As in previous studies, we will
look at definitions, scriptures, commentary
evidence, and confessional support for the
purpose to glorify God in how we live.
Definitions:
Sacrament:
A rite or ceremony instituted by
Jesus, and observed by the church as either a
testament to inner grace or a means of grace.
Various Protestant denominations differ on
whether sacraments should be considered to be
only testaments to inner grace, or also means
of grace, but all agree that there are two:
baptism and the Lord’s Supper; some prefer to
call these rites or ceremonies ordinances.*
Sacrament:
A visible manifestation of the
word. The bread and wine in the Lord's Supper
are considered sacraments in that they are
visible manifestations of the covenant promise
of our Lord: “In the same way, after the
supper he took the cup, saying, 'This cup is
the new covenant in my blood, which is poured
out for you.'” (Luke 22:20).
God, in the OT, used visible
signs along with His spoken word. These
visible signs, then, were considered to have
significance. “Among the OT sacraments the
rites of circumcision and the Passover were
stressed as being the OT counterparts of
baptism (Colossians 1:10-12) and the Lord's
Supper (1 Corinthians 5:7).” **
Scriptures
“Go ye therefore,
and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost.” (Matthew 28:19)
From Vincent's
Word Studies:
“Teach (μαθητεύσατε)
Rev., rightly, make disciples of.
In the name (εἰς τὸ
ὄνομα)
Rev., correctly, “into the name.”
Baptizing into the name has a twofold meaning.
1. Unto, denoting object or purpose, as εἰς
μετάνοιαν, unto repentance (Matthew
3:11), εἰς
ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν, for the remission
of sins (Acts 2:38). 2. Into, denoting union
or communion with, as Romans 6:3, “baptized
into Christ Jesus; into his death;” i.e., we
are brought by baptism into fellowship with
his death. Baptizing into the name of the Holy
Trinity implies a spiritual and mystical union
with him. Eἰς,
into, is the preposition commonly used with
baptize. See Acts 8:16; Acts 19:3, Acts 19:5;
1Corinthians 1:13, 1Corinthians 1:15;
1Corinthians 10:2; Galatians 3:27. In Acts
2:38, however, Peter says, “Be baptized upon (ἐπὶ)
the name of Jesus Christ;” and in Acts 10:48,
he commands Cornelius and his friends to be
baptized in (ἐν)
the name of the Lord. To be baptized upon the
name is to be baptized on the confession of
that which the name implies: on the ground of
the name; so that the name Jesus, as the
contents of the faith and confession, is the
ground upon which the becoming baptized rests.
In the name (ἐν) has reference to the sphere
within which alone true baptism is
accomplished. The name is not the mere
designation, a sense, which would give to the
baptismal formula merely the force of a charm.
The name, as in the Lord's Prayer (“Hallowed
be thy name”), is the expression of the sum
total of the divine Being: not his designation
as God or Lord, but the formula in which all
his attributes and characteristics are summed
up. It is equivalent to his person. The finite
mind can deal with him only through his name;
but his name is of no avail detached from his
nature. When one is baptized into the name of
the Trinity, he professes to acknowledge and
appropriate God in all that he is and in all
that he does for man. He recognizes and
depends upon God the Father as his Creator and
Preserver; receives Jesus Christ as his only
Mediator and Redeemer, and his pattern of
life; and confesses the Holy Spirit as his
Sanctifier and Comforter. Always (πάσας
τὰς ἡμέρας) Lit., all the days. Wyc.
, in all days.” (1)
“For I have
received of the Lord that which also I
delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the
same night in which he was betrayed took
bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake
it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body,
which is broken for you: this do in
remembrance of me. After the same manner, also
he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,
this cup is the new testament in my blood:
this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in
remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this
bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the
Lord's death until he come.” (1Corinthians
11:23-26)
From the Cambridge
Bible
for Schools and Colleges on
1Corinthians 11:26:
“26. For as often as ye eat]
These words are not those of Christ, but of St
Paul. St John 3:31-36, and Galatians 2:15-21
are somewhat similar instances, but in them it
is by no means certain that we have a
commentary by the writer on the speech he
records, but quite possible that the passage
forms part of the speech itself.
ye do shew] Tell, Wiclif.
