Are You Saved Are You Born Again Catholic Quote

"Have you been born again?" the Fundamentalist at the door asks the unsuspecting Catholic.

Aye, they believe in Jesus. And yeah, they endeavour to live Christian lives. They probably have some vague awareness that Fundamentalists recollect being born once more involves a religious experience or accepting Jesus every bit your personal Lord and Savior. Many cradle Catholics, besides, have had their moments of closeness to God, even of joy over God's beloved and mercy. They may even have had conversion experiences of sorts, committing themselves to take their faith seriously and to live more faithfully as disciples of Jesus. But the cradle Catholic probably cannot pinpoint any detail moment in his life when he dropped to his knees and accepted Jesus for the commencement fourth dimension. Every bit far back as he tin recall, he has believed, trusted and loved Jesus every bit Savior and Lord. Does that testify he has never been born again?

Non the Bible way, says the Fundamentalist. Just the Fundamentalist is wrong there. He misunderstands what the Bible says about being born once again. Unfortunately, few Catholics understand the biblical utilise of the term, either. Equally a result, pastors, deacons, catechists, parents and others responsible for religious pedagogy take their work cutting out for them. It would be helpful, and so, to review the biblical and Catholic pregnant of the term born again.

"Built-in once more " The Bible way

The just biblical use of the term built-in again occurs in John three:3-v although, equally nosotros shall meet, similar and related expressions such every bit new birth and ,regeneration occur elsewhere in Scripture (Titus 3:5; 1 Pet 1:3, 23). In John 3:three, Jesus tells Nicodemus, Truly, truly, I say to you, unless ane is built-in once more, he cannot see the kingdom of God. The Greek expression translated built-in again (gennathei anothen) besides ways built-in from above. Jesus, information technology seems, makes a play on words with Nicodemus, contrasting earthly life, or what theologians would later dub natural life (what is built-in of flesh), with the new life of sky, or what they would later call supernatural life (what is born of Spirit).

Nicodemus' reply: How tin a man exist born when he is one-time? Tin he enter a 2d time into his female parent'south womb and exist born? (John 3:4). Does he but mistake Jesus to be speaking literally or is Nicodemus himself answering figuratively, meaning, How can an old man larn new ways as if he were a child again? We cannot say for certain, simply in any instance Jesus answers, Truly, truly, I say to yous, unless one is born of h2o and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is built-in of the mankind is mankind, and that which is built-in of the Spirit is spirit. Exercise non curiosity that I said to yous, `You must be born again.' (John 3:5-7).

Here Jesus equates born once again or built-in from above with built-in of water and the Spirit. If, as the Catholic Church has always held, being built-in of water and the Spirit refers to baptism, and so it follows that being born again or born from above ways being baptized.

Conspicuously, the context implies that born of h2o and the Spirit refers to baptism. The Evangelist tells u.s. that immediately subsequently talking with Nicodemus, Jesus took his disciples into the wilderness where they baptized people (John iii:22). Furthermore, water is closely linked to the Spirit throughout John's Gospel (for instance, in Jesus' meet with the Samaritan adult female at the well in John 4:9-13) and in the Johannine tradition (cf. 1 John 5:7). It seems reasonable, then, to conclude that John the Evangelist understands Jesus' words nigh being built-in again and born of water and the Spirit to have a sacramental, baptismal significant.

Other views of "born of h2o and the spirit"

Fundamentalists who pass up baptismal regeneration normally deny that born of water and the Spirit in John three:five refers to baptism. Some argue that h2o refers to the h2o of childbirth. On this view, Jesus ways that unless 1 is born of water (at his physical nascence) and again of the Spirit (in a spiritual nascence), he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

A major problem with this statement, however, is that while Jesus does contrast concrete and spiritual life, he clearly uses the term mankind for the former, in contrast to Spirit for the latter. Jesus might say, Truly, truly, I say to y'all, unless one is born of flesh and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God though it would exist obvious and absurdly redundant to say that one must be born (i.due east., born of mankind) in club to exist built-in over again (i.e., born of the Spirit). But using born of water and the Spirit to mean built-in of the flesh and then of the Spirit would but confuse things by introducing the term water from out of nowhere, without any obvious link to the term flesh. Moreover, while the flesh is clearly opposed to the Spirit and the Spirit conspicuously opposed to the flesh in this passage, the expression born of water and the Spirit implies no such opposition. It is not h2o vs. the Spirit, but water and the Spirit.

Furthermore, the Greek of the text suggests that built-in of water and the Spirit (literally born of water and spirit) refers to a single, supernatural birth over against natural birth (born of the mankind). The phrase of water and the Spirit (Greek, ek hudatos kai pneumatos) is a unmarried linguistical unit. It refers to being built-in of water and the Spirit, not born of water on the one mitt and born of the Spirit on the other.

