SACRAMENTS (God's Grace for Sale)

Today we will take a look at the concept of sacraments. The word “sacrament” comes from the Latin “sacramentum”, signifying something sacred, namely, an oath. It also denotes a “mystery.” Sacraments may be used differently by various groups and can be found in the Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, and even in some Protestant churches. But since they are most prominent in the Catholic Church, we will deal with the Catholic view of sacraments.


Portrait of a Sacrament

So what are Catholic sacraments, and how important are they?

There are many descriptions of them, e.g., sacraments are said to be visible signs of an invisible reality… visible signs instituted by Christ to give grace… signs that really effect what they symbolize… outward signs of inward grace… signs that accomplish what they signify… vehicles of grace… signs that cause us to be united to Christ in the deepest and greatest possible way... etc., etc.

Here are some statements from Catholic sources concerning their importance:

The whole liturgical life of the Church revolves around the Eucharistic sacrifice and the sacraments. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1113)

By His power He [Christ] is present in the sacraments… (Pope Paul VI, “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” a Constitution of the Second Vatican Council, Paragraph 7)

His purpose also was that they might accomplish the work of salvation which they had proclaimed, by means of sacrifice and sacraments, around which the entire liturgical life revolves. (Ibid., Paragraph 6)

Sacraments are "powers that come forth" from the Body of Christ, which is ever-living and life-giving. They are actions of the Holy Spirit at work in his Body, the Church. They are "the masterworks of God" in the new and everlasting covenant. (CCC #1116)

The Church affirms that for believers the sacraments of the New Covenant are necessary for salvation. (CCC #1129)

Therefore, sacraments are extremely important to the Catholic Church. They are foundational to its existence and welfare, since they are “necessary for salvation.”

So, according to the Catholic Church, how does a sacrament actually work?

Celebrated worthily in faith, the sacraments confer the grace that they signify. They are efficacious because in them Christ himself is at work: it is he who baptizes, he who acts in his sacraments in order to communicate the grace that each sacrament signifies. (CCC #1127)

The sacraments are efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us. The visible rites by which the sacraments are celebrated signify and make present the graces proper to each sacrament. They bear fruit in those who receive them with the required dispositions. (CCC #1131)

What the Catechism is saying is that sacraments are symbols that have the power to “confer” / furnish / supply grace and to actually do what they symbolize (e.g., baptism actually washes away sin, and the Eucharist actually becomes Jesus’ flesh and blood, etc.)


Warning

Finally, what happens if one does not believe it?

The Council of Trent declares:

If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify; or, that they do not confer that grace on those who do not place an obstacle thereunto; as though they were merely outward signs of grace or justice received through faith, and certain marks of the Christian profession, whereby believers are distinguished amongst men from unbelievers; let him be anathema. (Session 7, Canon VI)

If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for the obtaining of grace; let him be anathema. (Session 7, Canon VIII)

So, we see here that if one does not believe what the Catholic Church teaches about the sacraments, he is declared “anathema” by the Catholic Church. An anathema is the gravest (most severe) form of excommunication, where one is eternally condemned to Hell unless and until he does penance to the Church’s satisfaction (see the online New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia – under the topic, “anathema”).


Symbol or Reality?

There is a confusing problem with the Catholic idea of sacraments. In the Eucharist, for example, Catholics believe that Christ is somehow present in a “sacramental” way (whatever that means). But if sacraments “accomplish what they signify”, if they actually do what they symbolize, then why do they need to symbolize at all? Catholics believe the Eucharist is not JUST a symbol, but is both “the real thing” (i.e., Christ’s actual body and blood) and at the same time, a SYMBOL of the “real thing.” But a certain object cannot be BOTH a symbol of something else AND its reality. It is either one or the other. If it is a symbol of a particular thing, then it is not that particular thing. If it is literally the “real thing,” then there is no need for it to be a “symbol of itself.” You can’t have it both ways. This is simply equivocation. No such thing exists in Scripture, nor in the modern world that we live in.


A Biblical Concept?

The concept of sacraments with “special powers” that can earn (or control the amount of) grace given to someone is certainly not biblical. How can a person “control grace” by rituals, objects and ceremonies? How can grace be dependent on works (especially grace for salvation)? It isn’t. But this is a typical example of the works-based salvation of the Catholic Church.

