Do Catholics Believe You Must Be Born Again to Be Saved?
| Almost Ignatius Insight | |
| Who We Are | |
| Ignatius Press | |
| Ignatius Press catalogs | |
| Catholic Globe Written report | |
| Homiletic & Pastoral Review | |
| IP Novels site | |
| IP Religious Ed weblog | |
| IP Disquisitional Editions | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 | |
 |
Are Catholics Born Again? | Mark Brumley | IgnatiusInsight.com
"Have you been built-in again?" the Fundamentalist at the door asks the unsuspecting Catholic. The question is unremarkably a segue into a vast doctrinal entrada that leads many ill-instructed Catholics out of the Catholic Church. How? By making them retrieve there is a conflict betwixt the Bible and the Catholic Church over being "built-in again." To be honest, about Catholics probably do non sympathize the expression "born again."
Yes, they believe in Jesus. And yes, they try to live Christian lives. They probably accept some vague awareness that Fundamentalists think being "built-in once again" involves a religious feel or "accepting Jesus equally your personal Lord and Savior." Many cradle Catholics, too, have had their moments of closeness to God, fifty-fifty of joy over God'due south love and mercy. They may even have had "conversion experiences" of sorts, committing themselves to take their religion seriously and to live more faithfully as disciples of Jesus. But the cradle Cosmic probably cannot pinpoint any detail moment in his life when he dropped to his knees and "accustomed Jesus" for the first time. As far back as he can recall, he has believed, trusted and loved Jesus equally Savior and Lord. Does that testify he has never been "born again"?
Not "the Bible way," says the Fundamentalist. But the Fundamentalist is wrong there. He misunderstands what the Bible says virtually being "born over again." Unfortunately, few Catholics empathise the biblical use of the term, either. As a result, pastors, deacons, catechists, parents and others responsible for religious teaching have their piece of work cut out for them. Information technology would be helpful, then, to review the biblical--and Catholic--meaning of the term "born once again."
"Born again" The Bible manner
The only biblical utilize of the term "built-in again" occurs in John 3:3-5--although, as we shall see, like and related expressions such equally "new birth" and "regeneration" occur elsewhere in Scripture (Titus 3:5; 1 Pet one:three, 23). In John 3:iii, Jesus tells Nicodemus, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." The Greek expression translated "born again" (gennathei anothen) also ways "built-in from above." Jesus, information technology seems, makes a play on words with Nicodemus, contrasting earthly life, or what theologians would subsequently dub natural life ("what is born of mankind"), with the new life of sky, or what they would later on call supernatural life ("what is born of Spirit").
Nicodemus' respond: "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a 2nd time into his mother's womb and be born?" (John 3:4). Does he but error Jesus to be speaking literally or is Nicodemus himself answering figuratively, meaning, "How can an old human being learn new ways every bit if he were a child once more?" Nosotros cannot say for certain, merely in whatever example Jesus answers, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is built-in of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is built-in of the Spirit is spirit. Practise not marvel that I said to you, `You must be born again."' (John 3:5-7).
Here Jesus equates "born again" or "born from above" with "born of h2o and the Spirit." If, as the Catholic Church has ever held, being "born of water and the Spirit" refers to baptism, then it follows that existence "born again" or "built-in from above" means existence baptized.
Conspicuously, the context implies that built-in of "water and the Spirit" refers to baptism. The Evangelist tells usa that immediately after talking with Nicodemus, Jesus took his disciples into the wilderness where they baptized people (John 3:22). Furthermore, h2o is closely linked to the Spirit throughout John'south Gospel (for example, in Jesus' encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well in John iv:ix-13) and in the Johannine tradition (cf. 1 John 5:7). It seems reasonable, then, to conclude that John the Evangelist understands Jesus' words about beingness "born over again" and "built-in of water and the Spirit" to accept a sacramental, baptismal pregnant.
Other views of "built-in of h2o and the spirit"
Fundamentalists who pass up baptismal regeneration unremarkably deny that "born of water and the Spirit" in John iii:5 refers to baptism. Some debate that "water" refers to the "water of childbirth." On this view, Jesus means that unless one is built-in of h2o (at his concrete nascency) and once again of the Spirit (in a spiritual nascency), he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
A major problem with this argument, however, is that while Jesus does contrast concrete and spiritual life, he clearly uses the term "flesh" for the former, in contrast to "Spirit" for the latter. Jesus might say, "Truly, truly, I say to y'all, unless i 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 built-in (i.east., born of flesh) in social club to be born again (i.e., born of the Spirit). Merely using "built-in of h2o and the Spirit" to mean "born of the mankind and and then of the Spirit" would only misfile things by introducing the term "water" from out of nowhere, without any obvious link to the term "mankind." 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 "water" vs. "the Spirit," but "h2o and the Spirit."
Furthermore, the Greek of the text suggests that "born of water and the Spirit" (literally "born of water and spirit") refers to a single, supernatural birth over against natural birth ("built-in of the flesh"). The phrase "of water and the Spirit" (Greek, ek hudatos kai pneumatos) is a single linguistical unit of measurement. It refers to existence "built-in of water and the Spirit," not "born of water" on the one hand and "born of the Spirit" on the other.
