a History of the “Sinners Prayer” from a Blog site

I’m Catholic History of the “Sinners Prayer” Brief History of the Sinner’s Prayer (Prayer of Faith) FROM …

My reply: The “Sinners prayer is a recent man-made innovation constructed to permit Protestant Evangelist to “Save souls” in the time frame of their Radio and or TV shows. Its NOT biblical and it is NOT God-Approved. And this is the opinion of some non-Catholics as well as my own.




Is Pope Francis the vicar of Christ? The Roman Catholic Church teaches that to be true. A vicar is someone acting in the place of another.

Catholic doctrine says the pope is the chief shepherd of the church of Christ.

The Roman Catholic Church claims that the pope is the head of the church of Christ on earth.

What does the Bible say?

  1. Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. (NKJV)

Jesus has all authority.

My REPLY because this is true what the Catholic Church teaches is and HAS to BE TRUE too.

BUT Christ choose to share His Authority with the Apostles THROUGH Peter:

Mt. 16:16-19 “Simon Peter answered and said: Thou art Christ, the Son of the living God.  And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: because flesh and blood hath not revealed it to thee, but my Father who is in heaven. [18] And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church,  [singular] and the gates of hell shall not [EVER!] prevail against it. [19]And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven”.

FYI: The terms “to bind .and to Loose have TWO very precise meanings:

  1. Total and complete Power and Authority of Governance of this new: One God; with One set of Faith beliefs, through One Church: today’s Catholic Church. My friend God simply could not have waited more than 1,500 YEARS to make His Truths known. {“truths” singular”} … That is an impossibility.
  2. The forgiveness of man’s SINS as GOD DECIDED TO DO: Read please, 1 John 1:8-10; 1 John 5:16-17 & John 20:1-23 FYI: The “sinners prayer, altar calls” and such are recent man MADE innovations not God approved.

Eph. 2:19-22 “Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners; but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and the domestics of God,  Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone: In whom all the building, being framed together, groweth up into an holy temple in the Lord. In whom you also are built together into an habitation of God in the Spirit.”

Mt. 10 1- “1-4, 8: “ And having called his twelve disciples together, he gave them power over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of diseases, and all manner of infirmities. [2] And the names of the twelve apostles are these: The first, Simon who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother, [3] James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew the publican, and James the son of Alpheus, and Thaddeus, [4] Simon the Cananean, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. [5] These twelve Jesus sent: commanding them, saying: Go ye! …. Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out devils: freely have you received, freely give”

John 17:18-20 & 20:21 “ Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truthAs thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world[[this means exactly what it says: WITH God’s OWN Powers and Authority — limited to what is NECESSARY to accomplish the Mission Christ gives US] ] And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth.” 

John 20:21 “ He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you”

Eph. 4:1-7 “I therefore, a prisoner in the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation in which you are called, With all humility and mildness, with patience, supporting one another in charity. Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body [Means just One Church with just One Faith] and one Spirit; as you are called in one hope of your calling. One Lord, one faith, one baptism. One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in us all. But to every one of us is given grace, according to the measure of the giving of Christ”

No doubt you’re aware of Mt. 16:15-19 where Christ APPOINTS Peter to be his Visar; the Leader of this newly Founded One God; with One set of beliefs and in and through One church; historically and biblically provable to be today’s Catholic Church.

May I suggest you READ and pray about Mt. 10:1-8; then Mt. 16:15-19; then John 17:11-26 and take note of verses 17 – 20   in particular:  Sanctify them in truth. Thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, I also have sent them into the world.  [Means exactly what it says with God’s Power and Authority]And for them do I sanctify myself, that they also may be sanctified in truth. And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me”…  Then READ please Mt. 28:16-20 “And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. … And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth.  Go therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world”

“2. Colossians 1:13-13 …the kingdom of the Son of His love,…..18 And He is the head of the body, the church…(NKJV)”


MY REPLY: Indeed He is! BUT he is not the VISAR; Christ is the King! Cf. To You Peter I give ALL the key’s [all access] to my Kingdom. And why not? Jesus was only following His Own Tradition of the Old Testament wherein he always and every time choose just ONE man to Lead His Chosen people: from Abram, Moses, the Judges, and King’s like David; Prophets like Isiah… God consistently choose just ONE man to lead. One can understand why you try so hard to prove what is unprovable; but both the bible and history prove the Catholic position.

“Jesus is the head of the church.”

MY REPLY Eph. 2:19-22 “Now therefore you are no more strangers and foreigners; but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and the domestics of God,  Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone: In whom all the building, being framed together, groweth up into an holy temple in the Lord. In whom you also are built together into an habitation of God in the Spirit.”

“3. 1 Peter 5:4 and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away. (NKJV)”

MY REPLY: John 21: 14-17 “This is now the third time that Jesus was manifested to his disciples, after he was risen from the dead. When therefore they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter: Simon son of John, lovest thou me more than these? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs. [16] He saith to him again: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? He saith to him: Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith to him: Feed my lambs.  He said to him the third time: Simon, son of John, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved, because he had said to him the third time: Lovest thou me? And he said to him: Lord, thou knowest all things: thou knowest that I love thee. He said to him: Feed my sheep.”  AMEN!

“Jesus is the Chief Shepherd.


“The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! “Father, the atheists? Even the atheist. Everyone! And this Blood makes us children of God of the first class. We are created children in the likeness of God and the Blood of Christ has redeemed us all. And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think is a beautiful path towards peace. If we, each doing our part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently. little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: We need that so much. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe , Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: We will meet one another there.”

MY REPLY: You, my FRIEND. Like all Protestants, lack God’s necessary grace for His Right Understanding:

Christ DID indeed “Redeem” the entire world; all “men” past, present and future. What you don’t seem to understand is the “Redemption is NOT the same as “salvation.”