But grace is not something you can buy through the performance of a ritual. By its very definition, grace excludes works. Grace is usually defined as “the UNMERITED favor of God.” It cannot be earned or bought.

Then how do we get grace, according to the Bible? Grace is received by FAITH, not by works, ceremonies or “sacraments.” (Romans 4:16; 5:2; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8-9) See also our three-part series on “Faith Alone” and our “Sola Fide Revisited” article, elsewhere on this blog.


Conclusion

Some may accuse us of being “anti-sacramental,” and automatically assume that we believe that “matter is evil.” But this is ridiculous and does not necessarily follow. We don’t think that matter is “evil,” nor do we make it a “spirit versus matter” issue.

And we are not against symbolism. Symbols are fine. Symbols help us to understand many concepts. They are very useful and meaningful in our everyday lives and in Scripture. But they don’t save anyone. One is saved by simply trusting in the work and the suffering of Jesus Christ on the cross for us, and that alone.

Not only is the Catholic concept of sacraments NOT IN SCRIPTURE, it is also AGAINST Scripture. It is a system of obtaining the priceless grace of God by works and rituals. Any system that can buy the grace of God is corrupt and anti-biblical, and anyone who believes in this view of sacraments is in serious doctrinal error, whether they claim to be Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant.

THE SACRAMENT OF ANOINTING OF THE SICK

 

Today, we will continue our series on the Catholic sacraments.  This is the fifth one that I’ll be addressing and it is called Anointing of the Sick, sometimes referred to as “Extreme Unction” (CCC #1512).

As you can tell by the name, it deals with anointing a sick person with oil in order for him to be healed.  Now, Protestants don’t normally have an issue with this concept, since it is a biblical one:

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.  Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.  (James 5:14-16)

And Catholics claim to base this sacrament mainly on this particular passage.  But according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, they claim a special power in this sacrament, the effects being:

·         The Anointing of the Sick unites the sick person to the passion of Christ, for his own good and that of the whole Church;

·         gives the person the strength, peace, and courage to endure in a Christian manner the sufferings of illness or old age;

·         imparts the forgiveness of sins, if the sick person was not able to obtain it through the sacrament of Penance;

·         provides for the restoration of health, if it is conducive to the salvation of his soul;

·         helps the sick person in the preparation for passing over to eternal life. (CCC #1532)

 

Preparing for the Final Journey?

In the Catholic Church, the Anointing of the Sick is also associated with a practice called the “Last Rites,” which is actually a collection of prayers and sacraments given to a person who may be in grave danger of dying.  The sacraments involved in the Last Rites are the Anointing of the Sick, Confession and the reception of the Eucharist (Holy Communion).

CCC #1523 talks of preparing for the final journey.  CCC #1525 says:

“Thus, just as the sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, and the Eucharist form a unity called ‘the sacraments of Christian initiation,’ so too it can be said that Penance, the Anointing of the Sick and the Eucharist as viaticum constitute at the end of Christian life ‘the sacraments that prepare for our heavenly homeland’ or the sacraments that complete the earthly pilgrimage.”

But this is deceptive in the sense that it teaches that there are rituals that must be done to enter Heaven.  We don’t get saved by works, sacraments, or rituals and we don’t maintain our salvation by works, sacraments, or rituals.  We get there, and stay there, by faith, that is, faith in the work and suffering of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary (Galatians 3:1-5).  Trusting in that alone will save us in our “final journey.”

Priests or Elders?

In CCC #1519, the Catechism specifically mentions the “priests of the Church” as one of the principal elements in this sacrament (Anointing of the Sick), and it footnotes James 5:14, which tells us to call for the elders of the church. 

I’ve covered this several times on this blog, and I want to emphasize it again: the word for “elders” in James 5:14 is the Greek “presbuteros.”  It is NOT the same biblical term used for “priests.”   The biblical term for “priest” in the New Testament is the Greek “hiereus.”  “Hiereus” is the same Greek word used for Old Testament priests, as well (e.g., Matthew 12:4-5; Luke 17:14; John 1:19; Acts 4:1and 6:7; Hebrews 8:4).  Furthermore, “hiereus” is also used of the universal priesthood of all believers (Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:6).  Even in the Old Testament, “elders” and priests were two different groups.  So, according to the God-breathed Scriptures, an elder is not the same thing as a priest.  This is a constant diversion used by Catholics.  See these links:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2010/03/priesthood.html

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2018/07/where-are-all-priests-in-new-testament.html

Authority to Forgive?

