- Formalism: the practice or the doctrine of strict
adherence to prescribed or external forms (as in religion or art)
In 1990,
Matthew Hood was baptized in the Catholic Church as an infant. Thirty years later, in August of 2020, while Hood
was an ordained Catholic priest in the Archdiocese of Detroit, he decided to go
back and watch his childhood baptism on video.
But something bothered him when he saw that video. He realized that the wrong formula had been used in his baptism, therefore,
according to the Church, he was not actually baptized!
So, exactly,
what were the implications of that?
Would he have to be re-baptized?
Would this affect his ordination as a priest? Or is it no big deal?
It turns out
that, to the Catholic Church, it is indeed a big deal. This caused quite a stir in the Catholic
world. According to one Catholic Answers article, this story “unleashed
a torrent of anxieties and questions around the sacraments.” See here:
Why the Fuss About Sacraments? |
Catholic Answers
So What’s the Problem?
The person
who performed Hood’s baptism was Mark Springer, a deacon in the Catholic Church
at that time. But according to his
archdiocese, the deacon is now retired “and no longer in active ministry.” The problem is not the fact that he was a
deacon, but that the wording in the ritual was unacceptable.
So, what was
this great deviation from the Catholic faith, this great error, in the
prescribed formula in Matthew Hood’s infant baptism? What exactly was it that was done wrong?
Well,
according to the Church, Springer used the phrase, “We baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the
Holy Spirit,” rather than, “I baptize you
in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” No kidding.
The Vatican said that using “we” is not acceptable, since it is not the
congregation, nor the community that baptizes, but rather, Jesus, Himself, working
through the person baptizing. “I” is
signifying that a baptism is done through the singular person of Jesus Christ. Otherwise, the baptism is invalid, according
to the Catholic Church.
Domino Effect
It is a
Catholic rule that a man who wishes to become a priest must have been properly
baptized. Since Matthew Hood was not
correctly baptized, that meant that his own ordination to the priesthood was
null and void. Furthermore, this brought
into question the marriages of each and every couple that he had performed, and
that all the confessions that he presided over were void (meaning that those
confessing were not forgiven after all), all the masses that he celebrated were
invalid, and no one was rightly “confirmed” under him. All because of a faulty wording in his
baptism ritual!
Questions
Worse yet,
where was Hood’s soul in the
meantime? By the Catholic Church’s own
standards, he was not even saved (CCC
# 1257), much less was he an actual priest.
So, hypothetically, what about those individuals who went to (Catholic)
Confession under Hood, but may have died shortly after, being supposedly
absolved (forgiven of their sins)?
Apparently, they would not be forgiven after all, would they? Do they end up in Hell because of a
mis-wording in Hood’s childhood baptism?
What about those who were “married” under Hood and died since? Were these living in sin (living together unmarried)
and raising illegitimate children, only to be in Hell now?
Are these poor,
unaware Catholics guilty due to the mistakes of their leaders? Is God a formalist? Is He so nitpicky and so hairsplitting in the
Catholic Church’s eyes that He would (just because of a technicality) consign a
person to Hell whose heart may have actually been right when he confessed his
sins?
Would God really eternally condemn those who are “illegally” married through no
fault of their own? All over a slight
mis-wording of a sacrament ritual? Didn’t Jesus say that God looks at the heart rather than a person’s performance
of rituals (Mark 7:1-8; Luke 11:37-42; 18:9-14)? Indeed He did.
Not God’s Nature
All this confusion
is actually an insult to God. It goes against His graceful, loving and
merciful nature to intervene in mankind’s affairs when we are powerless to do
anything (even when our hearts are right) - for example, like in the case of
the thief on the cross (Luke 23:39-43).
But this
puts Catholics in an awkward position.
On the one hand, it is an absolute necessity
(for Catholics) to have the proper wording for sacraments. But on the other hand, they’ll admit that
this can’t limit God, since He is omnipotent.
