Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Radio Replies Volume One: Wesley
iCatholicism.net ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

Posted on 05/26/2009 7:45:40 AM PDT by GonzoII

Wesley

308. What is your attitude towards John Wesley?

Wesley was a good and sincere man, but he was mistaken in his notion of Christianity. It was evil that he should have created a further sect. Yet because he and his followers were sincere God blessed their goodwill in many things, drawing good from their work in spite of the undoubted evil of preaching erroneous doctrines as if they were indeed the true doctrines of Christ. Meantime God wills for Wesleyans the greater good still of a return to the Catholic Church.

Copyright © 2005-2006 iCatholicism.net. All Rights Reserved.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic
KEYWORDS: catholic; radiorepliesvolone

Rev. Dr. Leslie Rumble, M.S.C.

"I was brought up as a Protestant, probably with more inherited prejudices than most non-Catholics of these days.  My parents were Anglican and taught me the Angelican faith. My 'broad-minded' protestant teachers taught me to dislike the Catholic Church intensely. I later tried Protestantism in various other forms, and it is some thirty years since, in God's providence, I became a Catholic. As for the 'open, free, sincere worship' of a Protestant Church, I tasted it, but for me it proved in the end to be not only open, but empty; it was altogether too free from God's prescriptions."

Eventually, Leslie became a priest of the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart.

In 1928, Fr. Rumble began a one-hour 'Question Box' program on 2SM Sydney, N.S.W. radio on Sunday evenings that was heard all over Australia and New Zealand. For five years he answered questions on every subject imaginable that had been written to him from all over that part of the globe. His first show began with a classic introduction:

"Good evening, listeners all. For some time I have been promising to give a session dealing with questions of religion and morality, in which the listeners themselves should decide what is of interest to them. Such a session will commence next Sunday evening, and I invite you to send in any questions you wish on these subjects . . . So now I invite you, non-Catholics above all, to send in any questions you wish on religion, or morality, or the Catholic Church, and I shall explain exactly the Catholic position, and give the reasons for it. In fact I almost demand those questions. Many hard things have been said, and are still being said, about the Catholic Church, though no criminal, has been so abused, that she has a right to be heard. I do not ask that you give your name and address. A nom de plume will do. Call yourself Voltaire, Confucius, X.Y.Z., what you like, so long as you give indication enough to recognize your answer."

"By the summer of 1937, the first edition of Radio Replies was already in print in Australia, financed by Rt. Rev. Monsignor James Meany, P.P. - the director of Station 2SM of whom I am greatly indebted."

"I have often been mistaken, as most men at times. And it is precisely to make sure that I will not be mistaken in the supremely important matter of religion that I cling to a Church which cannot be mistaken, but must be right where I might be wrong. God knew that so many sincere men would make mistakes that He deliberately established an infallible Church to preserve them from error where it was most important that they should not go wrong."

Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty

I broadcast my radio program, the Catholic Radio Hour,  from St. Paul, Minnesota.

I was also carrying on as a Catholic Campaigner for Christ, the Apostolate to the man in the street through the medium of my trailer and loud-speaking system. In the distribution of pamphlets and books on the Catholic Faith, Radio Replies proved the most talked of book carried in my trailer display of Catholic literature. As many of us street preachers have learned, it is not so much what you say over the microphone in answer to questions from open air listeners, but what you get into their hands to read. The questions Fr. Rumble had to answer on the other side of the planet are same the questions I had to answer before friendly and hostile audiences throughout my summer campaign."

I realized that this priest in Australia was doing exactly the same work I was doing here in St. Paul. Because of the success of his book, plus the delay in getting copies from Sydney and the prohibitive cost of the book on this side of the universe, I got in contact with him to publish a cheap American edition.  

It doesn't take long for the imagination to start thinking about how much we could actually do. We began the Radio Replies Press Society Publishing Company, finished the American edition of what was to be the first volume of Radio Replies, recieved the necessary imprimatur, and Msgr. Fulton J. Sheen agreed to write a preface. About a year after the publication of the first edition in Australia, we had the American edition out and in people's hands.

The book turned into a phenomena. Letters began pouring into my office from every corner of the United States; Protestant Publishing Houses are requesting copies for distribution to Protestant Seminaries; a few Catholic Seminaries have adopted it as an official textbook - and I had still never met Dr. Rumble in person.