When the elders in the local church pray for someone according to James 5:14-16, the person can have a reasonable expectation to be healed, and even forgiven (v. 15).  I actually like the way the Catechism puts it:

“… the liturgy has never failed to beg the Lord that the sick person may recover his health if it would be conducive to his salvation.” (CCC #1512 – Emphasis added)

There is nothing wrong with praying for someone’s health, and it is certainly not wrong to pray for his forgiveness.  But the forgiveness does not come from the elders, nor does it come from any ritual that they perform.  They don’t have special power to grant forgiveness.  That is a Catholic misunderstanding of Scripture.  We can indeed forgive one another for personal sins committed against each other, but absolution (a “clean slate” or total forgiveness of sins) is something that God alone can do.  Furthermore, any Christian can biblically recognize and declare that someone is forgiven (absolved), but only based on the person’s positive response to the gospel of Jesus Christ, not on any special authority of a man.

Conclusion

As I said earlier, Protestants don’t (generally) have an issue with the concept of anointing of the sick (which is biblical), but Extreme Unction is a different and non-biblical issue.  Extreme Unction is a very dangerous concept that many people (even some non-Catholics) believe.  It is dangerous because they are trusting that this last-minute Catholic ritual can save the soul of the dying person!  But once again, this is not so.  Priestly rituals are works, and no works can save an individual.  But the Catholic Church wants its priests involved in all areas of the lives of its members.  Please remember that the Catholic Church intends to impose itself upon all Catholics through dependence on the Church (priesthood) from cradle to grave.  In this system, it is the priests (not Jesus) who are the mediators between man and God (1 Timothy 2:5).  

But Extreme Unction is a false hope.  It would be far more advantageous (and biblical) for someone to share the simple gospel with the person on his death bed.  They say that the last thing to go before death (concerning our five senses) is our hearing.  I believe that this is so the gospel can be shared with them, even if they seem unresponsive.  If one can hear the gospel, he can respond (at least internally) and be saved.  The Bible promises that whosoever will call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved (Romans 10:13).

The repentant thief on the cross next to Jesus (Luke 23:39-43) was a good example of this simple salvation.  He could do no good works – he could not come down from his cross and get baptized, give to the poor, or help anyone cross the street.  All he could do was call on Jesus… and he did!  He is now memorialized in the sacred Scriptures as an eternal witness and example to all – obtaining salvation is free to all who come to Jesus.  It is simply a matter of a changed heart when you surrender to God and trust in His Son, Jesus Christ. (Ezekiel 36:26; John 3:16; 11:25; James 4:7)

This sacrament, this Catholic version of Anointing of the Sick is ultimately an unbiblical false hope and a twisting of the Scriptures.

 

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.

 

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM

Ok, so we’ve gone through five of the seven Catholic sacraments so far.  These last two that I will be addressing would be considered “heavyweights” in the world of Catholic sacraments.  Today, I will deal with the sacrament of baptism and next time, the Eucharist.  Catholics would probably consider these two to be the most important of all the sacraments.

Anyway, I have dealt with the topic of baptism before, so you can go to these links to first get a good foundation:

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

Differing Views

Of course, we (Protestants, Catholics and others) all recognize baptism as a very important and meaningful ritual. 

Most Protestants see baptism as a profound profession of faith.  It is an ordinance (not a sacrament) within the church, a symbol of what happens to a person when he first believed.  In the ceremony of baptism, he is immersed/buried in a “watery grave” in which he “dies to self.”  The “old man” (old self) is put to death, and coming up out of the water, the “new man” is resurrected to a new life:

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4). 

With (most) Protestants, the idea is that a person is first saved and given a new heart from God… then, and ONLY then, should he be baptized, this being a symbolic gesture to declare to the world that he has voluntarily chosen to identify with the Lord Jesus Christ and thereafter, to live for Him. 

