Does the PCA Believe that Baptism is Necessary for Salvation?

For my Reformed readers, this may seem like an absolutely bizarre question. However, it has developed out of a fascinating and enjoyable conversation I've been having with Oso Famoso and Peter Sean Bradley, here. In light of this, Oso posted a new article here. Both interesting reads. Make sure to check out the comments to the first one. I really appreciate the way these two have treated me with respect. I'm clearly the one that doesn't belong there, but I'm treated as if I do.

So anyways, Oso, following Peter, cites two sections out of the Westminster Confession of Faith (henceforth, "WCF"). I reprint them below with Oso's emphasis included.

First, on the Visible Church:

The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation. (Chapter 25, Paragraph 2)

Second, on Baptism:

Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in the newness of life. (Chapter 28, Paragraph 1)

Oso then asks: If being in the visible Church is necessary for salvation and baptism brings one into the visible Church isn't it the case that the WCOF is saying that baptism is necessary for salvation and thus...gulp...a "work" is necessary for salvation?

Peter also connects this with the Catholic notion of extra ecclesiam, nulla salus (outside the church, there is no salvation).

These are great questions that come out of a desire to understand what the PCA believes. I appreciate the fact that neither Oso nor Peter accused the PCA of anything here. Rather, they questioned whether or not they were reading things correctly.

So let us address the issue at hand. There are several things to be said here. I'll first address Oso's question.

First, the WCF does not say that membership in the visible church is necessary for salvation. Rather, it says that there is no other ordinary possibility of salvation. What this means is that the vast majority of truly saved believers are members of the visible church. It is very difficult for us to imagine a group of saved believers who shun Christ's Body and do not put themselves in submission of church leadership. This is the general, usual, and ordinary rule.

However, we, as Reformed Christians, are aware that there are exceptions to the rule. The thief on the cross beside Christ is the cliched example. Others who convert, but don't have an official, established church nearby (for instance, in foreign lands, where a Christian Church has not yet been planted) are other exceptions. Perhaps new Christians who die before the day of their baptism are yet more exceptions. The important thing to realize is that these are exceptions, not the rule.

Second, this means that Baptism cannot be required for salvation either. Yes, Baptism is required to be a member of the visible church, but as we have shown, being a member of the visible church is not required to go Heaven. There are exceptions here too.

Still, like with church membership, the ordinary process towards Heaven includes Baptism, and it would be very difficult to imagine a true believer refusing to be baptized.

Hence, we would tell "Christians" who refuse to join the visible through Baptism that they should seriously doubt their salvation, for they refuse to adhere to Christ's clear command (Matthew 28:16-20, et al.).

Third, and this is perhaps most important, is that we need to understand the Reformed understanding of the Ordo Salutis, order of salvation. People are not saved because they are Baptized or join churches. Rather, Christians will join churches and seek Baptism, because they are saved. This is why Justification (ch 11) precedes faith (ch 14), good works (ch 16), and the Sacraments (chs 27-29) in the WCF.

The only true requirement of salvation, in the sense that it causes salvation and that salvation is impossible without it, is God's grace. We are saved because God has shown us grace, and if He does not do so, then we are condemned already. This conduit for the grace of justification is faith alone. But as the WCF says, in chapter 11, paragraph 1, "... which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God." Thus, even faith is a grace.

Therefore, I must answer Oso's question in the negative. That Baptism is required for entrance into the visible church, and that being a member of the visible church is the ordinary way towards salvation, does not deny the Reformed doctrine of Sola Fide or make salvation dependent upon the "work" of Baptism.

We now turn to Peter's observation that the WCF teaches, "Outside the Church, there is no salvation." As we have shown above, church membership is not necessary for salvation, so we have to deny this connection.... at least in part.

As we've stated, we allow for certain exceptions that we listed above (under point 1). However, the Catholic doctrine of extra ecclesiam, nulla salus allows for these as well. In this sense we are in complete agreement with Catholicism here.

The disagreement is how this Catholic doctrine is interpreted and applied. The Reformers vehemently opposed the idea that Church = Catholicism. This is how the phrase has been interpreted by many Catholics, and it is there that we have strict disagreements.

For instance, Pope Pius IX said in an Encyclical dated Aug. 10, 1863 (emphasis added): 7. Here, too, our beloved sons and venerable brothers, it is again necessary to mention and censure a very grave error entrapping some Catholics who believe that it is possible to arrive at eternal salvation although living in error and alienated from the true faith and Catholic unity. Such belief is certainly opposed to Catholic teaching. There are, of course, those who are struggling with invincible ignorance about our most holy religion. Sincerely observing the natural law and its precepts inscribed by God on all hearts and ready to obey God, they live honest lives and are able to attain eternal life by the efficacious virtue of divine light and grace. Because God knows, searches and clearly understands the minds, hearts, thoughts, and nature of all, his supreme kindness and clemency do not permit anyone at all who is not guilty of deliberate sin to suffer eternal punishments.

8. Also well known is the Catholic teaching that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. Eternal salvation cannot be obtained by those who oppose the authority and statements of the same Church and are stubbornly separated from the unity of the Church and also from the successor of Peter, the Roman Pontiff... (source)

The PCA denies that the Church of Christ is limited to the Catholic Church, or that salvation comes through Catholicism alone. (Sadly, many within the PCA are convinced that the Church of Christ excludes the Catholic Church.)

Also, the PCA denies that the Church of Christ is limited to the PCA. This is seen in the quote above on the visible church: The visible Church..., consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion. Thus, there is not even a PCA parallel to this doctrine, in this sense.

As an aside, we need to point out that the official position of the Catholic Church does not demand that everyone who is saved be a member of the Catholic Church. This also goes beyond the exceptions I presented above. Members of the PCA can be saved, as can Methodist, etc. I point this out because this is often not understood by many Protestants. See The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 836-856, or if you have the time, read Lumen Gentium, a major document from the Second Vatican Council. See especially chapter 2, paragraphs 14-16.

Nevertheless, the Catholic Church believes that the reason those outside the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church are saved is because they are in some way connected with the Catholic Church, through Baptism, etc (CCC, 838). Of course, the PCA denies this. We don't see ourselves as a subset of the Catholic Church at all.

Therefore, before I give my answer as to whether or not the PCA teaches, extra ecclesium, nulla salus, I would have to ask Peter what he means by that. There is a good chance that we do hold some overlap with Catholicism here. The disagreements that the Reformers and others have had with this doctrine is when it has been interpreted narrowly to narrow the definition of the "Church."

I think that just about covers everything that needs to be said here. These are good questions, which are important to know and understand well. It is always important for us, as those who are Reformed and always reforming, to make sure that our beliefs are consistent and reasonable. Once again, I want to express my appreciation to Oso and Peter for their thought-provoking and respectful observations, questions, and even criticisms of my home denomination. The peace of Christ be with you!