Catechisma
Nowell's
Section 5 / 5
OriginalModernized

Q334392

IV. Of Sacraments

On Baptism and the Lord's Supper

Master. Now that we've finished our discussion of God's law, the Creed (or Christian confession), and prayer and thanksgiving, it remains to speak of the sacraments and divine mysteries, which always have prayer and thanksgiving joined to them. Tell me, then: what is a sacrament?

Scholar. A sacrament is an outward expression of God's goodwill and generosity toward us through Christ, conveyed by a visible sign that represents an invisible, spiritual grace. Through this sign, God's promises of forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation given through Christ are, as it were, sealed, and their truth is confirmed more firmly in our hearts.

Master. How many parts does a sacrament consist of?

Scholar. Two parts: the outward element, or visible sign, and the invisible grace.

Master. Why does God want us to use outward signs?

Scholar. We simply don't possess minds and understanding so heavenly and divine that God's graces appear clearly to us on their own, as they do to angels. God has therefore made provision for our weakness, so that we who are earthly and spiritually blind might behold heavenly graces in outward elements and figures, as though looking into certain mirrors, seeing what we would otherwise be unable to see. It is greatly to our benefit, moreover, that God's promises should be presented to our senses as well, so that they may be confirmed in our minds without doubt.

Master. But isn't it a clear sign of unbelief in us that we can't give firm faith to God's promises unless we're propped up by such aids?

Scholar. Our faith in this life is genuinely weak and incomplete, yet that doesn't stop us from being people of faith. The lingering traces of doubt that cling to our flesh reveal how fragile our faith can be, but they don't extinguish it entirely. We can't fully shake off these traces of doubt, but we must keep pressing toward a more perfect faith throughout our lives, growing continually until the end. The sacraments help us greatly in that effort.

Master. Is there another reason why the Lord also wanted external signs to be practiced?

Scholar. The Lord ordained His mysteries for this further purpose: that they would serve as clear marks and tokens of our profession, by which we bear witness to our faith before others. Through them, we openly declare that we share in God's blessings alongside the rest of the faithful, that we hold the same faith and the same convictions as they do, and that we are not ashamed of the name of Christ or of being called His disciples.

Master. What do you make of those who think they can do without the divine mysteries, as though they aren't particularly necessary?

Scholar. First, no one can neglect so godly and fitting a duty without committing a grave offense against God the Father, our Savior Jesus Christ, and His church. What else would that neglect amount to but an indirect denial of Christ? Anyone who won't even acknowledge himself as a Christian has no right to be counted among Christians. Furthermore, those who would refuse the sacraments as though they had no need of them deserve to be condemned not only for the most extreme presumption, but also for a kind of ungrateful wickedness toward God. In doing so, they despise not only the aids provided for their own weakness, but God Himself, who gave those aids. They reject His grace and, as far as it lies within them, they quench His Spirit.

Master. You understand the visible signs and outward use of the sacraments quite well. But when you give the sacraments the power to seal and confirm God's promises in our hearts, you seem to be assigning to them what properly belongs to the Holy Spirit.

Scholar. Enlightening the minds and souls of men, and bringing peace and security to their consciences, is, and should be recognized as, the proper work of the Holy Spirit alone. This praise belongs to Him and should not be transferred to anyone else. Yet this does not prevent God from giving His sacred ordinances a secondary role in quieting and strengthening our minds and consciences, provided nothing is taken away from the Spirit's power. We must therefore conclude that the outward element contains no sacramental force or efficacy in itself or by itself; rather, that power flows entirely from the Spirit of God as from a fountainhead, and is conveyed to us through the sacred ordinances the Lord has appointed for this very purpose.

Master. How many sacraments has God ordained in His church?

Scholar. Two.

Master. What are they?

Scholar. Baptism and the Holy Supper, which are observed among all the faithful. Through the one we are born again, and through the other we are nourished toward everlasting life.

Master. Then tell me first what you believe about baptism.

Scholar. By nature we are children of wrath, that is, strangers to the church, which is God's household. Baptism is, in a sense, the doorway through which we are received into that household. In it we receive a most substantial testimony that we now belong among God's people and His children; that we are joined and grafted into the body of Christ, made His members, and grow together with Him into one body.

Master. You said earlier that a sacrament consists of two parts: the outward sign and the inward grace. What is the outward sign in baptism?

Scholar. Water: the person being baptized is either dipped in it or sprinkled with it, "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Master. What is the hidden, spiritual grace?

Scholar. It takes two forms: the forgiveness of sins and regeneration. Both find their full and clear expression in that same outward sign.

Master. How so?

Scholar. First, just as water washes away the body's filth, so the forgiveness of sins washes away the stains of the soul. Second, the beginning of regeneration, which is the putting to death of our old nature, is expressed by being dipped in the water or sprinkled with it. Finally, when we rise up again out of the water, under which we have been for only a brief moment, the new life is represented: that new life being the other part, and the goal, of our regeneration.