Catholics, on the other hand, also see the ritual of baptism as a profession of faith to identify with Christ, but also as a sacrament in which a person is “meriting grace” from God.  To them, it is a sacrament of regeneration.  It is not only symbolic to them, but it also “accomplishes what it signifies” (CCC #1155; 1215; 1234).  It is supposedly a “visible sign of a hidden reality.”  When the Catholic is baptized, he is literally having his original sins washed away.  According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

“Holy Baptism is the basis of the whole Christian life, the gateway to life in the Spirit… and the door which gives access to the other sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from sin and reborn as sons of God; we become members of Christ, are incorporated into the Church and made sharers in her mission: ‘Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word.’” (CCC #1213 – Emphasis added)

Notice the underlined portions of the quote above.  The Catholic Church is specifically saying that this event (baptism) is what saves them.  According to them, it is water baptism that makes them eligible to enter Heaven.

What About Infant Baptism?

Most people know that the Catholic Church baptizes babies, more so than adults.  But is this practice scriptural?  Can a mere infant make a profession of faith and identify with Christ.  No, he can’t. 

You won’t find any specific biblical examples where little children are baptized.  But some will argue that this concept is implied in the text of certain passages, for example Acts 16:33, where the Philippian jailer and his whole household were baptized.  But that is simply speculation.  We just don’t know if there were infants in this family or not.  

But Catholics (and even some Protestants) claim that baptism is valid for infants because it is based on the parents’ faith.  They will point to passages like 1 Corinthians 7:14, which says that the faith of the believer sanctifies (sets apart) the children and shows that you intend to raise your children in the Lord, but this doesn’t ultimately save them.  The child still has to become mature enough to understand what is going on.  An infant certainly can’t do that.  Until that time, he is innocent.

But even if it were true that they did baptize babies and little children (those who were not accountable due to their age/state/understanding), we would still have to deal with the concept of biblical salvation – where one is saved by faith, apart from works.

One might argue that baptism is not a work, and that the infant being baptized is doing nothing at all, since he is incapable.  But this does nothing to help the Catholic case.  Since the child is incapable, neither can he make a decision to follow Christ, a decision which is absolutely necessary for salvation.  As I just said, very young children are simply innocent (and safe) in the eyes of God, at least until the child can make such decisions in his life.

The concept of infant baptism leans heavily toward the idea that baptism saves a person.  And I believe that’s why the Catholic Church teaches this.  But whether this notion is promoted by Catholic, Protestant, or anyone else, this denies the biblical teaching of faith (apart from the merits of work) for salvation (Romans 3:28; 4:4-5; 11:6).  It denies that Christ’s work on the cross was sufficient.  In fact, any sacrament, ritual or celebration that claims to “merit grace” contradicts and denies the finished and perfect work of Jesus Christ.

An Oxymoron

So, once again, the question is, does baptism save a person?   You know, any unsaved person can potentially get baptized, but it does nothing to change his heart.  His heart has to be changed before he ever decides to get baptized.

Being a believer is synonymous with being saved.  There are no saved unbelievers, nor unsaved believers.  That would be an oxymoron.  If you are unsaved, then (by definition) you are not a believer, and if you are saved, you already are a believer.

So, if it is true that baptism saves you, then aren’t you (by definition) an unbeliever until the point that you are baptized?  Yes, you would be.  But the truth is, baptism is for believers only (Mark 16:16), and there are absolutely no unbelievers in Scripture who were baptized.  The point is, you must be born again BEFORE you are baptized, therefore baptism doesn’t save anyone.

Conclusion

Another oxymoron in the Catholic Church is, as I mentioned before, the concept of “meriting” grace.  This is supposedly what sacraments do, but not only is this unbiblical, it is also illogical.  No one can “merit” grace, since, by definition, grace is the unmerited favor of God (Romans 11:6).  Even Catholics agree with this definition (CCC #1996).

In the Catholic Church, baptism is one of the seven sacraments, and they certainly claim special power in these sacraments.  But I am sorry to tell my Catholic readers that sacraments do not “make present” the “graces” necessary to be saved, as the Catholic Church teaches (CCC #1131).  This is totally unscriptural.

To be sure, baptism is an important and significant ritual to all of us, rich in meaning for all who claim to follow Christ.  But again, Catholic sacraments do not and cannot do what Catholics claim they can do.

 

THE SACRAMENT OF CONFIRMATION

Today, we will be dealing with the second in our series on the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church, again in no particular order.  In this one, I am addressing the sacrament of Confirmation, sometimes called the “Sacrament of Christian Maturity.”  This is certainly not the most talked-about sacrament, and even many Catholics are prone to misunderstand it.

