SINCE the debate over the Sacrament of Baptism at St Mary’s Parish, South Brisbane broke out, I have been waiting for someone to point out the real issue, which, to my mind is the integrity of the sacraments.
As you well know, the sacraments are those sacred signs Jesus has given to us as the means to lead us to our eternal salvation.
Sacraments are very important; we must maintain their integrity.
On one occasion Jesus said to Nicodemus, “Amen, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born through water and the Spirit” (John 3:5).
Baptism is important. We cannot be saved (enter the Kingdom of God) without it – as the Church teaches us, we need the regular baptism, or the baptism of blood (martyrdom) or the baptism of desire.
On another occasion Jesus told his disciples, “Go, therefore, make disciples of all nations; baptise them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you” (Matthew 28:19, 20).
In the case where Jesus gives us the sacrament and the actual words we are to use, we surely should not be questioning Jesus by deviating from his words, under pain of losing the integrity of the sacrament.
Where the integrity is lost, the efficacy is lost, so that one no longer has the sacrament but only some empty gestures that resemble the sacrament, thereby putting our salvation in jeopardy.
In some other instances Jesus gave us the sacrament, but not the words, as for example, in the case of Reconciliation.
He said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone’s sins, they are forgiven; if you retain anyone’s sins, they are retained” (John 20:23).
How to do that was not given to us. Not to worry, Jesus took care of that also because on one occasion he said, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16-19).
The Church, then, has the power of establishing “how” the “binding” or “loosing” will be done.
Some people seem put out by what Archbishop John Bathersby did, and these same people bring up the “good” that is being accomplished at St Mary’s, implying that because of that “good”, corrections should not be meted out.
I do believe the archbishop never did criticise the “good” being done. What he did was simply put a stop to an abuse.
As a matter of duty, the archbishop would be remiss in his obligations of bishop were he not to correct abuses, any abuse, in the diocese. He carries on his shoulders the burden of maintaining the purity and integrity of Christ’s teaching in the diocese. Consequently he should be applauded, not criticised, whenever he corrects abuses.
May the blessing of God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit be upon him as he fulfils the role of bishop in our archdiocese.
JEAN-LEON SHANKS
Ormiston, Qld
