Pints With Aquinas - 23: Is baptism necessary for salvation?

Episode Date: September 13, 2016

It is written (Ezekiel 36:25): "I will pour upon you clean water, and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness." I answer that, As the Apostle says (Romans 6:3), "all we, who are baptized in Christ Jesus, are baptized in His death." And further on he concludes (Romans 6:11): "So do you also reckon that you are dead to sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus our Lord." Hence it is clear that by Baptism man dies unto the oldness of sin, and begins to live unto the newness of grace. But every sin belongs to the primitive oldness. Consequently every sin is taken away by Baptism.  --- the Passion of Christ is communicated to every baptized person, so that he is healed just as if he himself had suffered and died. Now Christ's Passion . . .  is a sufficient satisfaction for all the sins of all men. Consequently he who is baptized, is freed from the debt of all punishment due to him for his sins, just as if he himself had offered sufficient satisfaction for all his sins. ---  As Augustine says in the book on Infant Baptism (De Pecc. Merit. et Remiss. i) "the effect of Baptism is that the baptized are incorporated in Christ as His members." Now the fulness of grace and virtues flows from Christ theHead to all His members, according to John 1:16: "Of His fulness we all have received." Hence it is clear that man receives grace and virtues in Baptism.    ST III, Q. 69, A. 1; 2; 4.   --- SPONSORS EL Investments: https://www.elinvestments.net/pints Exodus 90: https://exodus90.com/mattfradd/  Hallow: http://hallow.app/mattfradd  STRIVE: https://www.strive21.com/  GIVING Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/mattfradd This show (and all the plans we have in store) wouldn't be possible without you. I can't thank those of you who support me enough. Seriously! Thanks for essentially being a co-producer coproducer of the show. LINKS Website: https://pintswithaquinas.com/ Merch: https://teespring.com/stores/matt-fradd FREE 21 Day Detox From Porn Course: https://www.strive21.com/ SOCIAL Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/mattfradd Twitter: https://twitter.com/mattfradd Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mattfradd MY BOOKS  Does God Exist: https://www.amazon.com/Does-God-Exist-Socratic-Dialogue-ebook/dp/B081ZGYJW3/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586377974&sr=8-9 Marian Consecration With Aquinas: https://www.amazon.com/Marian-Consecration-Aquinas-Growing-Closer-ebook/dp/B083XRQMTF/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=fradd&qid=1586379026&sr=8-4 The Porn Myth: https://www.ignatius.com/The-Porn-Myth-P1985.aspx CONTACT Book me to speak: https://www.mattfradd.com/speakerrequestform

Welcome to Pints with Aquinas, episode 23. I'm Matt Fradd. If you could sit down with St. Thomas Aquinas over a pint of beer and ask him any one question, what would it be? In today's episode, we'll ask St. Thomas the question, is baptism merely a symbol or does it also regenerate the soul? Welcome to Pints with Aquinas. This is the show where you and I pull up a bar stall next to the angelic doctor and discuss theology and philosophy. And today we're going to be discussing one of my favorite sacraments, the sacrament of baptism. Now, for my Protestant listeners, I just want to say kudos to you, first of all,

for even being open to listening to me, a Catholic, talk about something you probably don't believe in and to share with you what St. Thomas Aquinas has to say. But can I just say this before we look at what Aquinas says? I think that if I were a Protestant Christian, the historic understanding of baptism would be a thorn in my side. I think it would keep me up at night. Maybe if I were Protestant, I might look at the Catholic Church and have many criticisms. I might even look at a lot of their doctrine and think that's clearly unbiblical. Okay, maybe. But when it comes to the sacrament of baptism, if I knew what I now know as a Catholic about what, well, scripture has to say about baptism, what the early church has to say about baptism,