Another statement used past opponents of baptismal regeneration: "born of water and the Spirit" refers, correspondingly, to the baptism of John (being "born of water") and the baptism of the Spirit (being "built-in of ... the Spirit"), which John promised the coming Messiah would effect. Thus, on this view, Jesus says, "Unless a man is born of h2o through John's baptism and of the Spirit through my baptism, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God."
We take already seen that, according to the Greek, "born of water and the Spirit" refers to a unmarried thing, a single spiritual birth. Thus, the first half of the phrase cannot apply to one thing (John's baptism) and the second one-half to something else entirely (Jesus' baptism). Merely even autonomously from the linguistical statement, if "built-in of water" refers to John's baptism, and then Jesus is maxim that in gild to be "born again" or "born from in a higher place" one must receive John's baptism of water ("built-in of water ...") and the Messiah's baptism of the Spirit (". . . and Spirit"). That would hateful just those who have been baptized past John could enter the kingdom of God--which would drastically reduce the population of heaven. In fact, no one holds that people must receive John's baptism in gild to enter the Kingdom--something now impossible. Therefore existence "born of water . . ." cannot refer to John's baptism.
The most reasonable explanation for "built-in 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 3:xiii-17; Mark one:9-eleven; 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 3:xi; Mark 1:viii; Luke 3:16; John 1:31; Acts one:four-5). 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 souvenir of the Holy Spirit" (Acts ii:38), thus fulfilling the promise of John. Peter clearly teaches here that the "water 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 h2o, just entails an inner transformation or regeneration by the Holy Spirit of the New Covenant; it is a "new nascency," a beingness "born over again" or "built-in from above." In Romans six:3, Paul says, "Exercise you non know that all of u.s.a. 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 also might walk in newness of life" (RNAB). Baptism, says Paul, effects marriage with the decease and resurrection of Christ, and then that through information technology we die and rise to new life, a form of "regeneration." Co-ordinate to Titus 3:5, God "saved u.s.a. through the washing of regeneration (paliggenesias) and renewal by the Holy Spirit." Opponents of baptismal regeneration fence that the text refers only to the "washing (loutrou) of regeneration" rather than the "baptism of regeneration." Merely baptism is certainly a grade of washing and elsewhere in the New Testament it is described as a "washing away of sin." For example, in Acts 22:16, Ananias tells Paul, "Get up, be baptized and launder your sins away, calling upon his name." The Greek word used for the "washing abroad of sins" in baptism here is apolousai, essentially the aforementioned term used in Titus three:5. Furthermore, since "washing" and "regeneration" are non commonly related terms, a specific kind of washing--one that regenerates--must be in view. The well-nigh obvious kind of washing which the reader would understand would be baptism, a betoken even many Baptist scholars, such as Thou.R. Beasley-Murray, admit. (Run across his book Baptism in the New Testament.) In i Peter i:3, it is stated that God has given Christians "a new birth to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead." The term "new birth" (Gk, anagennasas, "having regenerated") appears synonymous with "born again" or "regeneration." Co-ordinate to 1 Peter 1:23, Christians "have been born anew (Gk, anagegennamenoi, "having been regenerated") not from perishable only from imperishable seed, through the living and abiding discussion of God." From the discussion of the Gospel, in other words. Opponents of baptismal regeneration argue that since the "new birth" mentioned in 1 Peter 1:iii and 23 is said to come up about through the Word of God, being "born over again" means accepting the Gospel message, non being baptized. This statement overlooks the fact that elsewhere in the New Attestation accepting the gospel message and being baptized are seen as ii parts of the 1 human action of commitment to Christ. In Marking 16:16, for instance, Jesus says, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved; whoever does not believe will be condemned." "Assertive", i.e., accepting the Gospel, entails accepting baptism, which is the means by which ane "puts on Christ" (Gal. 3:27) and is buried and raised with him to new life (Rom 6:three-5; Gal two:12). Acts 2:41 says of the Jewish crowd on Pentecost, "Those who accepted his message were baptized . . ." It seems reasonable to conclude that those whom ane Peter 1:23 describes as "having been born anew" or regenerated through the "living and abiding word of God" were also those who had been baptized. Thus, existence "born of water and the Spirit" and existence "born anew" through "the living and abiding discussion of God" depict unlike aspects of one thing--being regenerated in Christ. Being "born again" (or "from above") in "water and the Spirit" refers to the external human action of receiving baptism, while being "born afresh" refers to the internal reception in faith of the Gospel (existence "born afresh" through "the living and abiding word of God"). Moreover, baptism involves a proclamation of the Word, which is part of what constitutes it (i.east., "I baptize you lot in the proper name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"). To accept baptism is to have the Give-and-take of God. There is no need, and so, to encounter the operation of the Word of God in regeneration as something opposed to or separated from baptism. Some Fundamentalists as well object that existence "born again" through baptismal regeneration contradicts the Pauline doctrine of justification by grace through religion. Implicit here is the idea that Christian baptism is a mere "human piece of work" done to earn favor before God. In fact, Christian baptism is something that is done to i (one is