“Redemption” means ONLY that Salvation, which is precisely conditional,  with a JUST reward based on how one chooses to live their life, is once again possible. Heaven had been blocked [locked THUS Christ makes necessity for THE KEY’S to HIS Kingdom which He entrust to PETER. [If not to whom, how and on what evidence?] , but now was unlocked by Christ Passion, death and Resurrection.

I won’t d go into all of this in detail unless you ask me too?

Heb.6: 10 “For God is not so unjust as to overlook your work and the love which you showed for his sake in serving the saints, as you still do.” 


Rev.2: 23 “and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches shall know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve.”


“What does the Bible say about unrepentant atheists? 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 These shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, (NKJV)

Mark 16:16 “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. (NKJV)[Jesus understands His gospel.]”

MY REPLY: … FYI: The Bible does not say precisely “unrepentant atheist”

My Friend; it would seem that you have never been exposed to the One Infallible Rule for RIGHT Understanding of the bible?

Never ever, can may or Does

One passage; verse, or teaching

Have the Power or Authority

To make void, invalidate or override

Another: passage, verse, or teaching.

The bible IS a Catholic Book!

Were this not true {it is} it would render the bible as worthless to teach or learn ones faith.

Again as a FYI: Just as Yahweh choose only ONE “Chosen people”; Christ founded only One Church, with HIS One set of Faith beliefs. {Any other position is a moral and theological; even a simple logical impossibility} WHY just “One” [Lev.26:12 & Heb. 8:10]… Christ choose “One” knowing that this OUGHT to [might] aid mankind to discover and uncover His necessarily singular truths. Amen!

“Obeying the gospel is simply believing and being immersed in water. You must know God and obey the gospel of Christ.”

MY REPLY: Indeed! In its entirety, dear friend.

“Good works cannot saved anyone, including atheists.”

MY REPLY: If you are inferring that Catholics are “atheists”; [do not believe in God], your using the incorrect term. I suspect you mean to classify us Catholics as “Agnostics?” Which too is wrong.

We Agree, that good works BY THEM SELVES cannot and Do not save:  BUT they are nevertheless essential no-ones salvation; a critical PART of the Salvation Process.

“Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.(NKJV)”

My Response: James 2:16-20 “And one of you say to them: Go in peace, be ye warmed and filled; yet give them not those things that are necessary for the body, what shall it profit? So faith also, if it have not works, is dead in itself. [18] But some man will say: Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without works; and I will shew thee, by works, my faith. Thou believest that there is one God. Thou dost well: the devils also believe and tremble.  But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?”

Salvation is a free gift of God. No good works are required. Obey the gospel of Christ by believing and being immersed in water (baptized) obtains that free gift.

MY REPLY:  No, dear friend it is not. Such a position is NOT biblical, nor is it provable. For example

Mt. 19:17 “Who said to him: Why asketh thou me concerning good? One is good, God. But if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments” {Heaven}

John 3:5 “Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”

Luke 23:23-24 “And a certain man said to him: Lord, are they few that are saved? But he said to them:  Strive to enter by the narrow gate; for many, I say to you, shall seek to enter, and shall not be able”.

Please note my friend that “gate” just like “church” in Mt. 16:18-19 is precisely singular.

“No man can take the place of Jesus Christ on earth or in heaven.”

You’re partially correct here. What you claim is true, BUT not fully understood by you. Never ever has the Pope, or the Catholic Church claimed to “replace God.” Nor can it be Objectively proven otherwise.

Mt. 22:36-38 “Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. This is the greatest and the first Commandment.  And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.  On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets.”

From the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church: http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

2105 “The duty of offering God genuine worship concerns man both individually and socially. This is “the traditional Catholic teaching on the moral duty of individuals and societies toward the true religion and the one Church of Christ.” By constantly evangelizing men, the Church works toward enabling them “to infuse the Christian spirit into the mentality and mores, laws and structures of the communities in which [they] live.” The social duty of Christians is to respect and awaken in each man the love of the true and the good. It requires them to make known the worship of the one true religion which subsists in the Catholic and apostolic Church. Christians are called to be the light of the world. Thus, the Church shows forth the kingship of Christ over all creation and in particular over human societies.”

2135 You shall worship the Lord your God” (Mt 4:10). Adoring God, praying to him, offering him the worship that belongs to him, fulfilling the promises and vows made to him are acts of the virtue of religion which fall under obedience to the first commandment.”

YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG. http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com

Thanks Steve, I’ll take a look at it BUT am very busy with my ministry. Should you have any questions; PLEASE let me know.

As a final FYI; being Catholic I used the Catholic version of the bible that we gave to the world {some 1,500 YEARS before the KJB existed]. I use the Douay, the New Revised and the Latin Vulgate.

God Bless you, and thanks for taking time to respond!



I’m Catholic
History of the “Sinners Prayer”

Brief History of the Sinner’s Prayer
(Prayer of Faith) FROM biblestudyguide.org
Note: This ENTIRE Document if from Protestant , non-Catholic Sources [PJM]

Bible study on salvation and the sinner’s prayer.
The sinner’s prayer, as we know it today, was invented by twentieth century preachers as a quick and easy way to save people. Unfortunately, it is a false doctrine.

Second Century
Around the second century, Gnostics taught that baptism was not essential to salvation. Christians, on the other hand, vehemently refuted the Gnostic doctrine and taught that baptism was absolutely necessary to be saved.

16th – 17th Centuries
Later, during the Reformation (sixteenth and seventeenth centuries), Protestant Theology, in opposition to Catholicism, led to the invention of Protestant denominations. Reformation theologians opposed some Catholic doctrines of salvation (e.g., indulgences) while embracing others (e.g., infant baptism). Trying to “reform” the Catholic church, Reformation theologians formulated their own doctrines of salvation from which denominations were created in breaking away from Catholicism. In the process, Gnostic doctrines of salvation (e.g., salvation before baptism, and salvation without baptism) were again popularized in Reformation doctrine. But, the doctrines of Reformed Theology did not develop into the “sinner’s prayer” for hundreds of years after the Reformation.

