Ordinances for the Church

2019.12.8
Timothy Lim

1
Ordinances for the Church1
I. The Concept of the Ordinance

Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are generally referred to as ordinances today, though some groups
prefer to call them sacraments. 2 The word “sacrament” means to make sacred, to dedicate to a god or
to sacred use. The Latin word was used in the Vulgate to translate the Greek musterion, which gave it
the idea of something mysterious or magical. Thus groups that prefer to call these rites of the church
sacraments usually connect with them some mysterious power or actual conveying of grace. The Council
of Trent3 defined a sacrament as “something presented to the sense, which has the power, by divine
institution, not only of signifying, but also of efficiently conveying grace.”

By contrast, “ordinance” 4 (though a synonym of sacrament in the dictionary) does not incorporate the
idea of conveying grace but only the idea of a symbol. Thus the ordinance itself has no inherent power
to change those observing it, though God may use it to minister to them.

II. The number of ordinances

Many (like Thiessen) restrict the ordinances to those ordered by Christ to be administered in the church.
By this kind of definition baptism and the Lord’s Supper are clearly ordinances, though foot-washing
might also be.

If an ordinances may be more broadly conceived (yet within the parameters of being God-ordained and
related to the church), then marriage and the rite of praying for the sick in James 5 might also be
considered ordinances. Marriage was God-ordained and symbolizes the important relationship between
Christ and the church, and praying for the sick involves the church through its elders.

1
This report is a summary and taken directly, in many cases, from texts of Basic Theology (section XII “I will build
my church”) by Charles Caldwell Ryrie. Moody Press, Chicago, 1999. Also many references are quoted from lecture
notes of Theology Course at the Luther Rice Seminary. Much credit and appreciation are due to this writer’s
mentor, late Dr. Charles Goodwin.

2
Sacrament: definition from dictionary (noun)

1.(in the Christian Church) a religious ceremony or ritual regarded as imparting divine grace, such as baptism, the
Eucharist and (in the Roman Catholic and many Orthodox Churches) penance and the anointing of the sick. 2. (in
Roman Catholic use) the consecrated elements of the Eucharist, especially the bread or Host.
3
Council of Trent, 19th ecumenical council of the Roman Catholic Church, held in three parts from 1545 to 1563.
Prompted by the Reformation, the Council of Trent was highly important for its sweeping decrees on self-reform
and for its dogmatic definitions that clarified virtually every doctrine contested by the Protestants. Despite internal
strife and two lengthy interruptions, the council was a key part of the Counter-Reformation and played a vital role
in revitalizing the Roman Catholic Church in many parts of Europe.

4
Ordinance Definition of ordinance – Webster’s Dictionary
1a: an authoritative decree or direction: order b: a law set forth by a governmental authority
2: something ordained or decreed by fate or a deity
3: a prescribed usage, practice, or ceremony

2
The Roman Catholics who emphasize the sanctification process as conditions of salvation, praying for
the sick is one of the seven sacraments which conveys the means of grace.5 All agree, however, that
baptism and the Lord’s Supper qualify as ordinances of the church.

III. The ordinance of Baptism

A. The Importance of Baptism
1. Christ was baptized (Matt 3:16). Though the meaning of His baptism was entirely different from
the significance of Christian baptism, nevertheless there exists a sense in which we follow the
Lord when we are baptized. To be sure, we can never fully imitate a sinless Person; yet we are to
follow His steps, and baptism was one of them (1 Pet. 2:2).
2. The Lord approved of His disciples baptizing (John 4:1-2).
3. Christ commanded that people be baptized in this age (Matt. 28:19). Clearly this command was
not only for the apostles who heard it but for His followers throughout the entire age, since He
promised His presence to the end of the age.
4. The early church gave an important place to baptism (Acts 2:38, 41; 8:12-13, 36, 38; 9:18; 10:47-
48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5). The early church never conceived of a believer remaining unbaptized.
5. The New Testament used the ordinance to picture or symbolize important theological truths
(Rom. 6:1-10, Gal. 3:27, 1 Pet. 3:21).
6. The writer to the Hebrews termed baptism a foundational truth (Hebrews 6:1-2). It is no more
optional or less significant than the doctrine of repentance, resurrection, and judgement.

