Baptism In The Spirit...

[Katholikos]

"Baptism in the Holy Spirit" is an expression coined by Protestants, growing out of the 'Holiness' or 'Pentecostal' interpretation of the Bible. I think Anna and Ice Princess are saying that it is not Catholic terminology, and therefore should not be used, particularly since it causes confusion among the Faithful. I agree with them. Catholic Charismatics I have known (which is a bunch) think there are two baptisms. There are not. There is only one. A different term should be used for the experience of the "outpouring or renewal or revitalization of the Holy Spirit" to eliminate this confusion. With all the spiritual richness of Catholicism, we do not have to use borrowed Protestant terms. We should use a term that says what it means -- and it doesn't mean "baptism."

JMJ Likos

[Azriel]

If the terminology is wrong, why has the Charismatic Renewal folks been permitted to use it lo these many years? I guess that's why I'm failing to see the problem.

If it is confusing to people, then more needs to be done to explain the differences. But, honestly, I've never encountered the confusion.

I've been through Life in the Spirit twice, and never found it to be a problem.

[Anna]

Lo, all these (36) years?

Since 1967?

The Church is over 2,000 years old!

And I suppose with the many serious and grave abuses going about all the time (even over centuries), the Church has to pick her battles.

If you expect the pope to speak out against every single little jot and tittle that causes confusion among the faithful, you are sorely mistaken.

Jake, who is "attacking" the renewal?

I have repeatedly said that my problem is with the phrase, not the movement, not the experience, not the outpouring---with the PHRASE. "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" or "Baptism in the Holy Spirit," whichever!

If this is why you've emailed the priest, to have defend and describe the outpouring of the Holy Spirit yet another time, as has been done on all those links, and which I already understood anyway, then really, don't bother, as it seems you must not be listening to me.

How many baptisms are there, Jake?

[hyperdulia again]

if the use of the word "baptism" isn't a big enough deal for the church to speak on it, then it probably isn't a big enough deal to warrant orthodox catholics banging each other over the head for four pages. just a thought.

[Anna]

:lol:

Ya know, hyper, you are right.

Pax. <><

[Freaky Chik]

would like to hear your thoughts on these verses

Matthew 3:11

"I baptize you with[ 3:11 Or in] water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

Mark 1:8

I baptize you with[ 1:8 Or in] water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."

Luke 3:16

John answered them all, "I baptize you with[ 3:16 Or in] water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

John 1:33

I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.'

Acts 1:5

For John baptized with[ 1:5 Or in] water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."

Acts 8

15When they arrived, they prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16because the Holy Spirit had not yet come upon any of them; they had simply been baptized into[1] the name of the Lord Jesus. 17Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

Acts 10

44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. 45The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46For they heard them speaking in tongues[2] and praising God.

47Then Peter said, "Can anyone keep these people from being baptized with water? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have." 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.

Acts 11:16

Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with[ 11:16 Or in] water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'

Acts 18

24Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor[2] and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.

Acts 19

1While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples 2and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when[1] you believed?"

They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."

3So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?"

"John's baptism," they replied.

4Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." 5On hearing this, they were baptized into[2] the name of the Lord Jesus. 6When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they

[Jake Huether]

Lo, all these (36) years?

Since 1967? 

The Church is over 2,000 years old!

And I suppose with the many serious and grave abuses going about all the time (even over centuries), the Church has to pick her battles.

If you expect the pope to speak out against every single little jot and tittle that causes confusion among the faithful, you are sorely mistaken.

Jake, who is "attacking" the renewal?

I have repeatedly said that my problem is with the phrase, not the movement, not the experience, not the outpouring---with the PHRASE. "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" or "Baptism in the Holy Spirit," whichever!

If this is why you've emailed the priest, to have defend and describe the outpouring of the Holy Spirit  yet another time, as has been done on all those links, and which I already understood anyway, then really, don't bother, as it seems you must not be listening to me.

How many baptisms are there, Jake?

Anna, in my latest responses I made it clear to you that I understood your confusion or concern was about the phrase. So, when I emailed Fr. Hampsch, I made clear that the issue wasn't about the renewal, rather, about why the words were chosen.