Luther, Anabaptists
As the Protestant Reformation developed, some churches (under the guidance of doctrines from such men as Martin Luther) taught that salvation was a gift from God and that baptism was not necessary for salvation. Later, Anabaptists broke away from churches adhering to the doctrine of infant baptism under the leadership of such men as Menno Simons and John Smyth, only baptizing adults.

Praying to be Saved
As these Protestant issues were hashed out, man-made religious doctrines increasingly rejected God’s word which requires men to be baptized to be saved (Matt. 18:18-19; Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Pet. 3:21). Since the Anabaptists rejected God’s word concerning baptism while also rejecting the Catholic and Reformed doctrine of infant baptism, they were forced to invent a human doctrine prescribing the point of one’s salvation. Praying to be saved became their substitute for God’s command to be baptized. In the end, baptism was relegated to merely being a symbolic act, not having anything to do with salvation. And in time, the phrase “baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace” was invented and adopted into Protestant doctrine.

Mourner’s Bench Salvation
As man-made doctrines of praying for salvation developed, “mourner’s bench salvation” was invented by men in the eighteenth century, becoming popular in the nineteenth century and dying out in the early twentieth century. This doctrine of salvation asserts that a sinner might be saved if he prays long and hard, at the mourner’s bench. Stories of people spending many long, arduous hours at the mourner’s bench were common. During this time, such phrases as “alter call” and “pray through” were popularized. But today, the mourner’s bench is practically nonexistent, although some churches have preserved the benches as mementoes of bygone revivalist days referred to as “old time religion.”

Pray a Prayer Salvation
In the early twentieth century, revivalist preachers began simplifying their doctrines of salvation. Mourner’s bench salvation was too time consuming and arduous a process making it unappealing. Also, large crusades became popular resulting in denominational preachers desiring a simple way for hundreds of people to be simultaneously saved within just a few minutes. So, preachers began asking people to come to the front and pray a prayer to be saved. By praying the prayer, people were led to believe they were forgiven of their sins and saved. This prayer soon developed into what is called the sinner’s prayer today.

Radio and Television Evangelism

As radio and television evangelism became popular in the twentieth century, preachers again simplified their doctrines of salvation. It was not possible for people listening to the radio or watching television to come to the front of an assembly, have contact with a preacher, and pray with him. Sometimes, people listening to the radio were asked to touch the radio and pray. Other times, people watching television were asked to touch the television and pray. And sometimes, they were not asked to do anything but pray. Since then, many preachers in churches do not ask people to come to the front and pray a sinner’s prayer but simply to pray while sitting in the audience.

Today, Sinner’s Prayer
Today, people are led to believe they can pray a sinner’s pray anywhere and under any condition to be saved. Many preachers and teachers “suggest” prayers for sinners to pray — some are several sentences long and some are only one or two sentences. But more and more, these preachers let people “receive Jesus” any way they want. Unfortunately, people who believe they have been saved by praying a sinner’s prayer have believed a false doctrine originating from men (Eph. 4:14).

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A sinner’s prayer is an evangelical term referring to any prayer of repentance, spoken or read by individuals who feel convicted of the presence of sin in their life and desire to form or renew a personal relationship with God through his son Jesus Christ. It is not intended as liturgical like a creed or a confiteor. It is intended to be an act of initial conversion to Christianity, and also may be prayed as an act of recommitment for those who are already believers in the faith. Often, at the end of a worship service, an evangelist will invite those desiring to “receive Christ” (become converted) to “repeat after me” the words of some form of a sinner’s prayer. It also is frequently found on printed “gospel” tracts, urging folks to “repeat these words from the bottom of your heart”.[1]

The prayer can take on different forms. There is no formula of specific words considered essential, although it usually contains an admission of sin and a petition asking that the Divine (Jesus) enter into the person’s life.

The use of the sinner’s prayer is common within many Protestant churches such as Baptists, evangelicals, fundamentalists, Pentecostals, and charismatics. It is sometimes uttered by Christians seeking redemption or reaffirming their faith in Christ during a crisis or disaster, when death may be imminent. It is generally not used by Roman Catholics, Anglicans, Orthodox, Lutherans, and other ancient traditionally liturgical Christian Churches. Some have noted, however, that its content (though not its intended use) is typically quite similar to the Jesus Prayer of the Eastern Orthodox traditions.

The Sinner’s Prayer as popularly known today has roots in Christian Protestantism and can be found as early as the eighteenth century in revival movement. A biblical example of this may be seen in the contrast related by Jesus between the prayer of a self-righteous Pharisee and that of a repentant tax collector humbling himself before the Lord.

An early proponent of the sinner’s prayer was the well-known American evangelist D.L. Moody.[2] Evangelists such as Billy Graham and evangelistic organizations such as Campus Crusade for Christ brought the concept to prominence in the 20th century

. Televangelists often ask viewers to pray a Sinner’s Prayer with them, one phrase at a time, to become a Christian. Quite commonly, such a prayer appears at the conclusion of a tract and is recited in a religious service or other public service as an invitation for congregants to affirm their faith, sometimes as part of an altar call. The prayer is nowhere found in the Bible, but proponents often point to Romans 10:9-10, Luke 18:13-14, and Matthew 7:7 as their sources.

An early version of the Sinners’ Prayer is found in Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan, published in 1678. … Ninth Stage. (Chapter 18)

Doctrine of “baptismal regeneration”

One criticism comes from traditional Christians who believe that baptism is generally necessary for salvation, such as the Churches of Christ and Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ. This doctrine is called baptismal regeneration because of adherents’ belief that the moment of salvation is experienced as the candidate emerges from immersion in water at the time of baptism.

One such critic has labeled the sinner’s prayer an “apostasy” since the presumption is that salvation can instantly be received (prior to baptism) upon confessing one’s sins and accepting Christ as Savior and Lord without water baptism.