IV. The Meaning of Baptism

Biblically, baptism is associated with forgiveness (Acts 2:38; 22:16), union with Christ (Rom. 6:1-10),
making disciples (Matt. 28:19), and repentance (Acts 2:38). This is not to conclude that water baptism
effects forgiveness, etc., but that it is closely connected with those things that begin the Christian life.

Theologically, baptism may be defined as an act of association or identification with someone, some
group, some message, or some event. Baptism into the Greek mystery religions associated the initiates
with that religion. Jewish proselyte baptism associated the proselyte with Judaism. John the Baptist’s
baptism associated His followers with His message of righteousness (he had no group for them to join).
(Incidentally, John was apparently the first person ever to baptize other people – usually baptisms were
self-administered.) For James and John to be baptized with Christ’s baptism meant to be associated with
His suffering (Mark 10:38-39). To be baptized with the Spirit associates one with the body of Christ (1
Cor. 12:13) and with the new life in Christ (Rom. 6:1-10). To be baptized into Moses involved
identification with his leadership in bringing the Israelites out of Egypt (1 Cor. 10:2). To be baptized for
the dead means to be identified with the Christian group and take the place of a believer who had died
(15:29). Christian baptism means identification with the message of the Gospel, the person of the
Savior, and the group of believers. Some of the baptisms listed do not involve water. Also observe how
impoverished we would be without a proper understanding of the meaning and ramifications of
baptism.

5
Seven sacred ceremony: The Catholic Church recognizes seven sacraments: Baptism, Eucharist, Confirmation,
Reconciliation (penance), Anointing of the sick, Marriage (matrimony), Holy orders (ordination).

3
V. The Subjects of Baptism

The question is: Should only believers be baptized or should infants of believing parents also be
baptized? Arguments in favor of infant baptism include these.

1. The circumcision argument. Colossians 2:11-12 clearly links circumcision and baptism. Since
infants were circumcised under the Old Covenant, they should be baptized under the New
Covenant. The argument rests on the covenant theology concept of a single covenant of grace
that involved an initiatory rite into that covenant, the rite being circumcision in the Old
Testament and baptism in the New. These rites indicate membership in the covenant, not
necessarily personal faith. 6
2. The historical argument. From early times the church practiced infant baptism; therefore it is
permissible. The Fathers did support infant baptism, often relating it to circumcision, but the
fact that the early church practiced or believed something does not in itself make it right.
Some in the early church taught baptismal regeneration, which is heretical.
3. The household argument. Households were baptized in New Testament times. It would be likely
that some infants at least were included in some of the households (see Acts 11:14; 16:15, 31,
33; 18:8; 1 Cor. 1:16). Some also cite the household promise of 1 Corinthians 7:14 as not only
permitting but expecting the baptism of infants of a household where there is one believing
parent.

The position against infant baptism and thus for believers’ baptism points out these:

1. The scriptural order is always believe and then be baptized (Matt. 3:2-6; 28:19; Acts 2:37-38;
16:14-15, 34)
2. Baptism is the initiatory rite into a believing community, the church; therefore it should only be
done to believers. By contrast, circumcision initiated people (including infants) into a
theocracy, which did have unbelievers in it.
3. The age of children is never mentioned in any passage that mentions household baptism. But it
is said that all who were baptized in those households believed. This, then, would exclude
infants from being included in the baptisms.
4. If 1 Corinthians 7:14 allows or requires the baptism of children in a household where there is a
believing parent, then it would also allow or require the baptism of the unbelieving adult mate.

VI. Rebaptism

There is only one clear example of people being baptized twice (Acts 19:1-5). These twelve men, who
had been baptized by john the Baptist, were rebaptized by Paul after they believed the Christian
message. This furnishes an example for counseling those who today were baptized either as unbelieving
infants, adolescents, or adults and who then came to faith in Christ. It also serves as an argument
against infant baptism, for why baptize an infant if later; after he personally receives Christ, he should
be baptized again?