Annuntiabitis, Calvin and the Vulgate.
Annoncerez, De Sacy. Some (e.g. the margin of
the English Bible) take this imperatively, but
it is better as in the text. If Meyer be right
in supposing that the word here used is never
employed except in the sense of oral
proclamation (see ch. 1 Corinthians 2:1, 1
Corinthians 9:14 of this Epistle; and Php
1:16; Php 1:18; Colossians 1:28, as examples
of its use by St Paul), we have here strong
grounds for affirming that the words of
institution formed part of the form of
celebrating the Sacrament, even in Apostolic
times. The word occurs ten times in the Acts
of the Apostles, always in the sense of
proclaim.
the Lord’s death] Since this
Sacrament was instituted as a memorial of
Christ’s Death upon the Cross.
till he come] As long as the
Christian Church shall last, this Sacrament
will continue to be celebrated for the object
for which it was instituted. However widely
divided on other points, Christians have
agreed in carrying out this prediction for
more than 1800 years.” (2)
The Sacraments
by Francis Turretin:
“FIRST QUESTION: THE WORD
“SACRAMENT” AND ITS DEFINITION
What is a sacrament as to the
name and as to the thing?
Necessity of treating the
sacraments.
I. As God willed to enter into a
covenant with the church (of which we have
thus far spoken) in order to apply to her the
salvation purchased by Christ, so (such is his
goodness) for the greater confirmation of
faith, he has condescended to seal this
covenant by sacraments as seals, that by them
as badges he might distinguish and separate
his people from the rest of the world. On this
account, the necessity to consider them is
incumbent upon us. Not only to ascertain more
distinctly their nature and use; but also to
unravel more easily the numerous and most
important controversies which are wont to be
agitated about them by various adversaries.
For we cannot behold without grief that those
things which were instituted by God to be
bonds and symbols of union and concord among
Christians, have been made (by the depravity
of men) the seed plot of contentions and the
apple of discord (melon eridos), which has
torn asunder Christians by a mournful divorce.
II. However, this topic contains
many heads. First, we will dispute in general
concerning the sacraments; second, in
particular of baptism and the holy Supper,
which are the two sacraments of the New
Testament instituted by Christ; third, of the
five false and spurious ones added by
Romanists. But we must first say something
about the word and the definition of a
sacrament.
Use of the word “sacrament”
III. We do not think there should
be any contention about the word “sacrament.”
For although (being Latin) it does not occur
in the books of the Old and New Testaments,
still its use has been so customary in the
church and it has been received so long, that
if anyone (influenced by superstition) would
abstain from it (as is done by the Socinians,
who in this way aim not so much at the word as
at the very nature of the sacraments), we
think he is scrupulously and preposterously
religious. Hence the Romanists do an injury to
Luther and the Lutherans to us when they
charge us with being shocked at this word,
since it is evident that it is ordinarily used
by us. But no less ridiculous are the
Romanists who, because this word is not found
in Scripture, wish to prove its insufficiency.
For to whom can it seem strange if a Latin
word does not occur in the Scriptures, which
are written in Hebrew and Greek?
And its origin
IV It is well known that
sacramentum comes from sacrando
And its origin. (i.e., “to consecrate” and “to
initiate”) as juramentum from jurando,
testamentum from testando.
