- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (01/16)
- Next Post »A La Carte (01/17)
Assurance of Salvation (Part 3)
- 01/16/06
- 25
Today we will conclude this short three-part series dealing with assurance of salvation by discussing first the basis of assurance and then some marks of salvation.
We have all known people who think they are saved when all the evidence points elsewhere. It is a sad fact, and one we examined in the second part of this series, that many who think themselves Christians are not. At the final judgment many will approach Jesus convinced that they are saved only to be told that Jesus never knew them (and hence that they never knew Him). We can often discern these people today simply by asking others how they know they will be given entrance into heaven. The answer to this question reveals a great deal about a person’s understanding of the gospel.
Far too many people depend ultimately upon themselves for assurance. This applies, I suspect, equally to believers and unbelievers. A person may be truly saved yet look to himself for assurance of this salvation. This is dangerous ground to tread for when a person experiences a time of doubt he may drive himself to despair because of his misplaced assurance. In an article I wrote a year or two ago I warned against statements of assurance that begin with, “Because I…” When our assurance rests on something we have done, a promise we have made or a prayer we have prayed, we have placed our assurance on shaky ground.
Let’s turn to the Bible to discover the true basis for our assurance.
Assurance of salvation rests on God’s character
In the last article I quoted the words of the Apostle Paul as we find them in 2 Timothy 1:12 “I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me.” What was the basis of Paul’s assurance? He rested in the character of God. He knew whom he had believed and trusted that God was good and would preserve him. He trusted in the goodness of God and in God’s desire to save His people. He rested in the words of Jesus that “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.” He knew that Jesus would never reject anyone who came to Him with humility and sincerity.
Assurance of salvation rests on God’s promises
We must not allow our assurance to rest on the basis of the words of any mere human. It is God who saves us and thus we must hear His heart on the matter. Hear some of the promises of God regarding salvation.
- “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved…” (Acts 16:31).
- “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).
- “And this is the promise that he made to us -eternal life” (1 John 2:25)
- “whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life” (John 5:24).
- “Everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21).
God’s promises are sure. In recent days I have been reading a new book by Mark Dever which is a survey of the New Testament with one chapter dedicated to each book. The book’s title is The Message of the New Testament and the subtitle is “Promises Kept.” The title is telling for the New Testament is a book of fulfilled promises. We should need and require no greater proof that God keeps promises than the New Testament where we witness God fulfilling promise after promise after promise. If God assures us that He accepts us on the basis of the work of Jesus Christ, how can we argue? How can we doubt? If the Bible is trustworthy in telling us how we can be saved it must also be trustworthy in how it prescribes assurance of that salvation. If we will not trust the Scripture what can we trust?
Assurance of salvation rests on the completed work of Jesus Christ.
Before the birth of Jesus, while Joseph pondered Mary’s pregnancy and formulated a plan to be rid of her, he was visited by an angel who assured him that this child was of the Holy Spirit. The angel also told Joseph what Jesus’ life would accomplish. “…He will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). Three decades later, as Jesus prepared to draw His last breath He cried out, “It is finished!” He cried out for all the world to hear that He had accomplished the purpose for which the Father had sent Him. When Jesus died He did not merely make salvation a possibility for those who would grab ahold of it, but He fully and effectually saved those who believe in Him.
We can build our assurance on the fact that Jesus Christ died having accomplished our salvation. His work was finished. And so the question we face as believers is, “Do we believe this?” Do we believe that Jesus actually accomplished His mission? In his first letter to Timothy Paul writes, “The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners…” Did Jesus accomplish what He came to do or did He merely allow the possibility of that work being accomplished?
And so we see that the basis of our salvation is God Himself. We can have great confidence that God does wish for us to have assurance and that He is ready, willing and able to provide it to us.
Marks of Salvation
This is an area, that for some reason, I feel woefully inadequate to discuss. I am going to turn to Don Whitney, whose work on this subject has done much to shape my understanding of assurance. I will provide an outline of the marks of salvation that he provides. He begins with a discussion of the inner confirmation from the Spirit. He shows that the Holy Spirit ministers to us through the Word of God to open our hearts and minds to the Bible in ways that give us assurance. He then teaches that assurance may be experienced partly through the attitudes and actions the Bible says will accompany salvation. Here are several questions which can guide us as we seek assurance:
- Do you share the intimacies of the Christian life with other believers?