So, what is Catholic Confirmation, actually?  The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that Confirmation is one of three “sacraments of initiation,” baptism and Holy Communion being the other two.  It also claims that Confirmation is necessary for the “completion of baptismal grace.” (CCC #1285)

Confirmation is a ritual of the Church that claims that:

-        It roots us more deeply in the divine filiation which makes us cry, “Abba! Father!"  

-        It unites us more firmly to Christ;

-        It increases the gifts of the Holy Spirit in us;

-        It renders our bond with the Church more perfect

-        It gives us a special strength of the Holy Spirit to spread and defend the faith by word and action as true witnesses of Christ, to confess the name of Christ boldly, and never to be ashamed of the Cross. (CCC #1303)

Not only that, but the Catechism claims that “… the effect of the sacrament of Confirmation IS the special outpouring of the Holy Spirit as once granted to the apostles on the day of Pentecost.” (CCC #1302 – Emphasis added)

The Catholic Catechism also states that Confirmation causes the seal of the Holy Spirit to be given to the Catholic. (CCC #1293 and CCC #1295)

Is it important for the Catholic to believe in Confirmation?  Very much so.  The Council of Trent states that if a person says that Confirmation is not instituted by Christ, that person is considered “anathema.” (Session VII, Canon I, “On the Sacraments in General”)

By the way, an anathema is the severest form of excommunication in the Catholic Church, where one is eternally condemned to Hell unless and until he does penance to the Church’s satisfaction.

Well, at least these things are what the Catholic Church claims about Confirmation.  Ok, so that’s a pretty weighty teaching, being mandatory and all for every Catholic to believe.  But does Catholic Confirmation actually do all those things listed above?  And if it does, how?  And, most importantly, is it indeed established by Jesus Christ?

So what does Jesus say about this Confirmation event?  If you look in the pages of the New Testament, you will not find any such ritual.  You will find that there is no single specific event that does all these things mentioned above.  Every Christian’s journey starts with salvation, that is, when justification is imputed to him by faith and his heart is changed by God.  After this happens, sanctification is the process where we are, over time, “rooted more deeply” and “united more firmly” to Christ, as we strive to please Him.  If a person is truly saved, the process of sanctification will indeed happen, whether there is a particular ceremony or not.

As far as the gifts of the Holy Spirit being increased in someone, Scripture tells us that these gifts are given as God wills (1 Corinthians 12:11) – He, alone, does the choosing of the gift(s), and He alone decides at what point in life to give them to you.  There is nothing in Scripture about them coming from a formal church ritual.

Catholic statements about Confirmation are indeed tall claims, and since the Catholic Church claims that there is a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the Confirmation event, akin to the event on the Day of Pentecost, it must necessarily be a miracle, right?  If this is true, is there any real evidence that the person confirmed is any closer to Christ, or that His gifts have, on that day, increased in that person’s life?  Have all the recipients of Confirmation spoken in other languages as they did on the Day of Pentecost?  Has it caused them to do miracles like those in the early church?  You see, real miracles, like those found in the Bible, always had clear evidence to back them up, and were not just empty claims.

To have a group go through a formal ritual like Confirmation and tell them that a special miracle had to have happened (without proof) is deceptive.     

Reality

In reality, the bottom line is this: the Catholic Church has, in the ceremony of Confirmation, a powerless person in an unbiblical role, performing an empty ritual, conferring fake gifts to a (more often than not) clueless recipient.

That may sound unkind, but let me explain.  The powerless person is the Catholic priest or bishop and he is powerless because there is no biblical backing for this “sacrament.”  Furthermore, his is indeed an unbiblical role, since there is no ministerial priesthood in the New Testament.  The ritual is empty because there is no such thing as a ritual, ceremony or ordinance that provides grace for a person.  Rituals are works, and grace does not come through works (1 Peter 5:5-6), therefore, this ceremony’s “gifts” are fake.  Concerning the recipient being clueless, most of the time, these are young, pre-teen children, who can hardly be considered “mature” when receiving this sacrament, even though it is often called the sacrament of maturity.  The Catholic may say that Confirmation is just the beginning of his walk of maturity.  Well, perhaps so, but there is no biblical evidence that Catholic Confirmation is the starting point.

