Number of sacraments/ordinances

FaithfulPilgrim

Eternally Seeking
Feb 8, 2015
455
120
South Carolina
✟39,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
It seems universal among evangelicals and Reformed Protestants for there two be two sacraments: baptism and the Lord's Supper.

I've heard that Baptists prefer to call them ordinances since "sacraments" has a negative connotation. I understand the thinking, but I feel like that is downplaying the importance of Baptism and Communion and the word "sacrament" gives a much more "mysterious" or "transcendent" connotation. Since they are instituted by Christ, and we love and respect Him, it's only appropriate we call them sacraments. That's just my personal opinion, however.

The Supper should be a weekly observance, and I think calling an ordinance rather than a sacraments downplays its importance in the faith as the majority of SBC churches I attend observe it quarterly.

Free Will Baptists practice foot-washing, though I don't think the practice is as common as it once was. I wouldn't go as far as calling it a sacrament, but an ordinance, something that can help us in our spiritual growth.

I don't see it on the same level as Baptism and Communion as I don't think it was instituted by Christ, but it can help us grow and teach us accountability as Jesus is our King, yet He also was a servant, and we should follow His example.

I have also heard of some churches that anoint their ministers, and I like the idea of the practice as Jesus was anointed and so were many OT leaders.

In short, I believe there are only two sacraments, but I use ordinances to refer to rites and traditions that are beneficial to the faith but are not on the same level of importance as the Baptism and the Lord's Supper and the churches, while having only two sacraments, can observe as many ordinances as they want or think is necessary/beneficial.

We are too casual in our worship and Christ is worthy of our respect, though I'm not saying we have to go as far as the RCC or the EOC.
 

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It seems universal among evangelicals and Reformed Protestants for there two be two sacraments: baptism and the Lord's Supper.

I've heard that Baptists prefer to call them ordinances since "sacraments" has a negative connotation. I understand the thinking, but I feel like that is downplaying the importance of Baptism and Communion and the word "sacrament" gives a much more "mysterious" or "transcendent" connotation. Since they are instituted by Christ, and we love and respect Him, it's only appropriate we call them sacraments. That's just my personal opinion, however.

The Supper should be a weekly observance, and I think calling an ordinance rather than a sacraments downplays its importance in the faith as the majority of SBC churches I attend observe it quarterly.

Free Will Baptists practice foot-washing, though I don't think the practice is as common as it once was. I wouldn't go as far as calling it a sacrament, but an ordinance, something that can help us in our spiritual growth.

I don't see it on the same level as Baptism and Communion as I don't think it was instituted by Christ, but it can help us grow and teach us accountability as Jesus is our King, yet He also was a servant, and we should follow His example.

I have also heard of some churches that anoint their ministers, and I like the idea of the practice as Jesus was anointed and so were many OT leaders.

In short, I believe there are only two sacraments, but I use ordinances to refer to rites and traditions that are beneficial to the faith but are not on the same level of importance as the Baptism and the Lord's Supper and the churches, while having only two sacraments, can observe as many ordinances as they want or think is necessary/beneficial.

We are too casual in our worship and Christ is worthy of our respect, though I'm not saying we have to go as far as the RCC or the EOC.


You can label and define ideas as you see fit. Language is cool that way.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

FaithfulPilgrim

Eternally Seeking
Feb 8, 2015
455
120
South Carolina
✟39,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
You can label and define ideas as you see fit. Language is cool that way.

I agree.

I wish Baptists had a higher reverence for the Lord's Supper, which is why I prefer to call it a sacrament instead of an ordinance. It was also why I was drawn to the Reformed understanding of the Lord's Supper and their traditions even though I think I lean Arminian.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,500
Milwaukee
✟410,948.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I agree.I wish Baptists had a higher reverence for the Lord's Supper, which is why I prefer to call it a sacrament instead of an ordinance. It was also why I was drawn to the Reformed understanding of the Lord's Supper and their traditions even though I think I lean Arminian.

I am quite the liberal in ways and don't
fit in any church well.
 
Upvote 0

Goodbook

Reading the Bible
Jan 22, 2011
22,090
5,106
New Zealand
Visit site
✟78,875.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Presbyterians call them sacraments and baptists call them ordinances but they are minsitered the same way basically. Its just different language.

