This is not a "debate" question, but I'm hoping some of you can help me understand something about ordinances.

[UberLutheran]

Over in my Lutheran tradition, we observe two Sacraments: baptism and the Eucharist (Holy Communion).

Sacraments, for us, are an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given to us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means whereby we receive Christ, along with a pledge to assure us thereof. As such, we believe that a sacrament is an act that is commanded by Christ, uses a material or earthly element, and through connection with the Word is the bearer of God’s promise.

I know that Baptists view baptism and Communion (The Lord's Supper) as ordinances -- things which our Lord commanded us to do, but which are symbolic of His life, death, and resurrection.

Here's the problem (and I'm asking this so I can understand and make a connection with what you all believe): when I go to Communion each week, I believe I literally encounter Christ in the elements of bread and the wine. Therefore, Communion is THE central and most important part of my religious experience. When I was baptized, I believe that I was literally marked as one of Christ's own, and therefore I belong to Him forever.

I know that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are meaningful observances to Baptists -- but I don't understand is how they "work" for you if they are viewed only as ordinances, and not as something where Christ's presence actually occurs.

I'm really not trying to start an argument -- but can any of you help me out so I can try to understand where you all are coming from on this?

 

[kayanne]

I'll do my best to share my own opinion of this. You believe that in the Eucharist Christ's presence actually occurs." Of course it is not in the "visible, Jesus sitting next to you on the pew, literal human begin head to toe" kind of presence. But you believe He is actually there. I believe Jesus is actually there also....but I believe Jesus is always with me, every day, in every situation. I don't believe that He is "in" the communion elements literally (like, if I drop my piece of bread, I don't feel the need to carefully pick it up as if I am holding Jesus Himself--to me that would be idolatrous), or that He is with me any more in communion than any other time. Now, MY mind and heart may (should) be more fully on HIM during communion, and I may feel His presence in a strong and special way. The bread and wine, to me, are reminders of what Jesus did for us, and how He paid for my sins with his body and blood. But I don't have to wait until communion to have Him with me--for He said "Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Matthew 28:20
If He is with me *always*, how can He be with any more than that during communion?

 

[Crazy Liz]

I know that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are meaningful observances to Baptists -- but I don't understand is how they "work" for you if they are viewed only as ordinances, and not as something where Christ's presence actually occurs.

I'm really not trying to start an argument -- but can any of you help me out so I can try to understand where you all are coming from on this?

The official position of all or nearly all churches in the Free Church Protestant traditions would be that baptism and communion do not "work" at all. As one of my Quaker friends recently said, they are "just object lessons."

Personally, that statement makes me uncomfortable, and it does represent one of the more extreme positions of Free Church Protestants, but I would say it is the majority view. They are "just object lessons," but at the same time, object lessons Jesus himself commanded to be observed.

The Anabaptists add a bit more significance to baptism than that, in that it is considered an act of obedience by which one is initiated into the church, and being a member of the church is a much more significant thing to Anabaptists than to other Free Church Protestants.

 

[sunshinejennii]

i dont take communion because i havent yet been baptised and feel i shouldnt yet. but i believe the bread and wine(grapejuice) are symbolic of Jesu's body and his sacrifice and that in taking them i would be reaffirming my commitment to him and giving myself some time to ponder on his amazing gift. therefore until ive made my public declaration of acceptance of christ through baptism i wont take communion.

 

[UberLutheran]

I'll do my best to share my own opinion of this. You believe that in the Eucharist Christ's presence actually occurs." Of course it is not in the "visible, Jesus sitting next to you on the pew, literal human begin head to toe" kind of presence. But you believe He is actually there. I believe Jesus is actually there also....but I believe Jesus is always with me, every day, in every situation. I don't believe that He is "in" the communion elements literally (like, if I drop my piece of bread, I don't feel the need to carefully pick it up as if I am holding Jesus Himself--to me that would be idolatrous), or that He is with me any more in communion than any other time. Now, MY mind and heart may (should) be more fully on HIM during communion, and I may feel His presence in a strong and special way. The bread and wine, to me, are reminders of what Jesus did for us, and how He paid for my sins with his body and blood. But I don't have to wait until communion to have Him with me--for He said "Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Matthew 28:20
If He is with me *always*, how can He be with any more than that during communion?

For us Lutherans, Jesus' presence is with us the other 167 hours during the week when we're not having Communion (except during Lent and Advent, when it's 166 hours because we have two services during the week ).

Jesus' spirit is with us always; but we believe that Jesus is present physically in the elements of bread and wine.