Here is what I wrote:

Fr. John Hampsch,

I'm Theresa Huether's son. I have been posting for some time now on a Catholic forum, phatmass.com. It is an excellent site. However, I have recently engaged in a discussion with another Catholic about the term "Baptism in the Holy Spirit". As I have researched the subject and read the Catechism and the Bible, I have come to a better and more appreciative understanding of this term. Yet, there are many who are confused by it; stating, "we don't need another baptism". They claim the Church teaches we only have one Baptism. I've pointed out this error to them: namely, the Church teaches there is one baptism *for the forgiveness of sins*, not necessarily that there is one baptism period.

Can you provide for me the precise origin of the term "Baptism in the Spirit". Not necessarily the meaning of it, as I don't think that is the main issue. Is there a reason why it isn't simply called (as it is defined), "the Outpouring of the gifts of the Holy Spirit". If this is a point of conflict for some, has the Pope or Bishops ever responded to this?

Thank you so much in advance for considering my question.

and here is what he wrote:

Dear Jacob,

Thanks for your inquiry.

The term "baptism in the Spirit" as a noun is not in Scripture, but the verb form is in Scripture many times, as "baptized in the Spirit." The plural word, "Baptsims" presupposes more than the single baptism by water (see Heb. 6:2 and 9:10).

The double baptism of water and of the Spirit is specifically referred to in several places: such as Acts 1:5; alos in Acts 11:16 and implicitly in Acts 8:16. Jesus referred to this in John 3:15 and Mark 1:8.

The baptism in the Spirit is referred to in many of the writings of the early Fathers of the Church and Doctors of the Church, so it is not a new term or concept.

I'll try to send you by attachment to this email a copy of my new book, Receiving the Baptism in the Spirit, in which more information is available.

God bless you, Jacob. Let us pray for one another. Please give my best regards to your parents.

Cordially, in Jesus' Spirit,

John H. Hampsch, cmf

Claretian Tape Ministry

P O Box 19100

Los Angeles, CA 90019-0100

I'm going to attempt to attach the attachment (and he has stated in it that it is okay to reproduce his material for the betterment of the Church).

...okay, so it won't let me attach it. So I will email it to you. (warning: it is like 150 pages - It's from his new book). Maybe I'll post some pertinant info. as I read it.

How many baptisms are there, Jake?

Anna, I will say it one more time. Please read this, so you don't have to ask anymore.

There is ONE Baptism for the forgiveness of sins. One Baptism which brings us into the family of Christ. It is the ONLY Sacramental Baptism that a Christian must recieve. But before the Sacrament of Baptism, there was the Baptism which John gave. And after the Holy Spirit came on Penticost, there was the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, which John had fortold that Jesus would give, and Jesus Himself promised to give. If you need quotes to support this, read what I posted before - I'm repeating myself here for clarity.

So, in History (starting from the ministry of Christ) there have been 3 Baptisms (by John, the Sacrament - as commanded by Christ, and the Baptism in the Holy Spirit - as Christ had promised would happen). Since John is no longer with us, there remains 2 that Christians may recieve. Only one is NECESSARY for salvation (that is the Baptism in the name of Jesus - who's formula is, "...in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit). We recieve the Holy Spirit in part upon this particular salvific Baptism. We recieve the Holy Spirit in His fullness upon Confirmation. Yet there exists another baptism by which we are not saved, nor are we brought into the family of Christ. This baptism is not the Sacrament. It is the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. And it is not refered to simply as "Baptism". It is always followed by "in the Holy Spirit".

And Katholicos, "Baptism in the Spirit" wasn't coined by Protestants. As you know, they rarely do anything without the Scripture (all though I agree much of it is out of context). "Baptism in the Spirit" is found in the Scripture (as has been pointed out).

And the only reason it is causing confussion among the faithful, is because some faithful refuse to learn it more deeply. The Eucharist, Confirmation, Intercession of Saints, these are all sources of confusion for the faithful. But I hardly doubt it is the "terminology". It is that the faithful refuse to educate themselves on the meaning of the words.

Baptism in the Spirit is NOT the Sacrament of Baptism. How can you confuse it? It has 3 more words attached to it! Above and beyond what has been said about it.

[Azriel]

Lo, all these (36) years?

Since 1967? 

The Church is over 2,000 years old!

And I suppose with the many serious and grave abuses going about all the time (even over centuries), the Church has to pick her battles.

If you expect the pope to speak out against every single little jot and tittle that causes confusion among the faithful, you are sorely mistaken.

nevermind. I'm just out of the debate table for awhile.