baptized--passive), non something one does for oneself. The i who baptizes, according to the Bible, is Jesus Himself by the power of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jn 1:33). It makes no more sense to oppose baptism and organized religion in Christ to i another as ways of regeneration than information technology does to oppose organized religion in Christ and the 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 apply of the term, the Cosmic Church links regeneration or being "born 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; it is the piece of work of Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit, which, by grace, washes away sin and makes u.s. children of God. It is primal to the Catholic understanding of justification by grace. For justification is, as the Council of Trent taught, "a translation from that state in which man is born a child of the first Adam, to the state of grace and of the adoption of the sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ" (Session vi, chapter 4). Baptism is an instrumental means past which God graciously justifies--that is, regenerates--sinners through organized religion in Jesus Christ and makes them children of God. Cosmic teaching is not opposed to a "religious feel" of conversion accompanying baptism (of adults)--far from it. But such an "experience" is not required. What is required for baptism to exist 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 volition that are not necessarily accompanied past feelings of being "born again." Regeneration rests on the divinely established fact of incorporation and regeneration in Christ, non on feelings one fashion or the other. This betoken tin be driven home to Evangelicals by drawing on a point they often emphasize in a related context. Evangelicals often say that the human activity of having accepted Christ every bit "personal Savior and Lord" is the important thing, non whether feelings accompany that act. Information technology is, they say, religion that matters, not feelings. Believe by faith that Christ is the Savior and the appropriate feelings, they say, will eventually follow. Merely even if they do not, what counts is the fact of having taken Christ as Savior. Catholics tin say something like regarding baptism. The human who is baptized may not "feel" whatsoever different later baptism than before. Simply 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 objectively and publicly identified himself with Jesus' death and resurrection. If the newly baptized man meditates on these things, he may or may not "feel" them, in the sense of some subjective religious experience. Still, he will believe them to be truthful by religion. And he will have the benefits of baptism into Christ nonetheless. A "built-in again" Christian? When Fundamentalists call themselves "built-in once more Christians," they want to stress an feel of having entered into a genuine spiritual human relationship with Christ as Savior and Lord, in contradistinction to unbelief or a mere nominal Christianity. As we take seen, though, the term "born again" and its parallel terms "new birth" and "regeneration" are used past 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 you been built-in over again?" An accurate answer would be, "Yes, I was built-in over again in baptism." However leaving it at that may generate fifty-fifty more confusion. Near Fundamentalists would probably understand the Cosmic to mean, "I'one thousand going to heaven just considering I'm baptized." In other words, the Fundamentalist would remember the Catholic is "trusting in his baptism" rather than Christ, whereas the informed Catholic knows information technology ways trusting in Christ with whom he is united in baptism. The Cosmic, then, should do more than than but bespeak to his baptism; he should discuss his living faith, trust and love of Christ; his want to abound in sanctity and conformity to Christ; and his full dependence on Christ for conservancy. These are integral to the new life of the Holy Spirit that baptism bestows. When the Fundamentalist sees the link between baptism and the Holy Spirit in the life of his Catholic neighbour, he may begin to meet that St. Paul was more than figurative when he wrote, "You were buried with Christ in baptism, in which you were besides raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead" (Col 2:12). This article originally appeared in The Cosmic Organized religion (November/December 1999), pages fifteen-18. 
Related IgnatiusInsight.com Book Excerpts, Interviews, and Articles:
• Why Catholicism Makes Protestantism Tick | Marking Brumley
• Evangelicals and Catholics In Conversation | Interview with Dr. Brad Harper
• Has The Reformation Ended? | An Interview with Dr. Mark Noll
• Thomas Howard and the Kindly Light | IgnatiusInsight.com
• Understanding The Bureaucracy of Truths | Douglas Bushman, Southward.T.L
• Objections, Obstacles, Credence | An Interview with J. Budziszewski
• Pope John Paul 2's Didactics on Divinization | Carl E. Olson
• Surprised by Conversion: The Patterns of Faith | Peter E. Martin
• Reformation 101: Who's Who in the Protestant Reformation | Geoffrey Saint-Clair
• From Protestantism to Catholicism | 6 Journeys to Rome
• Eternal Security? A Trinitarian Atoning for Perseverance | Freddie Stewart, Jr.
• God, The Writer of Scripture | Fr. Dominique Barth�lemy, O.P.
• Approaching the Sacred Scriptures | Scott Hahn and Curtis Mitch
Marker Brumley is President of Ignatius Press and associate publisher of IgnatiusInsight.com.An one-time staff apologist with Catholic Answers, Mark is the author of How Not To Share Your Faith (Catholic Answers) and contributor to The Five Bug That Affair Near. He is a regular contributor to the InsightScoop web log.
He has written articles for numerous periodicals and has appeared on FOX NEWS, ABC NEWS, EWTN, PBS'due south NewsHour, and other boob tube and radio programs.
Visit the Insight Scoop Weblog and read the latest posts and comments by IgnatiusInsight.com staff and readers almost current events, controversies, and news in the Church building!
 |
| |
Source: http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2007/mbrumley_bornagain_nov07.asp