VII. The Time of Baptism

6
James Buswell, A systemic Theology of the Christian Religion, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1962, 2, p262

4
The examples in the New Testament indicate that believers were baptized right after they believed. No
probationary period is indicated, though such might be justified in order to attest to the genuineness of
the faith.

VIII. The Mode of Baptism

1. The case for sprinkling.
a. Certain Old Testament rituals of cleansing involved sprinkling (Exod. 24:6-7, Lev. 14:7,
Num. 19:4, 8), and these are classified as washings (lit. “baptism”) in Heb. 9:10.
b. Sprinkling best pictures the cleansing of the Spirit as in Ezekiel 36:25.
c. Baptizo may have a secondary meaning of “bringing under the influence,” and sprinkling
can readily picture this.
d. Immersion was improbable or impossible in certain instances.
i. Too many people (Acts 2:41)
ii. Too little water in a desert place (Acts 8:38)
iii. Too little water in a house (Acts 16:33)
e. The greater majority of the visible church practices nonimmersion.
2. The case for pouring (or affusion)
a. Pouring best pictures the ministry of the Spirit coming on and into the life of a believer
(Joel 2:28-29; Acts 2:17-18).
b. The phrases “into the water” and “out of the water” may equally well be translated “to
the water” and “away from the water.” In other words, the one to be baptized went to
the water, perhaps even into the water; but not under the water.
c. Drawings in the catacombs show the candidate for baptism standing about waist deep
in water while the one doing the baptizing pours water over his head from a vessel he
holds.
3. The case for immersion
a. Immersion is unquestionably the primary meaning of baptizo. The Greek language has
words for sprinkle and pour that are never used of baptism.
b. Immersion best pictures the significance of baptism, which is death to the old life and
resurrection to the new (Rom. 6:1-4).
c. Immersion could have been done in every case. Sufficient pools existed in Jerusalem to
permit the immersion of three thousand converts on the Day of Pentecost. The road to
Gaza was deserted, but not waterless. Houses often had pools outdoors where, for
example, the Philippians jailer’s family could have been immersed.
d. Proselyte baptism was performed by self-immersion in a tank of water. This mode
would naturally carry over to the Christian church.
e. Pouring, not sprinkling, was the first exception to immersion and was allowed in cases of
sickness. This was called “clinical baptism.” Cyprian (ca. A.D. 248-258) was the first to
approve of sprinkling. Even nonimmersionists acknowledge that immersion was the
universal practice of the apostolic church (see Calvin Institutes IV.XV, 19).

An observation: It seems to me that those who wish to justify sprinkling proceed this way in their
thinking. If you can show that any form of nonimmersion (like pouring) was practiced early then you can
legitimately practice sprinkling, even though it evidently was not practiced in the apostolic church. In
other words, if pouring can be a hole in the dike of universal immersion, then sprinkling can flood in

5
also. However, if anything, the evidence only says that pouring (if it was practiced) was considered the
same as immersion, but sprinkling was not considered valid as baptism.

IX. Trine Immersion

Trine immersion is the immersion of the candidate three times (usually forward) to symbolize the
association with the Trine God. The Didache states that if immersion is not possible then water was to
be poured three times on the head (chap. 7). Notice that this early work does not say to immerse three
times, only pour three times. Proponents of trine immersion point out that some lexicons say that
baptizo means to dip repeatedly (but some do not). The evidence for this view is not strong.

The Direct Question:

Can an informed (the emphasis is on the word “informed”) Protestant (particularly a Baptist)
participate in a Roman Catholic Mass?

Which is the Lord’s Supper a “Sacrament” or an “Ordinance”?

Justification for the “NO” answer

The primary factor which demands an enlightened Protestant to give “the no answer,” comes as a result
of the doctrine or theology of the Roman Catholic concept of what happens when one celebrates the
“Lord’s Supper.” Roman Catholics identify this ordinances as “Mass.” (Most Protestants call this
ordinance “communion” or “the Lord’s Supper.”)

