine iniquity is taken away, and thy sin purged.
 
But let us remember, the original poster was asking if John had been **conceived **without original sin not born without it. There is a difference. Removal of original sin through baptism (in the womb or not!) is not the same as being conceived with the original sin in the first place. And the website she posted definitely said conceived without original sin.
posted by Hesychios

The East presupposes that the goal is to become “more and more holy” while the West (Catholic and Protestant) presupposes that the goal is to become “less and less sinful”.

…But in the Eastern concept of Ancestral Sin there is no guilt. Rather we are all victims of Adams Sin and we suffer the effects of it: we have inherited suffering and death, and a propensity (or weakness) to sin that we must struggle against all our lives.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure I understand this.
In the Catechism of the Catholic Church #405
Although it is proper to each individual, **original sin does not have the character of a personal fault **in any of Adams descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it; subject to ignorance, suffering, and the dominion of death; and inclined to sin- an inlination to evil that is called “concupiscince.” **Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back toward God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle. **

How is this different? Inclined to evil seems to be the same as propensity for sin. How is this different?
 
Actually I was asking if he was “born” without original sin, which is what the link stated.
 
carol marie:
Actually I was asking if he was “born” without original sin, which is what the link stated.
Click to expand...
That would be theological speculation. But as I said, it is not contrary to Christian teaching if he had been, as he was already filled with the Spirit.
 
The Baptist’s dying implies, he has NOT been freed from the judgment of original sin. Remember, death is the result of the sin of Adam and we all inherited the same judgment as Adam. Nor does it make any difference if the Baptist never sinned throughout his lifetime, not even with one single venial sin. He would still have had to rely on Christ dying on the cross to get entry into heaven, exactly the same as you and me.

People are talking apples and oranges again, for fear of offending Catholic Tradition. I repeat; the two exceptions to inheriting the judgment of death from Adam’s sin are the Virgin Mother and Christ Jesus. In my humble opinion the website has printed an error and it really does not matter what saint said it otherwise or for how long this view has persisted in the Church. This is not an infallible Dogma, one that we are bound to accept with no questions or reservations. I can reserve my right to disagree, and I still remain obedient to God and to the Magisterium of the Church.
 
but St. John the Baptist, though not conceived in this way, was filled with grace in the womb of his mother, the aged Elizabeth, and so was *born *without original sin.
Click to expand...
The site does not claim that John was conceived without original sin, just that he was born without it.

I read too quickly, and thought they said (as well as thought the original poster said) that he was conceived without sin.

My error all around. Sorry.
 
The site does not claim that John was conceived without original sin, just that he was born without it.
Click to expand...
In other words, he was born as pure as any other newly baptized infant. But that did not place him on the same level with our Lady or with our Lord. The website erroneously implies that.
Click to expand...
 
In other words, he was born as pure as any other newly baptized infant. But that did not place him on the same level with our Lady or with our Lord. The website erroneously implies that.
Click to expand...
I agree. But having me agree does not mean alot today:p I would certainly like to blame it all on the website, but I misread the original poster too!

God Bless
 
40.png
MariaG:
I agree. But having me agree does not mean alot today:p I would certainly like to blame it all on the website, but I misread the original poster too!

God Bless
Click to expand...
Gosh, we all “misread” from time to time. But the original question has been fudged by some of the responses, even questioned in validity and I think this is wrong. The truth is not always readily available and it has to be examined or else we can most assuredly fall into error as others have fallen before us. I fully disagree with the post that we do not need to figure things out for ourselves. We have to try, because untruth clouds truth.

For instance… elevating the Baptist on the one hand to the level of the Virgin Mary may not be terribly wrong in itself, but on the other hand, in some ways it could bring her down to a lower level and that in turn could begin to undermine the Dogmas we hold true about her role in our salvation. I am not an enemy of the Baptist, but I am an enemy of untruth, because I regard any near truth as falsehood and the corruption of truth. The website is wrong, I am not sure to what degree, but it does not jive what they say about the Baptist. Having things figured out should set us free but the road can be a rocky along the way and to be sure people generally do not look too keenly on such enterprise, especially if it challenges some of their established beliefs.
 
carol marie said:
**I just read in a different post that the Catholic Church teaches that John the Baptist was born without original sin? Is that true?? Where in the world did that come from?? First Mary and now him! Could someone please provide me with a list of all those you believe were born without original sin? :banghead: **
Click to expand...

You have somethings mixed up.

First is that Mary was not only Born without Original Sin but was conceived without Original Sin. She and she alone was conceived by human means without Original Sin.

John the Baptist was Born without Original Sin. He was however conceived with Original Sin and was Sanctified in his mothers womb.
 
40.png
Vincent:
I have absolutely no problem what that.

What I was wondering about was whether it was claimed in this thread that the tendency to sin doesn’t remain if one is sanctified between conception and birth.

It’s more than possible for John the Baptist to have been sanctified before birth, and that he lived a life free of mortal sin. But I would think that he would still have the tendency to sin that remains in all the baptized (unless God specifically gave him a grace that removed that tendency, too).
Click to expand...
Like I kinds said before. I don’t think the church gives us an answer of that one. Kinda like the Immaculate Conception. The best description was that it was fitting that Mary be sinless. But the church shies away from saying it was necessary becuase God could do what God wants nothing is necessary for him to do what he wants. Perhaps that applies here. It would be most fitting that one who was supernaturally sanctified and reborn in the spirit in the womb to have been blessed with additional graces to avoid mortal sin.
 
John the Baptist was Born without Original Sin. He was however conceived with Original Sin and was Sanctified in his mothers womb.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Which would have made him at his birth exactly like a newly baptized infant. Or would it not?
 
I dunno Captain, she’s going to blow any second now-Scotty’s answer from Star Trek series
 
40.png
tru_dvotion:
The Baptist’s dying implies, he has NOT been freed from the judgment of original sin. Remember, death is the result of the sin of Adam and we all inherited the same judgment as Adam. Nor does it make any difference if the Baptist never sinned throughout his lifetime, not even with one single venial sin. He would still have had to rely on Christ dying on the cross to get entry into heaven, exactly the same as you and me.

People are talking apples and oranges again, for fear of offending Catholic Tradition. I repeat; the two exceptions to inheriting the judgment of death from Adam’s sin are the Virgin Mother and Christ Jesus. In my humble opinion the website has printed an error and it really does not matter what saint said it otherwise or for how long this view has persisted in the Church. This is not an infallible Dogma, one that we are bound to accept with no questions or reservations. I can reserve my right to disagree, and I still remain obedient to God and to the Magisterium of the Church.

Neither Christ nor his Blessed Mother were exempt from death. They both died.
Click to expand...
“” The state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam – from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death. “”
 
40.png
tru_dvotion:
Which would have made him at his birth exactly like a newly baptized infant. Or would it not?
Click to expand...
It would have made him like any baptized and fully confirmed Catholic. Freed from sin and filled with the Spirit.

Just one more proof of the Free Gift of Grace.
 
40.png
Strider:
Maybe this will help

newadvent.org/cathen/08486b.htm

God bless
Click to expand...
Here I quote the relevant portion from that page…

“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.”
 
Br. Rich SFO:
First is that Mary was not only Born without Original Sin but was conceived without Original Sin. She and she alone was conceived by human means without Original Sin.

John the Baptist was Born without Original Sin. He was however conceived with Original Sin and was Sanctified in his mothers womb.
Click to expand...
This seems to sum it up pretty well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top