-We’re taking 4 weeks to look at some questions I’ve gotten over the past year. Last week we looked at the EFCA, which is our denomination. And we needed last week to set us up for this week, because this week we’re looking at the 2 ordinances or sacraments of the church (hold on to those terms, I’ll explain them in a bit).
-One of the realities that we need to be reminded of in our world is that there is a spiritual realm that we can’t taste, touch, or see. Sometimes we get glimpses of it where the barrier between the physical and spiritual becomes thin, but that’s not our normal human experience, and our world has been so shaped by the scientific revolution that we sometimes forget or neglect that there is a bigger spiritual reality behind the physical world that we can see. We also neglect that there’s an interplay between those 2 realms, where what we do in the physical realm has implications spiritually and vice versa. That means that the choices and actions we do today have implications for eternity.
-I share all that because we’re talking about things that from a physical perspective don’t seem to do much, but spiritually they’re an act of war where we’re pledging ourselves to Jesus as the King and (to use the phrase from the old baptismal recitation), “renouncing the devil and his works and effects.” That means these are things that shouldn’t be taken lightly or flippantly, but it also means that these things are gifts from God for us that do something to us in both the spiritual and physical realm.
-Text in any questions
READ/PRAY (pgs. 1001, 1018)
-we have a LOT to cover today, so I’m not going to be digging too far into any of these issues so we can at least get an overview of the significance of these practices.
-Here’s what the EFCA believes about these ordinances:
-The EFCA is making a distinction between “true church” and “local church” the way that’s often expressed is the visible vs. invisible church. Every individual believer when they are saved are brought into the church family of God (spiritual/invisible), but that also means they should identify themselves with a local church family (physical/visible)
-The marker of the family of God is that they are the ones who practice these 2 ordinances, which express the gospel. Each time either of these are celebrated they are visible reminders of the spiritual reality of what Jesus has done, it helps our eyes see what our ears and hearts know: the gospel. The Belgic Confession, written in 1561, tells us the 3 markers of a true church. These markers must bepracticed to be considered a church. Now, when we talk about a church, there’s different categories of churches, I got this chart from the book Sojourners & Strangers. And if we see the 3 markers of the church, if an organization that claims to be a church doesn’t practice 1 of these 3 markers, are they a church anymore? Similarly, is the trajectory of a church making them more or less holy?
-THE means of salvation, they are A means of salvation (grace) in that they confirm and nourish believers. Historically, the church has labeled these “means of grace,” things that God uses as gifts to make us more holy and more like Him. Here’s the way the EFCA has said it:
-It’s also important to note that these are markers of the church, which means they’re not something you practice by yourself. I can’t go baptize myself, I’m baptized by and into the church. Similarly, I can’t take communion by myself, I participate in communion as part of the church (meant to mark our union). This also means this is something we shouldn’t do on our own, this came up during COVID when we weren’t meeting in person, some churches encouraged people to grab their own elements and “do” communion in their homes, I was opposed to that because we are embodied people and not meeting together is abnormal, and I wanted us to feel it! There are other implications to this too, like I won’t serve communion at a wedding if it’s just for the couple, it’s not something individuals do together, it’s supposed to be for us all to celebrate, but that’s all I have time to say about that now!
-Where we’ll get to at the end: Jesus gave us these 2 ordinances (or sacraments) to practice as the markers of His people until He returns.
-Sacrament vs. ordinance. I will use them interchangeably; both can be used legitimately. Sacrament means something sacred or set apart (which they are). Early Protestants preferred the term “ordinance” to refer to something “ordained” by Jesus and to distinguish them from the RCC position on them. I think either one is appropriate for us to use today.
-This is a different sermon (in a bit of a different series), but to help you understand what we’re doing today, we’re going to begin: exegesis (reading the text), move to historical theology (what has the church historically believed), that will get us to systematic theology (summarize and systematize what the whole Bible says) and we’ll land at pastoral (or practical) theology, working to answer how do we live this out today?