- Do you have a deep awareness of your sin against the Word and love of God?
- Do you live in conscious obedience to the Word of God?
- Do you despise the world and its ways?
- Do you long for the return of Jesus Christ and to be made like Him?
- Do you habitually do what is right more and sin less?
- Do you love Christians sacrificially and want to be with them?
- Do you discern the presence of the Holy Spirit within you?
- Do you enjoy listening to the doctrines of the apostles taught today?
- Do you believe what the Bible teaches about Jesus Christ?
These biblical principals, taken as a whole, will do much to assure the believer that God is working in his life.
Ending at the Beginning
The impetus for this series was a web site I read where a Christian encouraged unbelievers to pray the following prayer. “Father I admit I am a sinner, and I will turn from my sin and do good. I believe that Jesus was your son and that He came here to die for me so that my sins would be forgiven. I ask you to forgive me and I will repent of my sins. In Jesus name I pray.” The author of the site then writes, “If you just prayed that prayer and meant it with all your heart, then God will know you as one of His own.” But is that necessarily true? This man has made the sincerity of the person praying the mark of a true conversion. It may well be that a person praying that prayer has become a believer. But I hope he will look beyond his sincerity and look to God for his assurance.
Conclusion
There is a great deal more we could discuss about this topic, but I am going to close this series nonetheless. I trust, though, that you have come to understand that assurance of salvation is the privilege of the Christian and that we are blessed to be able to seek after it. I trust that you have come to see that our assurance of salvation must not rest in our sincerity or in anything we have done. Rather, our assurance rests entirely in the character of God, the promises of God and the completed work of Jesus Christ. We can have assurance and I pray that both you and I will find and experience it to God’s glory.
If this is a topic that would you like to study, I would point you to Don Whitney’s excellent book on the subject, How Can I Be Sure I’m A Christian?
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I worship and serve as a pastor at 
Releasing on April 1, The Next
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
This is a guide written
Comments (25)
Tim,
Thank you for articulating truth so well in your 3-part series. I am encouraged in my own assurance just by reading this. I think your 7 questions here are excellent, and I think we should review them (or facsimile thereof) in our devotional life on a regular basis.
I also believe that the “Decision based Salvation” you spoke of is an enormous issue here in the “Bible Belt” South. In fact, I agree with those who have said that decision-based salvation has become to the Southern Baptist church what confirmation is to the Catholic church - a method by which people can consider themselves “going to heaven”, and then back-burner their faith.
For this reason, it has been argued that the Southern Baptist church and some similar denominations are becoming just as institutionalized and irrelevent to their culture as the Catholic church has become. The reason simply - lack of real transformation in the lives of the individuals that make up the church, therefore, lack of transformative power within the church to impact non-believers.
I’d welcome anyone’s thoughts on this as (to me) this is a huge issue that I come across almost daily.
Tim,
I agree that so called decisional-regeneration is a big problem in the church today (especially the SBC). My question is, how does our understanding of God’s sovereignty in regeneration affect how we practice evangelism? Surely this is tied up with assurance. If our aim is simply to make a man believe certain truths and repent of sin, how is this much different than saying the sinner’s prayer? (I’m not saying this is what you believe, but there are many reformed who’s methods of evangelism are really not much different from the arminians except that they would never do an altar call or appeal to a sinners prayer). If it is really God who draws and convicts of sin, should we not be calling people to SEEK God that He might grant salvation? If God’s giving of grace is not determined by anything we do, then what can a sinner do other then beg for him to convict them of sin and grant them a new heart? Assurance then is given by God himself when he grants a new heart and abides in the believer (what I John is all about). But we must be careful when evangelising not to give people assurance of God’s forgiveness ourselves - that is something God does. The believers deep abiding love for God is true assurance because that love is God IN us. I am not trying to disagree with what you have written but instead want to apply it to our evangelism of unbelievers. Could the “church” today be full of self-deceieved people who will be terrifyingly awakened at the final judgement?