Some other argument used past opponents of baptismal regeneration: born of h2o and the Spirit refers, correspondingly, to the baptism of John (being born of water) and the baptism of the Spirit (existence born of ... the Spirit), which John promised the coming Messiah would result. Thus, on this view, Jesus says, Unless a man is born of water through John'south baptism and of the Spirit through my baptism, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.

We take already seen that, co-ordinate to the Greek, born of water and the Spirit refers to a single thing, a single spiritual birth. Thus, the start half of the phrase cannot use to 1 matter (John's baptism) and the 2nd half to something else entirely (Jesus' baptism). But fifty-fifty apart from the linguistical argument, if born of water refers to John's baptism, then Jesus is saying that in guild to be built-in again or born from to a higher place one must receive John'due south baptism of h2o (built-in of water ...) and the Messiah'southward baptism of the Spirit (. . . and Spirit). That would mean only those who have been baptized by John could enter the kingdom of Godwhich would drastically reduce the population of heaven. In fact, no one holds that people must receive John's baptism in order to enter the Kingdom something now impossible. Therefore existence born of water . . . cannot refer to John'due south baptism.

The most reasonable explanation for born of water and the Spirit, then, is that it refers to baptism. This is reinforced by many New Testament texts linking baptism, the Holy Spirit and regeneration. At Jesus' baptism, the Holy Spirit descends upon him equally He comes up out of the water (cf. John 1:25-34; Matt iii:13-17; Marking 1:9-11; Luke 3:21-22). Furthermore, what distinguishes John's baptism of repentance in anticipation of the Messiah from Christian baptism, is that the latter is a baptism with the Holy Spirit (Matt iii:11; Mark 1:8; Luke three:16; John 1:31; Acts 1:4-five).

Consequently, on Pentecost, Peter calls the Jews to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins and promises that they will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts two:38), thus fulfilling the promise of John. Peter conspicuously teaches hither that the h2o baptism, to which he directs the soon-to-be converts, forgives sins and bestows the Holy Spirit. Christian baptism, then, is no mere external, repentance-ritual with water, only entails an inner transformation or regeneration by the Holy Spirit of the New Covenant; it is a new nascency, a being built-in once more or born from above.

In Romans 6:3, Paul says, Do you not know that all of usa who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were cached therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the expressionless by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life (RNAB). Baptism, says Paul, effects union with the death and resurrection of Christ, and so that through it we dice and rising to new life, a form of regeneration.

According to Titus 3:5, God saved us through the washing of regeneration (paliggenesias) and renewal by the Holy Spirit. Opponents of baptismal regeneration fence that the text refers merely to the washing (loutrou) of regeneration rather than the baptism of regeneration. Merely baptism is certainly a course of washing and elsewhere in the New Testament it is described as a washing away of sin. For instance, in Acts 22:16, Ananias tells Paul, Get upwards, be baptized and launder your sins away, calling upon his name. The Greek discussion used for the washing away of sins in baptism hither is apolousai, essentially the aforementioned term used in Titus 3:v. Furthermore, since washing and regeneration are non usually related terms, a specific kind of washing i that regenerates must be in view. The nearly obvious kind of washing which the reader would sympathize would be baptism, a point even many Baptist scholars, such as G.R. Beasley-Murray, acknowledge. (Encounter his book Baptism in the New Attestation.)

In 1 Peter i:3, information technology is stated that God has given Christians a new nascence to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. The term new birth (Gk, anagennasas, having regenerated) appears synonymous with built-in again or regeneration. According to 1 Peter ane:23, Christians have been born afresh (Gk, anagegennamenoi, having been regenerated) not from perishable but from imperishable seed, through the living and constant word of God. From the word of the Gospel, in other words.

Opponents of baptismal regeneration fence that since the new birth mentioned in i Peter 1:3 and 23 is said to come well-nigh through the Give-and-take of God, being born once again means accepting the Gospel message, not being baptized. This statement overlooks the fact that elsewhere in the New Testament accepting the gospel message and being baptized are seen as two parts of the one human action of commitment to Christ.

In Marking 16:16, for example, Jesus says, Whoever believes and is baptized will exist saved; whoever does not believe volition exist condemned. Believing, i.due east., accepting the Gospel, entails accepting baptism, which is the means past which ane puts on Christ (Gal. 3:27) and is buried and raised with him to new life (Rom 6:3-five; Gal 2:12). Acts two:41 says of the Jewish crowd on Pentecost, Those who accustomed his message were baptized . . . Information technology seems reasonable to conclude that those whom ane Peter 1:23 describes as having been born afresh or regenerated through the living and constant give-and-take of God were also those who had been baptized. Thus, being born of water and the Spirit and being born anew through the living and abiding word of God describe dissimilar aspects of one affair being regenerated in Christ. Being built-in once more (or from higher up) in water and the Spirit refers to the external human action of receiving baptism, while existence born anew refers to the internal reception in organized religion of the Gospel (existence born anew through the living and constant discussion of God).