With the ancient authors of the Latin
language, it signifies two things. (1) The
“money” or the pledge deposited by two parties
to a suit with the pontiffs in a sacred place,
with which he was mulcted who had lost his
cause as a punishment of an unjust litigation
(as Varro observes, On the Latin Language
5*.180 [Loeb, 1:166-69]). (2) An “oath” which
was taken only when some sacred deity was
invoked. Hence sacramento contendere (with
Cicero) means “to affirm by a solemn oath”; sacramento
interrogari, sacramento
teneri, etc. But it is used peculiarly
to denote a military oath by which soldiers
bound themselves by a certain rite and
prescribed words to the state and the
magistrate, that they would strenuously
perform what the emperor had commanded and
would not desert the military standards. Hence
the phrase obligare
sacramento (Cicero, De
Officiis 1.36 [Loeb, 21:38-39]) and
Isidore (Etymologiarum
9.3 [PL 82.347]). Hence in the old glosses
sacramentum is a military oath (horkos
stratiotikos). Tertullian: “We were
called to the militia of God, even then when
we responded to the words of the sacrament”
(To the Martyrs 3 [FC 40:22; PL 1.697]).
V. The word, having been
transferred from military affairs to sacred
uses, was employed by ecclesiastical writers
to signify any mystery or sacred and not
obvious doctrine. Hence everywhere in the
fathers you will find the sacrament of the
Trinity, of the incarnation, and of faith, and
in general the whole Christian religion comes
under this name. In this sense, the word is
used in the Vulgate where the word “mystery”
occurs (1Tim. 3:16; Eph. 1:9; 5:32). “The
sacrament of the seven stars” (Rev. 1:20);
“the sacrament of the beast” (Rev. 17:7). More
strictly it is taken for a sacred sign or
external symbol which exhibits one thing to
the sense, another to the mind. In this sense
Augustine says, “Signs, when they pertain to
divine things, are called sacraments” (Letter
138, “To
Marcellinus” [FC 20:40; PL 33.527]). At
length and by various degrees, it most
recently came to signify a sign and seal of
the covenant in Christ, instituted by God in
the church. Again, sacrament in this sense is
taken either for external signs or rites
simply, or for the internal thing signified;
or to embrace both the external and internal
thing, the sign and thing signified complexly,
in which sense it is here considered by us.
The word mysterion answers to it.
VI. To this word the Greek word mysterion
corresponds, derived also by profane writers
either from muein (“to initiate into sacred
things,” whence the priests over sacred rites
were called mystai,
either from closing [para
to muein
to stoma]
the lips, because it was fitting, as
Eustathius says, that “the priests of secret
rites should close their lips, and not reveal
things which were not to be uttered” [tour
mystas myein to stoma, kai meekphainein
amemyenta]) or from the Hebrew sthr,
which is to "shut up," hence msthr
(“secret”). Afterwards the sacred writers
transferred this word from a superstitious to
a better use to designate all the heads of the
Christian religion, which are hidden from
flesh and blood. But in the Scriptures, it is
never used for a sacrament, as this word is
taken strictly for the signs of the covenant
of grace (although in other respects we do not
repudiate that word, because the sacraments
are really signs of a secret thing or of
invisible grace, which have a hidden
signification and commend themselves most
especially with a latent mystery).
VII. Scripture more properly
calls them “signs of the covenant” (Gen. 9:12,
13; 17:11), “signs and seals” of the
righteousness of faith (Rom. 4:11), and simply
“signs” (Ex. 12:13), “patterns” (hypodeigmata,
Heb. 8:5; 9:23) and “figures” (antitypa,
1Pet. 3:21). In the Old Testament, the word 'vth
occurs (Gen. 17:11; Ex. 31:13, 17; Ezekiel
20:12, 20), which denotes a sign and is
applied to the old sacraments.
Various definitions of sacrament
VIII. Now although it cannot be
perfectly defined, be cause it is something
concrete and extraordinary which consists of
things which are not in the same genus, still
it can be fitly described. By many it is said
to be “a sign of a sacred thing,” as
Augustine, who says, “Signs, when they pertain
to sacred things, are called sacraments”
(Letter 138, “To
Marcellinus” [FC 20:40; PL 33.527]). The
definition of the Scholastics is: “A sacrament
is the visible form of invisible grace.” But
neither pleases the modem Romanists.