-1 other note (I promise this is the last one!) but I want to help us understand how to “triage” this issue. 1st you HAVE to believe to be a Christian, 2nd is why we have different churches and denomination (need to take a position, but can make different biblical arguments), 3rd should be able to have a fun conversation about but not condemn or divide over. The reason this is tricky is because the EFCA is unique in that we’ve put the timing and mode of baptism as a 3rd issue, in most churches it’s a 2nd order issue, but everyone agrees this issue has 1st order implications. The way these are practiced are 2nd order issues, but that they are practiced are 1st order issues, which means these must be practiced in order to be an obedient church.
- What is Baptism?
-The first and most important reason for this is to be like Jesus. Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist (which also shows us the significance of this act). It’s talked about in all 4 Gospels, we’re just going to look at Matt. today to save some time.
-The end of this Gospel also talks about baptism, it’s often referred to as the great commission. Jesus says that the way we make disciples is by baptizing them and teaching them. Once again, notice is that this is given to the church as a whole, not for individual Christians to do by themselves (this will come up later, I just want to mention it now so you can see it) the commands are plural.
-Then in the book of Acts repeatedly we see 2 things connected to each other: repent AND be baptized. The first time is in Acts 2, after the first disciples have been filled with the Spirit and Peter preaches the most impact sermon ever. God is at work, the people are convicted of their sin, and look at what Peter says:
-This tells us that the marker of someone who has repented of their sins is baptism, and can you imagine being at this baptism service? The church went from a house church to a megachurch in a day!
-1 other passage that we read earlier (so I won’t read it again) Rom. 6. Paul seems to assume that everyone had been baptized. He also tells us that baptism serves as a picture of our union with Jesus. We go down into the water just like Jesus went down into death, then we are raised up from the water, just like Jesus was raised up from the dead. It serves as a physical reminder of the spiritual reality of what has taken place. Our old self has been crucified with Jesus.
-The NT also tells us that there 3 OT stories that point to the reality of baptism: crossing the Red Sea, circumcision, and the flood
-The first is found in 1 Cor. 10, where Paul says that the church must be careful that they remain faithful in their confession because even the Israelites participated in the pictures of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but they weren’t all saved. Similarly, we can participate in these practices today but not be saved.
-Circumcision is seen in Col. 2, this connects back to Deut. 30:6 when God said He would circumcise the hearts of His people, here Paul is connecting the NT practice of baptism to the OT practice of circumcision (hold on to that, it’ll come up later!)
-Finally, the flood of Gen. 7. Here Paul says baptism corresponds to the way Noah and his family were saved through the flood, centered on the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Now, notice that it’s not baptism itself that is salvific, it’s what baptism points to: the resurrection of Jesus.
-Throughout the book of Acts, the normal order was repentance then be baptized, and it was almost immediate. Things changed in the 4th & 5th centuries when Christianity became much more prevalent (and legal). People started to join the church just for social standing, which meant they weren’t truly Christians. So the church added a period of training before you could be baptized (for a season it was an entire year). The other shift was that the church quickly moved to infant baptism as the general practice (as most rigorously defended by Augustine).
-The church also had conversations (debates) around what “counts” as a baptism? And the general agreement was 2 things: Trinitarian, and water. So a picture of the church in the 1st century can be found in the Didache (teachings), here’s what they said:
-Do you see all the caveats? Living water (moving), cold, pouring onto the head, fasting at least 1 or 2 days. In Geneva, Switzerland, they’ve uncovered a church from the 4th century with a baptistry. What’s fascinating about this is if you look closely you can see that this was “living” water because it was connected to the river.
-To put all the pieces together into a systematic overview, I like the way John Frame defines baptism:
-Today there are 2 positions about who should be baptized: paedo, credo. Credo think of Creed, someone who can confess to believe in Jesus.