To keep a long story short, we finally got a chance to meet, published volumes two and three of Radio Replies, printed a set of ten booklets on subjects people most often asked about, and a few other pamphlets on subjects of interest to us.

Fr. Carty died on May 22, 1964 in Connecticut.

"Firstly, since God is the Author of all truth, nothing that is definitely true can every really contradict anything else that is definitely true. Secondly, the Catholic Church is definitely true. It therefore follows that no objection or difficulty, whether drawn from history, Scripture, science, or philosophy, can provide a valid argument against the truth of the Catholic religion."



Biographies compiled from the introductions to Radio Replies, volumes 1, 2 and 3.

Source: www.catholicauthors.com

1 posted on 05/26/2009 7:45:41 AM PDT by GonzoII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: fidelis; Atomic Vomit; MI; Salvation; mel
 Radio Replies

Radio Replies Ping

FReep-mail me to get on or off

“The Radio Replies Ping-List”

ON / OFF


2 posted on 05/26/2009 7:47:48 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

The Radio Replies Series: Volume One

Chapter One: God

Radio Replies Volume One: God’s Existence Known by Reason
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of God
Radio Replies Volume One: Providence of God and Problem of Evil

Chapter Two: Man

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Man & Existence and Nature of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Immortality of the Soul
Radio Replies Volume One: Destiny of the Soul & Freewill of Man

Chapter Three: Religion

Radio Replies Volume One: Nature of Religion & Necessity of Religion

Chapter Four: The Religion of the Bible

Radio Replies Volume One: Natural Religion & Revealed Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Mysteries of Religion
Radio Replies Volume One: Miracles
Radio Replies Volume One: Value of the Gospels
Radio Replies Volume One: Inspiration of the Gospels
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 1]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 2]
Radio Replies Volume One: Old Testament Difficulties [Part 3]
Radio Replies Volume One: New Testament Difficulties

Chapter Five: The Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: The Religion of the Jews
Radio Replies Volume One: Truth of Christianity
Radio Replies Volume One: Nature and Necessity of Faith

Chapter Six: A Definite Christian Faith

Radio Replies Volume One: Conflicting Churches
Radio Replies Volume One: Are All One Church?
Radio Replies Volume One: Is One Religion As Good As Another?
Radio Replies Volume One: The Fallacy of Indifference

Chapter Seven: The Failure of Protestantism

Radio Replies Volume One: Protestantism Erroneous
Radio Replies Volume One: Luther
Radio Replies Volume One: Anglicanism
Radio Replies Volume One: Greek Orthodox Church
Radio Replies Volume One: Wesley

3 posted on 05/26/2009 7:49:23 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Wesley was a good and sincere man, but he was mistaken in his notion of Christianity. It was evil that he should have created a further sect. Yet because he and his followers were sincere God blessed their goodwill in many things, drawing good from their work in spite of the undoubted evil of preaching erroneous doctrines as if they were indeed the true doctrines of Christ. Meantime God wills for Wesleyans the greater good still of a return to the Catholic Church.

Millions were saved from sin by the revivals started by Wesley and his contemporaries and this ignorant man has the gall to call that evil.
4 posted on 05/26/2009 7:50:56 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
It was evil that he should have created a further sect. Yet because he and his followers were sincere God blessed their goodwill in many things, drawing good from their work in spite of the undoubted evil of preaching erroneous doctrines as if they were indeed the true doctrines of Christ.

Let me be the first to say ...

What a pant load ..

5 posted on 05/26/2009 7:52:06 AM PDT by tx_eggman (Clinton was our first black President ... Obama is our first French President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
...Meantime God wills for Wesleyans the greater good still of a return to the Catholic Church...

Actually, God wills for all mankind to be born-again out of their life of sin into a life of salvation and sin-free living.

This is what Wesley preached.

A freedom from sin inspired and created by faith in the Son of God and the sacrifice he made on Calvary. A freedom from the dead works of man and the traditions of men masquerading as the edicts of God.

A freedom to live above sin, not continually sinning and having to confess your sin on a regular basis to mortal man.

This is the Godly freedom Wesly preached and it is the same Gospel that Jesus and his Apostles presented as well.
6 posted on 05/26/2009 7:55:31 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Plenty of Protestants believe the Catholic church to be evil, so I suppose the former good Reverend is to be forgiven for engaging in tit for tat.

I’ll pray for him.