Bellarmine says these definitions are
imperfect, if they are taken according to the
sound of the word; but if they are received
according to the sense of the Roman church,
they are legitimate because by signs they
understand sensible signs established and
active (“De
Sacramentis in Genere,”
1.2 Opera [1858], 3:20-22). Therefore he seems
expressly to find fault with two things in the
adduced definitions. The first, that the
sacraments are called a visible form too
specifically; for he contends that it is
sufficient for the nature of a sacrament, if
the sign is sensible (i.e., can be perceived
by any sense, even if not by the sight). The
other, that the sacraments are not said to be
active signs (i.e., effecting grace). These
two things he expressly places in the
definition of a sacrament, which he draws from
the catechism of the Council of Trent in these
words: “A sacrament is a thing subjected to
the senses, which has the power not only of
signifying but also of effecting grace”
(Catechism of the Council of Trent [tr. J.A.
McHugh, 1923], p. 142). This is cunningly
proposed by Bellarmine in order to favor the
invented sacraments of penitence, matrimony
and the like, which are without a visible
sign. Again, that he may lay the foundation of
that false hypothesis (to wit, that the
sacraments of the New Testament confer grace ex opere
operato, as they express it, of which we
will speak hereafter).
The true definition is proposed.
IX. In defining a sacrament, we
follow Paul, who, speaking of circumcision,
says, it is “a sign and seal of the
righteousness of faith” (Rom. 4:11). This is a
generic definition and is rightly ascribed to
the species. Therefore, this torch throwing
its light before us, we say: “The sacraments
are the signs and seals of the grace of God in
Christ.” Or a little more explicitly: “Sacred
visible signs and seals divinely instituted to
signify and seal to our consciences the
promises of saving grace in Christ and in turn
to testify our faith and piety and obedience
towards God.” In this definition, the nature
of the sacraments is made clearly known from
their causes (concerning which something must
be said didactically before we treat them
argumentatively).
The matter of a sacrament is
twofold: the sign.
X. The matter of a sacrament is
twofold: one external and sensible, the other
internal and intelligible; the former is
called the sign, the latter the thing
signified. That is perceived by the senses of
the body and especially by the sight; but this
by the mind, furnished with a fit instrument
for it (to wit, faith). That is an element
instituted by God in order to signify and seal
grace; this is the grace of God in Christ or
Christ with all his benefits. Now by the sign
we understand whatever in the sacraments has
the relation of signification, which is of a
twofold kind. First, the external symbols
belong here. Second, the ceremonial rites or
acts, both of the minister standing in the
place of God and of the believers perceiving.
The actions of this kind in baptism are the
sprinkling of water or immersion; in the
Supper, the breaking, distribution and
reception of the bread and wine, all of which
have their signification. Still by way of
eminence (katexochen)
the external elements themselves are called
signs for a peculiar reason—because they are
earthly things and substances about which such
ceremonies and actions are performed.
And the thing signified
XI. The other part of the
sacramental matter is the thing signified, by
which nomenclature is understood Christ
himself with all that faith applies to itself
for salvation. Now it applies to itself Christ
with all the benefits which flow from his
passion and death, which Paul embraces when he
says, “who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and
redemption” (1Cor. 1:30). Thus Christ
crucified (who is as it were the nucleus of
the sacraments) is signified with all the
saving benefits which he purchased for us by
his death, for the commemoration of which
these signs were instituted, to confirm both
its truth and utility—signifying the truth,
exhibiting and sealing the utility. As Christ
is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb.