1. Sacrament
a. Christianity, any of certain rites ordained by Jesus: in the Roman Catholic Church and
the Orthodox Eastern Church it is held that there are seven sacraments, namely, 1)
baptism, 2) confirmation, 3) the Eucharist (Ed. – “the Lord’s Supper”), 4) penance, 5)
extreme unction, 6) holy orders, and 7) matrimony. Protestants in general acknowledge
but two sacraments, baptism and the Lord’s Supper.7
b. In The Century Dictionary, the reader is provided more detailed definitions for both
“sacrament” and “ordinance.”8
c. Sacrament – In theology, an outward and visible sign of inward and spiritual grace; more
particularly, a solemn religious ceremony…. In the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek
Church there are seven sacraments – namely, baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist,
penance, holy orders, matrimony, and (in the Roman Catholic Church) extreme unction
or (in the Greek Church) unction of the sick. Protestants in general acknowledge but two
sacraments, baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The difference of view as to the value or
significance of sacraments is more important than the difference as to their true
number.
d. In general it may be said that there are three opinions explaining them (editorial
comment by TL):

7
Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary Unabridged, 2nd ed., (1978), s.v. “sacrament.”
8
William Dwight Whitney, ed., The Century Dictionary – An Encyclopedic Lexicon of the English Language, 10 vols.
(New York: The Century Company, 1999), s.v. “sacrament”)

6
 i. That the sacrament is a means of grace acting directly upon the heart and life,
“a sure and certain means to bring peace to our souls” (Bishop Hay, Sincere
Christian).
1. This is the view held by the Roman Catholic Church and Greek Church,
as well as some in the Anglican Communion.
ii. That the sacrament, though not in itself the means of grace, is nevertheless a
solemn ratification of a covenant between God and the individual soul.
1. The view of most Protestants (other than Baptists), including the
Presbyterian and Reformed.)
iii. That the sacrament (more appropriately called “ordinance”) is simply a visible
representation of something spiritual and invisible, and that the spiritual or
invisible reality may be wanting, in which case the symbol is without spiritual
value or significance.
1. The view of Baptists and Zwinglians and, in modern times, many of the
Congregational denominations.
2. Ordinance
a. In Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary it is stated, (1) A direction or command
of an authorative nature. (2) An established religious rite9
b. The Century Dictionary reads: Eccles., a religious ceremony, rite, or practice established
by authority: as, the ordinance of baptism10

A further distinction is needed in regard to Webster’s statement, “Protestants in general acknowledge

but two sacraments, baptism and the Lord’s Supper.”

Most Protestants allow the use of the term “sacrament.” However, Baptists do not use this term. While
it is true that most Protestants agree with Baptists that there are two religious rites practiced in the New
Testament church, the defining of these religious rites differs slightly.

Many Protestants (e.g., Presbyterian, Methodist, Anglican, and Lutheran) use the term “sacrament.”
However, Baptists have preferred to use the word “ordinance” rather than “sacrament” because of
certain sacerdotal11 ideas that the word “sacrament” has gathered to itself. The word “sacrament,” in
this writer’s opinion, seems to convey the idea of a transference of grace to the partaker of the Lord’s
Supper and baptism. The word “ordinance” has a different emphasis. The word “ordinance” points to
the ordaining authority of Christ which lies behind the practice. For Baptists there are two ordinances,
namely, believers’ baptism12 and the Lord’s Supper.

9
Webster’s Twentieth Century Dictionary, s.v. “ordinance.”
10
The Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia, s.v. “ordinance.”
11
Sacerdotal – characterized by belief in the divine authority of the priesthood (Webster’s New Twentieth Century
Dictionary Unabridged, 2nd ed., (1978), s.v. “sacerdotal”)
12
Believers’ baptism – One must first become a believer and then is baptized (immersed) as a witness to his/her
conversion. Therefore, infant baptism is not practiced by Baptists.