Others see it as an example of apparently instantaneous salvation coming through repentance without water baptism or any kind of work but saying and believing the Sinner’s Prayer, citing the assurance Jesus gave to the penitent thief on a cross next to him during the crucifixion.[Lk 23:39-43]

An opposing position is that the penitent thief was dying under the older Mosaical law which did not require baptism and that before Christ’s death He had authority and did forgive many without any of the salvation requirements found after His Death, Burial and Resurrection found in the rest of the New Testament.[Heb 9:15-17] Additionally, it is unknown whether the thief had been baptized at a stage in life before being crucified. John the Baptizer and Jesus’ disciples already had baptized many individuals. See “What about the thief on the cross?

Evidence for baptism being necessary for salvation includes the conversion of Saul of Tarsus (the Apostle Paul). After Christ had told Saul to enter Damascus where Saul would be told what he “must” do,[Acts 9:6] Saul was blind for three days and was praying during this time.[Acts 9:9-11] Ananias arrived and baptised Saul to wash away his sins. [Acts 22:16] Baptism is also called “washing of regeneration” and is part of the “born again” conversion experience in the Bible.

Absence of biblical example
The absence of any specific example of conversion in the Bible through the Sinner’s Prayer is also used by some to argue against it. Some say it creates within the sinner a false sense of security. Often cited as an example of salvation through repentance without baptism by water is found in the example of the penitent thief on a cross[Luke 23:39-43] Others suggest that the penitent thief on the cross was dying under the Mosaical law (which did not require Baptism), not during the time of the church (established on Pentecost over 7 weeks later), into which baptism signifies entrance. John the Baptizer and Jesus’ disciples already had baptized numerous individuals in that part of the world, so it is theoretically possible that the thief could have been baptized before Jesus promised him eternal life

Possible shallow or insincere commitment
A third major criticism is that many fail to mature as Christians after their supposed conversion using the Sinner’s Prayer. An article in Christianity Today claims that “mediocrity and hypocrisy characterize the lives of many avowed Christians.”

The writer encourages believers to go beyond a sinner’s prayer and “embark on a life fully devoted to the love of God, the love of neighbor, the moral practice of God’s will, and radical, costly discipleship.”

Does the reciter truly understand what the commitment to Christ really means? Praying a sinner’s prayer with someone who isn’t genuinely repentant may create a false sense of security in the one reciting it. According to John 6:44, if a sinner is ready to accept Jesus as Savior, a biblical prerequisite is that the sinner (Christian prospect) has been drawn by the Holy Spirit.

The Sinner’s Prayer:
“Modern apostasy and false teaching that prevents men from being saved.”
The earliest notion of sinners prayer is less than 500 years old. It wasn’t formalized as a theology until around the time of Billy Graham.

No one in the Bible ever prayed for their initial salvation. They did however believe, repent, confess Jesus and be immersed in water for the forgiveness of their sins. The sinners prayer is a an innovation that thwarts God’s plan of salvation. First they replaced believers baptism by immersion with infant baptism by sprinkling. Second they later replaced baptism altogether with the “sinners prayer” so that baptism is no longer even part of the plan of salvation. If you prayed the “sinners prayer” for your salvation, you are still lost in your sins, because it is not what God said to do.

The Sinner’s Prayer

C.S. Lewis used the term “a great cataract of nonsense” to describe how people use a modern idea to construe Bible theology. One such example, perhaps the best example, is a conversion method called the Sinner’s Prayer. It is more popularly known as the Four Spiritual Laws.

Lewis used this term to describe what happens when someone looks backward at the Bible based only on what he or she has known. Instead, an evangelical should first discern conversion practices from Scriptures and then consider the topic in light of two thousand years of other thinkers. As it is, a novel technique popularized through recent revivals has replaced the biblically sound practice.

Today, hundreds of millions hold to a belief system and salvation practice that no one had ever held until relatively recently. The notion that one can pray Jesus into his or her heart and that baptism is merely an outward sign are actually late developments. The prayer itself dates to the Billy Sunday era; however, the basis for talking in prayer for salvation goes back a few hundred years.
Consider the following appeal:

“Just accept Christ into your heart through prayer and he’ll receive you. It doesn’t matter what church you belong to or if you ever do good works. You’ll be born again at the moment you receive Christ. He’s at the door knocking. You don’t even have to change bad habits, just trust Christ as Savior. God loves you and forgives you unconditionally. Anyone out there can be saved if they … Accept Christ, now! Let us pray for Christ to now come into your heart.”

Sound familiar? This method of conversion has had far-reaching effects worldwide as many have claimed this as the basis for their salvation. Yet, what is the historical significance of this conversion? How did the process of rebirth, which Jesus spoke of in John 3, evolve into praying him into one’s heart? I believe it was an error germinating shortly after the Reformation, which eventually caused great ruin and dismay in Christendom. By supplying a brief documentation of its short, historical development, I hope to show how this error has served as “a great cataract of nonsense”.

The Reformation
Although things weren’t ideal after the Reformation, for the first time in over a thousand years the general populace was reading the Scriptures. By the early 1600s, one hundred years after the Reformation was initiated, there were various branches of European Christendom that followed national lines. For instance, Germans followed Martin Luther. There were also Calvinists (Presbyterian), the Church of England (Episcopalian), various branches of Anabaptists and, of course, the Roman church (Catholics). Most of these groups were trying to revive the waning faith of their already traditionalized denominations. However, a consensus had not been reached on issues like rebirth, baptism or salvation–even between Protestants.

The majority still held to the validity of infant baptism even though they disagreed on its significance. Preachers tended to minimize baptism because people hid their lack of commitment behind sayings like “I am a baptized Lutheran and that’s that.” The influence of the preachers eventually led to the popular notion that one was forgiven at infant baptism but not yet reborn. Most Protestants were confused or ambivalent about the connection between rebirth and forgiveness.