13:8), so he has always declared the same
grace to his church and sealed it by the
sacraments. This is the reason why with
respect to the internal matter Paul ascribes
the sacraments of the New Testament to
believers under the Old (1Cor. 10:1-3); and in
turn the sacraments of the Old to believers
under the New (Col. 2:11; 1Cor. 5:7). Further,
the thing signified differs from the sign in
three particulars: (1) in nature and
properties, for the sign is an earthly and
visible thing; the thing of the sign is
heavenly and invisible; (2) in object, for the
sign tends to the body, the thing signified to
the soul; (3) in the mode of communication,
for the mode of the sign is bodily, of the
thing signified spiritual.
The form.
XII. The form of the sacrament is
placed in the analogy or relation (schesei)
of the external matter to the internal, of the
sign to the thing signified, by which the
thing promised is so represented to our minds
that it is caused also to be truly
communicated. In this analogy consists the
union of the sign with the thing signified,
which consequently is neither natural by
bodily contact, nor local by contiguity, nor
even spiritual by a spiritual energy (energeian)
by which the signs are immediately made alive,
or the power to regenerate or justify given to
them; but it is relative and sacramental,
placed principally in three
things—signification, sealing and exhibition.
The signification depends on the similitude
between the sign and the thing signified. The
sealing, upon the institution of God by which
these external symbols have not only the
relation of a sign, but also of a seal; since
to the promises are added the sacraments to
induce greater confidence in the thing
promised, still in such a way that our faith
is supported by them and not the word of God,
which is self-credible (autopiston).
The exhibition of the truth of God because God
does not trifle by instituting bare and empty
signs; but as by the vocal word he really
performs what he promises, so in the sacrament
(which is a palpable and visible word) he
gives by the thing itself that which the signs
represent, so that with the signs (in the
legitimate use of the sacrament) is connected
the true possession and fruition of the thing
signified, as the French Confession, Article
38, teaches (Cochrane, p. 157). Still we do
not recognize in the signs any implanted or
inherent power by which they either act upon
grace or on any quality of the soul, whether
we call it a stamp or anything similar. For as
the sound of the spoken word at length
striking the ears and the air does not strike
the heart by any power inherent in itself; so
neither does the external sign possess any
power to affect the soul, but only strikes the
senses.
XIII. From this analogy and
agreement, however, between the sign and the
thing signified arises the sacramental
phraseology; or those enunciations frequently
used in the Scriptures (called by theologians
“sacramental predications”), in which the
names of the signs and things signified are
interchanged with each other. The sign is
predicated of the thing signified—Christ is
called the Passover (1Cor. 5:7); or, on the
contrary, the thing signified is predicated of
the sign—as circumcision is called the
covenant, the body of Christ is called bread.
The foundation of these predications is the
sacramental union which by analogy (kat'
analogian)
joins the sign and thing signified, and
consequently makes these predications true on
account of the truth of the signification,
sealing and conferring in the lawful use. As
in the person of Christ the hypostatical union
of the natures makes those predications true
in which the properties of one nature are
enunciated either of the whole person or also
of either nature expressed by a concrete term,
yet without any confounding of the natures,
because they are united without being mixed (asynchytas)
and immutably (atreptos).
The efficient
XIV. The efficient of the
sacraments is God alone. (1) He is the sole
author of the promises and of the covenant of
grace. Now it is his to promise and give
grace, of whom also it is to seal it. (2) God
is the sole author of the word; therefore of
the sacraments also, which are the visible
word. (3) They are parts of divine worship,
which can be instituted by God alone. Now God
effects the sacrament by the word of
institution; for the word being added to the
element, it becomes a sacrament not by the
infusion of a new quality, but by a change of
use. There are, however, two parts of the word
which is called sacramental: the command and
the promise. The command unfolds the dignity
of the sacrament and the reason of the use of
its lawful administration. The promise
demonstrates the thing signified, the
perspicuity and truth of the significations
and so the whole efficacy of the sacrament; so
that no more is to be sought in the external
sacrament than is contained in the promise,
lest it degenerate into an idol. The word of
command is that by which God orders the
sacraments to be rightly administered and
perceived, by prescribing their formula and
commanding their legitimate use. Hence the
dignity and integrity of the sacrament ought
to be estimated (which is lessened neither by
the fault of the minister, nor by the unbelief
of the partaker, although the unbeliever
perceives the sign alone without the thing).