7
Most Baptists do not see the “ordinances” as a “means of grace”13 as seen in Roman Catholic, Lutheran,
or even Reformed communities. (In a general sense, Baptists limit the phrase “means of grace” to the
Word of God and Prayer.)14

X. The Lord’s Supper

1. Its Institution
Apparently the Lord instituted the Supper in connection with eating the Passover meal
before His crucifixion even though this poses a chronological problem. Assuming a Friday
crucifixion, John’s Gospel seems to state that Passover was not celebrated until after Jesus’
death and burial (18:28; 19:14). However some think that the Galileans and/or the Pharisees
ate the Passover on Thursday night, while the Judeans and/or the Sadducees celebrated on
Friday night. (The imperfect tense, “were sacrificing,” used in Mark 14:12 may indicate that
priests offered the sacrifices both days.)
2. Its Order
The ordinance alone (without the meal) consisted of Christ taking unleavened bread, giving
thanks, distributing it to the disciples, and doing the same with the cup.
During the early centuries the more extended service included a love feast, various prayers
of thanksgiving and confession, reading and instruction from the Scriptures, the Supper
itself, a collection for orphans, widows, sick, and needy, and a holy kiss. 15
The first reference above from Justin Martyr states that the wine was mixed with water. The
Scriptures do not use the word “wine” in connection with the Supper, only “the cup” or “the
fruit of the vine.” Of course it was juice from the grape, but whether fermented or not is not
stated. Unfermented wine was used more in the time of Christ than most suppose.
Nevertheless, if this was fermented some it was apparently diluted with water. For the sake
of converted alcoholics or even to forestall anyone beginning to drink, unfermented juice is
preferable in the light of today’s worldwide problem with alcohol.
3. Its Significance
a. It is a remembrance of Christ (1 Cor. 11:24).
i. It recalls His life (the bread), His death (the cup), His resurrection and living
presence (the service itself).
b. It is a proclamation of His death (1 Cor. 11:26).
i. The service itself states the Gospel message as well as the claims of the
Gospel on the redeemed person. A missionary whom I knew was directed to
service on the mission field when he, as a pastor presiding at a Lord’s
Supper in his church, was meditating on its meaning while the deacons were
distributing the elements.

13
Means of Grace – the medium through which God dispenses grace to the one participating. There is a problem
with the view that the ordinances (sacraments) are a means of grace. The problem is: there is no explicit statement
or inference from Scripture suggesting that by observing the ordinances, grace is imparted to the participants.
[See: Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago: Moody Press, 1989), pp. 350-365.]
14
Henry C. Thiessen, Lectures in Systematic Theology, revised by Vernon D. Doerksen (Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1979), p. 300.
15
Didache, 7-15; Justin Martyr. Apology, c. lxvii and c. lxv

8
 c. It is an assurance of Christ’s second coming (Matt. 26:29; 1 Cor. 11:26)
d. It is a time of fellowship with Christ and His people (1 Cor. 10:21).
4. Its Interpretations: In What sense is Christ present in the Supper?
a. Transubstantiation
i. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the literal body and blood of Christ
are present in the bread and cup and at the time of consecration the
elements are actually changed (transubstantiation.)
ii. This interpretation is an indication that the ministry of our Lord, Christ, in
this world is not complete. It seems Jesus is continually involved in the
Mass. Jesus said that His work while on this earth is complete (John 19:30).
The writers of Hebrews agrees with this (Heb. 10:10-14).16 The Bible also
teaches that Jesus is on the right hand of the Father at present moment,
rather than omnipresent at every time and every place of Eucharist (Heb.
10:12, Act. 7:55-56)
b. Consubstantiation
i. The Lutheran Church teaches that the individual partakes of the true body
and blood of Christ in, with, and under the elements. The elements remain
unchanged, but the prayer of consecration communicates Christ to the
participants.
ii. Lutherans, unlike the Roman Catholics, reject the notion of the perpetual
sacrifice of Christ in the Eucharist. But it is almost a double talk. For
example, Luther insisted, “that by partaking of the sacrament one
experiences a real benefit – forgiveness of sin and confirmation of faith. This
benefit is due, however, not to the elements in the sacrament, but to one’s
reception of the Word by faith.”17 The problem of this is the failure to
recognize Jesus’ statement, “This is my body” as a figure of speech.
c. Reformed View (Calvinist View)
i. The Reformed view teaches that though the elements are only symbols,
partaking of them involves partaking of Christ in His redemptive presence.

16 Pay special attention to Hebrews 10:10-12 in emphasis of completed work of Jesus. “10 And
by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of
Jesus Christ once for all. 11 Day after day every priest stands and performs
his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can
never take away sins. 12 But when this priest had offered for all time one
sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, 13 and since that
time he waits for his enemies to be made his footstool. 14 For by one
sacrifice he has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.”