(I wasn’t sure if you allowed outside links, but I think there is a very good article here (PDF file). It picks up in the middle of a discussion about Luther’s bondage of the will and how it applies to salvation. I’ve also found a series of sermons by a somewhat unknown but reformed guy named Paul Washer posted here very helpful.
I’d welcome anyone’s thoughts on this as (to me) this is a huge issue that I come across almost daily.
nhe, you may find these two articles by Tim of interest:
Decisional Regeneration Decisional Regeneration (Further Thoughts)
and these:
DECISIONAL REGENERATION by J. E. AdamsDr. Lloyd-Jones on the Altar CallIn Defense of Refusing to Heed an Altar Call By Sandy FiedlerThe “Altar Call” Is it helpful or harmful? by Fred G. ZaspelAltar Call by G. I. WilliamsonAccepting Christ by I.C. HerendeenALTAR CALLS by John MacArthurA Closer Look at Invitations and Altar Calls A Biblical Response to Moving God and Manipulating People by Carey HardyA Close Look at Invitations and Altar Calls (Handout and Study Notes) Carey Hardy Associate Pastor, Adult and Family Ministries (Statements are adaptations, and in some cases exact quotations, from material by Jim Ehrhard, Jim Elliff, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Iain Murray and others.)Altar Call Evangelism By Paul Alexander
Hello Tim,
On the main page the main article title is unreadable when using Firefox as the browser. Looks fine with Microsoft though……
Do I have something set wrong?
What version of FF are you using? I use FF (two versions on my 2 PCs) and it seems to work fine. Do you have Javascript disabled, perhaps?
Firefox 1.0.7 Javascript enabled.
Don’t you think it’s time to update? :)
How about Flash? Do you have Flash installed?
I don’t understand how the “Marks of Salvation” list is much different from the “Rapture Letter” Tim initially had issue with.
-j
“I don’t understand how the “Marks of Salvation” list is much different from the “Rapture Letter” Tim initially had issue with.”
The marks of salvation is a list of evidences of the Spirit’s involvement in a person’s life. The rapture letter hinges everything on sincerity. Surely you can see a great difference there.
Tim, thank you for this excellent series. It has been biblically based, rather than experientially based, which can make all the difference in the world. I, too, am concerned about shallow recitation of the “sinner’s prayer” and then telling people they are going to heaven.
Tim,Assurance of salvation rests on the finished work of Christ alone - sola [sic???solus] Christos - but then Don whitney comes along with the marks - sole mio!Dad
Nice series, Tim. Helpful and needed. Thanks.
I started commenting, but then posted instead (it just got too long :) and I couldn’t get the trackbacking to work. Here’s the link - http://philthreeten.blogspot.com/2006/01/life-and-death-good-news-and-bad-news.html
Aaron, I am a friend of Paul Washer’s and while much of his doctrine is “reformed” or Calvinistic, he si not reformed, nor does he place himself in that category. His doctrine is sound, that is enough.
Chad,High Pointe Baptist Church certainly have some excellent thoroughly truly Reformed websites they link to though, brilliant in fact, don’t they?:
Other Ministries
Web Link
Does Paul agree with those websites as being Reformed? Paul is not ashamed of the Reformed Faith is he? Are you?
If by “reformed” you mean, taking a strong stand on the sovereignty of God, especially in the realm of the salvation of men, such as Calvinism, then Paul would agree that you have correctly identified his theology on that issue. “Reformed”, however, is a word usually used to define a much broader set of theological distinctives which Paul would not endorse, such as infant baptism and covenant theology. If you mean “reformed” in that sense, then by no mens would Paul say that you hae correctly identified his theology. I really don’t want to discuss all of this about what someone else believes. It is rather silly. I just did not want Paul to be misrepresented here. Paul has a website that itself links to many of those same resources.