Master. You seem to be making the water nothing more than a symbol of divine realities.

Scholar. It is a symbol, yes, but not an empty or deceptive one. It is a symbol to which the truth of the things it represents is genuinely joined and bound. For just as God truly grants us forgiveness of sins and newness of life in baptism, so we truly receive them. God forbid that we should think He mocks and deceives us with hollow symbols.

Master. Do we not then obtain forgiveness of sins through the outward washing or sprinkling of water?

Scholar. No. Christ alone has washed away the stains of our souls with His blood. It is not right to give that honor to an outward element. Rather, the Holy Spirit, as it were, sprinkles our consciences with that holy blood, wiping away all the stains of sin and making us clean before God. The sacrament gives us a seal and pledge of this cleansing from sin.

Master. But where does regeneration come from?

Scholar. Only through the death and resurrection of Christ. Through the power of Christ's death, our old self is, in a sense, crucified and put to death, and the corruption of our nature is, as it were, buried, so that it no longer lives and holds power over us. And through the gift of His resurrection, He gives us the grace to be remade into a new life, one that obeys the righteousness of God.

Master. Does everyone receive this grace equally and without distinction?

Scholar. Only the faithful receive this benefit. The unbelieving, by rejecting the promises God offers them, shut the door on themselves and walk away with nothing. Yet this does not mean the sacraments lose their power or their nature.

Master. Then tell me briefly: what does the proper use of baptism consist of?

Scholar. Faith and repentance. First, we must hold with firm confidence in our hearts that we are cleansed by the blood of Christ from all the filth of sin, that we are therefore acceptable to God, and that His Spirit dwells within us. Then we must continually, with all our strength and effort, work at putting the flesh to death, obeying the righteousness of God, and showing by a godly life that we have, in baptism, as it were put on Christ and received His Spirit.

Master. Since infants cannot, by reason of their age, do any of the things you have described, why are they baptized?

Scholar. The requirement that faith and repentance come before baptism applies only to those who are old enough to be capable of both. For infants, the promise Christ made to the Church, in whose faith they are baptized, is sufficient for the present. Then, when they have grown up, they must themselves acknowledge the truth of their baptism, and allow its power to be alive in their souls and visible in their lives and conduct.

Master. How do we know that infants should not be kept from baptism?

Scholar. Since God, who never departs from truth or strays from the right path, did not exclude infants from circumcision in the Jewish church, our infants should not be turned away from baptism either.

Master. Do you consider these two things so similar, sharing the same basis and pattern?

Scholar. Completely. Just as Moses and all the prophets testify that circumcision was a sign of repentance, Paul teaches that it was also a sacrament of faith. Yet Jewish children, who were not yet old enough to exercise faith or repentance, were circumcised all the same. Through this visible sign, God showed Himself in the Old Testament to be the Father of young children and of the offspring of His people. Now, since it is certain that God's grace is both more abundantly poured out and more clearly revealed in the Gospel through Christ than it was in the Old Testament through Moses, it would be a serious injustice to suggest that this same grace is now somehow dimmer or diminished in any way.

Master. Continue.

Scholar. Since it is certain that our infants share with us the substance and essential reality of baptism, a wrong would be done to them if the sign itself, which is secondary to the reality it represents, were denied them. To take away something that so powerfully testifies to God's mercy and confirms His promises would be to rob Christians of a profound comfort that believers in earlier times freely enjoyed. Our infants would then be treated more harshly under Christ in the New Testament than Jewish infants were treated under Moses in the Old. It stands to reason, therefore, that through baptism, as through the impression of a seal, our infants should be assured that they are heirs of God's grace and of the salvation promised to the children of the faithful.

Master. Is there anything more you want to say on this matter?

Scholar. Since the Lord Christ calls children to Himself, commands that no one prevent them from coming, embraces them when they do come, and declares that the kingdom of heaven belongs to them, it seems a serious injustice that people would bar them from its very first entry point and door, effectively shutting them out of the Christian community.

Master. That's true. But since you mentioned earlier that children, as they grow older, should acknowledge the truth of their baptism, I'd like you to say a bit more about what that actually means.

Scholar. In earlier times, parents and teachers carefully instructed their children in the foundational principles of the Christian faith as soon as the children were old enough to understand them. The goal was that they would absorb godliness almost from infancy, and that from their earliest years they would be nourished with the gentle food of virtue, oriented toward the blessed life. For this purpose, short introductory books called Catechisms were written, covering the same subjects, or very similar ones, to what we are discussing now. Once children appeared to have a solid enough grounding in the principles of the faith, their parents would bring them before the bishop.

Master. What was the purpose of that?

