How are we then to define a sacrament, so that the definition may be what a definition should be, viz., adequate, yet devoid of superfluous conditions? A sacrament is an ordinance instituted by Christ Himself, and which exhibits, in a symbolical form, the way, or the meritorious cause, of our salvation. Hence the Anglican body rightly says, there are two sacraments and two only. One of these is subjective, the other objective. Baptism, the subjective, and the initiatory rite of the church, signifies that death and resurrection in and with Christ is the process of salvation. “Know ye not that so many of us as have been baptized unto Jesus Christ have been baptized unto His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him by baptism unto death.” (Rom. 6:3, 43Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3‑4)). “Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him,” &c. (Coloss. 2:2). “For ye have died, and your life is hid with Christ in God.” (Coloss. 3:3.) “Verily, verily I say unto you, He that heareth My word, and believeth on Him that sent Me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but is passed from death unto life.” (John 5:2424Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24):) Death and resurrection is the fundamental principle of the gospel—on the part of Christ it is the meritorious cause of our salvation, on our part it is the necessary process; and of this truth baptism is the symbol. The Lord's Supper is the ordinance in which the sacrificial death of Christ is symbolically presented to us, as forming the subject-matter of the church's communion with the Lord, and with each other, and that in peace with God. The Lord's Supper is particularly connected with the church as the body of Christ “For we being many are one bread (loaf), and one body” (1 Cor. 10.17); but we are baptized into one body, not by water, but by the Holy Ghost.
Water baptism is connected with the kingdom—a wider sphere than the church. And even though the church and the kingdom are, as long as the church is upon earth, coincident, the terms are not synonymous, either as to their general meaning or in reference to the individuals who may be in either. To be in the church is to be in the kingdom, but the converse will not always be true. Water baptism is connected with the kingdom, and that again is connected with this earth,—the kingdom, whether in its mystic or in its manifested form, here on earth. The principle of death and resurrection is so thorough, that it utterly baffles any attempt on the part of men in the flesh to follow that way—such an attempt would be hopeless. Faith in Christ is the only way. Hence the weakest believer, if a true believer in Him, has a vast vantage-ground. Life in the risen and glorified Son of God is indeed a divine gift, and not only entitles the believer to, but requires that he should, reckon himself dead to sin, dead to the law, and dead to the world. Nor is this mere theory—it is most solemnly and wonderfully true. An earthly religion would be useless to such, it cannot reach him where he is—he worships by the spirit of God—he is in Christ, and boasts in Him. Amidst all the sorrows and changes of this world, he has access to “the Father of mercies and the God of all comfort,” who never forsakes or forgets His child, even though He may chasten him for his good; and if called to die, it is his privilege to realize, practically, the momentous importance and unspeakable reality of that life in Jesus, which, having reached his soul, whilst in the body and in this world, passes, through the dissolution of that body, into the presence of Him who is that life—without break of continuity—changeless and his own, from the moment Christ gave him life, and onward to a never-ending eternity. Beyond the power of sin or death, to touch, taint, or injure it, such gift is God's unspeakable grace and mercy, to poor man, ruined by sin, and under the terrible power of Satan and of death, with eternal judgment before him, the only escape from which is in that Savior who “bore our sins in His own body on the tree,” and who is “the way, the truth, and the life.”
For baptism the Lord gave a formula of words, not as “consecrating” the water, but as giving validity to the rite as performed in His name, and by His authority. No such fixed formula of words, but giving of thanks, attends the celebration of the Lord's Supper; for 1 Cor. 11:24; 14:16, 1724And 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. (1 Corinthians 11:24)
16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? 17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified. (1 Corinthians 14:16‑17), compared with Matt. 26:2626And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body. (Matthew 26:26), and with 1 Cor. 10:1616The 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); prove that εὐλογέω=εὐχαριστέω, and that, εὐλογία=εὐχαριστία, i.e. to bless means in this case to give thanks. To quote the words of a very able writer: “The term εὐχαριστια is used metonymically, resembling in all respects the phrase ποτήριον εὐλογίας, ὅ εὐλόγουμεν in Paul= ὁ εὐχαριστηθεὶς ἄρτος καὶ οἶνος, in Justin Martyr—the bread and wine over which the prayer of thanksgiving has been pronounced. The latter says expressly that, immediately after the president of the church has pronounced this prayer of thanksgiving over the bread and wine, and the church joined in it with their amen, the sacramental elements were distributed. He mentions no other consecration.” We quote this, simply as confirming what we have just stated as the teaching of Scripture, not as regarding the “Fathers” to be any authority whatever. On the contrary, it is to the Fathers we must go to find the basis of that systematic perversion of Scripture, and of that traditional and corrupted Christianity, which has existed (though with increasing departure from the truth) from the time the apostles were removed from this world; who even, in their later writings, endeavored to combat the tide of corruption, both of doctrine and in practice, which was then commencing to invade, as it soon overflowed, the church, to its ruin as, a testimony in the world for God.
