John the Baptist . . . Born Without Original Sin?
A reader writes:
Hello Jimmy
I heard this for the first time last night and do not know the answer.
I was told that the Catholic Church teaches that John the Baptist was Born without original sin, is this the teaching of the church if so can you please explain why.
This is not something that the Catholic Church teaches, but it is what may be called a pious and probable belief among Catholics.
The reason is that in Luke 1:13-15, when an angel prophecies the birth of John the Baptist, he says:
Do not be afraid, Zechari’ah, for your prayer is heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John.
And you will have joy and gladness, and many will rejoice at his birth;
for he will be great before the Lord,and he shall drink no wine nor strong drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb.
It is commonly understood that the Holy Spirit does not fill those who are still in a state of original sin. As Catholics use the term, “original sin” refers to the privation of the sanctifying grace which unites us with God. A soul filled with the Holy Spirit seems unquestionably to be united with God and thus not deprived of sanctifying grace. Hence, it has not original sin as the term is commonly used among Catholics, just as every person who has been baptized or otherwise justified has not original sin as Catholics use the term.
(N.B., Protestants have a different and more expansive definition of the term “original sin,” which includes the corrupt nature we inherit from Adam and which remains with us after we are justified. Consequently, it would sound very improbable to them that any person in this life does not have original sin, but this is because of the way the term is used in their circles, not because of a substantive theological difference.)
(N.B.B., If it is granted that John the Baptist was freed from original sin before birth, it does not follow that he was immaculate, as was the Blessed Virgin Mary. This is firstly because he may have been freed of original sin after his conception and before birth, whereas Mary was preserved from her conception from contracting original sin. And it secondly is because Mary was not only free of original sin, as is posited in the case of John the Baptist, but also utterly free of the stain of original sin, which includes more than just the deprivation of sanctifying grace. It also includes, for example, the later tendency to sin—concupiscience—to which we are subject in this life.)
Posted by Jimmy Akin
http://www.jimmyakin.org/2004/12/john_the_baptis.html
but it is what may be called a pious and probable belief among Catholics.
A "probable" belief? The more the RCC opens her mouth to explain her beliefs, the worse it gets for anyone who tries to make sense of this 2000-year-old-2-BILLION-plus group of "representatives" of Christ. But keep going. You have 2000 years of tradition to back up your claims...and lots of implicit scripture to decode for the 'faithful'.
One bit of logic I’ve never been able to understand about the idea of the immaculate conception, is that, given this fallen world, if God can and did create sinless humans (like Rome says Mary, and possibly John were)before the cross, why in the world would He need to send Jesus to die for our sins?
He could of more easily just wiped sin out in one generation by causing EVERYONE’S conception to be immaculate.