Now, I’m not saying that the ritual of Confirmation has never had any meaning for the “confirmand” (the person being confirmed), but that it simply does not provide grace, as it claims.  I’m also not saying that the Holy Spirit could never work in the heart of any recipient during this ceremony.  It is possible.  I am not limiting the Holy Spirit’s ability to work in someone whose heart is right, but the Holy Spirit does not give grace to a person because he goes through a particular ceremony, especially an unbiblical one.

Again, grace is not obtained through rituals (Proverbs 3:34; James 4:6) and therefore, sacraments cannot be a means of grace (Romans 11:6).

Conclusion

Catholics will claim that their Confirmation is biblical, since its ceremony uses the laying on of hands and anointing oil.  But that doesn’t prove anything.  Any unbiblical group can do the same.

The apostle Paul does mention that Jesus Christ will “confirm” the believer until the end.  But this is an ongoing thing, not a one-time ritual.  Paul is simply saying that the Christian needs to be “confirmed” in the sense that he is strengthened, established, kept and sustained in the faith (1 Corinthians 1:6-8).  THAT is biblical confirmation.

The Catholic Church has a system of many rituals that its members depend on from cradle to grave.  This system supposedly doles out God’s grace through sacraments, piece by piece, in periodic installments.  And they claim that it is only through the Church that one can get these saving sacraments, thus shackling its members to “Mother Church.”  Catholic Confirmation is only one of those sacraments.

But remember, real and biblical salvation doesn’t come in installments or rituals.  It simply comes by FAITH in the Person and work of Jesus Christ on the cross of Calvary (John 3:16; Romans 4:4-5; Ephesians 2:8-9).

See also this link concerning sacraments:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2011/01/sacraments-gods-grace-for-sale.html

And this link on the priesthood:

http://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2010/03/priesthood.html

 

IS NOAH’S ARK A SYMBOL OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH?

In Palermo, Sicily resides a Palatine Chapel which is reported to contain a famous mosaic of Noah’s ark.  Pictures of it can be found here:

https://www.christianiconography.info/sicily/noahArkPalatineChapel.html

https://www.christianiconography.info/sicily/noahPalatine.html

In this mosaic, Noah’s ark appears to be representing the Church, which Catholics officially believe to be the “universal sacrament of salvation” (Lumen Gentium, chapter VII, par. 48).  See here:

https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

Please note that another official teaching of Catholicism is that the Catholic Church is absolutely necessary for the salvation of mankind.  The first paragraph of the papal decree Unam Sanctam reflects this teaching:

“Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic… we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins… In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism... There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church… outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.” (Unam Sanctam, Bull of Pope Boniface VIII promulgated November 18, 1302). 

Moreover, this document “infallibly” declares:

“Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman pontiff [pope].” (Emphasis added)

See here:

https://www.papalencyclicals.net/bon08/b8unam.htm

This whole bull (public papal decree) is about the authority of the Catholic Church and the necessity of it for salvation.  And because of this concept, this Church puts forth the idea that the ark of Noah (Genesis chapters 6-8) has to be a picture of the Church – specifically, the Catholic Church.  So, with this in mind, we can begin to understand the reason why the average Catholic in the pew sees Noah’s ark as a symbol of the Church. 

But is the ark of Noah indeed a picture of the Church, or are Catholics mistaken?  Furthermore, does it even matter?

Wrong Picture

Yes, it does indeed matter, because Catholics are attributing to their Church a power that Scripture does not give it. 

It was certainly the ark that saved Noah and the other seven members of his family, but the church is not a structure, like a boat or a building, but rather, the church is defined as the people of God (1 Corinthians 16:19; Philemon 1:1-2). Believers are not IN the church, they, collectively, ARE the church. 

It is the people in the ark (Noah and his family) who are the picture of the church – while the ark itself represents Jesus, the one who saves from judgment!

What Does “the Church” Mean?

When most Catholics (even the “clergy”) use the term “the Church,” they are not using the biblical definition.  They are usually not talking about the universal, worldwide church of Jesus Christ (e.g., Ephesians 5:23; Colossians 1:17-18), nor the local assembly of believers (e.g., 1 Corinthians 1:2; Galatians 1:2; Revelation 2:1, 8, 12, 18; 3:1, 7, 14), but to them, the term “Church” means specifically the Magisterium, i.e., the leaders of the institution of the Church of Rome, the Catholic Church and no other church. 