In the bible it is not called a sacrament actually I do recall that they were called ordinances, i think that word is actually used in the bible. Techinically they are commandments as the Lord commanded we observe those two things.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: JM
Upvote 0

FaithfulPilgrim

Eternally Seeking
Feb 8, 2015
455
120
South Carolina
✟39,839.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Libertarian
I am quite the liberal in ways and don't
fit in any church well.

Same. The main reason I remain in the SBC is due to its diversity. I can be Arminian or Calvinist and still be a Southern Baptist, and I can believe what I want about eschatology and creation vs evolution.

I would be non-denominational, but I don't see denominations as necessarily bad, and I feel like. Non-denominational is a denomination since they often have similar beliefs to each other and use it as their. "Denominational label."

From my experience, they're just closet Southern Baptists with speaking in tongues and contemporary worship.
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
The reason that Baptists use the word ordinances for the Lord's Supper and Baptism is because the word sacrament means much more than what Baptists believe are part of the rites. A sacrament necessarily means that grace is imparted by the rite. That is why Presbyterians and the RCC call them sacraments. Of course the RCC hold to seven sacraments of which baptism saves and the bread and wine is actually turned physically into the body and blood of Christ. They impart grace to the receiver as they are taken. In Presbyterianism, which in no way agrees with the RCC view, grace is imparted by the real presence of the Lord in and around the elements of bread and wine and baptism includes one into the covenant. Grace is imparted by the act and the receiver is given something that he did not have before or given more of what he has.

Baptists historically have denied the idea of grace imparted, though they have always held a very high view of both rites. Both the Lord's supper and baptism are symbols of the Gospel of Christ. There is no more grace imparted by the practice of them than there is in the preaching of the Gospel. Baptists call them ordinances because we are commanded to do them.

Baptism is the symbolic public identification with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. There is no grace imparted by it that makes us any different than we were before except to focus us on what is pictured. Baptism may be "the door to the church" in that those who have made their profession of faith in public baptism are welcomed into the body but it in no way puts us in the church. Faith in Christ is our access to the church.

The same with the Lord's supper. The bread and the wine do not change into anything more spiritual nor do they carry any special ability because in some way they do something. They are just bread and wine. They symbolically represent the body and blood of Christ and show us the Gospel. They picture for us what faith in Christ does by the taking of the bread and the wine and making them a part of our being. The bread becomes a part of us as does our food and the wine becomes a part of us in the same way. But there is nothing special in the elements themselves to impart grace or special favor by partaking in them. They are not sacraments.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DeaconDean
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,361
3,628
Canada
✟747,724.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Historically, the authors of the London Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689 used the term sacrament and ordinance interchangeably in their writings and they always refer to two sacraments/ordinances.

If there is any doubt we can always check the Catechisms of the time along with the Confession to see if Baptists defined the sacraments just like other Reformed Christians or if they defined them differently.

This is a very important fact, Baptists did not see themselves as different from other Reformed Christians, only differing on ecclesiology which lead to a different idea concerning who should be baptized. The first Baptists used Reformed Confessions of Faith to show how similar they were with their Congregational and Presbyterian brothers and sisters.

The London Baptist was a re-write of the Savoy and Westminster, the Baptist Catechism was a re-write of the Westminster Shorter Catechism, the Orthodox Catechism was a re-write of the Heidelberg Catechism...even the Arminian Baptists re-wrote the Westminster!

From the London Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689:

“…for the perpetual remembrance, and shewing forth the sacrifice of himself in his death, confirmation of the faith of believers in all the benefits thereof, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in him, their further engagement in, and to all duties which they owe to him…” 30.1

“…Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed…”

“…spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of believers…” 30.7

This is what, if I’m not mistaken, Bullinger taught and has been largely forgotten.

A Baptist Catechism:

Q. 95. What are the outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of redemption?

A. The outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of redemption are His ordinances, especially the Word, Baptism, the Lord’s Supper and Prayer; all which are made effectual to the elect for salvation. (Rom. 10:17; James 1:18; 1 Cor. 3:5; Acts 14:1; 2:41,42)

Q. 98. How do Baptism and the Lord’s Supper become effectual means of salvation?

A. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper become effectual means of salvation, not from any virtue in them or in him that administers them, but only by the blessing of Christ and the working of His Spirit in them that by faith receive them. (1 Peter 3:21; 1 Cor. 3:6,7; 1 Cor. 12:13)