7 posted on 05/26/2009 7:57:12 AM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

>>>Wesley was a good and sincere man, but he was mistaken in his notion of Christianity. It was evil that he should have created a further sect. Yet because he and his followers were sincere God blessed their goodwill in many things, drawing good from their work in spite of the undoubted evil of preaching erroneous doctrines as if they were indeed the true doctrines of Christ. Meantime God wills for Wesleyans the greater good still of a return to the Catholic Church.<<<

The only signigicant false doctrine that Wesley taught was infant baptism.


8 posted on 05/26/2009 7:59:00 AM PDT by Above My Pay Grade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

I dare say that this author cannot point to anything Wesley preached that runs counter to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the Bible.

I’ve read through most of Wesley’s works, his notes on the New Testament and Old Testament and have as yet to find anything that is incorrect from a theological point of view with regards to the Bible.


9 posted on 05/26/2009 8:02:29 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Furthermore, it was the works of John Wesley, primarily his sermon on the “Righteouse of Faith” that God used to save my soul from sin and cause me to be Born Again.

So from a personal perspective, I know the author does not know what he is talking about when he says these kind of things about Wesley.


10 posted on 05/26/2009 8:05:32 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
Millions were saved from sin by the revivals started by Wesley and his contemporaries and this ignorant man has the gall to call that evil.

And what's weird is that so many people believe what this bone-head says just because he says it...

From the post:
Wesley was a good and sincere man, but he was mistaken in his notion of Christianity. It was evil that he should have created a further sect.

Millions upon millions of people have turned to Jesus and accepted Jesus as their Savior thru the preaching and teaching of John Wesley...Anyone who claims John Wesley taught a phony Christianity or started an evil sect has to be a child of Satan...

Yet because he and his followers were sincere God blessed their goodwill in many things, drawing good from their work in spite of the undoubted evil of preaching erroneous doctrines as if they were indeed the true doctrines of Christ.

And this is one ignorant statement...God blessed the work of an evil religion because they were sincere??? What ignorance...

The author apparently knows of God...But he doesn't know God...

11 posted on 05/26/2009 8:05:44 AM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

“The world is my parish!” - John Wesley

That’s part of what both the Church of England and the Catholic Church hated - and still hate - about the Wesleyan doctrines. After all, where did the word, “parochial” come from?


12 posted on 05/26/2009 8:12:07 AM PDT by jagusafr ("Bugs, Mr. Rico! Zillions of 'em!" - Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

“Yet because he and his followers were sincere God blessed their goodwill in many things, drawing good from their work in spite of the undoubted evil of preaching erroneous doctrines as if they were indeed the true doctrines of Christ.”

I just this morning read the part of CS Lewis’ “The Great Divorce” that dealt with the White Ghost (a soul visiting heaven from hell), and he made this very argument: if I have a sincerely held position, God will bless it no matter whether it contradicts Scripture. What a complete tragedy that a leader in the Catholic Church makes the very same argument.


13 posted on 05/26/2009 8:15:27 AM PDT by jagusafr ("Bugs, Mr. Rico! Zillions of 'em!" - Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jagusafr
That’s part of what both the Church of England and the Catholic Church hated - and still hate - about the Wesleyan doctrines. After all, where did the word, “parochial” come from?

Not sure what you mean by this. Can you clarify?
14 posted on 05/26/2009 8:16:05 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Above My Pay Grade
"The only signigicant false doctrine that Wesley taught was infant baptism."


III. Infant Baptism

Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3 - these texts show the circumcision of eight-day old babies as the way of entering into the Old Covenant - Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults.

Job 14:1-4 - man that is born of woman is full of trouble and unclean. Baptism is required for all human beings because of our sinful human nature.

Psalm 51:5 - we are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the necessity of baptism from conception.

Matt. 18:2-5 - Jesus says unless we become like children, we cannot enter into heaven. So why would children be excluded from baptism?

Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."

Luke 18:15 – Jesus says, “Let the children come to me.” The people brought infants to Jesus that he might touch them. This demonstrates that the receipt of grace is not dependent upon the age of reason.

Acts 2:38 - Peter says to the multitude, "Repent and be baptized.." Protestants use this verse to prove one must be a believer (not an infant) to be baptized. But the Greek translation literally says, "If you repent, then each one who is a part of you and yours must each be baptized” (“Metanoesate kai bapistheto hekastos hymon.”) This, contrary to what Protestants argue, actually proves that babies are baptized based on their parents’ faith. This is confirmed in the next verse.

Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.