So, to avoid the Catholic Church’s obvious contradiction toward God’s
nature, Catholics will try to backpedal and say, “Well, God would do the right
thing in the case of an invalid marriage or confession,” or they’ll say, “The
person would still obtain SOME grace… although not the fullness of grace which sacraments normally provide.”
But it is
not in God’s nature to allow such a petty restriction to keep someone out of
Heaven. Catholics may claim that the
people in these circumstances would go to Purgatory, and not Hell. But this argument doesn’t fly, since there is no Purgatory. It is not a biblical concept. See here:
http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-false-doctrine-of-purgatory-part-1.html
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/03/the-false-doctrine-of-purgatory-part-2.html
Furthermore,
there is no need for perfectly performed/worded sacraments in God’s eyes.
Good Intentions, Bad Theology
One Catholic
article stated:
“Yet in
this case, Springer almost literally destroyed the village in order to save
it.”
See here:
Priest baptism story offers memo for
reformers: Look before you leap | Crux (cruxnow.com)
What the quote
means is that Springer attempted to save everyone by baptizing them, but ended
up endangering them through a not-so-carefully worded ritual.
This is the
mentality of the Catholic world. But
this is all a misunderstanding of biblical principles.
The truth
is, baptism does not save anyone when
done correctly, nor does it destroy
anyone when done incorrectly! See these
relevant articles:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/05/on-baptism-part-1-few-basics.html
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/06/on-baptism-part-2-bible-verses.html
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/07/on-baptism-part-3-more-verses.html
What About Sacraments?
To start
with, the concept of sacraments is an unbiblical
one. Sacraments don’t save anyone, and grace doesn’t even come from
sacraments (Proverbs 3:34; James 4:6)!
In fact, the performance of sacraments is actually trying to buy the grace of God, which is
impossible (Romans 11:6).
I have an
article written specifically on that topic which I hope can be of help. See here:
https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/search?q=sacraments
Apparently,
if a sacramental ritual is not precise,
it won’t “work.” It almost appears that
the Catholic Church sees the ritual of sacraments as akin to using a spell or
incantation, where the wording has to be precise, rather than seeing baptism
simply as a Christian ordinance (as intended by God).
But there is no specific formula for baptism
in Scripture, other than it being done in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). Furthermore, we see no babies being baptized
in the Bible. All the examples of baptism
in Scripture show that it was only done for those who were of age, repentant,
and who knew what they were doing (for example, Matthew 3:13-16; Acts 2:40-41;
8:12-13; 8:36-38; 9:17-18; 10:44-48; 16:29-33; 18:7-8; 19:3-5).
And by the
way, nothing in Scripture says that Jesus is the one doing the baptism
through the baptizer. So the “I/we”
distinction is irrelevant. Baptism is simply
a picture of what happened to you at salvation… you die to self, i.e., to the “old
you” and are buried, putting to death the old man; and then you are raised to
new life in Jesus Christ.
Repercussions
Research by
the Catholic Church showed that there were a total of 782 presumed invalid
baptisms due to Hood’s ministry of 13 years, and the Church was still trying to
remedy this.
See
here:
By the way, this was not an isolated
case. A similar incident happened in
Arizona (and Oklahoma, as well):
Conclusion
One article I saw had a meme, a
depiction of a priest about to give the last rites to a Catholic lying in
bed. The caption reads: “Father, before
you hear my confession and give me last rites, I’d like to see video proof of
your valid baptism.”
Of course this is silly, but it does
address a valid point. When one is about
to die, he desperately needs to know
that his soul is safe and he is going to Heaven. If something as trivial as a slight
mis-wording of a ritual can prevent him from getting into Heaven, he should not
be in a church that teaches such and should call for someone who can share the true gospel (of salvation by faith alone)
with him.
Catholics are consumed with the idea
of grace coming through sacraments and rituals, but once you open that can of worms, it opens the door to
all sorts of problems.
Remember, it is Catholics who are the formalists, not God. We should be thankful that He looks at the heart.