-Everyone practices adult believer’s baptism; the question is what do we do with children? For those who are credo, we do dedications (which my Presbyterian friends tells me is a child baptism I just forgot the water)
-As I said earlier, remember the baptism connection to circumcision that Paul made in Col. 2? If baptism corresponds to baptism, then should it look the same in the NT as the OT? Protestant paedobaptists would argue yes. Both of these serve as the initiatory right: if you a part of this covenant community, you will practice this rite as the beginning of your journey into the church, therefore children should be baptized.
-My position: credobaptist, with a preference for immersion because of Acts, Rom. 6, and the Didache but I have strong with sympathies to and appreciation of paedobaptism who strive to see the children as part of the family of God. My leaning right now (subject to change) is that we should be more willing to baptize younger children than we often are! If God is at work in children, we shouldn’t prevent them from following in obedience to Him, so parents if you see the Holy Spirit at work in your children and they express interest in being baptized, reach out to someone on staff! We’d love to help your kids move towards publicly identifying themselves with Jesus!
-The primary thing is if you are following after Jesus, you must by baptized. I like the way Wayne Grudem summarizes this in his Systematic Theology:
-EFCA says similar: by saying that it is essential, it means that it is required. So friends, if any of you haven’t yet been obedient to Jesus’s command, what’s stopping you? We’d love to baptize you! Reach out to us!
- What is Communion?
-Remember, Jesus gave us 2 ordinances (or sacraments), baptism which is the marker of entrance into His people, and communion (or the Lord’s Supper, or the eucharist) as the ongoing reminder that we are a part of His body. That was practice is 1st order, the way we practice is a 3rd order issue.
-Far fewer passages on this topic, but it’s just as important as baptism as these are the 2 things that mark out the people of God as unique. And just like baptism, we trace this practice back to Jesus, and because we used this Gospel earlier, I’ll stick with Matt.
-The other key text is 1 Cor. 11, Paul’s instructions, very similar to what we say in Matt, but here we see that Paul connects this back to Jesus’s practice.
-It’s likely that the early church practiced this weekly, as inferred from 1 Cor. 11:18
-For the historical practice of the church, I’ll once again quote from the Didache, which lays out clear parameters around who should participate: you must be baptized. This tells us that the practice of the early church was not only that baptism was expected for everyone following Jesus, but it was required before anyone could partake in the Lord’s Supper.
-Over time, the restrictions got more and more narrow, which meant that before the Reformation (1517) the RCC only allowed some people to take the bread (if they were allowed to take at all), no cup, because that was too holy for the “common folk.” (Sidenote: the pre-Reformation church largely became a spectator sport where the preaching was in a language you couldn’t understand, the singing was done by professionals without the congregation, and full communion was reserved for the priests. It seems like many mega-churches today are moving back to that model)
-In more recent history, Spurgeon’s practice was to use tickets that had to be turned in before you were given the elements. They used this system to both track attendance and fence the table. Fencing is the word used to lay out who is allowed to participate in this meal. Spurgeon went so far as having his congregation vote on this practice for visitors (Aug. 13, 1856). He required people to be both baptized AND members of a local church.
-So now a systematic definition once again from John Frame:
-Baptism is meant to be a 1-time thing (can you be born twice?), communion is meant to be observed “perpetually.” There’s some debate about how often that means, we’ll talk about that later!
-4 views of communion today:
-Transubstantiation: RCC, the elements are TRANSformed back into the body & blood.
-Consubstantiation: (Lutheran) CON is Greek for WITH, Christ is uniquely present in, with, and around the elements but they are not TRANSformed.
-Spiritual presence: Christ is spiritually present in in the practice of communion in some unique and special way
-Pure memorial: (“Do this in remembrance of me.) This is often the default position of many Protestants, but I love what Millard Erickson says about the potential negative of this position.