The Great Awakening
The Great Awakening was the result of fantastic preaching occurring in Europe and the eastern colonies during the early to mid 1700s. Though ambivalent on the practice of baptism, Great Awakening preachers created an environment that made man aware of his need for an adult confession experience. The experiences that people sought were varied. Jonathan Edwards, George Whitfield and John Wesley furthered ideas of radical repentance and revival. Although there is much to be learned from their messages, they did not solve the problems of the practices associated with baptism and conversion.

Eventually, the following biblical passage written to and inspired for lukewarm Christians became a popular tool for the conversion of non-Christians:
“To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. ….Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent. Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.” (Revelation 3:14-20)

This passage was written explicitly for lukewarm Christians. Now consider how a lecturer named John Webb misused this passage in the mid 1700s as a basis of evangelizing non-Christians:

“Here is a promise of Union to Christ; in these words, I will come in to him. i.e. If any Sinner will but hear my Voice and open the Door, and receive me by Faith, I will come into his Soul, and unite him to me, and make him a living member of that my mystical body of which I am the Head.” (Christ’s Suit to the Sinner, 14)

Preachers heavily relied on Revelation 3:20. By using the first-person tense while looking into the sinner’s eyes, preachers began to speak for Jesus as they exhorted, “If you would just let me come in and dine with you, I would accept you.” Even heathens who had never been baptized responded with the same or even greater sorrow than churchgoers. As a result, more and more preachers of Christendom concluded that baptism was merely an external matter–only an outward sign of an inward grace. In fact, Huldreich Zwingli put this idea forth for the very first time. Nowhere in church history was such a belief recorded. It only appears in Scripture when one begins with a great cataract of nonsense. In other words, it only appears in the New Testament through the imagination of readers influenced by this phenomenon.

Mourner’s Seat
A method originated during the 1730s or ’40s, which was practically forgotten for about a hundred years. It is documented that in 1741 a minister named Eleazar Wheelock had utilized a technique called the Mourner’s Seat. As far as one can tell, he would target sinners by having them sit in the front bench (pew). During the course of his sermon “salvation was looming over their heads.” Afterwards, the sinners were typically quite open to counsel and exhortation. In fact, as it turns out they were susceptible to whatever prescription the preaching doctor gave to them. According to eyewitnesses, false conversions were multiplied. Charles Wesley had some experience with this practice, but it took nearly a hundred years for this tactic to take hold.

Cane Ridge
In 1801 there was a sensational revival in Cane Ridge, Kentucky that lasted for weeks. Allegedly, people barked, rolled over in the aisles and became delirious because there were long periods without food in the intense heat. It resulted in the extreme use and abuse of emotions as thousands left Kentucky with wild notions about rebirth. Today it is generally viewed as a mockery to Christianity.

The excesses in Cane Ridge produced expectations for preachers and those seeking religious experience. A Second Great Awakening, inferior to the first, was beginning in America. Preachers were enamored with the idea that they could cause (manipulate) people into conversion. One who witnessed such nineteenth century hysteria was J. V. Coombs who complained of the technique

“The appeals, songs, prayers and the suggestion from the preacher drive many into the trance state. I can remember in my boyhood days seeing ten or twenty people laying unconscious upon the floor in the old country church. People called that conversion. Science knows it is mesmeric influence, self-hypnotism … It is sad that Christianity is compelled to bear the folly of such movements.” (J.V. Coombs, Religious Delusions, 92ff).

The Cane Ridge Meeting became the paradigm for revivalists for decades. A lawyer named Charles Finney came along a generation later to systemize the Cane Ridge experience through the use of Wheelock’s Mourner’s Seat and Scripture.

It wasn’t until about 1835 that Charles Grandison Finney (1792-1875) emerged to champion the system utilized by Eleazar Wheelock. Shortly after his own conversion he left his law practice and would become a minister, a lecturer, a professor, and a traveling revivalist. He took the Mourner’s Seat practice, which he called the Anxious Seat, and developed a theological system around it. Finney was straightforward about his purpose for this technique and wrote the following comment near the end of his life:

“The church has always felt it necessary to have something of this kind to answer this very purpose. In the days of the apostles, baptism answered this purpose. The gospel was preached to the people, and then all those who were willing to be on the side of Christ, were called out to be baptized. It held the place that the anxious seat does now as a public manifestation of their determination to be Christians”

Finney made many enemies because of this innovation. The Anxious Seat practice was considered to be a psychological technique that manipulated people to make a premature profession of faith. It was considered to be an emotional conversion influenced by some of the preachers’ animal magnetism. Certainly it was a precursor to the techniques used by many twentieth century televangelists.

In opposition to Finney’s movement, John Nevin, a Protestant minister, wrote a book called The Anxious Bench. He intended to protect the denominations from this novel deviation. He called Finney’s New Measures “heresy”, a “Babel of extravagance”, “fanaticism”, and “quackery”. He also said, “With a whirlwind in full view, we may be exhorted reasonably to consider and stand back from its destructive path.” It turns out that Nevin was somewhat prophetic. The system that Finney admitted had replaced biblical baptism, is the vertebrae for the popular plan of salvation that was made normative in the twentieth century by the three Bills — Billy Sunday, Billy Graham and Bill Bright.

However, it wasn’t until the end of Finney’s life that it became evident to everyone and himself that the Anxious Bench approach led to a high fallout rate. By the 1860s Dwight Moody (1837-1899) was the new apostle in American evangelicalism. He took Finney’s system and modified it. Instead of calling for a public decision, which tended to be a response under pressure, he asked people to join him and his trained counselors in a room called the Inquiry Room. Though Moody’s approach avoided some of the errors encountered in Finneyism, it was still a derivative or stepchild of the Anxious Bench system.

In the Inquiry Room the counselors asked the possible convert some questions, taught him from Scripture and then prayed with him. The idea that prayer was at the end of the process had been loosely associated with conversion in the 1700s. By the late 1800s it was standard technique for ‘receiving Christ’ as Moody’s influence spread across both the United States and the United Kingdom. This was where a systematic Sinner’s Prayer began, but was not called as such until the time of Billy Sunday.