Now, if we take an x-ray of the consecrated elements, we're not going to see a skeleton in the bread; nor if we put the wine through a centrifuge, are we going to see blood cells and hemoglobin separated out. (Someone actually asked me that, once!). Still, we DO believe Jesus is physically present in the elements of bread and wine.

Your explanation DOES help give me an understanding of how Communion "works" for Baptists as an ordinance.

 

[MominTX]

I have been apart of 4 different religions, but I was raised Lutheran and now attend a Baptist church. The Baptist church I attend is very charismatic-almost borderline pentecostal and I've seen numerous water baptisms in the past few months, but we have only had communion once in the past few months. Mainly both religions, I think, have similiar beliefs of Baptism and Communion, but Baptists believe they are more of just symbols of your faith, whereas Lutherans feel more spiritual about it in the act of the communion. One other thing I noticed is that Baptists put a lot more emphasis on the baptism and Lutherans on the Communion. I've also seen the Catholic side of things and they are really ritualistic about baptism and communion. But I feel like I need to be baptized again because I was baptized as a baby and then went through confirmation, but I was never baptized when I truly accepted Jesus as my Savior and I feel I need to do that.

 

[UberLutheran]

I have been apart of 4 different religions, but I was raised Lutheran and now attend a Baptist church. The Baptist church I attend is very charismatic-almost borderline pentecostal and I've seen numerous water baptisms in the past few months, but we have only had communion once in the past few months. Mainly both religions, I think, have similiar beliefs of Baptism and Communion, but Baptists believe they are more of just symbols of your faith, whereas Lutherans feel more spiritual about it in the act of the communion. One other thing I noticed is that Baptists put a lot more emphasis on the baptism and Lutherans on the Communion. I've also seen the Catholic side of things and they are really ritualistic about baptism and communion. But I feel like I need to be baptized again because I was baptized as a baby and then went through confirmation, but I was never baptized when I truly accepted Jesus as my Savior and I feel I need to do that.

We have Communion every time we have a service -- Sunday, Wednesday, wedding, funeral, you name it. It doesn't "cheapen" the action of Communion at all to have it frequently: if anything, it brings us closer to Christ.

 

[sunshinejennii]

ah whereas we have communion once a month(ish)

 

[eldermike]

I know that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are meaningful observances to Baptists -- but I don't understand is how they "work" for you if they are viewed only as ordinances, and not as something where Christ's presence actually occurs.

Well, we don't teach Christ's presence as an event. All beleivers are priest', Christ' presence is 24-7. Also, we don't find a biblical basis for the presence of Christ other than He is always with us even to the end of this age. Hope this helps.
Mike

 

[Sinai]

Here's the problem (and I'm asking this so I can understand and make a connection with what you all believe): when I go to Communion each week, I believe I literally encounter Christ in the elements of bread and the wine. Therefore, Communion is THE central and most important part of my religious experience. When I was baptized, I believe that I was literally marked as one of Christ's own, and therefore I belong to Him forever.

I know that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are meaningful observances to Baptists -- but I don't understand is how they "work" for you if they are viewed only as ordinances, and not as something where Christ's presence actually occurs.

I'm really not trying to start an argument -- but can any of you help me out so I can try to understand where you all are coming from on this?

Christian churches have historically held one of four principal views regarding the Lord's supper or communion. Roman Catholics believe in transubstantiation (i.e., that the elements in the Mass actually become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Martin Luther adopted a modified version of the Catholic view by asserting that Jesus' blood and body are present with the elements (consubstantiation). Some Christians in various denominations believe in the Lord's supper as a means of grace, and contend that one receives grace by partaking of communion.

Baptists are among those who tend to adhere to the fourth position: The elements symbolize the body and blood of Jesus and have no power per se to save or redeem anyone. Rather, they remind the partaker or observer of what our Savior did for us and the price He paid for our sins. In other words, Baptists generally consider both ordinances to be visual aids whereby believers portray the basis and experience of their saving relationship with Jesus Christ. After all, Jesus said that "as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes"--and that they were to be taken "in remembrance of me,"

Since Baptists churches are generally autonomous, you will find a variety among them regarding the manner and frequency of observing the Lord's supper. Some use a single cup, some use individual cups for each believer, and some offer participants their choice. Some churches may end each service (or each Sunday morning service) with the Lord's supper, while others may observe it once every so many Sundays.

I hope that helps a bit......

 

[theseed]

I know that Baptism and the Lord's Supper are meaningful observances to Baptists -- but I don't understand is how they "work" for you if they are viewed only as ordinances, and not as something where Christ's presence actually occurs.

Well I believe that Christ is always really present with me. He lives in the believer.

And although we believe that baptism and the Lord's Supper are ordinanes, we still enjoy the reality of what they represent.