Luke 1:59 - this proves that "teknon" includes infants. Here, John as a "teknon" (infant) was circumcised. See also Acts 21:21 which uses “teknon” for eight-day old babies. So baptism is for infants as well as adults.

Acts 10:47-48 - Peter baptized the entire house of Cornelius, which generally included infants and young children. There is not one word in Scripture about baptism being limited to adults.

Acts 16:15 - Paul baptized Lydia and her entire household. The word "household" comes from the Greek word "oikos" which is a household that includes infants and children.

Acts 16:15 - further, Paul baptizes the household based on Lydia's faith, not the faith of the members of the household. This demonstrates that parents can present their children for baptism based on the parents' faith, not the children's faith.

Acts 16:30-33 - it was only the adults who were candidates for baptism that had to profess a belief in Jesus. This is consistent with the Church's practice of instructing catechumens before baptism. But this verse does not support a "believer's baptism" requirement for everyone. See Acts 16:15,33. The earlier one comes to baptism, the better. For those who come to baptism as adults, the Church has always required them to profess their belief in Christ. For babies who come to baptism, the Church has always required the parents to profess the belief in Christ on behalf of the baby. But there is nothing in the Scriptures about a requirement for ALL baptism candidates to profess their own belief in Christ (because the Church has baptized babies for 2,000 years).

Acts 16:33 - Paul baptized the jailer (an adult) and his entire household (which had to include children). Baptism is never limited to adults and those of the age of reason. See also Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 1 Cor. 1:16; and 1 Tim. 3:12; Gen. 31:41; 36:6; 41:51; Joshua 24:15; 2 Sam. 7:11, 1 Chron. 10:6 which shows “oikos” generally includes children.

Rom. 5:12 - sin came through Adam and death through sin. Babies' souls are affected by Adam's sin and need baptism just like adult souls.

Rom. 5:15 - the grace of Jesus Christ surpasses that of the Old Covenant. So children can also enter the new Covenant in baptism. From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God's Covenant kingdom.

1 Cor. 1:16 - Paul baptized the household ("oikos") of Stephanus. Baptism is not limited to adults.

Eph. 1:1; Col. 1:2 - Paul addresses the "saints" of the Church, and these include the children he addresses in Eph. 6:1 and Col. 3:20. Children become saints of the Church only through baptism.

Eph. 2:3 - we are all by nature children of wrath, in sin, like all mankind. Infants are no exception. See also Psalm 51:5 and Job 14:1-4 which teach us we are conceived in sin and born unclean.

2 Thess. 3:10 - if anyone does not work let him not eat. But this implies that those who are unable to work should still be able to eat. Babies should not starve because they are unable to work, and should also not be denied baptism because they are unable to make a declaration of faith.

Matt. 9:2; Mark 2:3-5 - the faith of those who brought in the paralytic cured the paralytic's sins. This is an example of the forgiveness of sins based on another's faith, just like infant baptism. The infant child is forgiven of sin based on the parents' faith.

Matt. 8:5-13 - the servant is healed based upon the centurion's faith. This is another example of healing based on another's faith. If Jesus can heal us based on someone else’s faith, then He can baptize us based on someone else’s faith as well.

Mark 9:22-25 - Jesus exercises the child's unclean spirit based on the father's faith. This healing is again based on another's faith.

1 Cor. 7:14 – Paul says that children are sanctified by God through the belief of only one of their parents.

Exodus 12:24-28 - the Passover was based on the parent's faith. If they did not kill and eat the lamb, their first-born child died.

Joshua 5:2-7 - God punished Israel because the people had not circumcised their children. This was based on the parent's faith. The parents play a critical role in their child's salvation.

Source: Scripture Catholic

 

Tradition / Church Fathers


II. Infant Baptism

"And many, both men and women, who have been Christ's disciples from childhood, remain pure and at the age of sixty or seventy years..." Justin Martyr, First Apology, 15:6 (A.D. 110-165).

"And when a child has been born to one of them, they give thanks to God [baptism]; and if moreover it happen to die in childhood, they give thanks to God the more, as for one who as passed through the world without sins." Aristides, Apology, 15 (A.D. 140).

"Polycarp declared, 'Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and Saviour?" Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, 9 (A.D. 156).

"For He came to save all through means of Himself--all, I say, who through Him are born again to God--infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men." Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 2,22:4 (A.D. 180).

"I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord." Polycrates, Fragment in Eusebius' Church History, V:24:7 (A.D. 190).