it would really, really bother me. So, if you're a Protestant, I hope that I bother you in this episode. And if you want to share with me a rebuttal, you could send me an email, matt at pintswithaquinas.com, and I promise you that I'll read your whole thing over the air. But I want to talk about baptism. I want to see what Thomas Aquinas has to say about it. But before we do that, let's just see what the Catechism of the Catholic Church has to say about baptism. This is from paragraph 1213 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It says, 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. We are incorporated into the church and made sharers in her mission. Baptism is the sacrament of regeneration through water in the word. End quote. So, let me tell you what we're going to do today. We're going to see three different things that Aquinas has to say about baptism. I want to share with you just a few remarks about the early church and what they thought about baptism. And then I want to respond to an objection you may have heard, or maybe if you're not a Catholic, maybe you've even posed. And it comes from 1 Corinthians 1 verses 14 through 17. And basically, I want to address that bit where Paul says this line,

for Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Now, for a Catholic, that might be a troubling line. It seems at first that maybe Paul is distancing baptism from the gospel. But we'll see by the end of this episode that that absolutely is not the case. But before we begin, let's have a look at what Aquinas has to say, shall we? This is from the third part of the Sympathologiae, question 69. And I'm going to read three excerpts from article one, article two, and article four. So first he says this, it is written in Ezekiel 36, 25, I will pour upon you clean water and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness. I answer that as the apostle says in Romans 6, 3, all we who are baptized into Christ Jesus are baptized in his death. And further on,

he concludes in Romans 6, 11, so do you also reckon that you are dead to sin, but alive unto God in Christ Jesus, our Lord, end quote. And Aquinas continues, hence's stop there for a moment. So, what the church has always taught for 2,000 years and continues to teach today is that, yes, baptism is a symbol. Of course, it's a symbol. That's what a sacrament is, a sign, but it affects something. And here, Aquinasinas says it cleanses us of all sin, original sin and actual sin. And not only that, it frees us from punishment. Aquinas addresses this in Article 2. Listen to what he says.

The passion of Christ is communicated to every baptized person so that he is healed just as if he himself had suffered and died. Now, Christ's passion is a sufficient satisfaction for all the sins of all men. Consequently, he who is baptized is free from the debt of all punishment due to him for his sins, just as if he himself had offered sufficient satisfaction for all his sins. We'll read one more excerpt from Aquinas from Article 4, question 69 in the third part of the Summa Theologiae, and this has to do with the effects of baptism. Aquinas says, as Augustine says in the book on infant baptism, the effect of baptism is that the baptized are incorporated in Christ as his members.

Now the fullness of grace and virtues flows from Christ, the head, to all his members. According to John 1.16, Of his fullness we all have received. Hence, it is clear that man receives grace and virtues in baptism. Now, if you are an evangelical Christian, I want to say this. This is a brother, you know, not trying to be better than you, not trying to think that I know more than you or anything like that. But again, something that would bother me and I think should bother you is this idea that not only do we have seemingly unambiguous scriptures that indicate that baptism is what regenerates us, and we'll get into some of those in a moment, but we have

the early church. There is a universal agreement in the early church from the church fathers that baptism is the way in which we are born again. You will not find one single. In fact, my colleague when I worked at Catholic Answers, Jimmy Akin, did a study on John 3, 5. did a study on John 3, 5. And this, of course, is where our Lord says, truly I say to you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and spirit. Okay. You're not going to find one church father that does not think this relates directly to baptism. So, that would bother me. You know, how is it that I'm right about baptism? Okay. 2,000 years removed. I think that I have'm right about baptism? Okay. 2000 years removed. I think that I have the truth about baptism. It's merely a symbol. It doesn't affect anything in the one baptized. And what's interesting is I did a bit of research. The very first person I can find, and I've checked this out with a few other church historians who seem to agree with me or do agree with me, the first person who denied baptismal regeneration

was Protestant reformer Ulrich Zwingli, who lived in the 16th century. 16th century. The first prominent person, right? Theologian, Christian to deny baptismal regeneration. And he does so in his work, De Baptismo. Can I share with you what he said? This is from his work. He says this, direct quote, in the matter of baptism, if I may be pardoned for saying it, I can only conclude that all the Forgive me, but what arrogance to stand there and say, if I may be pardoned, all of the doctors, all the church fathers, they had it completely wrong in regards to baptism. Now, if you believe like I believe that Christ is going to lead his church into all truth, that he said of the church, the gates of hell would not prevail against it,