Q. 107. What is the Lord’s Supper?

A. The Lord’s Supper is a holy ordinance, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to Christ’s appointment, His death is showed forth, and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporeal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of His body and blood, with all His benefits, to their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace. (1 Cor. 11:23-26; 10:16)

Q. 108. What is required to the worthy receiving of the Lord’s Supper?

A. It is required of them that would worthily (that is, suitably) partake of the Lord’s Supper, that they examine themselves, of their knowledge to discern the Lord’s body; of their faith to feed upon Him; of their repentance, love, and new obedience: lest, coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves. (1 Cor. 11:27-31; 1 Cor. 5:8; 2 Cor. 13:5)

From Hercules Collins An Orthodox Catechism.

Of the Lord’s Supper.
Lesson 29
Q. 80 How does the Lord’s Supper remind you and assure you that you share in Christ’s one sacrifice on the cross and in all his gifts?
A. In this way: Christ has commanded me and all believers to eat this broken bread and to drink this cup. With this command he gave this promise:1 First, as surely as I see with my eyes the bread of the Lord broken for me and the cup given to me, so surely his body was offered and broken for me and his blood poured out for me on the cross. Second, as surely as I receive from the hand of the one who serves, and taste with my mouth the bread and cup of the Lord, given me as sure signs of Christ’s body and blood, so surely he nourishes and refreshes my soul for eternal life with his crucified body and poured-out blood.

1Matt. 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25

Q. 81 What does it mean to eat the crucified body of Christ and to drink his poured-out blood?
A. It means to accept with a believing heart the entire suffering and death of Christ and by believing to receive forgiveness of sins and eternal life.1 But it means more. Through the Holy Spirit, who lives both in Christ and in us, we are united more and more to Christ’s blessed body.2 And so, although he is in heaven3 and we are on earth, we are flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone.4 And we forever live on and are governed by one Spirit, as members of our body are by one soul.5

1John 6:35, 40, 50-54
2John 6:55-56; 1 Cor. 12:13
3Acts 1:9-11; 1 Cor. 11:26; Col. 3:1
41 Cor. 6:15-17; Eph. 5:29-30; 1 John 4:13
5John 6:56-58; 15:1-6; Eph. 4:15-16; 1 John 3:24

Q. 82 Where does Christ promise to nourish and refresh believers with his body and blood as surely as they eat this broken bread and drink this cup?
A. In the institution of the Lord’s Supper:

“The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, ‘This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.’ In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.”1

This promise is repeated by Paul in these words:

“Is not the cup of thanksgiving for which we give thanks a participation in the blood of Christ? And is not the bread that we break a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.”2

11 Cor. 11:23-26
21 Cor. 10:16-17

Lesson 30
Q. 83 Are the bread and wine changed into the real body and blood of Christ?
A. No. Just as the water of baptism is not changed into Christ’s blood and does not itself wash away sins but is simply God’s sign and assurance,1 so too the bread of the Lord’s Supper is not changed into the actual body of Christ2 even though it is called the body of Christ3 in keeping with the nature and language of sacraments.4

1Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5
2Matt. 26:26-29
31 Cor. 10:16-17; 11:26-28
4Gen. 17:10-11; Ex. 12:11, 13; 1 Cor. 10:1-4

Q. 84 Why then does Christ call the bread his body and the cup his blood, or the new covenant in his blood?
(Paul uses the words,a participation in Christ’s body and blood.)

A. Christ has good reason for these words. He wants to teach us that as bread and wine nourish our temporal life, so too his crucified body and poured-out blood truly nourish our souls for eternal life.1 But more important, he wants to assure us, by this visible sign and pledge, that we, through the Holy Spirit’s work, share in his true body and blood as surely as our mouths receive these holy signs in his remembrance,2 and that all of his suffering and obedience are as definitely ours as if we personally had suffered and paid for our sins.3

1John 6:51, 55
21 Cor. 10:16-17; 11:26
3Rom. 6:5-11

Lesson 31
Q. 85 How does the Lord’s Supper differ from the Roman Catholic Mass?
A. The Lord’s Supper declares to us that our sins have been completely forgiven through the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ which he himself finished on the cross once for all.1 It also declares to us that the Holy Spirit grafts us into Christ,2 who with his very body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father3 where he wants us to worship him.4 But the Mass teaches that the living and the dead do not have their sins forgiven through the suffering of Christ unless Christ is still offered for them daily by the priests. It also teaches that Christ is bodily present in the form of bread and wine where Christ is therefore to be worshiped. Thus the Mass is basically nothing but a denial of the one sacrifice and suffering of Jesus Christ and a condemnable idolatry.