"And they shall baptise the little children first. And if they can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let their parents answer or someone from their family." Hippolytus of Rome, Apostolic Tradition, 21 (c. A.D. 215).

"[T]herefore children are also baptized." Origen, Homily on Luke, XIV (A.D. 233).

"For this reason, moreover, the Church received from the apostles the tradition of baptizing infants too." Origen, Homily on Romans, V:9 (A.D. 244).

"Baptism is given for the remission of sins; and according to the usage of the Church, Baptism is given even to infants. And indeed if there were nothing in infants which required a remission of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of baptism would seem superfluous." Origen, Homily on Leviticus, 8:3 (post A.D. 244).

"But in respect of the case of the infants, which you say ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, and that the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded, so that you think one who is just born should not be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day...And therefore, dearest brother, this was our opinion in council, that by us no one ought to be hindered from baptism...we think is to be even more observed in respect of infants and newly-born persons…" Cyprian, To Fidus, Epistle 58(64):2, 6 (A.D. 251).

"It shows no crease when infants put it on [the baptismal garment], it is not too scanty for young men, it fits women without alteration." Optatus of Mileve, Against Parmenium, 5:10(A.D. 365).

"Have you an infant child? Do not let sin get any opportunity, but let him be sanctified from his childhood; from his very tenderest age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Fearest thou the Seal on account of the weakness of nature?" Gregory Nazianzen, Oration on Holy Baptism, 40:17 (A.D. 381).

"Be it so, some will say, in the case of those who ask for Baptism; what have you to say about those who are still children, and conscious neither of the loss nor of the grace? Are we to baptize them too? Certainly, if any danger presses. For it is better that they should be unconsciously sanctified than that they should depart unsealed and uninitiated." Gregory Nazianzen, Oration on Holy Baptism, 40:28 (A.D. 381).

"'Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.' No one is expected: not the infant, not the one prevented by necessity." Ambrose, Abraham, 2,11:79 (A.D. 387).

"We do baptize infants, although they are not guilty of any sins." John Chrysostom, Ad Neophytos (A.D. 388).

"And if any one seek for divine authority in this matter, though what is held by the whole Church, and that not as instituted by Councils, but as a matter of invariable custom, is rightly held to have been handed down by apostolical authority, still we can form a true conjecture of the value of the sacrament of baptism in the case of infants, from the parallel of circumcision, which was received by God's earlier people, and before receiving which Abraham was justified, as Cornelius also was enriched with the gift of the Holy Spirit before he was baptized." Augustine, On Baptism against the Donatist, 4:24:31 (A.D. 400).

"While the son is a child and thinks as a child and until he comes to years of discretion to choose between the two roads to which the letter of Pythagoras points, his parents are responsible for his actions whether these be good or bad. But perhaps you imagine that, if they are not baptized, the children of Christians are liable for their own sins; and that no guilt attaches to parents who withhold from baptism those who by reason of their tender age can offer no objection to it. The truth is that, as baptism ensures the salvation of the child, this in turn brings advantage to the parents. Whether you would offer your child or not lay within your choice, but now that you have offered her, you neglect her at your peril." Jerome, To Laeta, Epistle 107:6 (A.D. 403).

"Now, seeing that they [Pelagians] admit the necessity of baptizing infants,--finding themselves unable to contravene that authority of the universal Church, which has been unquestionably handed down by the Lord and His apostles,--they cannot avoid the further concession, that infants require the same benefits of the Mediator, in order that, being washed by the sacrament and charity of the faithful, and thereby incorporated into the body of Christ, which is the Church, they may be reconciled to God, and so live in Him, and be saved, and delivered, and redeemed, and enlightened. But from what, if not from death, and the vices, and guilt, and thraldom, and darkness of sin? And, inasmuch as they do not commit any sin in the tender age of infancy by their actual transgression, original sin only is left." Augustine, On forgiveness of sin and baptism, 39[26] (A.D. 412).

"The blessed Cyprian, indeed, said, in order to correct those who thought that an infant should not be baptized before the eighth day, that it was not the body but the soul which behoved to be saved from perdition -- in which statement he was not inventing any new doctrine, but preserving the firmly established faith of the Church; and he, along with some of his colleagues in the episcopal office, held that a child may be properly baptized immediately after its birth." Augustine, Epistle 166:8:23 (A.D. 412).

"'C. Tell me, pray, and rid me of all doubts, why little children are baptized?
A. That their sins may be forgiven them in baptism." Jerome, Against the Pelagians, 3:18 (A.D. 415).