We too beleive that baptism is an outward sign of inward grace--but that grace is not infused through the water or is not carried by the water--as if the water was the vehicle. I

believe that the Holy Spirit draws and regenerates us (baptism/grace) and we by our new nature believe in Christ. And faith accredits us rightousness thereby allow God to let us into heaven because our rightousness is based on Christ death. So we don't hve to pay the wages of sin and go to hell. We recieve eternal life because we are delivered from death by justification. We are justified through grace alone by faith alone through Christ alone.

As you notice though, I take a reformed/calvin position. Other baptists may not.


John 14:23
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

 

[theseed]

Like the Lutherans though, i reject double predistination. We read in Romans 9 that we are stilled held responsible, despite God's Soveriegn will. If anybody goes to hell, it is because they rejected Christ.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Christian churches have historically held one of four principal views regarding the Lord's supper or communion. Roman Catholics believe in transubstantiation (i.e., that the elements in the Mass actually become the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Martin Luther adopted a modified version of the Catholic view by asserting that Jesus' blood and body are present with the elements (consubstantiation). Some Christians in various denominations believe in the Lord's supper as a means of grace, and contend that one receives grace by partaking of communion.

Baptists are among those who tend to adhere to the fourth position: The elements symbolize the body and blood of Jesus and have no power per se to save or redeem anyone. Rather, they remind the partaker or observer of what our Savior did for us and the price He paid for our sins. In other words, Baptists generally consider both ordinances to be visual aids whereby believers portray the basis and experience of their saving relationship with Jesus Christ. After all, Jesus said that "as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes"--and that they were to be taken "in remembrance of me,"

Since Baptists churches are generally autonomous, you will find a variety among them regarding the manner and frequency of observing the Lord's supper. Some use a single cup, some use individual cups for each believer, and some offer participants their choice. Some churches may end each service (or each Sunday morning service) with the Lord's supper, while others may observe it once every so many Sundays.

I hope that helps a bit......

Again, this "four views" list omits the Eastern Orthodox, who believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but refuse to explain it further, preferring to say, "It's a Mystery."

 

[kayanne]

Again, this "four views" list omits the Eastern Orthodox, who believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but refuse to explain it further, preferring to say, "It's a Mystery."

Could you tell me how the EO belief in Real Presence differs from the cath belief?

 

[UberLutheran]

It's so easy to get into a system of "this is the way we do it" to the point where we don't really understand how (or why) other people do it differently.

This has helped A LOT. Thanks to all of you who responded!

UberLutheran

 

[Crazy Liz]

Could you tell me how the EO belief in Real Presence differs from the cath belief?

Sorry I missed your question.

The RC position, as I understand it, is called Transubstantiation. I think it was Thomas Aquinas who first described it, and it has been accepted since then. It is a pretty detailed explanation of exactly when and how the Eucharist becomes the actual body and blood of Christ. Beyond that, ask the Catholics in OBOB to explain it. I'll probably make a mistake. Luther disagreed with this theory, and came up with one of his own. Calvin and Zwingli both disagreed with Luther, and came up with two other ideas about the significance of the Lord's Supper. Baptists and Anabaptists followed Zwingli.

The EO may speculate about just how the body and blood of Christ become present in the Eucharist, but do not make any theory a point of doctrine. They simply say they believe the body and blood of Christ are really present. If you want to say anything beyond that, you may, but you may not say it is dogma. The EO do not like to settle theological questions dogmatically unless it is absolutely necessary, and even then, they believe it takes the whole Church together to make a dogmatic statement. Therefore, since around 1054 when the Eastern and Roman Catholic churches split, the Eastern churches have refused to make any new pronouncements of dogma. Again, this is my understanding, but if you want more details or to check the accuracy of my description, go ask our Orthodox brothers and sisters in their forum.

The basic difference, as I understand it, is that the RCs have a specific explanation, while the EO are content to leave it vague.

 

[Crazy Liz]

BTW, the EO refusal to make dogmatic pronouncements without the whole Church acting together is a way of stating on a grand scale the same thing the Anabaptists believe about the Holy Spirit guiding the congregation as a whole, as opposed to the Baptist view of individual freedom of conscience.

I think it's really cool that the Holy Spirit would lead two branches of the Church that seem so far apart to such similar beliefs.

 

[Bro. Gabriel]

I attend a rather traditional Southern Baptist Church, and we always treat the Communion time very reverently and seriously. We make sure people have things cleared up with God before they participate, and we always do it in a sober and solemn manner. It's not just "something we do", we make a big deal out of it and do it seriously. However, I know what you mean, in that most people there probably don't see it as deeply significant as I do... and that is sad. I hope I can change that attitude in the SBC someday.