-Who can participate in this sacrament? There’s more to 1 Cor. 11 then we looked at! This says it’s not open to just anyone, and that each person is supposed to examine themselves, which many people have taken as needing to confess all your sins before communion. But that’s not what Paul is saying, there’s a specific examination we’re supposed to do, but it’s not internal. We’re supposed to be repenting of sin all the time, but in communion we’re supposed to examine how we are in relation to the rest of the church (body). This means that you should not participate in this meal if you have unresolved issues with someone else in the church. This tells us that one of the purposes of this celebration is to unite us together (spiritually).
-Vs. 30 is why I’m spiritual presence, because there’s something more than just a memorial meal that’s taking place in communion.
-This is also where we get the idea of “fencing” the table, this isn’t open to anyone to come take a piece of bread and shot of grape juice, I believe there’s something else going on spiritually here that we shouldn’t be flippant about.
-This has led to the church having 3 approaches as to who can participate. One note is every church believes there is some limit to who is allowed to participate, but they draw the boundaries in difference places.
-Closed communion: in 2 ways, either a baptized member of that denomination, or some go so far as to say a baptized member of that specific church.
-Close would be say a baptized member of a church (Spurgeon)
-Open is this meal is for anyone who has been saved, without any other limitations.
-My personal position differs from our church on this, we practice open communion, but my position is “close” communion, but because this isn’t a gospel essential, we can dialogue and debate the merits of these positions without dividing over them (more on that coming in 2 weeks)
-The final question is how often should we celebrate? And once again, my preference is different than our church! When I first arrived, it was celebrated monthly, we have since moved to 2/month, but I would love to celebrate it weekly as the culmination of our worship service, where each week, we’re reminded of Jesus’s sacrifice and each week we can taste and see that the Lord is good.
-When we switched to 2/month, I got an anonymous letter from someone who didn’t like this transition. Just so everyone hears this, if anyone ever sends an anonymous letter, it goes straight into the garbage. The Bible tells us if we have an issue with someone we go straight to them, we don’t hide beyond anonymity. I will share all the push backs I’ve gotten to celebrating communion weekly, and why I think they’re wrong, are you ready? I can condense them down to 2:
-First, people have said it makes communion less special. What doesn’t make sense to me is why that doesn’t apply to: singing, or praying, or preaching. Or if we want to go a step further, if communion is meant to nourish us spiritually, I need food to be nourished physically, but eating 3x a day doesn’t make it any less special for me! Sometimes it’s a very special meal, but most of the time it’s just to get calories into my body.
-Second, I’ve been told it takes too much time. Which honestly just sounds lazy. I’m not sure if you realize this, but anything worth doing takes time. And since it’s something Jesus commanded, I think it’s worth “wasting” time on it! I had a conversation with someone once who’s a member of the biggest EFCA church in the country. That church celebrates communion 1/month only at their Saturday service, and they don’t let anyone know that’s the only time they celebrate it. Something’s off if it’s not an essential component of the practices of your church!
-So those are the 2 sacraments given to us from the Lord that are means of grace from God to us to confirm and nourish us as believers.
- Does the Order Matter?
-I think the order to these does matter, because they’re both connected to being a Christian, but they’re connected to different parts of being a Christian. Baptism is connected to the beginning or entry point. Throughout the NT, the command is repent AND be baptized.
-But here’s where there’s room for some disagreement. I can’t point to a specific chapter and verse for this ordering. It’s a logical argument that they should be sequential, but that’s where I’ll stop. The way I’ll say it is I think the preferred order should be: you’re saved, then shortly after that you’re baptized, and then only when you’ve been baptized (as the entry rite) should you participate in the Lord’s Supper (the ongoing rite) because why would you willingly only participate in 1 of these 2 practices? Both are commands (not optional) therefore both need to be done. You may be asking: what about if someone gets saved today during this service, would you ban them from the table until they’ve been baptized? No! But I would hope they would want to be baptized ASAP. I’ve said before that I would love to fill this baptistry up every week because people were being saved. The logical ordering from what the Bible teaches seems to be: salvation leads to baptism which then leads to the Lord’s Supper.
Pastor Mike's Musings 