1John 19:30; Heb. 7:27; 9:12, 25-26; 10:10-18
21 Cor. 6:17; 10:16-17
3Acts 7:55-56; Heb. 1:3; 8:1
4Matt. 6:20-21; John 4:21-24; Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3

Q. 86 Who are to come to the Lord’s table?

A. Those who are displeased with themselves because of their sins, but who nevertheless trust that their sins are pardoned and that their continuing weakness is covered by the suffering and death of Christ, and who also desire more and more to strengthen their faith and to lead a better life. Hypocrites and those who are unrepentant, however, eat and drink judgment on themselves.1

11 Cor. 10:19-22; 11:26-32

Q. 87 Are those to be admitted to the Lord’s Supper who show by what they say and do that they are unbelieving and ungodly?
A. No, that would dishonor God’s covenant and bring down God’s anger upon the entire congregation.1 Therefore, according to the instruction of Christ and his apostles, the Christian church is duty-bound to exclude such people, by the official use of the keys of the kingdom, until they reform their lives.

11 Cor. 11:17-32; Ps. 50:14-16; Isa. 1:11-17

Q. 88 How should this Ordinance of the Lord’s Supper be closed?
A. In singing Praises to God vocally and audibly for his great Benefits and Blessings to his Church in the shedding of the most precious Blood of his Son to take away their Sin; which Blessings are pointed out in this Sacrament. Also we find our Lord and his Disciples did close this Ordinance in singing a Hymn or Psalm; and if Christ sang, who was going to die, what cause have we to sing for whom he died, that we might not eternally die, but live a spiritual and eternal life with Father, Son, and Spirit in unexpressible Glory.1

1Mat. 26.30

Philadelphia Baptist Catechism

CHAPTER XXX

Q. 194. What is the Lord’s Supper?
A. The Lord’s Supper is a memorial of the sacrifice of Christ.
Scr. “Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of Me. — 1 Corinthians 11:24

Q. 195. What are the benefits of the Lord’s Supper to believers?
A. They are confirmed in their faith, they are spiritually fed, they are reminded of the debt they owe unto Christ, and they are rededicated to His service and worship.
Scr. “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” — 1 Corinthians 10:16 See also John 6:53-57

Q. 196. What are the elements used in the Lord’s Supper?
A. Bread and wine.
Scr.”Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying Drink ye all of it;” — Matthew 26:26, 27, 29 See also 1 Corinthians 11:23

Q. 197. What do the elements of bread and wine signify?
A. They signify the body and blood of Christ.
Scr. “Take, eat: this is My body,… This cup is the new testament in My blood:” — 1 Corinthians 11:24, 25

Q. 198. Who should partake of the Lord’s Supper?
A. Those who can spiritually receive and feed upon Christ crucified.
Scr. “Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.” — 1 Corinthians 11:27

Q. 199. Can ungodly persons partake of the Lord’s Supper?
A. Not lawfully, for they are unworthy of the Lord’s table, and cannot feed upon Him spiritually.
Scr. “For he that eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.” — 1 Corinthians 11:29

I pray this was useful.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0

twin1954

Baptist by the Bible
Jun 12, 2011
4,527
1,473
✟86,544.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
JM said:
This is a very important fact, Baptists did not see themselves as different from other Reformed Christians, only differing onecclesiology which lead to a different idea concerning who should be baptized. The first Baptists used Reformed Confessions of Faith to show how similar they were with their Congregational and Presbyterian brothers and sisters.
Baptists also differed from the Reformed in their view of the Covenants. You are the one who actually caused me to grasp more clearly the difference.
 
Upvote 0

JM

Augsburg Catholic
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2004
17,361
3,628
Canada
✟747,724.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Baptists also differed from the Reformed in their view of the Covenants. You are the one who actually caused me to grasp more clearly the difference.

Hehe, I know.

Covenant theology => to their doctrine of the church / ecclesiology. Because of how Baptists view the covenant of grace it alters their doctrine of the church, who should be baptized.

Yours in the Lord,

jm
 
Upvote 0