R. A. Torrey succeeded Moody’s Chicago-based ministry after his death in 1899. He modified Moody’s approach to include “on the spot” street conversions. Torrey popularized the idea of instant salvation with no strings attached, even though he never intended as much. Nonetheless, “Receive Christ, now, right here” became part of the norm. From that time on it became more common to think of salvation outside of church or a life of Lordship.

Billy Sunday and the Pacific Garden Mission

Meanwhile in Chicago, Billy Sunday, a well-known baseball player from Iowa, had been converted in the Pacific Garden Mission. The Mission was Chicago’s most successful implementation of Moody’s scheme. Eventually, Sunday left baseball to preach. He had great public charm and was one of the first to mix ideas of entertainment with ministry. By the early 1900s he had become a great well-known crusade leader. In his crusades he popularized the Finney-Moody method and included a bit of a circus touch. After fire and brimstone sermons, heavy moralistic messages with political overtones, and humorous if not outlandish behavior, salvation was offered. Often it was associated with a prayer, and at other times a person was told they were saved because they simply walked down his tabernacle’s “sawdust trail” to the front where he was standing. In time people were told they were saved because they publicly shook Sunday’s hand, acknowledging that they would follow Christ.

Billy Sunday died in 1935 leaving behind hundreds of his imitators. More than anything else, Billy Sunday helped crusades become acceptable to all denominations, which eventually led to a change in their theology. Large religious bodies sold out on their reservations toward these new conversion practices to reap the benefits of potential converts from the crusades because of the allure of success.

Both Dwight Moody and Billy Sunday admitted they were somewhat ignorant of church history by the time they had already latched on to their perspectives. This is highly significant because the Anxious Seat phenomenon and offshoot practices were not rooted in Scripture nor in the early church.

Billy Graham, Bill Bright
Billy Graham and his crusades were the next step in the evolution of things. Billy Graham was converted in 1936 at a Sunday-styled crusade. By the late 1940s it was evident to many that Graham would be the champion of evangelicalism. His crusades summed up everything that had been done from the times of Charles Finney through Billy Sunday except that he added respectability that some of the others lacked. In the 1950s Graham’s crusade counselors were using a prayer that had been sporadically used for some time. It began with a prayer from his Four Steps to Peace with God. The original four-step formula came during Billy Sunday’s era called in a tract called Four Things God Wants you to Know. The altar call system of Graham had been refined by a precise protocol of music, trained counselors and a speaking technique all geared to help people ‘accept Christ as Savior.’

In the late 1950s Bill Bright came up with the exact form of the currently popular Four Spiritual Laws so that the average believer could take the crusade experience into the living room of their neighbor. Of course, this method ended with the Sinner’s Prayer. Those who responded to crusades and sermons could have the crusade experience at home when they prayed,

“Lord Jesus, I need You. Thank You for dying on the cross for my sins. I open the door of my life and receive You as my Savior and Lord. Thank You for forgiving my sins and giving me eternal life. Take control of the throne of my life. Make me the kind of person You want me to be.”

Later, in 1977 Billy Graham published a now famous work entitled, How to Be Born Again. For all the Scripture he used, he never once uses the hallmark rebirth event in the second chapter of the book of Acts. The cataract (blind spot) kept him away from the most powerful conversion event in all Scripture. It is my guess that it’s emphasis on baptism and repentance for the forgiveness of sins was incompatible with his approach.

The Living Bible and Beyond
By the late 1960s it seemed that nearly every evangelical was printing some form of the Four Spiritual Laws in the last chapter of their books. Even a Bible was printed with this theology inserted into God’s Word. Thus, in the 1960s, the Living Bible’s translation became the translation of choice for the crusades as follows:

“Even in his own land and among his own people, the Jews, he was not accepted. Only a few welcome and received him. But to all who received him, he gave the right to become children of God. All they needed to do was to trust him to save them. All those who believe this are reborn! –not a physical rebirth resulting from human passion or plan–but from the will of God.”(John 1:11-13, Living Bible, bolds mine)

The bolded words have no support at all in the original Greek. They are a blatant insertion placed by presuppositions of the translator, Kenneth Taylor. I’m not sure that even the Jehovah’s Witnesses have authored such a barefaced insertion in their corrupt Scriptures. In defense of Taylor’s original motives, the Living Bible was created primarily with children in mind. However, the publishers should have corrected the misleading verse in the 1960s. They somewhat cleared it up in the newer LB in the 1990s, only after the damage has been done. For decades mainstream evangelicals were using the LB and circular reasoning to justify such a strong ‘trusting moment’ as salvation, never knowing their Bible was corrupted.

A whole international enterprise of publishers, universities and evangelistic associations were captivated by this method. The phrases, “Receive Christ,” and “Trust Jesus as your personal savior,” filled airwaves, sermons, and books. James Kennedy’s Evangelism Explosion counselor-training program helped make this concept of conversion an international success. Missionaries everywhere were trained with Sinner’s Prayer theology. Evangelicalism had the numbers, the money, the television personas of Graham and Kennedy and any attempt to purport a different plan of salvation would be decried as cultic and “heresy.”

Most evangelicals are ignorant of where their practice came from or how Christians from other periods viewed biblical conversion. C.S. Lewis regarded it as chronological snobbery when we don’t review our beliefs against the conclusions of others:

“Most of all, perhaps, we need intimate knowledge of the past. Not that the past has any magic about it, but because we cannot study the future, and yet need something to set against the present, to remind us that the basic assumptions have been quite different in different periods and that much which seems certain to the uneducated is merely temporary fashion. A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village; the scholar has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age.” (Learning in Wartime, 1939)

The bolded words have no support at all in the original Greek. They are a blatant insertion placed by presuppositions of the translator, Kenneth Taylor. I’m not sure that even the Jehovah’s Witnesses have authored such a barefaced insertion in their corrupt Scriptures. In defense of Taylor’s original motives, the Living Bible was created primarily with children in mind. However, the publishers should have corrected the misleading verse in the 1960s. They somewhat cleared it up in the newer LB in the 1990s, only after the damage has been done. For decades mainstream evangelicals were using the LB and circular reasoning to justify such a strong ‘trusting moment’ as salvation, never knowing their Bible was corrupted.