Moreover, baptism involves a proclamation of the Give-and-take, which is part of what constitutes it (i.eastward., I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit). To accept baptism is to accept the Give-and-take of God. There is no need, then, to see the operation of the Give-and-take of God in regeneration as something opposed to or separated from baptism.

Some Fundamentalists also object that existence born again through baptismal regeneration contradicts the Pauline doctrine of justification by grace through faith. Implicit here is the idea that Christian baptism is a mere human work done to earn favor before God. In fact, Christian baptism is something that is done to one (one is baptized passive), not something ane does for oneself. The one who baptizes, co-ordinate to the Bible, is Jesus Himself by the power of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn i:33). Information technology makes no more sense to oppose baptism and faith in Christ to one some other as ways of regeneration than it does to oppose faith in Christ and the piece of work of the Holy Spirit to one another. There is no either/or here; it is both/and.

The Catholic view of being "born again"

Following the New Testament employ of the term, the Cosmic Church links regeneration or being born over again in the life of the Spirit to the sacrament of baptism (CCC, nos. 1215,1265-1266). Baptism is not a mere human work one does to earn regeneration and divine sonship; information technology is the work of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, which, by grace, washes abroad sin and makes u.s.a. children of God. It is cardinal to the Catholic agreement of justification by grace. For justification is, as the Quango of Trent taught, a translation from that country in which man is born a child of the kickoff Adam, to the land of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ (Session vi, affiliate 4). Baptism is an instrumental means by which God graciously justifies that is, regenerates sinners through organized religion in Jesus Christ and makes them children of God.

Catholic pedagogy is not opposed to a religious experience of conversion accompanying baptism (of adults) far from it. But such an feel is not required. What is required for baptism to be fruitful (for an adult) is repentance from sin and faith in Christ, of which baptism is the sacrament (CCC, no. 1253). These are grace-enabled acts of the will that are not necessarily accompanied by feelings of beingness born over again. Regeneration rests on the divinely established fact of incorporation and regeneration in Christ, not on feelings ane fashion or the other.

This point can be driven domicile to Evangelicals by drawing on a indicate they oft emphasize in a related context. Evangelicals oft say that the human action of having accepted Christ every bit personal Savior and Lord is the important affair, not whether feelings back-trail that act. It is, they say, faith that matters, not feelings. Believe by faith that Christ is the Savior and the appropriate feelings, they say, will eventually follow. But even if they practice not, what counts is the fact of having taken Christ every bit Savior.

Catholics can say something similar regarding baptism. The homo who is baptized may non feel whatever unlike after baptism than before. But once he is baptized, he has received the Holy Spirit in a special way. He has been regenerated and made a child of God through the divine sonship of Jesus Christ in which he shares. He has been buried with Christ and raised to new life with Him. He has considerately and publicly identified himself with Jesus' death and resurrection. If the newly baptized man meditates on these things, he may or may non experience them, in the sense of some subjective religious experience. Nevertheless, he will believe them to be truthful by organized religion. And he volition have the benefits of baptism into Christ nonetheless.

A "built-in over again" Christian?

When Fundamentalists call themselves born again Christians, they desire to stress an experience of having entered into a genuine spiritual human relationship with Christ as Savior and Lord, in contradistinction to unbelief or a mere nominal Christianity. Equally we have seen, though, the term born once more and its parallel terms new birth and regeneration are used by Jesus and the New Testament writers to refer to the forgiveness of sins and inner renewal of the Holy Spirit signified and brought about by Christ through baptism.

How, then, should a Catholic answer the question, Have y'all been born again? An accurate answer would be, Yes, I was born again in baptism. Yet leaving it at that may generate even more than confusion. Most Fundamentalists would probably understand the Cosmic to mean, I'm going to heaven simply because I'm baptized. In other words, the Fundamentalist would think the Cosmic is trusting in his baptism rather than Christ, whereas the informed Catholic knows it means trusting in Christ with whom he is united in baptism.

The Catholic, then, should do more than just point to his baptism; he should discuss his living faith, trust and love of Christ; his desire to grow in sanctity and conformity to Christ; and his total dependence on Christ for salvation. These are integral to the new life of the Holy Spirit that baptism bestows. When the Fundamentalist sees the link betwixt baptism and the Holy Spirit in the life of his Catholic neighbor, he may begin to meet that St. Paul was more than figurative when he wrote, You were cached with Christ in baptism, in which you were too raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead (Col ii:12).

wisethavestoon.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/apologetics/are-catholics-born-again.html

Share this post