"Likewise, whosoever says that those children who depart out of this life without partaking of that sacrament shall be made alive in Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration, and condemns the universal Church, in which it is the practice to lose no time and run in haste to administer baptism to infant children, because it is believed, as an indubitable truth, that otherwise they cannot be made alive in Christ."
Augustine, Epistle 167,7,21 (A.D. 415).

"Canon 2. Likewise it has been decided that whoever says that infants fresh from their mothers' wombs ought not to be baptized...let him be anathema." Council of Carthage, Canon 2 (A.D. 418).

"Concerning the Donatists it seemed good that we should hold counsel with our brethren and fellow priests Siricius and Simplician concerning those infants alone who are baptized by Donatists: lest what they did not do of their own will, when they should be converted to the Church of God with a salutary determination, the error of their parents might prevent their promotion to the ministry of the holy altar." African Code, Canon 47/51 (A.D. 419).

"[T]his concupiscence, I say, which is cleansed only by the sacrament of regeneration, does undoubtedly, by means of natural birth, pass on the bond of sin to a man's posterity, unless they are themselves loosed from it by regeneration." Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, 1:23 (A.D. 420).

"Believest thou this?...When a newborn child is brought forward to receive the anointing of initiation, or rather of consummation through holy baptism." Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on John, 7 (A.D. 428).

"Question XIX. Concerning those who after being baptized in infancy were captured by the Gentiles, and lived with them after the manner of the Gentiles, when they come back to Roman territory as still young men, if they seek communion, what shall be done?
Reply: If they have only lived with Gentiles and eaten sacrificial food, they can be purged by fasting and laying on of hands, in order that for the future abstaining from things offered to idols, they may be partakers of Christ's mysteries. But if they have either worshipped idols or been polluted with manslaughter or fornication, they must not be admitted to communion, except by public penance." Leo the Great [regn. A.D. 440-461], To Rusticus, Epistle 167 (A.D. 459).

"But with respect to trine immersion in baptism, no truer answer can be given than what you have yourself felt to be right; namely that, where there is one faith, a diversity of usage does no harm to holy Church. Now we, in immersing thrice, signify the sacraments of the three days' sepulture; so that, when the infant is a third time lifted out of the water, the resurrection after a space of three days may be expressed." Gregory the Great [regn. A.D. 590-604], To Leander, Epistle 43 (A.D. 591).

Source: Scripture Catholic


15 posted on 05/26/2009 8:22:26 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xzins

As a Methodist pastor, xzins, does this PR from Rome create in you a yearning to drown in the Tibur?


16 posted on 05/26/2009 8:28:18 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe; Corin Stormhands; Revelation 911; AppyPappy; Gamecock; Frumanchu; enat; ..

I’m not real sure how this basic article is significantly different than Chick Publications. It calls my Methodism: “evil.”

I’ll not ping on it, though. Better to let them get it out of their system.


17 posted on 05/26/2009 8:36:07 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain, Pro Deo et Patria)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Dr. Eckleburg; P-Marlowe; Corin Stormhands; Revelation 911; AppyPappy; Gamecock; ...
"the greater good still of a return to the Catholic Church"

Just happened upon this in my annual reading of Pilgrims Progress.

18 posted on 05/26/2009 8:51:15 AM PDT by blue-duncan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
You have twisted and perverted just about every scripture you posted...

Mark 16:16 - Jesus says to the crowd, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." But in reference to the same people, Jesus immediately follows with "He who does not believe will be condemned." This demonstrates that one can be baptized and still not be a believer. This disproves the Protestant argument that one must be a believer to be baptized. There is nothing in the Bible about a "believer's baptism."

What in the world are you trying to say here...The verse is crystal clear...If you believe and are baptized, you will be saved...

If you don't believe but are baptized, you are condemned...

The obvious key is believing...And you will notice that it doesn't say that if you believe but are not baptized, you will be condemned...

Sure, anyone can get baptized...They'll just be wet when they go to hell because they didn't believe...

And all the supposed correct greek translations you put in there...After all this time, why hasn't your church constructed a bible using those 'correct' greek translations instead of coming up with greek words to correct what's already written, even by your own church???

And the answer to that is because if your church produced a bible with the 'correct' translations and greek words you claim belong there, that bible wouldn't come close to matching any greek texts found anywhere on the face of the earth...

