[Note: One of the most important things an understanding of worldview brings to us is a clear picture of the outer limits of the various belief systems that exist in the world. By understanding how a belief system answers the three worldview questions (Who is God? What is man? What is salvation?), we know what worldview system it belongs to and how to evaluate it for truth. However, there are also other questions, beyond the three essential worldview questions, that come up as people attempt to understand and live out their faith. The answers to these “other” questions are important – some even very important. However, as important as they might be, they are not essential to the faith. People can answer them differently, and even get the answers wrong, and still be a part of the faith. There are many of these kinds of questions in the Christian faith, and it is typically these non-essential questions that create the conflict and division that exists within the faith itself. In fact, these kinds of differences are the main reason why there are different denominations. The purpose of this series is to explain those differences in order to give Christians a basis upon which to agree to disagree in love. These kinds of differences may cause various divisions, but they should never cause Christians to reject one another.]
What are Ordinances?
As we consider the non-essential doctrines that we find mentioned in the Bible, the first one that we will deal with, here in this article, is ordinances. An ordinance is a religious ritual that churches practice in fulfillment of teachings in the Bible. There are two ordinances that are practiced nearly universally in Christian churches: baptism and communion (or the Lord’s Supper). There is a third that is practiced by some churches: foot washing.
Beyond the actual ordinances themselves, there are also different meanings that are assigned to the practice of the ordinances. Some churches see the ordinances as sacraments, where the practice is understood to be an actual part of the salvation process. Other churches see the ordinances as symbols of a spiritual reality that represents a spiritual truth beyond itself.
One of the problems we run into when dealing with this topic is a semantic one. Various denominations or theological strains don’t always define the concept of ordinance or sacrament in the same way. In order to avoid the semantic problem as much as possible, we will try to express the biblical worldview concepts in terms that clearly differentiate the various issues.
What we can say is that ordinances are not the means by which people receive salvation. Religious groups which claim that participation in an ordinance is necessary for salvation stand outside of biblical worldview teachings. The provision of salvation was provided by Jesus’ death on the cross and resurrection from the dead. Receiving that salvation requires that an individual personally believe that truth, repent of sin, and, by faith, invite Christ into their heart. Participation in the ordinances is an act of testimony and obedience for those who have already received God’s salvation through Jesus Christ. With that background, let’s look at the various ordinances and how different Christian groups view them.
Communion or The Lord’s Supper?
Obviously, the idea of communion originated with The Last Supper, when Jesus participated in the Passover meal with his disciples just before his crucifixion. During that meal, Jesus told his disciples, in Luke 22:14-20:
14 When the hour came, Jesus and his apostles reclined at the table. 15 And he said to them, “I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. 16 For I tell you, I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in the kingdom of God.” 17 After taking the cup, he gave thanks and said, “Take this and divide it among you. 18 For I tell you I will not drink again from the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes.” 19 And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” 20 In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.
Based on that event, Christians began to observe communion as a remembrance of what Christ did to provide salvation. While the practice of communion has continued throughout all of Christian history, different groups have given different theological meanings to the practice. Some of the more prominent interpretations include:
Transubstantiation
The theological concept of transubstantiation asserts that the substance of the bread and wine used in the communion ceremony is miraculously changed into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Christ. At the same time, those holding this belief also assert that the physical traits and chemical properties of the bread and wine remain. This belief is held by Roman Catholics, the Orthodox Church, and some Anglicans.
In more recent times, many theologians who adhere to this interpretation have tended to prefer to use different terminology to describe it. They have come to feel that the term transubstantiation is too shallow to describe something with such spiritual magnitude. More commonly, the tendency is to describe this belief as “objective reality, but pious silence about technicalities.” That is, they believe the doctrine but don’t care to try to describe or speculate about the mystery of the change that actually takes place in the elements during the ceremony.
Consubstantiation
Consubstantiation is unique to Lutheran theology. This approach to understanding the ordinance clams that during communion, the body and blood of Christ coexist in union with the bread and wine but is not changed into the substance itself. This is the view that Christ’s glorified body comes down into the bread when it is consecrated, and abides together with it. At the same time it is believed that it does not actually join together with the bread and wine as one substance, as in transubstantiation. Some Lutheran theologians don’t like using the word Consubstantiation, so have opted for the term Sacramental Union.
Memorialism
Memorialism is the belief that the bread and wine are purely symbolic of the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Thus when believers partake of the elements, there is no belief that the actual blood and body of Christ are present, they are simply commemorating, or memorializing, the sacrificial death of Christ. Most Evangelicals hold this point of view.
Suspension
Suspension is the point of view that it is no longer necessary to participate at all in the Lord’s Supper. Those who hold this view believe that partaking of the bread and wine was not intended to be an ongoing ordinance for the church, so no longer needs to be practiced. The Quakers and Salvation Army are the main groups holding this position.
Baptism
The word baptism comes from the Greek word baptizo and means immerse or dip. Baptism is a ceremony that provides a Christian with the opportunity to publicly identify as a believer in Jesus Christ. The concept of baptism has a long history that began well before it became a part of the Christian faith. In ancient Judaism it was a cleansing ceremony.
At the beginning of his public ministry, Jesus had himself baptized by John the Baptist as an example to those who would follow him, that cleansing from sin was important. It became a part of the Christian faith after Jesus’ death as the act of publicly identifying oneself as a follower of Jesus Christ.
In dealing with the topic of baptism within the context of modern Christianity, there are two issues that come to the forefront. The first has to do with the proper method for baptizing, and the second with its theological meaning.
There are three primary modes (or methods) of water baptism used in Christian churches today: aspersion (sprinkling), affusion (pouring), and immersion (in which the person is completely submerged).
Sprinkling, Affusion, or Immersion?
Originally, baptism in the Christian church was done only by immersion. Archeological evidence of this is found throughout the places where Christianity spread in its earliest days. Sprinkling was only gradually introduced in the late second and third centuries. Affusion was not commonly introduced until around the 10th century. There were two main reasons why non-immersion practices came about.
The first had to do with the practice of some who waited until late in life to accept baptism. When this became popular, many who wanted to receive baptism were either sick or otherwise less mobile because of their age. In these cases, immersion was often quite difficult. As a compromise, the practice of sprinkling was implemented. In fact, this practice was originally referred to as “clinical” baptism because it was practiced with people who were ill.
A second reason for the change had to do with the introduction of infant baptism. Infant baptism was not practiced early on, though there are references to it beginning in the late 2nd century. It started to gain wider acceptance when St. Augustine began to teach that infants inherit the sin of Adam and Eve, and therefore should be baptized soon after birth. Sprinkling or affusion was introduced in this case for practical reasons, since totally immersing a child can be problematic.
The truth is, infant baptism is nowhere taught in the Bible. Augustine’s teaching was based on a theological conclusion about the nature of sin and the point in time when sin causes one to be separated from God, not on any specific place in Scripture where infant baptism is taught.
As we look at the question of methodology, what we find is that the dispute divides people into two camps – those who believe the proper, or at least appropriate, method of baptism is sprinkling or pouring, and those who believe immersion is the proper form.
Theological Meaning
The second issue of dispute that arises around baptism has its root in theology. It should be noted that there are many nuances within the various theological approaches to baptism. However, there are three major categories that will help us grasp this issue.
Sacrament
There are a number of denominations that look at baptism as a sacrament – a religious ceremony or ritual that is viewed as having the ability to impart divine grace. Roman Catholicism, and Eastern Orthodox churches hold this belief. Thus, they believe that those who do not receive proper baptism in their lifetime cannot receive the grace that provides salvation.
Symbol
Most Protestant and Evangelical churches look at baptism as having some type of symbolic meaning. The nuances about what is symbolized varies somewhat from denomination to denomination, but no one in this camp considers that the act itself imparts grace unto salvation. With this belief, baptism is symbolic of the salvation that Christ provided through his death on the cross and resurrection from the dead.
Baptismal Regeneration
There are also a few churches that believe that a person must receive water baptism in order to receive salvation. In these churches, however, baptism is not considered a sacrament. Churches that hold this belief include Churches of Christ/Christian Church and Oneness Pentecostalism.
Foot Washing
Christian denominations that observe foot washing as a third ordinance typically do so based on what they consider the authoritative example and command of Jesus found in John 13:1-15. Where it is practiced, it is frequently done in conjunction with a communion service. While not a ceremony that is widely practiced, foot washing is observed by several Protestant groups, including Seventh-day Adventists, certain Pentecostal groups, many Pietistic groups, some Anabaptists, and several types of Baptists. It is also practiced on a more periodic basis by some Roman Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, and Methodist churches.
We Can Agree to Disagree
Sadly, many Christians use their belief about various ordinances as a test of fellowship. The reason this is a sad state of affairs is that while the symbolism of the various ordinances is very important, and while there is a meaning and methodology that corresponds with scriptural teaching, none of them are important enough to avoid fellowshipping with other brothers and sisters in Christ.
Those who feel strongly that their beliefs about the various ordinances are right, should find a church that believes and practices them in a way that corresponds with what they believe is taught by Scripture. That said, is it also important to recognize that beliefs about the ordinances are non-essential worldview beliefs – that is, a person can be dead wrong about this issue and still be considered a believer. Regardless of the particular way various Christian groups practice and theologically analyze the various ordinances, none of them are necessary to receive salvation. In fact, it is possible for a person to never practice any ordinance, or to completely misunderstand the meaning of the ordinances, and still be a Christian.
Christian fellowship should always be based upon the understanding that everyone who knows a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ is a spiritual brother or sister in Christ. When it comes to non-essential theological beliefs, we should not let those be a barrier to fellowship. It is a wonderful thing to study the various non-essential beliefs as fully as possible, and to practice what one believes to be the true teaching of the Bible. In the process of doing that, however, it should never become a barrier to fellowship.