17
Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology, 3 vols. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985), 3:1118.

9
 ii. This view is also known as the Calvinist view because its adherents are from
the Reformed churches (and others) who follow Calvin’s teaching on the
subject.
iii. This view rejects the notion of the literal presence of Christ in any sense,
and in this it is similar to the memorial (Baptist) view.
iv. This view, however, does emphasize the “present spiritual work of Christ.”
v. Calvin taught that Christ is “present and enjoyed in his entire person, both
body and blood.” He emphasizes “the mystical communion of believers
with the entire person of the Redeemer….the body and blood of Christ,
though absent and locally present only in heaven, communicates a life-
giving influence to the believer.” 18
vi. The claim is that because of the mystical presence of Christ in the elements,
grace is communicated to the participant in the elements; moreover, it is a
grace that is similar to that received through the Word, and in fact, it adds
to the effectiveness of the Word.19

A problem with this view is that there is no explicit statement or inference from Scripture suggesting
that grace is imparted to the participant.

Reformed has largely limited the phrase “means of grace” to two, the Word of God and the sacraments.
The sacraments are, in Reformed theology, baptism and the Lord’s Supper.20 In Baptist theology, we
limit the phrase “means of grace” to the Word of God and prayer.

d. Memorial view (Zwinglian view)

i. The memorial view is also referred as the Zwinglian view because the Swiss
reformer Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531) is considered a clear exponent of this
view in contrast to other current views of his time.
ii. In contrast to the Calvinist view, Zwingli taught that there was no real
presence of Christ but only a spiritual fellowship with Christ by those who
partake in faith.
iii. Essential to the memorial view is the notion that the bread and cup are
figurative only; they are a memorial to the death of Christ. Zwingli
acknowledged a spiritual presence of Christ for those who partake in faith,
however, Anabaptists rejected the idea of Christ being present in the Lord’s
Supper and more than he would be present anywhere else. The Memorial
view emphasizes that the participants demonstrate faith in the death of
Christ through this symbolic activity. It is as stated in The Baptist Faith and
Message,
VII. Baptism and the Lord's Supper

Christian baptism is the immersion of a believer in water in the name of the

Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. It is an act of obedience symbolizing the

18
Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1941), p. 653
19
Ibid. 654.
20
Henry C. Thiessen, revised by Vernon D. Doerken, Lectures in Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1979), p. 300

10
 believer's faith in a crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, the believer's death to
sin, the burial of the old life, and the resurrection to walk in newness of life in
Christ Jesus. It is a testimony to his faith in the final resurrection of the dead.
Being a church ordinance, it is prerequisite to the privileges of church
membership and to the Lord's Supper.
The Lord's Supper is a symbolic act of obedience whereby members of the
church, through partaking of the bread and the fruit of the vine, memorialize
the death of the Redeemer and anticipate His second coming.
Matthew 3:13-17; 26:26-30; 28:19-20; Mark 1:9-11; 14:22-26; Luke 3:21-
22; 22:19-20; John 3:23; Acts 2:41-42; 8:35-39; 16:30-33; 20:7; Romans 6:3-5; 1
Corinthians 10:16,21; 11:23-29; Colossians 2:12.21

The memorial view has much commend it in the Scriptures. An examination of the passages reveals the
significance of the Lord’s Supper.

It is a memorial to His death (1 Cor. 11:24-25): the recurring statement, “in remembrance of
me,” makes this clear, the bread symbolizing his perfect body offered in sin-bearing sacrifice (1
Pet. 2:24) and the wind his blood shed for forgiveness of sins (Eph. 1:7.)

It is a proclamation of the death of Christ while waiting for His coming (1 Cor. 11:26); it involves
a looking back to the historical event of the cross and an anticipating of his return in the future
(Matt 26:29).