The link pointed out by “hmmmm!” is a good case in point. They are a baptist church, which means that in this second definition, not even they would qualify. Nor, for instance would John Piper, to whom they link. Nor the council on biblical manhood and womanhood whom they link to (Wayne Grudem, and others such as John Piper, who many “reformed” people disassociate themselves with b/c they believe strongly in the present work of the HS, and are open to what some would call signs and wonders.) Monergism is a site with a lot of reformed stuff on it, but it is not all reformed. Hope this helps.
You can see Paul’s website at www.heartcrymissionary.com
Chad,
Thanks for the clarification. I should have been more careful with these labels. I was thinking in terms of the sovereignty of God regarding salvation but do realize that “reformed” is very broad. On the one hand, describing one’s position with terms such as “reformed” or even “calvinist” can save a lot of explaning. But on the other, they can be vague and mis-leading. I generally try to stay away from such terms and will be more careful in the future. Even the word calvinism can stir up images of mean-spirited people who don’t believe in evangelism. And if you say you agree with much of what the Puritans wrote, people will think for sure you are a legalist! And yet, when recommending sermons or articles to people who are “reformed” in some sense of the word, it is nice to be able to quickly give some idea of their theological underpinnings. Now I don’t claim to know all of Paul Washer’s theology, but from what sermons I have heard, I would say he believes strongly in the sovereignty of God in all matters and the weakness and inability of all men apart from Him. Perhaps that is enough, since few believe such things today.
They are a baptist church, which means that in this second definition, not even they would qualify. Nor, for instance would John Piper, to whom they link. Nor the council on biblical manhood and womanhood whom they link to (Wayne Grudem, and others such as John Piper, who many “reformed” people disassociate themselves with b/c they believe strongly in the present work of the HS, and are open to what some would call signs and wonders.)
So none of the above hold to the Reformed Faith/Theology? :
Reformed Theology
I believe the Reformed Faith/Theology is the true exposistion of the Christian life. Don’t you or Paul?
”It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching: no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines, that are called by nickname CALVINISM, but which are surely and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus. By this truth I make a pilgrimage into [the] past, and as I go, I see father after father, confessor after confessor, martyr after martyr, standing up to shake hands with me … . Taking these things to be the standard of my faith, I see the land of the ancients peopled with my brethren; I behold multitudes who confess the same as I do, and acknowledge that this is the religion of God’s own church.” ~ Charles Haddon Spurgeon
Mr. Spurgeon was a Baptist who held firmly to Reformed Theology/Faith and the present working of the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is not presently working, no one would be saved, would they?
Do you have an aversion to Reformed Theology? I am just asking, as most professing Christians hate and despise Reformed Theology/Faith for one reason or another. I see a lot of misunderstanding, bitterness and unforgivenss. Very un-Christ like attitudes in professing Christian’s lives, true?
I really don’t want to discuss all of this about what someone else believes. It is rather silly.
That is a very sad attitude to take. How can one contend for the truth if someone believes something wrong? If what someone else believes about the Reformed Faith is WRONG, is it silly to discuss the issues and try and clear up the misconceptions? Do you(generic) want to carry on in ignorant(lack of knowledge) bliss?
This will be, I intend, my last post on this topic.
Clarifications: In the last post by “Hmmmm!” he said regarding my aversion to discussing what Paul Washer may or may not believe:
“That is a very sad attitude to take. How can one contend for the truth if someone believes something wrong? If what someone else believes about the Reformed Faith is WRONG, is it silly to discuss the issues and try and clear up the misconceptions? Do you(generic) want to carry on in ignorant(lack of knowledge) bliss?”
I thought I was being pretty clear that it was not contending for the truth that I felt was silly, but rather discussing what Paul believes while outside of his presence. Similarly, is it really fruitful to discuss what Calvin believed, except as a matter of historical curiosity? Who cares what he believed! show me the text! This, it seems to me is the attitude we should take.
Or let me put it another way. Here Tim has written this good word on assurance, and the blog has degenerated into whether Paul Washer is reformed or not, and whether I am personally proud of the “reformed” heritage. What?! How absurd. Is this not rather silly? While it is true that I brought up the issue of Paul’s belief, I did so only to clear up a minor point which could have easily been misunderstood — which evidently it has been by some. But “Hmmmm!” has not let the issue alone. I apologize to Tim for all of this, but there is no other forum in which I can explain my comments to “Hmmmm!”