19 posted on 05/26/2009 9:03:39 AM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

welcome newbie - have we seen you before?


20 posted on 05/26/2009 10:02:32 AM PDT by Revelation 911 (How many 100's of 1000's of our servicemen died so we would never bow to a king?" -freeper pnh102)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blue-duncan; xzins

21 posted on 05/26/2009 10:09:53 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

In Wesley’s day, the Church of England was (and still is, I assume) divided into parishes, and one of the first and strongest criticisms of him was that he was poaching in other parishes when he preached in the fields and in the streets of towns outside his prescribed area (his parish). His response was what I quoted, and stemmed from his disgust at the church’s failure to tend its own flock. Parochialism (protecting one’s turf) for the sake of parochialism is also something the Catholic Church has done and still does. Protecting the flock from false teaching is admirable; however, it’s also incumbent upon the person “in charge” of that parish to actively tend it. That’s what Wesley was so incensed about, and why he went out and preached to whoever would listen.

Did I make sense (even if there’s disagreement)?


22 posted on 05/26/2009 10:12:05 AM PDT by jagusafr ("Bugs, Mr. Rico! Zillions of 'em!" - Robert Heinlein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: jagusafr

No offense taken and I agree with your take on the matter and Wesley’s approach.

Parochalism is a hindrence to the Gospel not a help.


23 posted on 05/26/2009 11:45:44 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Col 2:11-12 - however, baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. Therefore, baptism is for babies as well as adults. God did not make His new Covenant narrower than the old Covenant. To the contrary, He made it wider, for both Jews and Gentiles, infants and adults.

You've taken something out of context and have not applied basic gospel principles.

Just because someone is baptized does not mean they are going to heaven.

Jesus described the path to heaven in John Chapter 3:

1  There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:

2  The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

3  Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4  Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5  Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6  That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7  Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8  The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9  Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10  Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11  Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12  If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

13  And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

14  And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15  That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

16  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18  He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19  And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20  For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21  But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.



So we see, from scripture in Jesus's own words in context, that faith or believing God is the primary prerequisite to salvation, not baptism.

Furthermore, until a child reaches an age of accountability, that child automatically goes to Heaven because of the Grace and Mercy of God.

After they reach the age of accountability (and I am sure that is different for every human being and only God himself knows what this is for each human being), each and every human being that desires to make heaven will have to follow God's path of Repentence and Faith.

24 posted on 05/26/2009 12:00:48 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Psalm 51:5 - we are conceived in the iniquity of sin. This shows the necessity of baptism from conception.

No, Baptism does not save.

We are born-again, and thus saved from sin and put on the path to heaven through repentence and faith as the Gospel account shows. See John chapter 3.
25 posted on 05/26/2009 12:12:54 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Acts 2:39 - Peter then says baptism is specifically given to children as well as adults. “Those far off” refers to those who were at their “homes” (primarily infants and children). God's covenant family includes children. The word "children" that Peter used comes from the Greek word "teknon" which also includes infants.

How do you arrive at the position that "Those far off" refers to children and infants?
26 posted on 05/26/2009 12:14:49 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Matt 19:14 - Jesus clearly says the kingdom of heaven also belongs to children. There is no age limit on entering the kingdom, and no age limit for being eligible for baptism.

Mark 10:14 - Jesus says to let the children come to Him for the kingdom of God also belongs to them. Jesus says nothing about being too young to come into the kingdom of God.


So?

I have been a Protestant my whole life and have never heard a Preacher, layman, or a member of any Protestant congregation say anything that would be at odds with these scriptures nor can you make a logical, in context case that somehow Protestant theology is incorrect with regards to these scriptures.
27 posted on 05/26/2009 12:17:02 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Acts 16:30-33 - it was only the adults who were candidates for baptism that had to profess a belief in Jesus. This is consistent with the Church's practice of instructing catechumens before baptism. But this verse does not support a "believer's baptism" requirement for everyone. See Acts 16:15,33. The earlier one comes to baptism, the better. For those who come to baptism as adults, the Church has always required them to profess their belief in Christ. For babies who come to baptism, the Church has always required the parents to profess the belief in Christ on behalf of the baby. But there is nothing in the Scriptures about a requirement for ALL baptism candidates to profess their own belief in Christ (because the Church has baptized babies for 2,000 years).

It is a logical fallacy to try and use the practices of the CATHOLIC church as proof that their practices prove they are correct.
28 posted on 05/26/2009 12:18:46 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"No, Baptism does not save."