The essence of a sacrament is from the divine
institution. Therefore if the sacrament is
administered according to it, whether the
receiver believes or not, it is all the same.
The truth of the promises does not depend on
the faith of the believing; otherwise
unbelievers could weaken the truth of God and
from the infidelity of men God could be made a
liar (which is absurd). Therefore, although
faith is necessary to perceive the thing
signified, still it is not necessary to
constitute the essence and integrity of the
sacrament.
The end.
XV. The end of the sacraments is
either proper or accidental. The proper is
either principal or primary, or secondary and
less principal. The principal is the
confirmation of the covenant of grace and the
sealing on the part of God of our union with
Christ (promised in the covenant) and of all
his benefits; and on our part the
testification of our deep gratitude to God and
of love towards our neighbor. The less
principal is that they may be badges of a
public profession and of divine worship by
which they who belong to the visible church
are distinguished from other assemblies. Hence
it is evident how great is the philanthropy (philanthrapia)
of God, who, letting himself down as it were
to us creeping upon the ground, wishes to
seize not only our minds but also our external
senses with the haste and admiration of his
grace, inasmuch as he subjects it to the
bodily senses, to the hearing in the spoken
word, to the touch and sight in the
sacraments. However, signs are wont to be
employed in weightier things. For trivialities
are not confirmed by signs, but when they are
of great importance; as when princes are
inaugurated, when marriages are entered into,
when donations are made or other agreements,
signs are wont to be employed to confirm these
things which we wish to be best attested, that
they may be known not only by reason, but also
by sense. The accidental end is the just
condemnation of the wicked and hypocrites
abusing the sacraments, which end (accidental
through the fault of men) does not overthrow
the proper end. For Christ does not cease to
be by himself the author of life and the
bestower of it with respect to believers,
although (by accident on account of the
unbelief of men) he is the savor of death unto
death and a stone of stumbling and of
destruction with respect to hypocrites and
unbelievers.
XVI. Now from what has been said
it is easily gathered "What are the requisites
of a sacrament properly so called." What are
required and concur to constitute it
intrinsically and extrinsically, whether as
essential parts or as necessary conditions.
They are principally these four. (1) The
external and visible element with the rite, or
the earthly and corporeal matter which holds
the relation of sign. (2) The heavenly and
spiritual thing contained in the promise of
grace, which has the relation of the thing
signified, which coheres with the sign in its
lawful use, not substantially by composition,
but sacramentally by a mystical relation. (3)
The divine institution (and that immediate)
that it may be a sacrament. (4) The stated and
ordinary use of it in the church. For from
these four a sacrament properly so called is
intrinsically and extrinsically constituted
and from them its truth appears and is known.
Intrinsically, indeed, from the element with
the rite and the word of the promise of grace
as essential parts. But extrinsically from the
divine institution as the efficient and
immediate cause, and from the stated and
ordinary use of the testification and sealing
in the church as the proximate end.
XVII. This is clearly proved by
an induction of the sacraments of the Old and
New Testaments; for the divine institution was
common to all, as is evident with respect to
circumcision (Gen. 17:9-14), to the Passover
(Ex. 12:3-20), baptism (Mt. 28:19), the Supper
(Mt. 26:26-28). Common was the external sign
with some rite annexed: in circumcision the
cutting off of the foreskin; in the Passover
the lamb slain and eaten; in baptism the laver
of water; in the Supper the bread broken and
the wine poured out. Common was the word of
promise of grace according to the covenant of
God and the circumcision of the heart (Dt.