Also in that last post he quoted Spurgeon. Notice that the word “reformed” was missing from the quotation. Interestingly, Spurgeon called it “Calvinism.” And I agree with the bare bones system of Calvinism, the 5 doctrines of grace, though I am no follower of Calvin (I am not a Presbyterian by conviction and so I disagree with things Calvin said on some issues, though I find him very helpful on most). But the “reformed” label, which often refers to those who hold strongly to Covenant theology, infant baptism, doctrines of grace, confessional membership, etc. is not a label that Spurgeon would apply to himself in that way as he did nto agree with infant baptism.
Nevertheless, the “reformed” label is often applied to anyone who holds to the doctrines of grace, or “the 5 points of Calvinism.” With this understanding, then, many people, including myself, including Spurgeon, including Paul Washer, would be “reformed.” I have a strong doctrine of the sovereignty of God, especially in matters of salvation.
The issue many “reformed” people of the denominational brand have with John Piper and Wayne Grudem is not that they hold to the present work of the Holy Spirit, as all people of the broader, second “reformed” camp believe that. Rather, it is their belief in the signs and wonders and the more experiential, subjective, working of the Spirit, such as we read about in 1 Cor. 12-14, etc.
Another example would be D. M. Lloyd-Jones. Certainly he is “reformed”. Yet, b/c of his teaching on the Baptism in the Holy Spirit, many people called him a charismatic. Banner of Truth will not even sell his books on that topic! and the reason is that his views on that issue were outside the pale for those in the traditional, more denomiational “reformed” camp.
When Hmmmm! talks about “reformed” as being the true exposition of the Christian life, it sounds rather elitist. Personally, I am very cautious about identifying myself with one camp or another. Every system of doctrine has its weaknesses and failings. Every camp has its problems.
I am an elder at a Bible church, which has met in a home for more than 25 years. We are not emergent, baptist, presbyterian, reformed, etc. Nor are we art of the house church movement — we simply prefer to meet in a home. But most of the books we enjoy reading are written by reformed, baptist, presbyterian, brethren, etc. I don’t have to pigeon hole my theology into one camp or another simply for the sake of convenience. In fact, I refuse to do so. I disagree with covenant theology at the very foundations. I also disagree with a rigid church structure, whether it be the Presbytery, or the church by-laws and constitution.
The Scriptures are our guide in all things, and they are sufficient. So when someone comes to me and says, “you said this … but I think Calvinism is wrong.” I will tell them, “You are right, I do believe in Calvinism, but that is not really the issue. let’s go to the Bible and see if this is so. I don’t preach through the 5 points of Calvinism, but through the Bible. In the course of teaching, all 5 points of Calvinism will come across, not because I will make sure they do, but b/c they are in the texts themselves. It is an eventuality of true Bible exposition.
If, however, someone in the church has come across these things in their reading, and they want to counsel on them, then sure, we can discuss them. But the Bible does not present the 5 pts. of Calvinsim, nor did the “reformed” churches at the synod of dort. We preach not ourselves, but Christ crucified. WE preach His testimony left in the Scriptures. We preach his teaching and will as expressed by His apostles. Let the chips fall where they may. If this means, and it does, that many in the “reformed” camp will disagree, then so be it. My allegiance is not to that camp, though I may owe much to some of the writings of men within that camp. My desire is to follow them insofar as they follow Christ, but no further.
Finally, I refer you to my previous post regarding Paul Washer’s belief:
“If by “reformed” you mean, taking a strong stand on the sovereignty of God, especially in the realm of the salvation of men, such as Calvinism, then Paul would agree that you have correctly identified his theology on that issue. “Reformed”, however, is a word usually used to define a much broader set of theological distinctives which Paul would not endorse, such as infant baptism and covenant theology. If you mean “reformed” in that sense, then by no means would Paul say that you have correctly identified his theology.