It can scarcely be necessary to observe that circumcision and the passover were types, whilst baptism and the Lord's Supper are symbols; and symbols only. The type looks forward, and is prophetic; the symbol, as it were, looks back, and is figuratively expressive of a known truth, i.e., is historical. The two sacraments, viz., baptism and the Lord's Supper, are of similar import to circumcision (which signified the cutting off of the flesh), and the passover (which was typical of the expiatory death of Christ); but, the atonement having taken place, Christians commemorate the Lord's Supper in the blessing of accomplished redemption, and hence it has to them the character of the peace-offering. But the sacraments are not operative and efficacious in themselves. Whilst in the Lord's Supper we have communion with the Lord as to His death, and its value to us, nevertheless one main object of the sacrament is to mark off and separate the Christian profession from non-Christianity, and that by signs significative of Christ's death.
This is essential to the meaning and nature of a sacrament, rightly understood. Marriage is not a sacrament, though it is, and was from the first, a divine institution. It does not distinguish Christianity from Judaism or from heathenism, for the relationship exists in these. There are in fact two “sacraments” only, using the term in the proper sense, the term itself no doubt being merely ecclesiastical, though expressing the two New Testament ordinances, and not necessarily in a wrong sense. Confirmation is not regarded as a sacrament in the Anglican body, though it is retained as a rite. Still, not a trace of it is to be found in the Scripture. The word ἐπιστηρίζω occurs four times, all in the Acts; and it is impossible to read those passages with an unbiassed mind, and not see that the meaning is no ritual process, but morally and spiritually—to strengthen or establish. Thus Parkhurst says in his Lexicon “In the New Testament it is used only in a figurative and spiritual sense for confirming persons in their adherence to the gospel, notwithstanding opposition and persecution.” These occurrences are Acts 14:22; 15:3222Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God. (Acts 14:22)
32And Judas and Silas, being prophets also themselves, exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them. (Acts 15:32) and 41; 28:23; the last text being, “And after he had spent some time there, he departed and went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples.” And in 15:32, Judas and Silas, the prophets, exhorted and confirmed the brethren. Now the so-called “Bishop” is the person who “confirms” —doubtless for the sake (as is so often said) of decency and order. But this human view of decency and order has utterly overthrown God's order, and made human authority in the church paramount to Scriptural authority, generally with the flimsiest pretense, and often without any at all.
Take, again, what is called “ordination,” or official appointment to the office of a teacher in the church. Here is another most striking instance of the way in which God's word is set at naught, and the sovereign operations of the Holy Spirit completely checked by human regulations under the plea of decency and order. That God sometimes used the apostles as channels, through whom, extraordinarily, to convey some spiritual gift, is most true, and the Greek preposition used (&a, with the genitive), shows that God used them instrumentally (see Acts 8:1818And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, (Acts 8:18) Tim. 1:6); but 1 Tim. 4:1414Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery. (1 Timothy 4:14) also shows that when, on a certain occasion, others were associated with the apostle, the particle of association per& is used not that of instrumentality. The place which the apostles had in the church was unique, and marked by God in various way s, not only us a whole, but in detail. That the apostle Paul deputed Timoth; and Titus to ordain elders in specified localities is true; but where is the authority now to ordain elders?—where the proof that it ever was to be transmitted?