1Pt:3:21: "Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you "

29 posted on 05/26/2009 12:21:37 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Matt. 8:5-13 - the servant is healed based upon the centurion's faith. This is another example of healing based on another's faith. If Jesus can heal us based on someone else’s faith, then He can baptize us based on someone else’s faith as well.

I am dumbstruck by the logical fallacy of inserting both human tradition and human logic to try and come to a conclusion that is not supported by scripture.

I guess your next illogical extension will be to use the same idea to support praying people out of Purgatory, right?
30 posted on 05/26/2009 12:22:04 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
"No, Baptism does not save."

1Pt:3:21: "Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you "


If you are going to use or quote scripture to support your position you need to use it in context.

You forgot to include the previous verses that show that the Baptism that Peter was referring to was Christ's Resurection (see verse 18 below) from the dead. Here is all of the scripture including the part you left out.

18  For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

19  By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

20  Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21  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:

22  Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.


31 posted on 05/26/2009 12:27:48 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"If you are going to use or quote scripture to support your position you need to use it in context."

The context clearly shows salvation by "water" i.e. baptism.

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 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:

32 posted on 05/26/2009 12:37:03 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
The context clearly shows salvation by "water" i.e. baptism.

No sir, you are incorrect.

The context clearly regards the baptism that Christ suffered when he died and rose again, much as Baptism is clearly a reflection of that same resurrection but in putting in it's stead sin for death.
33 posted on 05/26/2009 12:41:47 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

So what will it be GonzoII,

Will you believe Jesus when he declaritively, without reservation, and with no other path given to Heaven state: “You must be born again”?

Or are you going to hold to your illogical position that runs counter to the command of Jesus that you can be saved by Baptism alone.

It cannot be both.


34 posted on 05/26/2009 8:01:39 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"So what will it be GonzoII,"

Mk:16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall he condemned."

35 posted on 05/26/2009 8:55:24 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Thanks for the ping!


36 posted on 05/26/2009 9:18:19 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII
Mk:16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall he condemned."

You keep posting this verse...What do you see that we don't???

37 posted on 05/27/2009 4:56:11 AM PDT by Iscool (I don't understand all that I know...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Yep. That’s what they do.


38 posted on 05/27/2009 11:15:15 AM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

He and his brother, Charles, wrote some of the great hymns of the faith as well.


39 posted on 05/27/2009 11:16:34 AM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

Amen, SoCon.


40 posted on 05/27/2009 11:21:08 AM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie

That’s right. Baptism never saves unless the person being baptized has received the Lord Jesus Christ into his or her life. THEN we baptize to cleanse them from their sin.


41 posted on 05/27/2009 11:22:25 AM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Belief in Christ is FIRST and then baptism. It’s not the other way around.


42 posted on 05/27/2009 11:25:14 AM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
"Belief in Christ is FIRST and then baptism. It’s not the other way around."

That's what Catholics believe:

1226 From the very day of Pentecost the Church has celebrated and administered holy Baptism. Indeed St. Peter declares to the crowd astounded by his preaching: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."26 The apostles and their collaborators offer Baptism to anyone who believed in Jesus: Jews, the God-fearing, pagans.27 Always, Baptism is seen as connected with faith: "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household," St. Paul declared to his jailer in Philippi. And the narrative continues, the jailer "was baptized at once, with all his family."28

26 Acts 2:38.
27 Cf. Acts 2:41; 8:12-13; 10:48; 16:15.
28 Acts 16:31-33.

Source: http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p2s2c1a1.htm#II

43 posted on 05/27/2009 11:35:54 AM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

From what I gather on these posts, infant baptism is salvific. That’s where we part company, I think.


44 posted on 05/27/2009 12:00:28 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Marysecretary
"From what I gather on these posts, infant baptism is salvific. That’s where we part company, I think."

That is correct, I could only point to the tradition
of the early Church to prove directly that infant baptism was practiced, but Scripture does not say that it is forbidden.

45 posted on 05/27/2009 12:28:09 PM PDT by GonzoII ("That they may be one...Father")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

I have no real problem with infant baptism. I was baptized as an infant but also re-baptized in a pond when I became an adult. It just bothers me that many believe their infant baptism saves them and that’s not true. It may help sanctify them for God’s use but it doesn’t save.


46 posted on 05/27/2009 12:43:56 PM PDT by Marysecretary (GOD IS STILL IN CONTROL.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson