Leaders representing the Roman Catholic Church and some American Protestant denominations have signed an agreement in Texas to recognize each other's baptisms.
After about six years of dialogue, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Reformed Church in America, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), the Christian Reformed Church in North America, and the United Church of Christ signed a document recognizing each other's liturgical rites of baptism.
The five denominations signed the "Common Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Baptism," affirming the baptism agreement on Tuesday evening at a prayer service held at St. Mary's Cathedral in Austin....
The article spoke of the Common faith and acknowledgment of the various baptisms practiced by different denominations. Common faith does not exist between a practicing Roman Catholic and a born again believer. One is trusting is the merits of Christ plus nothing and the other is trusting in their own good works of keeping the sacraments. One of those sacraments is baptism. Baptism is by immersion for believers only as an affirmation of a faith they already profess. So affusion practiced on an infant is not baptism. The "judgment" that is being made is by the Word of God. There can be no agreement on a Biblical basis and that is the standard that counts
Lurker wrote: So I'm filled with false doctrine, am I? And you came to this judgment based on one question... the purpose and meaning of which escaped you? Luther's 95 theses is what irreversibly set the..in motion even though Luther wanted to reform his beloved RCC.... not leave it. I asked the question to find out how you view the Protestant Reformation. Was it God's work or the work of men? But, on second thought, don't bother. . . . wuyjr, Perfect. Thank you.
I would say you are filled with false doctrine if your faith is based on the 95 Theses, but Luther didnt intend it to be a catechism. He was just recirculating ideas that existed for centuries. The Bishop of Rome went up against the printing press more than Luther.
You are correct when you say Luther wanted to reform his beloved Church, because Luther knew Gods People were there and it wasnt the 'antichrist' church of JohnUks imagination. In a small sense, Luther was successful. The RCC reformed many of their practices.
I would be careful not to say that everything after the Reformation was holy, as where man is also is sin. I wouldnt lay those sins at the charge of God. Remember during the 30 yr war, Protestants eventually turned their weapons on each other
Christopher000 wrote: Frank wrote:...I will thank the Lord for each of you tonight. Thank you. I never, ever, as far as I'm aware, have anyone who ever mentions my name in their prayers, mostly because I really don't know anyone who prays anything that God listens to. Anyway, I firmly believe in the power of prayer as opposed to some forced chore that some see it as. I know that the invisible world around is is like a bee hive and a prayer is like a ball of energy that gets carried straightaway to God. The power of prayer is very real and I think many get bored or discouraged with it because we can't see the activity that our Earthly eyes have been blinded to. Anyway, this was an exhaustive way of saying, "thanks!" I find it exciting to read that my name may have actually been mentioned to God...in a good way for a change...ha-ha.
I have actually prayed for you on several occasions. I always think of prayer as an honor and not a chore. God listens to all of His children when they come to Him, but since many prayers are not according to His will, they don't get answered like we want. (Me too) I try not to make prayer a mystical endeavor, but simply talking to my God, King and Father in a worshipful and respectful manner.
SteveR wrote: Are you really comparing Luthers 95 Theses to the Baptism of John? If so, please refrain from doing so. Even Luther on his weakest day at the height of the 30 yr war wouldnt be so filled with leaven. Read the Theses, much of it confirms RCC doctrine(like purgatory) now rejected by Faithful Churches.
So I'm filled with false doctrine, am I? And you came to this judgment based on one question... the purpose and meaning of which escaped you?
Luther's 95 theses is what irreversibly set the Protestant Reformation in motion even though Luther wanted to reform his beloved RCC.... not leave it.
I asked the question to find out how you view the Protestant Reformation. Was it God's work or the work of men?
Lurker wrote: Martin Luther's 95 theses and the subsequent Protestant Reformation: Was it from heaven or men?
The Reformation was ordained of God. This was God's historic rejection of the UnBiblical practices and idolatry of the Roman Catholic apostate church.
This did not of course suggest that the Protestant church was perfect, but it did, by grace, establish the real Christians in truth and Bible doctrine. In due course the Protestant church has suffered from various apostasies and failures itself eg Liberalism. Thus, no surprise, sin and Satan works in all denominations.
The problem highlighted in the Roman church is its failure to learn from its mistakes and thus warns the Christians against joining it.