A whole international enterprise of publishers, universities and evangelistic associations were captivated by this method. The phrases, “Receive Christ,” and “Trust Jesus as your personal savior,” filled airwaves, sermons, and books. James Kennedy’s Evangelism Explosion counselor-training program helped make this concept of conversion an international success. Missionaries everywhere were trained with Sinner’s Prayer theology. Evangelicalism had the numbers, the money, the television personas of Graham and Kennedy and any attempt to purport a different plan of salvation would be decried as cultic and “heresy.”

Most evangelicals are ignorant of where their practice came from or how Christians from other periods viewed biblical conversion. C.S. Lewis regarded it as chronological snobbery when we don’t review our beliefs against the conclusions of others:

“Most of all, perhaps, we need intimate knowledge of the past. Not that the past has any magic about it, but because we cannot study the future, and yet need something to set against the present, to remind us that the basic assumptions have been quite different in different periods and that much which seems certain to the uneducated is merely temporary fashion. A man who has lived in many places is not likely to be deceived by the local errors of his native village; the scholar has lived in many times and is therefore in some degree immune from the great cataract of nonsense that pours from the press and the microphone of his own age.” (Learning in Wartime, 1939)

While most do this unknowingly, evangelicals are skewing church auditoriums all over the world from a clear picture of conversion with a nonsensical practice.

Written and copyright by Steven Francis Staten. This article is an overview of a book being written on the origins of the Sinner’s Prayer.

10 Things to remember if Pope Francis Bugs you by Fr. Longenecker

Ten Things to Remember if Pope Francis Upsets You
July 15, 2014 By Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Many conservative Catholics are experiencing a range of negative feelings about Pope Francis. When a headline screams that he stated that 2% of Catholic clergy are pedophiles, that he “promises to solve the celibacy problem” that he doesn’t want to convert Evangelicals or that he doesn’t judge a homosexual who “searches for the Lord and has goodwill” they experience confusion, anger, resentment, bewilderment and fear.
Some have given up on Pope Francis. Others say he is “the false prophet” who will accompany the anti Christ in the end times. Others don’t like his dress sense, grumble about his media gaffes and some think they are all intentional and that he is a very shrewd Jesuit who wants to undermine the Catholic faith. The sensationalism doesn’t do any good. These folks should step back and realize they are (in their own way) being just as sensational about Pope Francis as liberals were about Pope Benedict when they called him “God’s Rottweiler” or “Nazi Ratzi” and said he was a closet homosexual and a hater of women.

So if Pope Francis upsets you–and by the way–I’ve had my own moments of head scratching over Francis–here are ten things to remember which help put things in perspective and maintain some balance.

The first thing to remember is that he is the pope. He is not going to change Catholic doctrine or moral teaching. He can’t and he knows that. He may be a “reformer” but there’s only so much he can do. His statement on women priests is an indicator of that: “The door is closed to women’s ordination.”

The second thing to remember is that we have been blessed for the last thirty years with two stellar popes. Most of us don’t remember any other kind of papacy. Both Pope St John Paul II and Benedict XVI have been men of outstanding holiness, intellectual accomplishment, courage and perception, and they were very much bookends. They supported one another. Francis is different, and if he is not their equal in those attributes, he has other strengths. Instead of criticizing him for what he’s not we should be loving him for who he is.

The third thing to remember is that Popes come and go. Each one brings different gifts and different personalities to the papacy. God knows what he’s doing, and if a particular pope challenges your faith…well faith isn’t much good unless it’s challenged. What kind of faith is it it is nothing but certainty and confidence all the time? Think of St Peter walking on the water. That’s faith.

Fourth: is your faith in Jesus Christ and the faith of the church or is it in the pope? Catholics should love the pope, but they should love Jesus more. If one pope comes along who you find difficult to love and understand, take heart. You weren’t supposed to love him that much anyway. It’s okay to love the pope, but those who blame Catholics for idolizing the pope? Well, sometimes they have a point.

Fifth: Check out the times in which we live. With modern social media, every conversation can become a global headline. This is a pope who loves people and relates to them. Here is a pope who connects with people, talks with people, shares with people and embraces people. When this happens there is a multitude of communication risks that take place. The pope says “X” but the person hears “Y” and reports “Z”. Hasn’t this ever happened to you? You’ve had a conversation and it was reported to a third or fourth party and you shriek, “But that’s not what I said!” The only way to avoid this is for the pope to be a silent figurehead in the apostolic palace just waving to people and never saying anything except in a formal papal statement. Maybe some people think this is what the pope should be, and some popes have been content to be that sort of figurehead. Not Francis.

Six: Media people love to write attention grabbing headlines and they know conflict sells. People love to read the gossip. They love to read the scandal. They love to pick up on the negativities. If a sour person can put a negative and shocking headline on a story he will. That’s life. Read More.

We’re foolish to believe the headlines and we’re even more foolish to believe the headlines that do nothing but feed our own negative bias. Example: a liberal who disliked Pope Benedict would gravitate towards headlines that portrayed him as God’s Rottweiler and Nazi Ratzi. They were false but the foolish person swallowed the headline because it reinforced his already existing bias. Do you dislike Francis? Are you gullible enough to pick up the negative headlines about Francis and believe them without listening to the whole story? Do you believe the headline without even reading the whole article? Then it’s your partially your fault.

Seven: Remember Francis is from Argentina. The church scene there is very different from the atmosphere in the USA and Europe. He surprises us in many ways. He surprises right wing conservative American Catholics with what seems to be left leaning economic positions. He surprises liberal Catholics with his emphasis on the devil and the battle against demons. He surprises those in the developed world with his passion for the poor and his ability to turn over some tables. This is part of his gift to the church: that he is an outsider and as such he surprises and disturbs. Isn’t that part of what the gospel should do? Its supposed to make us uncomfortable. Its supposed to make us re-examine our preconceptions, our self righteousness and our certain certainties. Isn’t that what Jesus did to the religious establishment? Sure it’s scary at times. So buckle your seat belt.