I see most of these posts are several months old, but maybe someone is still up to answering some Q’S I have about the topics you discussed. I have been looking at Calvinism, much to my shegrin, and have to admit a lot of it makes sense. I do wonder however, if it allows for any free will? Why would we have to persuade men if they could not be persuaded? Did not Pharoah harden his heart first and then God hardened it? This is one aspect of Calvinism that I just don’t seem to be able to get. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
Also what is covenant theology? It seems dangerously close to Catholicism to me.
Oh..and Amen to the alter call/say this little prayer business. For years I thought there was something wrong with that approach and I just couldn’t put my finger on it. It actually made me doubt my salvation because I never had said the “sinner’s prayer.” What an awful mess!
Sarah,I think you have landed on the crux of the issue. I think that most non-Calvinists are not Calvinist because of this view of free will. Calvinists believe that are will is in bondage to sin to the extent that it is not free to choose anything good. This is what is meant by total depravity and inability. You are correct to think that this might have an effect on a Calvinists view of evangelism, which is why Calvinists are sometimes not as strong on evangelism as those of certain other persuasions.The reason that this view of our will seems counterintuitive to you is that it is contra to what we experience. We feel that our choices are ours, even if they are only the result of unconditional election.Is this doctrine correct and true to the Bible? That is the subject of much debate. I will pray that the Author and Spirit of Truth enlightens us both as we continue to seek Him.
“I do wonder however, if it allows for any free will?”
Well…it depends on your definition of free will. Biblically the natural man is free to choose anything he WANTS, but being that man is born spirtually dead in sin , man would never WANT to choose God (Romans 3:10-1),. It takes a miracle to spiritually resurect a person to enable them to choose Chirst (John 3:3), which is a work of the Holy Spirit. So man is only free to choose what he WANTS, not what he OUGHT to choose without divine intervention.
“Why would we have to persuade men if they could not be persuaded?”
The Bible is full of commands that man can not obey. How can we be perfect as our Heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48)? How could anyone in the Old Testament actually fulfill all of the Law? This impossibilty makes man totally dependent on Christ and gives God all the glory for doing what we can not. Saving us (Matt 19:26)Even so, we must preach the Gospel to unsaved men because this is the means by which God has chosen to bring about salvation. He could have done it and not included us, but our Father is gracious enough to include His Children in His work. Pretty cool huh?
“Did not Pharoah harden his heart first and then God hardened it?”
Perhaps, but look at why Paul says God does this”For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”. God did not do this in response of Pharaoh, he did this for His glory in freeing His people and punishing those responsible just as He said He would to Joseph in Genesis.
Also, take a deep look into Romans 9. You will see that the objections you may have are ones that Paul anticipates and answers.
“What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
“You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God?”
Notice that Paul does not explain why. He plainly says who are we to question God? So, who are we to question God?
“It seems dangerously close to Catholicism to me.”
Why is that?
Dallas,
Yes, I know those scriptures and if you are basically saying that God is God and I am not, I agree. My husband says I am trying to understand what cannot be understood, but my mind struggles to anyway. I have this incredible need to understand everything, so Calvinism has been very hard for me. Maybe someday He will settle it in my my mind, but for now I guess He’s using it to drive me to the Scriptures, repentance, holy living, praying like crazy for my kids, etc.
As to why I think Covenant theology sounds Catholic to me, well…like I said I’m not sure how it works. If it says that being baptized into a certain faith makes you more likely to be saved, than it seems to emphasize the works of man. But maybe I’m totally off base and that not what Covenant theolgy teaches at all.
Thanks for your comments,sarah
I understand Sarah. I went through the same thing while pondering these scriptures. God actually settled my heart on the matter while I was studied something else. Go figure.
As far as Covenant theology, I am not well studied on it. I am not of the infant baptism persuasion, but I do know that it only symbolizes coming into the visible church and not necessarily guarantees the person is saved. It is either administered as a baby and marks entrance into the visible church, or it marks a believers desire to obey Christ and be baptized. It is now way guarantees salvation as far as I understand it does in Catholicism. However I do not know much about Catholicism either. I am not much help here.