then how do we make sense of, if Zwingli is right, if the Protestant today who denies baptismal regeneration is right, If the Protestant today who denies baptismal regeneration is right, then he has to conclude that for 16 centuries, the church had no understanding of this teaching. Think about what we're talking about. We're talking about the nature of salvation, how man is saved, and Christians had no idea about it. They were walking around thinking, because the apostles taught, the Bible says, baptism regenerates us, right? It's how we enter the kingdom of God, these sorts of things. They had it wrong. Now, if you're an evangelical Protestant, you might be having a lot of kind of

responses, but do me a favor and just sit in that for a moment. Just feel the weight of that. Maybe I'm wrong, right? Maybe I've got it wrong and you can correct me, but just feel the weight of that. Maybe I'm wrong, right? Maybe I've got it wrong and you can correct me, but just feel the weight of that for a moment. Now, does St. Paul distance himself from baptism? Let's look at that verse from 1 Corinthians 1, verses 14 through 17. Let me read it to you. St. Paul says, but to preach the gospel and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. Now, the key phrase here, which our Protestant brothers and sisters may point to, and which may be a stumbling block to some, is this line,

Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel. So the question is this, if baptism is necessary for salvation, why is Paul distinguishing it from the gospel, which he later says in the same letter, no less, this gospel saves us. So, the conclusion that's drawn by many of our Protestant friends and others is sometimes that baptism isn't important. is sometimes that baptism isn't important. It's not necessary for our salvation. Let me respond in two ways. First, context. It's been said, it's a great line,

that a text without context is often a pretext for a proof text. I'll say that one more time. A text without context is very often a pretext for a proof text. It's irresponsible. All Christians would agree, right? To read a text without taking into account the context of that entire text. I know that's a mouthful. So, I think the first thing I might say to a Protestant friend, you know, suppose I said in Luke 18, 19 proves that Jesus isn't God, you know, and you say, why? And I'll say, well, because he said to the rich ruler, why do you call me good? No one is good, but God alone. Now that would seem to suggest that Jesus isn't God, right? Well, taken out of context, it might, but taken in context, not at all. out of context, it might, but taken in context, not at all. I mean, there's many verses we could point to. Matthew 28, 17, John 1, 1, and John 1, 14, and John 5, 17, and John 5, 23, and 1 Timothy

3, 6, and we could go on. There are many verses that seem to say that he is God, so we have to read the text in context. Now, in a similar way, you know, even if I found 1 Corinthians 1, 14 through 17, where Paul talks about, you know, not to baptize, but preach the gospel. Even if I found that problematic, I wouldn't find it so problematic that it would explain away the passages of scripture that seem to say that baptism is necessary for salvation. We could look at many verses. Let's just look at three very quickly, and I won't even explain them, but let's just look at each of them. John 3, 5, we already mentioned this. Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit.

The Greek there, if my memory serves, is hudatos kaiponumatos. And what that indicates is it's one action. It's water and spirit together. He cannot enter the kingdom of God. And again, this is something that all church fathers saw as being in reference to baptism. Jimmy Akin, my colleague at Catholic Answers, said he cannot find one exception to this. Achan, my colleague at Catholic Answers, said he cannot find one exception to this. What about Mark 16, 16? He who believes and is baptized will be saved, but he who does not believe will be condemned. Thirdly, 1 Peter 3, 21, baptism, which corresponds to this, talking about Noah's flood, now saves you not, not Noah's flood, I should say Noah's ark and the flood in which that came about. Read that again. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a clear

conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Now, I understand. I understand that there are responses to all of these texts. Of course, they're going to be. If you think that baptism doesn't regenerate the soul, and if the scriptures appear sometimes to say that it does, then you're going to have to find responses to them. But I just say to you, like, how much clearer do I have to be? Like, if I'm Peter and I want to say baptism saves you, what else can I say but baptism saves you? Like, what else? We could look at many more verses, and what I might do is throw them up in the description of this podcast for you to look up. All right, second thing I would say is I would say, oh gosh, I'm tripping all over my words here,