30:6); Christ, the Lamb slain (1Cor. 5:7); the
washing away of sins by the blood and spirit
of Christ (Acts 2:38; 1Cor. 6:11); and the
body of Christ broken and his blood shed for
us. Finally, the use of both classes of
sacraments was stated and ordinary and common
to the church.” (3)
Westminster
Confession of Faith Chapter 27 - Of the
Sacraments:
Section 1.) Sacraments are holy
signs and seals of the covenant of grace, (1)
immediately instituted by God, (2) to
represent Christ, and His benefits; and to
confirm our interest in Him: (3) as also, to
put a visible difference between those that
belong unto the Church, and the rest of the
world; (4) and solemnly to engage them to the
service of God in Christ, according to His
Word. (5)
(1) Ro 4:11; Ge 17:7, 10; (2) Mt
28:19; 1Co 11:23 (3) 1Co 10:16; 1Co 11:25, 26;
Gal 3:27; Gal 3:17 (4) Ro 15:8; Ex 12:48; Ge
34:14 (5) Ro 6:3, 4; 1Co 10:16
------------------------------------
Section 2.) There is, in every
sacrament, a spiritual relation, or
sacramental union, between the sign and the
thing signified: whence it comes to pass, that
the names and effects of the one are
attributed to the other. (1)
(1) Ge 17:10; Mt 26:27, 28; Tit
3:5
------------------------------------
Section 3.) The grace which is
exhibited in or by the sacraments rightly
used, is not conferred by any power in them;
neither doth the efficacy of a sacrament
depend upon the piety or intention of him that
doth administer it: (1) but upon the work of
the Spirit, (2) and the word of institution,
which contains, together with a precept
authorizing the use thereof, a promise of
benefit to worthy receivers. (3)
Section 4.) There be only two
sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the
Gospel; that is to say, Baptism, and the
Supper of the Lord: neither of which may be
dispensed by any, but by a minister of the
Word lawfully ordained. (1)
(1) Mt 28:19; 1Co 11:20, 23; 1Co
4:1; Heb. 5:4
------------------------------------
Section 5.) The sacraments of the
Old Testament, in regard of the spiritual
things thereby signified and exhibited, were,
for substance, the same with those of the new.
(1)
(1) 1Co 10:1-4
In Closing, a
summary from the Monergism.com web site on
sacraments:
“In Reformed theology, baptism
and the Lord's Supper are sacraments which
signify a person's union with Christ, or being
joined to Christ and being treated as if they
had done everything Christ had. Sacraments,
along with preaching of God's word, are means
of grace through which the Holy Spirit works
to portray visibly the promises of the gospel
... means that use our sight, taste, touch,
and smell. They have no efficacy in themselves
but are signs and seals which point us to
point us to “the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on
the cross as the only ground of our salvation”
(The Heidelberg Catechism, Q&A 67).
Sacraments are believed to have their effect
through the Holy Spirit, but these effects are
only believed to be beneficial in any
redemptive way to those who, by grace, turn to
trust in Christ alone.” (4)
Notes:
1.Marvin R. Vincent, Word
Studies In The New Testament, (THE AGES
DIGITAL LIBRARY), Albany, Oregon), p.176.
2.General Editor, J. J.
S. Perowne, D.D., John James Lias, The first
Epistle to the Corinthians, Cambridge
Bible for Schools and Colleges,
(Cambridge, England, Cambridge University
Press, 1897), p. 115.
3.Francis Turretin, Institutes
of Elentic Theology, Vol. 3,
(Phillipsburg, New Jersey, Presbyterian and
Reformed Publishing Company, 1997), pp.
337-342.
4.Monergism.com web site
on sacraments
“To God,
only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ
forever. Amen.” (Romans 16:27) and “heirs
according to the promise.” (Galatians 3:28,
29)
Mr. Kettler has
previously published articles in the Chalcedon
Report and Contra
Mundum. He and his wife Marea attend the
Westminster, CO, RPCNA Church. Mr. Kettler is
the author of the book defending the Reformed
Faith against attacks, titled: The
Religion That Started in a Hat.
Available at: http://www.TheReligionThatStartedInAHat.com