Eight: Remember that you don’t have to pay serious attention to every single word that falls from the mouth of the pope. He’s not some sort of divine oracle, and the more he talks informally to people, the more he’s likely to be misunderstood, make gaffes and be mis reported. It’s okay to shrug your shoulders and let him get on with being pope and for you to get on with your Catholic life of prayer, worship, study, service and the pursuit of sanctity. So be a good Catholic and don’t worry about the pope. Even if he’s a corrupt monster (and we’ve had some popes like that) the church goes on. The gates of hell will not prevail against her–and neither will the odd pope who doesn’t fit your ideal.

Nine: The Catholic Church is universal. It’s a very big family. Not everything or everyone will be to your taste. Speaking of taste–how much of your discomfort with Pope Francis is simply a matter of taste? Have you done your homework, read what he has really said, watched what he has really done? Has any of it actually contradicted formal church teaching? Is any of it heresy? No. Maybe you don’t like Pope Francis and maybe you actually think he’s a lousy pope. Maybe you think he could handle the media better and may be you worry about some of his opinions. So welcome to the muddled mystery that is the Catholic Church. If you want a church to your own liking I guess you better go join a sect because the Catholic Church is never going to be 100% what anybody likes. Somebody once asked me after I became a Catholic whether I “liked the Catholic Church.” I said, “No. I didn’t join the Catholic Church because I liked it. If I was joining a church I liked I’d still be an Anglican. I joined it because it was the true church.”

Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/standingonmyhead/ten-things-to-remember-if-pope-francis-upsets-you#ixzz37duQ4ssC

Two meanings: One Teaching from Dr Ambrosio

Parable of the Sower and the Seed – a Double Meaning
Dr. D’AmbrosioParable of the Sower-
Farming the Seeds of Faith
Dr. Marcellino D’Ambrosio

To Listen to this article as read by Dr. D’Ambrosio, CLICK HERE!

twitter – coming soon!

Seeds of Faith, Catholic, Jesus
I’ve always loved gardening. Seeds I’ve planted include carrot, cucumber, and of course, zucchini. In each case, I’ve planted seeds in neat rows, expecting nearly all of them to sprout and yield fruit.

But the farmer in Jesus’ parable (Mat 13:1-23) uses the broadcast method. Lots of seed cast everywhere. And predictably, many of these seeds do not produce. Some get eaten by birds. Some sprout but then wither. Some seedlings get choked out by weeds. Finally a few yield varying amounts of grain.

At the end of the story, Jesus says “they who have ears, let them hear.” In other words, he wants us to learn something and take some action steps.

To respond to this parable adequately, we must view it from two different angles. The first is to look at the story as if we are the seed. Many who hear the gospel never seem to “get it.” The message is stolen before it ever takes root. Then there are the 50% of Catholic kids who receive the sacraments but disappear somewhere between age 18 and 35. Shallow roots fail to equip them to take the heat of our pagan culture. Then there are the 89% of lifelong, regular churchgoers who, according to George Gallup, have values and lifestyles identical to those of their pagan neighbors. Their faith has been neutralized by bad theology and worldliness so though they look like wheat plants, their religion is fruitless. Then there are those who stay out of serious sin, manage to do some good for some people, but all in all produce a mediocre harvest Finally come the few who are not satisfied with just getting by. They sink their roots deep into Scripture, Tradition, prayer and the sacraments, and produce a bumper crop. We call these people saints.

Pope John Paul II< Mother Theresa, Saints, Catholic Faith
In speaking to us as seed, Jesus is saying: “be careful. If you don’t make the effort to get thoroughly rooted in your Catholic faith, you just might not make it. If you do manage to survive, you might produce absolutely nothing. But you are called to bear much fruit (John 15), to yield 100 fold, to be a saint, to leave a mark on the lives of many that will last forever. Don’t settle for anything less!”

On the other hand, we can look at the parable as if we were the farmer. Vatican II and all the Popes since have stately repeatedly and unequivocally that each of us is called to be an evangelizer, to tell others that Jesus Christ changes lives eternally and that the place to encounter him most fully is within the Catholic Church. “But,” you may protest, “I tried it a few times and got nowhere. I just don’t have the personality, don’t have the gift”

Jesus, the Son of God, indisputably had both the personality and the gift. Yet when he sowed seed, much of it still ended up as bird food. Consider the thousands he fed with loaves and fishes, the multitude that heard his sermon on the mount, the throngs that welcomed him on Palm Sunday. Yet on the day of Pentecost, there were only 120 left in the cenacle, awaiting the Holy Spirit. Notice, though, that the fruit borne by these 120 plants eventually filled the whole world!

Catholic Faith, Growing in Faith
To get the few that bear fruit, lots of seed must be sown by lots of people. So regardless of whether or not we think we have green thumbs, we farmers are being commanded through this parable to get the seed out there, sowing it everywhere we go, undeterred by the birds, the weeds, and the scorching sun.

So the parable of the sower has a twofold message: as seed, our job is to get busy growing. As farmers, our job is to get busy sowing.

This was originally published in Our Sunday Visitor as a reflection upon the readings for the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time, liturgical cycle A (Is 55:10-11, Ro 8:18-23; Mt 13:1-23). It is reproduced here with the permission of the author.

Download and Print The Prodigal Son

To download, print and share the Parable of the Sower – Click Here!

For more Catholic catechetical religious education resources for stronger faith formation, visit the Crossroads Initiative Homepage.
Win a Free CD – Catholic Online Resources

To sign up for our free weekly e-mail with Dr. D'Ambrosio's commentary on the Sunday readings, liturgical feasts, updates on where Dr. D will be speaking, a chance to WIN a FREE CD and MORE, CLICK HERE!