Saturday, November 5, 2022

CATHOLICISM PORTRAYS GOD AS A FORMALIST

 

 

  •      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:

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/24/us/michigan-invalid-baptisms/index.html#:~:text=CNN%20Store-,Catholic%20church%20in%20Michigan%20still%20trying%20to%20remedy%20hundreds,baptisms%20performed%20over%2013%20years&text=Father%20Matthew%20Hood%2C%20a%20priest,the%20problem%20with%20the%20language.

By the way, this was not an isolated case.  A similar incident happened in Arizona (and Oklahoma, as well):

https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-catholic-priest-resigns-over-wrongly-used-word-during-baptism-what-you-should-know-about-the-mix-up

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.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment