Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

For the thinkers, theologians, philospophers.
gaining_age
Sunday School Teacher
Sunday School Teacher
Posts: 254
Joined: 21 Jun 2022, 14:45
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 19 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by gaining_age »

Hi All,

It seems I've grown up in more the ordinance side of the Church and have some exposure now to the Sacrament perspective. This is a little foreign to me and this group is friendly and eclectic.

How does one perceive either or both? I'm looking to learn as the church I'm active in now (not a member) is Sacramental and I wrestle with understanding how that fits in to my history and understanding-- what is new and different I don't want to perceive as incorrect, per se, yet am not yet at a place to embrace. It's a learning moment and I know you all have a variety of perspective.

Lay it on me... how dost though liturgy?
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2725
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 233 times
Been thanked: 372 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by Del »

gaining_age wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 08:05ping
I like your question. I have struggled to understand the idea of "ordnances" myself. No surprise or offense if you aren't clear on sacramental faith.

American Evangelicals are a bit leery of "works," reflecting their Calvinist tradition. So they appear (to me) to be saying, "We don't trust in works. We'll do baptisms and the Lord's Supper, because Jesus told us to "Do this." We want to be obedient. But we won't do it too often, because we don't want to act like we trust in works. Okay?"

Apostolic Christians (Catholic and Orthodox) have never believed this way. We aren't doing anything in the sacraments. It is always Christ and the Holy Spirit who are the actors.... we receive His gifts and grace. We don't imagine that we create our own grace by some act of liturgy.

In Catholic grade school, we memorized this definition of a Sacrament: A sense-perceptible symbol or sign, in which the symbol actually accomplishes the thing that it symbolizes. Then we spent a few weeks picking these words apart until we understood.

Sense-perceptible simply means "something we can see or hear or touch." All of the biblical sacraments use words and objects that our human minds and bodies can comprehend.

But the key to sacramental faith lies in seeing that the symbols do what they symbolize. The water represents washing, and our sins are washed away. The water represents birth (amniotic fluid), and we really are born again into new life in Christ.

The bread and wine represent the Body and Blood of Christ -- and it really is the living Body and Blood of the risen Christ, all of His humanity and divinity. Thus we can receive Him as our Savior, as He commanded.


How deep do you want to go with this?

We can talk about each the Seven Sacraments. We can trace threads through the Old Testament, if you want.
We can talk about symbol and form and matter.
We can talk about the power and purpose of Icons.
We can talk about veneration, and why it isn't even close to idolatry.
User avatar
DLJake
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 517
Joined: 09 Apr 2022, 18:05
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by DLJake »

gaining_age wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 08:05 Hi All,

It seems I've grown up in more the ordinance side of the Church and have some exposure now to the Sacrament perspective. This is a little foreign to me and this group is friendly and eclectic.

How does one perceive either or both? I'm looking to learn as the church I'm active in now (not a member) is Sacramental and I wrestle with understanding how that fits in to my history and understanding-- what is new and different I don't want to perceive as incorrect, per se, yet am not yet at a place to embrace. It's a learning moment and I know you all have a variety of perspective.

Lay it on me... how dost though liturgy?
This is a good one, G-man.

I find the Eastern Rite Churches have the most open view on what a sacrament is. The Western Rite numbers them 1 to 7. The Eastern view is far more esoteric and less definitive in this area.

In early Christianity the head of the house, the bishop of the family and a small number of well trusted outsiders, would bring The Blessed Sacrament home in order to offer daily reception to the church in his home. This was fairly risky as it was in the time where if any Roman LEO caught you, you'd be killed without a so much as a how do you do.

THE DOORS! THE DOORS!
Nothing destroys cowboy boots faster than mare's urine. - JimVH as published in Equine Quarterly September 2022
User avatar
Jocose
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2305
Joined: 09 Apr 2022, 12:10
Location: Ulaanbaatar
Has thanked: 299 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by Jocose »

gaining_age wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 08:05 ...
Lay it on me... how dost though liturgy?
Divine Liturgy
The views expressed here are either mine or not my own, not sure.
The opinions expressed here may or may not be my own.
I post links to stuff.
Make your own choices.
User avatar
tuttle
Sunday School Teacher
Sunday School Teacher
Posts: 424
Joined: 08 Apr 2022, 05:21
Location: Middle-west
Has thanked: 213 times
Been thanked: 90 times
Contact:

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by tuttle »

I'll give a prot perspective, that may bump up against others.

The Ordinances refer to specifically commanded Sacraments. In this case, the Sacraments Christ commanded: baptism and the supper. I think it's a quirk of history (and most Baptists are bad at history) that when Baptists look back at their old confessions and see the word "ordinance" where others have "sacrament" they believe it means something different. It doesn't. Early Baptists were distinguishing which Sacraments were commanded by our Lord as 'ordinances' in order to try to clarify. Of course because there are different histories/traditions/theologies all out there using the same language, it can be tough to wade through what's being aimed at.

I believe there are other Sacraments which may not necessarily be ordinances in the same way (as in not specifically commanded by Christ), and thus not binding in the same way on all believers. For instance, suffering is sacramental. The New Testament is extremely clear that believers who suffer are participating in Christ's suffering. That's straight up sacramental.

I may disagree on details with Rome but I think it's clear from the New Testament that marriage is a sacrament too. Ephesians lets the cat out of the bag. About marriage Paul says, "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

I like Del's definition of a Sacrament, but I'd change a word: A sense-perceptible symbol or sign, in which the symbol actually participates in or with the thing that it symbolizes. (That doesn't necessarily mean that something isn't accomplished, but I think it gives a broader picture of what is happening)

It's not foolproof, but a good rule of thumb is whenever you run across the word 'participation' or 'partakers' in the NT your 'sacrament' alarm should go off.

Suddenly the New Testament warning not to be partakers of wickedness takes on a whole new light. Paul's warning to the Corinthians is extremely interesting. He says that even if the idol that the pagans sacrifice to is nothing, there is, in reality, something behind it that he doesn't want them participating with, namely demons.
"tuttle isn't saved" - Legion
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2725
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 233 times
Been thanked: 372 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by Del »

tuttle wrote: 30 Nov 2022, 05:58 I'll give a prot perspective, that may bump up against others.

The Ordinances refer to specifically commanded Sacraments. In this case, the Sacraments Christ commanded: baptism and the supper.

....

I like Del's definition of a Sacrament, but I'd change a word: A sense-perceptible symbol or sign, in which the symbol actually participates in or with the thing that it symbolizes. (That doesn't necessarily mean that something isn't accomplished, but I think it gives a broader picture of what is happening)

It's not foolproof, but a good rule of thumb is whenever you run across the word 'participation' or 'partakers' in the NT your 'sacrament' alarm should go off.
DLJake wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 19:40 I find the Eastern Rite Churches have the most open view on what a sacrament is. The Western Rite numbers them 1 to 7. The Eastern view is far more esoteric and less definitive in this area.
These are great! The spectrum of sacramental faith is coming clearer.

"Participation" is Western terminology describing faith like the Eastern Christian devotion of Icons. An icon is more than a picture to help us remember. It is a window into heaven -- an icon makes present for us the reality symbolized by the image written there.

Icons may not be "biblical," as American Bible Christians understand the Bible. But keep in mind that St. Luke the Evangelist wrote icons with the same inspiration that he wrote Scripture! The missionary work of icons to spread the Faith is as old as the Apostles. It is probably older than the oldest New Testament Scripture.

The Seven Sacraments are set apart as they are regarded as "instituted by Christ." Christ taught about certain changes that occur by grace in the sacraments, and by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit the Apostles spread this understanding. A believer is born again. We eat the Flesh and drink the Blood of Christ. Two become one flesh. Healing occurs. The Holy Spirit comes and dwells in hearts.

The Two Ordnances were "commanded by Christ," as necessary participation in His New Covenant. Baptism is the New Circumcision -- a child or new believer is accepted by Christ and received into His People, the Church. The Eucharist is the New Passover -- we accept Christ as our Savior and renew our participation in His New Covenant.
User avatar
DLJake
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 517
Joined: 09 Apr 2022, 18:05
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by DLJake »

Jocose wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 19:45
gaining_age wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 08:05 ...
Lay it on me... how dost though liturgy?
Divine Liturgy
THE DOORS! THE DOORS!
Nothing destroys cowboy boots faster than mare's urine. - JimVH as published in Equine Quarterly September 2022
User avatar
DLJake
Sunday School Superintendent
Sunday School Superintendent
Posts: 517
Joined: 09 Apr 2022, 18:05
Has thanked: 51 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by DLJake »

tuttle wrote: 30 Nov 2022, 05:58 I'll give a prot perspective, that may bump up against others. Fear not, I am here! And here is my first read through.

The Ordinances refer to specifically commanded Sacraments. Holy smokes! I'm all in to reading this mamma jamma In this case, the Sacraments Christ commanded: baptism and the supper indeed. I think it's a quirk of history (and most Baptists are bad at history) that when Baptists look back at their old confessions and see the word "ordinance" where others have "sacrament" they believe it means something different. It doesn't. Early Baptists were distinguishing which Sacraments were commanded by our Lord as 'ordinances' in order to try to clarify. Of course because there are different histories/traditions/theologies all out there using the same language, it can be tough to wade through what's being aimed at. Well said

I believe there are other Sacraments which may not necessarily be ordinances in the same way (as in not specifically commanded by Christ), and thus not binding in the same way on all believers. For instance, suffering is sacramental. The New Testament is extremely clear that believers who suffer are participating in Christ's suffering. That's straight up sacramental.

I may disagree on details with Rome but I think it's clear from the New Testament that marriage is a sacrament too. Ephesians lets the cat out of the bag. About marriage Paul says, "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

I like Del's definition of a Sacrament It's not his def, it's the def from the Western Rite, but I'd change a word: This is why you are a most loveable heretic. Just change One Word. 1052. A single word change a cause for schism felt to today. A sense-perceptible symbol or sign, in which the symbol actually participates in or with the thing that it symbolizes. (That doesn't necessarily mean that something isn't accomplished, but I think it gives a broader picture of what is happening)

It's not foolproof, but a good rule of thumb is whenever you run across the word 'participation' or 'partakers' in the NT your 'sacrament' alarm should go off.