It is a communion of believers with each other (1 Co. 10:17): they eat and drink the same
symbolic elements, focusing on their common faith in Christ.) 22

5. Who can administer this ordinance? - Sacramentalism and sacerdotalism

a. First, to understand the view of Baptists, one needs to understand that Baptists are
not sacramentalists nor sacerdotal.
By definition sacramentalism is the doctrine that the sacraments are necessary to
salvation (Webster’s Twentieth Century Dictionary Unbridged, s.v.
“sacramentalism”).
Baptists believe in salvation by grace through the instrument of faith. Thus Baptists
do not view baptism nor the Lord’s Supper as having any inherent spiritual efficacy
relating to soteriology (having to do with spiritual salvation). These rites are viewed
as ordinances. Thus, Baptist are anti-sacramental in their views.
b. Second, Baptists are not sacerdotal. By definition sacerdotal means or is
characterized by belief in the divine authority of the priesthood (Webster’s
Twentieth Century Dictionary Unbridged, s.v. “sacerdotal”).
c. The Title priest is given in the Anglican, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic
churches to an ordained person set apart for a holy purpose and separated from the
laity. The Roman Catholic Church divides priests into two grades: (1) “Priests of the
second order by their ordination to the priesthood are given power to offer the

21
http://www.sbc.net/bfm2000/bfm2000.asp
22
Paul Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago: Moody Press, 1989), p. 363

11
 sacrifice of the Mass, to baptize solemnly, and to administer Extreme Unction, but
need jurisdiction for the valid administration of the sacraments of Penance and for
valid assistance at the sacrament of Matrimony, and an indult for the valid
administration of Confirmation.” (2) “Priests of the first order, i.e., bishops, possess
the additional power of administering the sacraments of Confirmation and Holy
Order.”23
d. In contrast, Baptists adhere to a doctrine known as The Priesthood of all Believers.
Adherents of this doctrine are convinced that the New Testament teaches that
Christ’s mediation gives all Christians equal standing before God, with direct access
to God and no need for another human to bridge the gap between themselves and
God.24
e. Bible Arguments for the Priesthood of All Believers
i. The Uniqueness of the New Testament Priesthood (1 Peter 2:4-5, 9)
4As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by humans but chosen by
God and precious to him— 5 you also, like living stones, are being built into a
spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable
to God through Jesus Christ….. 9 But you are a chosen people, a royal
priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the
praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

ii. Church Age Believers are Both Kings and Priests (Revelation 1:5b, 6)

To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, 6 and has
made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be
glory and power for ever and ever! Amen.

iii. Jesus is Our High Priest and All Church Age Believers May Approach God
Directly and at Any Time (Hebrews 4:14-16)
14Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has ascended into
heaven, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess. 15 For
we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our
weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we
are—yet he did not sin. 16 Let us then approach God’s throne of grace with
confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our
time of need.

Then who can administer the ordinances?

The fact that Baptists are not sacerdotal is demonstrated in the observance of the two
ordinances, namely baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It is true – in most Baptist churches
baptism and the Lord’s Supper are commonly and properly administered by the pastor, or
some other ordained and accredited minister. But this is not a requirement. A deacon, or

23
Terry L. Miethe, The Compact Dictionary of Doctrinal Words (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1988), s.v.
“Priest.”
24
Ibid., s.v. “Priesthood of all Believers.”

12
 any devout member of the church can administer these ordinances if the occasion should
arise.25
6. Its Requirements
a. Regeneration: Only believers can experience Communion.
b. Fellowship with a local church. Unrepentant believers under discipline were
excluded from the Supper (1 Cor. 5:11-13, 2 Thess. 3:6, 11-15).
c. Cleansing before partaking (1 Cor. 11:27-32)
7. Its Frequency

The Scriptures do not specify on this point. After Pentecost the believers broke bread from
house to house, but this does not prove a daily observance of the Supper (Acts 2:46). For
one thing it is not clear that “breaking bread” in this text meant anything other than taking
anything other than taking a fellowship meal together. For another thing, the text does not
even imply that whatever was done was done daily in each house. At Troas the believers
evidently included the Supper in their first day of the week meeting (20:7) However often a
church observes this ordinance, it should be given sufficient time so that it is not “tacked
on” to a service.