but I don't edit this show when I step all over my words here, trip all over my words. Maybe I should edit this one out. Nope, I'm not going to. My second response to my Protestant friend would have to do with the not but construction. What does that mean? Well, let's look at that line. St. Paul says this, for Christ did not send me to baptize, St. Paul says this, for Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Okay, we have here what I've seen scripture scholars refer to as the not-but construction, and it's used many different places in scripture. And whenever it's used, it isn't used to denigrate the former, but to emphasize the latter. I'll say that again. When the not but construction is used elsewhere in scripture, it's not used to denigrate the former, but to emphasize the latter. Let's

give a few examples. In John 6, 27, Jesus says this, do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life. Now, we could say, you know, is Jesus denigrating, you know, labor or food? Is he saying that we oughtn't do that? No, he's not. What about these? Matthew 10, 34. Our Lord says, I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Well, did he not come to bring peace?

Well, in a sense, did. Well, Matthew 20, 28, the son of man came not to be served, but to serve. Well, are we not to serve him? Yes, we are. Mark 9, 37, whoever receives me receives not me, but him who sent me. Is Jesus saying, if we receive him, we won't receive him? No, he's not. John 12, 44, whoever believes in me, believes not in me, but in him who sent me. A similar thing here, right? This is getting comical. Whoever believes me, believes not in me, but him who sent me. Is he saying, if you believe in me, you won't believe in me? No, he's not saying that. Again, whenever this not but construction is used, it's not used to denigrate the former, but to emphasize the latter. What about John 1.13?

We were born not of blood, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Okay, I think you get the point. Let's see, let's look at just three more, okay? Because I don't want you to think I'm cherry picking just a couple of verses. We could look at even more, but let's just stick to three more. John 11, 4. The sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God. Yet it was unto death, but for the glory of God. Acts 5, 4. You have not lied to men, but to God.

But of course he has lied to men also, but we're emphasizing that last bit. Finally, Romans 8, 9, you are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if indeed the spirit of God dwells in you. So, that would be my second response. So, when we take into account the context and this not but construction, we see that Paul wasn't downplaying baptism at all. Rather, he was emphasizing the truth of the gospel to the church at Corinth, whose theology of baptism had become perverted. He writes earlier in the same chapter, quote, it has been reported to me by Chloe's people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren. What I mean is that each of you says, I belong to Paul, or I belong to Apollos, or I belong to Cephas, or I belong to Christ. Is Christ divided?

Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? were you baptized in the name of Paul? So, when we read this text in context, we see that this line, right, I am thankful that I baptized none of you except Christmas guys, as any of you should say that you were baptized in my name, that this makes sense. The not but construction in this case, it seems to me, indicates that what the church of Corinth needed was the unperverted truth of the gospel, that Christ is not divided, that it was Christ and not Paul who was crucified for them, etc. Now, of course, elsewhere, we see Paul demonstrate a very clear understanding of the salvific nature of baptism. Titus 3.5, which maybe some of the more attentive listeners picked up when I quoted the catechism, they actually referenced this. Okay,

so St. Paul says this, he saved us not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit. Similar to John 3.5, isn't it? Water and spirit. Here in Titus 3.5, again, we have water and spirit. Now, we could go through many more verses, but we don't have the time. But anyway, I hope that that is a help. Aquinas taught that baptism freezes of our sin, it infuses us with grace, that it's necessary for salvation. I do understand that much more could be said on this topic. We could talk about infant baptism. We could talk about immersion, and maybe we'll do that in a later episode since Aquinas addresses that.

Now, just in case someone's listening out there and is totally confused on this point, I just want to say one more thing before we wrap up today. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those who have heard the proclamation and have had the chance to receive baptism. But as we say, God is not bound by the sacraments. We are. So if God says to us, you must be baptized, then you must be baptized. And if you reject baptism, then you will not be saved. Reject baptism knowing that it's necessary for your salvation. That said, can God bring people into salvation through means known only to himself? Yes, he can. That's it for this week.

God bless you. Thanks for listening. Please rate Pints with Aquinas. Visit pintswithaquinas.com. Tell all of your friends about it if you don't mind. And until next time, God bless you. And I would give my whole life to carry you, to carry you. And I would give my whole life to carry you, to carry you.

And I would give my whole life to carry you, to carry you, to carry you, to carry you, to carry you. you