Suddenly the New Testament warning not to be partakers of wickedness takes on a whole new light. Paul's warning to the Corinthians is extremely interesting. He says that even if the idol that the pagans sacrifice to is nothing, there is, in reality, something behind it that he doesn't want them participating with, namely demons.
Nothing destroys cowboy boots faster than mare's urine. - JimVH as published in Equine Quarterly September 2022
User avatar
FredS
A Rotten Mexican Woman
A Rotten Mexican Woman
Posts: 1687
Joined: 08 Apr 2022, 06:05
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 465 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by FredS »

gaining_age wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 08:05 It seems I've grown up in more the ordinance side of the Church and have some exposure now to the Sacrament perspective. This is a little foreign to me and this group is friendly and eclectic.

How does one perceive either or both? I'm looking to learn as the church I'm active in now (not a member) is Sacramental and I wrestle with understanding how that fits in to my history and understanding-- what is new and different I don't want to perceive as incorrect, per se, yet am not yet at a place to embrace. It's a learning moment and I know you all have a variety of perspective.
Ahhh - some friends and I had this conversation over dinner a couple weeks ago. My friend took a similar path away from his tradition towards a liturgical church. I think it's FANTASTIC when a Christian takes this turn as an adult, with eyes wide open. Check yer BM for an offer to pass on a little understanding that Dug shared with me long ago.



Del wrote: 29 Nov 2022, 14:08 In Catholic grade school, we memorized this definition of a Sacrament: A sense-perceptible symbol or sign, in which the symbol actually accomplishes the thing that it symbolizes. Then we spent a few weeks picking these words apart until we understood.

Sense-perceptible simply means "something we can see or hear or touch." All of the biblical sacraments use words and objects that our human minds and bodies can comprehend.
I've heard it described by a protestant pastor as "an outward symbol of invisible grace." This is a watered down notion of the Catholic idea, as it doesn't proscribe any power or works to the symbol. Whatever happens is by God's Grace, not the water or the wine. But our symbols acknowledge our need and desire for, and our plea for, His Grace.
If we ever get to heaven boys, it ain't because we ain't done nothin' wrong. - Kris Kristofferson
User avatar
Del
Usher
Usher
Posts: 2725
Joined: 11 Apr 2022, 22:08
Location: Madison, WI
Has thanked: 233 times
Been thanked: 372 times

Ordinance vs. Sacrament considerations

Post by Del »

FredS wrote: 01 Dec 2022, 06:18 I've heard it described by a protestant pastor as "an outward symbol of invisible grace." This is a watered down notion of the Catholic idea, as it doesn't proscribe any power or works to the symbol. Whatever happens is by God's Grace, not the water or the wine. But our symbols acknowledge our need and desire for, and our plea for, His Grace.
Flannery O'Connor shared this anecdote in a private letter, from the time when she was a young writer and just breaking into the genteel Southern world of celebrities and literary elites. It contains what is now her most famous quote.
“I was once, five or six years ago, taken by some friends to have dinner with Mary McCarthy and her husband, Mr. Broadwater. (She just wrote that book, A Charmed Life). She departed the Church at the age of 15 and is a Big Intellectual. We went at eight and at one, I hadn’t opened my mouth once, there being nothing for me in such company to say. The people who took me were Robert Lowell and his now wife, Elizabeth Hardwick. Having me there was like having a dog present who had been trained to say a few words but overcome with inadequacy had forgotten them.

Well, toward morning the conversation turned on the Eucharist, which I, being the Catholic, was obviously supposed to defend. Mrs. Broadwater said when she was a child and received the Host, she thought of it as the Holy Ghost, He being the ‘most portable’ person of the Trinity; now she thought of it as a symbol and implied that it was a pretty good one. I then said, in a very shaky voice, ‘Well, if it’s a symbol, to hell with it.’ That was all the defense I was capable of but I realize now that this is all I will ever be able to say about it, outside of a story, except that it is the center of existence for me; all the rest of life is expendable.”
This is essential to sacramental faith. The Eucharist really is the Body and Blood of Christ. If it isn't, then the Resurrection, the Bible, and all the rest are significantly robbed of meaning and importance.

But if the miracle of Christ's presence really does occur daily at the world's altars, then Apostolic Christians are scarcely surprised when other miracles occur.... especially "Eucharistic miracles," when the Body of Christ presents as actual flesh or the Blood of Christ behaves like real blood.

A tale regarding St. Thomas Aquinas:

A young friar entered the hall and breathlessly reported on the occurance of a Eucharistic miracle. A drop of communion wine had spilled on the altar cloth and had turned into a blood stain!
St. Thomas replied mildly, "That is odd. The Blood of Christ usually leaves a stain like that of wine."

I heard Scott Hahn offer this reflection on the conversation between Jesus, Moses, and Elijah at the Transfiguration.

Jesus: "Did you see that? I turned water into wine!"
Moses: "That's nothing. I turned a river of water into blood."
Jesus: "Well, you keep your eyes on that wine! I'm not done with it yet."
Post Reply