[Donna]

The term - and its meaning as it's been defined here - implies the Sacraments of baptism and confirmation are not enough.

That we are less than, and must receive this in order to be full.

It reminds me of things based upon gnosis (secret knowledge).

[Jake Huether]

The term -  and its meaning as it's been defined here -  implies the Sacraments of baptism and confirmation are not enough.

That we are less than, and must receive this in order to be full.

It reminds me of things based upon gnosis (secret knowledge).

Are they enough?

How many people do you know that are Baptised and Confirmed really walk their faith?

I can tell you right now, I know more Confirmed Catholics who DON'T live their faith, than I know that do.

Our faith, and our Lives in the Spirit, GROW. We are Saved, being saved, and will be saved. Right? It is a process.

Baptism and Confirmation are "seeds". If you think that they are "enough", then I think you should re-read Acts. Gentiles were being baptized in the Spirit before they were even Baptised! It is a totally seperate event that takes place in the life of a Christian. It isn't a "need" per se. As Baptism is a NEED for salvation. But Baptism in the Spirit is a growth that one makes, when they finally open the gifts given to them in Baptism and Confirmation.

In essence, Baptism and Confirmation would be enough if only we would FULLY accept Christ and His Spirit in us! If we ALL automatically opened the gifts as soon as we recieved them, then "Baptism in the Spirit" would be a null term, as it would simply describe what happens at Confirmation. Unfortunatly, some of us open the Gifts before hand, and some (like the Gentiles in Acts) recieve and open them even before the Spirit seals them in Baptim and Confirmation!

It is a seperate "thing". Baptism and Confirmation are enough, in that they impart the gifts to us. There is NOTHING NEW that is given to us in the Baptism in the Spirit. Baptism and Confirmation equip us with the gifts. But we must open the gifts for them to be affective.

In fact, Donna, our whole entire Sacramental lives aren't "enough" in most cases. We still NEED purgatory in order to enter Heaven.

Hope that further clarifies things...

[PedroX]

so, what is the secret to opening these gifts that results in a "baptism"? Why does the Catechism remain strangely silent on this subject? in fact, the catechism says

CATECHISM:

720: Finally, with John the Baptist, the Holy Spirit begins the restoration to man of "the divine likeness," prefiguring what he would achieve with and in Christ. John's baptism was for repentance; baptism in water and the Spirit will be a new birth.

This clearly shows that one Baptism (in water and the Holy Spirit) is sufficient. I guess I'm just not bright enough to understand this all.

peace...

[hyperdulia again]

one faith. one lord. one baptism.

jake, i really hope i'm a blockhead who's misreading you.

[Anna]

Freaky,

My thoughts on those passages, hopefully are in line with the mind of the Church. If I err in describing them adequately, then it is due to my own inadequacies, and not those of the Church.

All of the excerpts you provided point to two different baptisms.

One type was used just prior to Christ's public ministry. (This was the baptism provided by St. John the Baptist, son of St. Elizabeth, and cousin of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.) John's mission was to preach repentence to make ready for the coming of Christ. "Repent, and prepare ye the way of the Lord." Those who were baptized by John were exercising a preparatory cleansing of sin, in anticipation of the coming of the Messiah.

When the Messiah arrives at the waters, several things happen: He does not arrive alone. The Father and the Holy Spirit make themselves known to those witnessing. The Holy Spirit appears like a dove, and the Father's voice is heard coming from the heavens, "This is My Beloved Son..."

From this point on, St. John the baptist ceases to baptize any more. "He must increase, and I must decrease."

The new baptism which takes place is the Sacrament of Baptism, which Christ instituted and gave to His Church. It is the baptism using water whereby the Holy Spirit enters the soul. A later Sacrment called Confirmation, confirms this baptism, imparting the Holy Spirit in It's fullness.

But just as St. Paul wrote to the Ephesians (Chapter 4:1-6)

"1 I, then, a prisoner for the Lord, urge you to live in a manner worthy of the call you have received,

2

with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another through love,

3

striving to preserve the unity of the spirit through the bond of peace:

4

one body and one Spirit, as you were also called to the one hope of your call;

5

one Lord, one faith, one baptism;

6

one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all."

How many Lords are there? One Lord. Three Divine Persons in One Godhead.

How many baptisms are there? One Baptism. In water and in spirit. This Baptism is made in the Name of the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit, as Jesus instructed His Apostles.

This is the one and only baptism which is also described in all the passages you cited. The baptism of water and spirit written in the Scriptures is the Baptism instituted by Christ.

Pax Christi. <><

[Jake Huether]

Well, I've exhausted all my resources (Catechism, Bible, Priests, Logic,...).

What remains to be seen is, in light of the fact that several Popes have heard and supported the Charismatic leaders (in the Church that is), any evidence that what I've stated is against Church teaching.

Pope's and Bishops know of the Charismatic terminology. And if it was an issue, then I'm sure I'd find it somewhere. It has been 35 years since the RENEWAL, but the actual event has survived 2000 years. It is a renewal, not a novalty. And 35 years (however short it is in comparison to the age of the Church itself) is still a long time to "miss" something as aperantly confusing as it is being made.

St. Paul is obviously refering to the Sacramental Baptism. There is ONE Baptism in which we are all made one in family with God. You keep on trying to make me look like I'm saying there are more than one Sacramental Baptism. I've expressed it as clear as I possibly can. I can't do anymore, or say anymore than what I've said.

According to the definition of baptism (immersion), then I baptise myself everytime I take a bath. But that doesn't refer to my Sacramental Baptism.

If a Catholic is confused about the Sacrament Baptism and Baptism in the Spirit that isn't the fault of the Charismatic renewal, it is the fault of the individual (or the RCIA leaders I suppose) for not understanding his faith.

If you simply have a beaf with the terminology, then what can I say? Call it "the outpouring of the Spirit", or "immersion in the Spirit", or whatever. But the Pope hasn't commanded any of the renewal leaders NOT to use the terms they've chosen.

May I ask: If I were to replace the words "Baptism in the Holy Spirit" with "the outpouring of the gifts of the Holy Spirit", is there anything wrong with what I've said?

I stated that there were 2 baptisms in Christian life, one being the Sacrament the other being "In the Holy Spirit". But I have explicitly and in detail described why those words are chosen. I fully and completely understand the Catechism and the Church and the Bible, etc. There is ONE Baptism by which we are brought into the Family of God. When I say there are 2 baptisms, I don't say that there are 2 of the same Baptisms. There is only one that is necessary for our salvation, the cleansing of our sins, the entrance into the Family of God. But there are MANY other "Baptisms" if we list what any number of things this could refer to (Christian or not). Baptism, despite being a Sacrament, is also a word in the English vocabulary. We must learn to deal with this. Eucharist, being a word, could also refer to OTHER things. Confirmation!? I use that all the time! "I am calling to CONFIRM my appointment." Should that be confusing for a Catholic who answers my call? Will they theink I'm going to annoint the appointment with oil and lay hands on it! LOL. Baptism in the Spirit refers to another Baptism that Christians can recieve that in no way repeats, replaces, or competes with Baptism in the Name of the Trinity.

Your arguments seem to be agains the event (the opening of the Gifts) and the necessity for us to seak to open the gifts.

If you are in agreement with this, then I am happy - because that is the main idea.

You however have stated that it is only the terminology that you are concerned with. If that is the case, the I can do no more. I thought I made it clear why they might choose those words. I will simply pray that the Spirit allows you to see what I'm seeing. Or conversly, I ask you to pray that the Spirit shows me what I must be missing (and include in that prayer all the Charismatic leaders who would use the term).

God bless, and may the peace of the Spirit rest upon you.

[Jake Huether]

so, what is the secret to opening these gifts that results in a "baptism"?  Why does the Catechism remain strangely silent on this subject? in fact, the catechism says

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>CATECHISM:</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

720: Finally, with John the Baptist, the Holy Spirit begins the restoration to man of "the divine likeness," prefiguring what he would achieve with and in Christ. John's baptism was for repentance; baptism in water and the Spirit will be a new birth.

</td></tr></table>

This clearly  shows that one Baptism (in water and the Holy Spirit) is sufficient.  I guess I'm just not bright enough to understand this all.

peace...

So, I guess I should show this to the Charismatic leaders who MUST have missed it.

On the contrary, I think that they have seen it, yet understand the meaning surrounding the words (and the significance of adjectives). I think that you are simply not trying to read what I've written, in an attempt to better understand the words and the meaning of them.