8. Some Questions
a. At what service of the church should the Supper be observed?
i. The example of the early church answers Sunday. But since it was a Super, it
seems appropriate to observe it during an evening service on Sunday at
least sometimes.
b. Should it only be observed in the church?
i. This seemed to be the normal pattern (1 Cor. 11:18, 20).
c. Should only church members partake?
i. Again, this seems to be the New Testament example, since only baptized
believers were clearly associated with a local assembly. Should visitors be
excluded if they are believers? Not necessarily. As a courtesy they could
participate. But since discipline by a local church and fellowship within a
local church are related to the upper, then normally only those who are
clearly associated with that local church should partake of the Supper in
that group.
XI. Love Feast

As part of the extended service that included the Lord’s Supper, a full meal was also eaten in and by the
church. This feast of love is mentioned specifically in 2 Peter 2:13(in some manuscripts) and Jude 12 and
implied in 1 Corinthians 11:20 (and possibly also in Acts 2:42, 46; 6:1).

Whatever the origin of the meal was (pagan feasts, Jewish common meals, Christians’ desire to avoid
meats offered to idols, etc.), it had fallen into abuse by the time Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. Some were
making it an excuse for gluttony, taking as much as possible for themselves, and refusing to share what
they had brought with others. Paul instructed that church to have the people eat at home rather than

25
Edward T. Hiscox, Principles and Practices for Baptist Churches, p. 138. “CONCLUSION OF PARENTHETICAL
COMMENT.”

13
negate the ideas of fellowship and love that the agape stood for. During the fourth century the love
feast came into increasing disfavor and is seldom practiced today. The fact that Paul could counsel its
suspension in the church excludes it from being an ordinance.

XII. Foot-Washing

In accord with the common custom in the East because of the effect of dusty or muddy roads on
sandaled feet, the Lord at the Last Supper washed and dried the disciples’ feet (John 13:1-20). This act
served as an example of humility (v 15), as an exhortation to forgive one another (v. 14), and as a lesson
in the need for cleansing in the Christian life (v. 10). As baptism symbolizes the cleansing of the
forgiveness of sin, foot-washing symbolizes the cleansing needed for fellowship.

Those who focus on cleansing find ground for continuing the observance of this as an ordinance today.
Those who emphasize the example or forgiveness aspects do not feel it is necessary to perform the
ritual but rather to practice the spiritual truths the ritual illustrated. It is true that the exhortation to
follow Christ’s example in John 13:14-15 related to forgiving one another in humility, rather than to
God’s forgiving our missteps in life. This, then, would argue against considering foot-washing as an
ordinance.

XIII. Summary Bullets

1. Baptists and other church systems holding to a memorial view of the Lord’s Supper and
Believers’ Baptism use the term ordinance when making reference to rites. Other Protestants,
along with Roman Catholics, use the term sacrament in making reference to these rites. Is there
a difference? Yes, there is a major difference in the way Protestants and Roman Catholics view
the Lord’s Supper.
2. Baptists and some other church systems holding to a memorial view and using the term
ordinance, usually refer to the Lord’s Supper as the Lord’s Supper or communion (without any
prefix such as “holy”). Other Protestants and the Roman Catholics use different terms when
making reference to the Lord’s Supper. They hold to a sacramental view and use terms such as
Holy Communion, the Eucharist, the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, and the Sacrament of Holy
Communion. There are differences in the way different Protestants denominations view the
Lord’s Supper, which includes, but not exclusive to the use of certain words to describe the
rite.
3. The question is – what is the best term for us to use when making reference to this Christian
celebration? In this writer’s opinion, the best term to use in referring to this celebration is the
Lord’s Supper. An acceptable term is communion. However, from a Baptist perspective one
must be careful not to prefix communion with the word holy.26 Yes. It is wrong for a
theologically informed (key word “informed”) Protestant to participate in the Roman Catholic
Mass.
4. Baptists believe the means of grace comes from the Words of God and Prayer. The Baptists
ordinances refer to the Believers’ Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Baptism symbolizes believers
union with Christ and the Lord’s Supper symbolizes believers’ communion with Christ.

26
Func & Wagnalls New Comprehensive International Dictionary of the English Language Encyclopedic Edition, s.v.
“sacramentarian.”

14