Whether it is intentional or not, there is a continual effort in the Catholic Church to present the Magisterium in this way.  But the term “church” is not ever used this way in the Bible.  And once we use the biblical definition, it clears the air and does not allow the heresy of having any one denomination as the “one true church.”

This is simply the mindset of most Catholics.  See more of this mindset in this link:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2017/04/the-catholic-mindset.html

What About 1 Peter 3:20?

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the event of Noah’s ark and the flood prefigures/symbolizes salvation by water baptism:

“The Church has seen in Noah's ark a prefiguring of salvation by Baptism, for by it ‘a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water.’" (CCC #1219)

And it then footnotes 1 Peter 3:20, which says:

“Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

Of this verse, Catholics will often focus on the last three words in the King James Version of the Bible – “saved by water.”  They claim that this verse proves that a person is saved by water baptism.  But the context does not bear this out.

A more correct reading would be “saved through the water,” as the great majority of the Bible translations indicate, as well as the Catholic Catechism quote above.

It is a fact that not every Scripture passage that talks about baptism is about water baptism.  Yes, there is water in the context of this passage, but the water here destroyed all those who were “baptized” in it.  The water in this context was the judgment of God.  If this is all about water baptism saving a person, this is a terrible example! 

The only reason that “baptism language” is used here is to indicate that Noah and his family were placed/immersed into the ark – which is what saved them.  This is a picture of those who are incorporated into the body of Christ to be saved (1 Corinthians 12:12-13), not into water.  Water baptism is simply a symbol of what happens to you when you get saved. 

So, this “salvation-by-baptism” argument fails to show that Noah’s ark is symbolic of the Catholic Church.

See more about 1 Peter 3:20 and baptism here:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2015/07/

Biblical Church vs. Sacramental Church

For the biblical Christian, the local church should indeed be a vital aspect of his life.  There, he is fed spiritually (Hebrews 5:13-14), he is edified and equipped for the ministry (Ephesians 4:12), encouraged and comforted in his Christian walk (1 Thessalonians 2:12), he is convicted of sin when necessary (1 Corinthians 14:24), and he is fellowshipping and interacting with other Christians in a mutually positive way (1 John 1:3, 7) – but most importantly, he is encouraged to depend on the life and work of Jesus Christ on the cross for his salvation, and that alone (Romans 4:4-6) – or, at least this should be the case. 

But throughout the individual Catholic’s life, the Catholic Church subtly (and sometimes not so subtly) conditions him to depend on the Catholic institution/organization/denomination itself for salvation.  Usually, he receives the sacrament of baptism very early in life, even as an infant.  He is brought up to believe that this absolved him of his original sin.  He is also taught that the sacrament/ritual of confirmation confirms and establishes him in his faith.  He will also receive the Eucharist weekly and go to confession often, and when he is at the point of death, he will receive the last rites.  It is a cradle-to-grave dependence upon the (Catholic) Church for salvation, through the sacraments.

All these are necessary steps in his salvation and these can only be obtained from the leaders of the Church.  And if he happens to miss a step, he can always depend on a temporary visit to Purgatory to finish the job that Jesus Christ was unable to finish with His work on the cross!  Yes, this is absolute blasphemy, yet, in practice, this is what the Catholic is expected to believe.

See this link for more on the sacraments:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2011/01/sacraments-gods-grace-for-sale.html

See also a seven-part series on Catholic sacraments, beginning here:

https://answeringcatholicclaims.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-sacraments-of-catholic-church-part.html

Conclusion

Yes, the (truly biblical) local church is indeed very important.  But again, the Catholic Church puts great emphasis on a person’s lifelong subjection to its sacraments and rituals for salvation. 

And this is exactly why they liken the Church to Noah’s ark, because the ark is what saved the eight people of God, and they desperately want their members to believe that their salvation comes from the Church.

But in Catholic theology, it seems that Jesus always has to take a back seat to the Magisterium, which, in practice, is the one that is actually exalted. 

Granted, in their official documents, the Catholic Church uses many sublime descriptions and eloquent language to describe their honor of, and submission to, Jesus – yet in practice it seems to be quite different.  Mother Church is the one who always seems to be in the limelight, while the work of Jesus is minimized.

When one looks deeper into their doctrines, he will see a notable disparity between those teachings and the Holy Scriptures that they claim to love and obey.

To nail it home, the event of Noah’s ark points to the Savior of the world, Jesus Christ as the one who saves mankind, not to the Catholic Church.