Catholic genetic engineering through baptism?

Once caught on the shhook or in the net, if things go according to its will, the Vatican Church never lets anyone out of its clutches. It’s not for nothing that the just cited canon from the “Codex Juris Canonici” talks about the indelible character that the candidate for baptism receives.

How we can imagine this indelible character and what effect it allegedly has is described by the Spanish Cardinal of Madrid, Antonio Maria Rouco, according to a report by the Catholic News Agency: Cardinal Antonio Maria Rouco said … baptism … leaves an indelible mark and the person who receives it will always be Catholic. … it is a part of one’s DNA. (www.catholicnewsagency.com, July 9, 2004))

This Vatican doctrine of a kind of Catholic genetic engineering via baptism was described in December, 2010 with nearly the same words by another bishop, Thomas Tobin from the United States. Bishop Tobin asserted:

And there’s really no such thing as a former Catholic. If you were baptized a Catholic, you‘re a Catholic for life – even if you‘ve renounced the title and joined another Church. Your baptism infused your soul with Catholic DNA – it de nes who and what you are. (www.catholic.org)

No, baptism does not “de ne” who and what we are. For God, the Eternal, also gave us a mind. Everyone decides for himself whether he is a slave of the Church or follows Jesus of Nazareth.

The Catholic Church does not provide any scienti c proof for its “genetic engineering.” However, in for- mer times, an indelible mark was the slavemark, which was burned into the skin and could no longer be removed. And just like the serf and his children were formerly lifelong slaves, unless they had been set free by their masters, guratively speaking, until today the Church lays lifelong claim to those baptized, however “for eternity.”

This lifelong usurpation by the Church, which continues beyond death, can be seen by the fact that the Church vehemently refuses to delete from the baptismal registers those who as matured adults have left the Church.

For example, in Germany, you can of cially leave the church institution. But the Church does not acknowledge this. The person’s free will is blatantly ignored, and a deletion from the baptismal registers does not take place.

This is also why the German Cardinal Karl Lehmann emphasized, that theologically and spiritually the Catholic Church knows no such thing as “leaving the Church” … Thus, the old rule de nitely applies: … once a Catholic, always a Catholic. (Radio Vatican March 19, 2011, German edition)

So instead of freedom in the Spirit of God it is: “Divide, bind and rule.”

Thus, this church doctrine is also in stark contrast to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations. There, it literally says in article 18:

Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief … (www.un.org/en)

With their statements of nonterminating, eternally binding baptism, the churches reveal that they are totally indifferent to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations and the right to freedom that is anchored in many democraticconstitutions. They want to establish the person’s bondage and his dependency on the Church for life – that is, from the cradle to the grave and even beyond death.

And what this bondage brings with it is clearly expressed in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. There it says:
Having become a member of the Church, the person baptized belongs no longer to himself, but to him who died and rose for us. From now on, he is called to be subject to others, to serve them in the communion of the Church, and to obey and submit to the Church’s leaders, holding them in respect and affection … (No. 1269)

Where did Jesus of Nazareth teach that a person should obey the Church’s leaders and submit to them?
Jesus of Nazareth did not talk about submission – on the contrary, Jesus Himself did not submit to the “leaders” of the religious authorities at that time; nor did He teach his fellowman to do this. Jesus was a man of freedom who did not bind anyone to Himself; nor did He call upon anyone to let himself be bound, patronized, coopted, subjugated or in- doctrinated.

The Vatican Church does the exact opposite of this. The following is laid down in one of its dogmas, de ned as infallible:
If anyone shall say that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and mistress [that is, teacher] of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism – anathema sit. (Neuner/ Roos, No. 442)

Jesus of Nazareth taught neither that the Church is the mother, nor that the pope is the father, for there is only one Father, the heavenly Father, who is also the Father-Mother-God.

Jesus of Nazareth clearly taught: I am the way and the truth and the life. (John 14:6) He did not speak of an institution that is the mother and mistress of all churches.

Passage from the Book: Rehabilitation of the Christ of God

Authors: Kübli, Dieter Potzel, Ulrich Seifert

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s