Paul, indeed, says to Timothy, “the things which thou hast heard of me, in the presence of many witnesses, the same commit them to faithful men, such as shall be able to teach others also.” Every care was taken that, till the canon of Scripture was completed, the truth which God had revealed should not be lost. But what has this to do with ordination? Truth, which any of us may deem now to be far from generally seen or held, we are anxious to impress upon our children, or others, even although it is already contained in the written word. Guides or rulers in the church there are, and wine) so long as the church is upon earth; but elders or bishops, specifically, there are not, just as there are no apostles, and consequently none deputed to act locally for them. Whatever may have been the qualifications necessary for an elder or bishop, we see from Scripture, e.g., Rom. 12:77Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; (Romans 12:7); 1 Cor. 12:8, 11, 81; 14:12, 26, 29, 348For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; (1 Corinthians 12:8)
11But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will. (1 Corinthians 12:11)
12Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. (1 Corinthians 14:12)
26How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. (1 Corinthians 14:26)
29Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. (1 Corinthians 14:29)
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. (1 Corinthians 14:34); 1 Peter 4:10, 1110As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. 11If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:10‑11), that the ministry of the word in the church (assembly), was open to such as were qualified for it, and for the occasion, by the Spirit, that women only were excepted. If ordination were the sanction, 1 Peter 4:10, 1110As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God. 11If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. (1 Peter 4:10‑11) would be meaningless. Also, whatever may have been otherwise desirable in an elder or bishop, the essential function pertaining to that office was to rule (i.e., to take a spiritual oversight and care), not to teach (see 1 Tim. 5:1717Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine. (1 Timothy 5:17)). Doubtless ability to teach was desirable, but this by no means implies that teaching was the primary duty of the elder or bishop, much less that no one might teach who was not an elder. The distinction between the functions of teaching and ruling is clearly made in Rom. 12:7, 87Or ministry, let us wait on our ministering: or he that teacheth, on teaching; 8Or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness. (Romans 12:7‑8), and 1 Tim. 5:1717Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine. (1 Timothy 5:17).
No doubt at an early period of the church's history we find a sacerdotal and hierarchical system in the germ: first, kcal episcopacy, soon to develop into diocesan; a priestly caste, gradually coming into view, with a corresponding metamorphosis of the elements in the Eucharist; the growth of Catholicism, soon to ripen into Popery. But all this is the corruption of the truth, a corruption which, it is admitted, began to work very early—but which, whatever tradition may say, is branded by Holy Scripture as the corruption of God's word and order. As this sacerdotal element developed itself in the early church, so every truth waned and vanished under its baneful shade. The priesthood of all true believers was ignored or despised, spiritual worship consequently was lost, and a half Christian, half Jewish kind, substituted for it. The simplicity of the way in which the Lord's Supper had formerly been observed was annihilated; the elements underwent a so-called “consecration,” and, began to be regarded with superstitions reverence. The gospel was unknown in its purity and power, and contemned by the side of this perverted “sacramental” system. Immense, in short, was the loss to the Church and to individual souls, and great the dishonor done to God's word, great the despite to the Spirit of grace.
This terrible state of things was but partially rectified at the Reformation, the Church of England was but half reformed; baptismal regeneration and apostolical succession were doctrines never eradicated from its tenets, and we are now living to see the result in a frightful relapse into Romanism, or in the giving up of all faith and even profession of Christianity for blank infidelity, these being the two poles of unbelief, as to the Scriptures, and as to the power of God, through the Spirit. Of supreme importance to the individual, and consequently to the church, as evangelical truth is, experience has proved that there is a tendency, when too exclusively dwelt on, to disregard, either as though it were non-essential, or as though it could have no practical importance, the teaching of Scripture as to the church—her calling and destiny. We do not say this evil goes to the same lengths, or is fraught with such dire effects, as that of being absorbed with, and trusting almost exclusively to, a spurious sacramental system. Very far from this, evangelical truth, i.e., a clear and fall gospel, is of paramount importance—there could be no true church, no happy and intelligent Christians without it.
The gospel, and that only and exclusively, is God's grand ordinance for the salvation of man, and the too general absence of the knowledge of the gospel in its power and fullness, and the substitution for this of mere ordinances, amply accounts for the state of heart and mind in which so many are to be found, even though they may be very devoted church people. But if the teaching of Scripture, on the subject of the church, is in any measure slighted, there is just as certainly great loss to the individual, and great dishonor to the Lord. True, it is impossible to go back to apostolic times; sadly true it is that we seem to have witnessed even in our days, though on a smaller scale, what we might almost call a second fall of the church. Doubtful it is how far any considerable body of Christians now existing in the world can fairly and justly claim to represent the church. Still, when in spirit and in heart all true Christians, the whole church in God the Father is included in our thoughts and spiritual desires—with subjection to our Lord as the Head of His church even the (literally) two or three gathered together unto His name will not fail to know his presence, and to have His blessing. There may, through circumstances, be more or less of isolation; nevertheless, if the eye is single and the heart true, we shall surely find that “the secret of the Lord is with them that fear Him.”