Frank wrote:...I will thank the Lord for each of you tonight. Thank you. I never, ever, as far as I'm aware, have anyone who ever mentions my name in their prayers, mostly because I really don't know anyone who prays anything that God listens to. Anyway, I firmly believe in the power of prayer as opposed to some forced chore that some see it as. I know that the invisible world around is is like a bee hive and a prayer is like a ball of energy that gets carried straightaway to God. The power of prayer is very real and I think many get bored or discouraged with it because we can't see the activity that our Earthly eyes have been blinded to.
Anyway, this was an exhaustive way of saying, "thanks!" I find it exciting to read that my name may have actually been mentioned to God...in a good way for a change...ha-ha.
I asked a Catholic lady once if she had ever received Christ as her Saviour.
John 1:12-13 KJV 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
She replied, "Oh yes!"
And so I asked her when that was.
She said, "This very morning."
And so I asked her where it happened, and what happened.
"Oh," she said, "It was down at the Catholic Church, at the early mass. That is where I received Christ."
Dorcas wrote: This common agreement on mutual recognition of baptism is absolute heresy! Salvation by works!
Yes, you are correct and here is your proof text! Notice what happens when we obey in verse 18.
 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?  And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?  And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in [them]; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.  Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you,  And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. (2Cr 6:14-18 KJV)
Xromanist wrote: As an ex romanist all the posts by Brandon,Frank, and John UK,also Chris,are spot on.when you are born again and indwelt by the Holy Spirt,HE will open your eyes and ears and drive you away from that heretical and apostate system.dont be mislead SteveR and try to mislead others by your false statements!!
I'm glad the Lord rescued you from that Satanic church; He did the same for me. There is absolutely no doctrine of the RCC that is according to God's word; not even one. I have always considered them to be Satan's church because they have confused and mislead the most of any pseudo Christian cult. And like all cults, they are very good at spinning what they really believe. I want to thank you, Brandon, Chris, lekeb and John for not giving in to this Emergent Church fellow who affirms things he doesn't really believe from the heart. In fact, I will thank the Lord for each of you tonight.
Like the Pharisee the Roman Catholic cannot obey the Word or the Commandment of God. Like the pharisee the Roman Catholic cannot receive the truth. (2Thes 2:10.11) And Like the Pharisee Christ rejects them and their human traditions so fondly loved and worshipped by the papists.
Christ teaches. Mk 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
We are taught by Scripture that a little leaven leaveth the whole lump. For centuries the leaven of idolatry has permeated the Roman church. Open your eyes to the facts that the Roman church is used in Satan's subtle way to confound the reprobate and the ignorant.
Gal 5:7 who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? 8 This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. 9 A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.
Just one more thing, Steve, before I turn in. You reckon the pope is not antichrist, and I need to take off some imaginary blinkers?
The 1689 Baptist Theologians would disagree with you as well. I expect the following will also apppear in the Philadelphia Confession.
Ch 26:4 "The Lord Jesus Christ is the Head of the church, in whom, by the appointment of the Father, all power for the calling, institution, order or government of the church, is invested in a supreme and sovereign manner; neither can the Pope of Rome in any sense be head thereof, but is that antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God; whom the Lord shall destroy with the brightness of his coming."
Xromanist...thanks for chiming in. When these discussions get going, I wish more ex RC's would comment but maybe there are not too many. When I first came on board, I had, and still have, many things wrong. John UK, and Frank were instrumental in helping me to turn some things around. Many others have helped out since then as well. Anyway, what I'm getting at is that I was "certain" of my views and interpretations at the time. When I was told that I had it all wrong, I was like, "huh? I don't think so, guys". Well, I ended up doing a 180 on several things. Maybe this is how Steve is feeling.
John for JESUS wrote: When Jesus assembled the apostles, He grouped together people with various beliefs about God that did not mesh. If Catholics are not Christian then why did God use the Catholic Church so heavily in early Christianity? If Catholics are not Christian then there are large parts of the world that have never heard the gospel.
John, when I was a newborn Christian, I did not know the difference between a Catholic and a Methodist. It can take a very long time to discern the subtleties, and understand the apostasy of both. But one thing I knew straight away, and that by the Holy Ghost, I knew what the gospel message was saying to people, and that the new birth was NOT by baptism or any such thing done by men, but was an act of God bringing forth genuine repentance and faith in a risen and ascended Saviour. When I was saved, I was eternally saved, not partially. And yes, you are correct in saying that those parts of the world which are predominantly Catholic, are yet to hear the true gospel message. Are you up for it?
Xromanist Thank you so much for your contribution. Have you ever heard of any genuine believer remaining in the RCC? I reckon it must be impossible.