Scholar. The idea was that children, after their baptism, would do what older converts, also called students of the faith, had traditionally done before baptism, or rather at the moment of baptism itself. The bishop would question them, and the children would give an account of their faith and belief. Those whom the bishop judged to have made sufficient progress in understanding the faith he would approve, laying his hands on them and blessing them before sending them on their way. This act of approval and blessing by the bishop is what our people call Confirmation.

Master. But wasn't there a different form of confirmation used more recently?

Scholar. In place of this ancient and genuinely valuable practice, they substituted a device of their own invention: rather than having the bishop examine children to see whether they understood the basic teachings of the faith, they began anointing infants who could not yet speak, let alone give any account of what they believed. To this they added other ceremonies with no basis in Scripture or the early church. They insisted on calling this invention a sacrament, and treated it as nearly equal in dignity to baptism; some even placed it above baptism. By every means available, they promoted this confirmation of theirs as a kind of completion of baptism, as though baptism were somehow unfinished without it, and as though children who had been clothed in Christ and all His benefits through baptism were only half-Christians until they had been confirmed. No greater injury could be done to the divine sacrament, or to God Himself, or to Christ our Saviour, the author and founder of the holy sacrament of baptism.

Master. It would be desirable, then, to restore the ancient practice of examining children?

Scholar. Very much so, without question. If that practice were restored, parents would be pressed to fulfill their duty of raising their children in godliness, a duty that most of them currently neglect and push aside entirely. If parents and schoolmasters would take this responsibility seriously and carry it through faithfully, we would see a remarkable unity in faith and religion, rather than the wretched fragmentation we witness today. Things would not lie so buried under the darkness of ignorance, nor would they be so shaken apart by the endless clash of competing opinions, as they are at present. It is a deeply sorrowful state of affairs, and every good person should grieve over it.

Master. What you say is quite right. Now tell me about the order of the Lord's Supper.

Scholar. It follows exactly what the Lord Christ himself established, who "on the same night he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, 'Take, eat: this is my body, which is given for you: do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way, after supper he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, 'Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for you and for many, for the forgiveness of sins. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as you eat this bread and drink from this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.'" This is the form and order of the Lord's Supper, which we should observe and keep faithfully until he comes.

Master. For what purpose?

Scholar. To celebrate and continually maintain a grateful remembrance of the Lord's death, and of that most extraordinary gift we have received through it; and just as we were born again once in baptism, so through the Lord's Supper we are continually fed and sustained for spiritual and eternal life.

Master. You're saying, then, that baptism is received only once, just as one is born only once, but that the Lord's Supper, like food, must be received repeatedly.

Scholar. Yes, exactly, sir.

Master. Do you say that this sacrament also has two parts, as baptism does?

Scholar. Yes. The first part is the bread and wine, the outward signs, which we see with our eyes, handle with our hands, and taste with our mouths. The second part is Christ himself, by whom our souls are inwardly nourished, as if on their proper food.

Master. And do you say that everyone should receive both parts of the sacrament equally?

Scholar. Yes, certainly, sir. Since the Lord has expressly commanded it, it would be a most serious offense to reduce or limit His command in any way.

Master. Why did the Lord intend for two signs to be used here?

Scholar. First, He gave the signs of His body and blood separately, so that the image of His death would be all the more vivid and clear. His body was torn, His side was pierced, and all His blood was shed; and by printing that memory so deeply into our hearts, it takes hold of us more firmly. Beyond this, the Lord provided for our weakness in a way that makes His purpose unmistakably plain: just as bread nourishes our bodies, so His body has a singular and powerful force to feed our souls spiritually. And just as wine lifts men's spirits and strengthens them, so His blood relieves and refreshes our souls. In this way we can be fully assured that He is not only our food but also our drink, and that we need look nowhere else but to Him alone for any part of our spiritual nourishment and eternal life.

Master. So the Supper delivers not merely a symbol, but the actual reality of the benefits you have described?

Scholar. What else could it be? Since Christ is truth itself, there is no question that what He declares in words and represents in signs, He also carries out in deed and delivers to us directly. He makes those who believe in Him partakers of His body and blood just as surely as they know with certainty that they have received the bread and wine with their mouths and stomachs.

Master. Since we are on earth and Christ's body is in heaven, how can what you are describing actually be possible?

Scholar. We must lift our souls and hearts away from earth and raise them up by faith to heaven, where Christ is.

Master. Are you saying, then, that faith is the means by which we receive the body and blood of Christ?

Scholar. Yes. When we believe that Christ died to free us from death and rose again to secure life for us, we share in the redemption purchased by His death, in His life, and in all His other blessings. By the same union that binds a head to its members, He joins us to Himself through the secret and marvelous power of His Spirit, so that we become members of His body, of His flesh and bones, and grow together with Him into one body.

Master. Do you then imagine, in order for this union to take place, that the bread and wine are transformed into the actual substance of Christ's flesh and blood?

Scholar. No such transformation needs to be invented. Both the Holy Scriptures and the best and most ancient interpreters teach that through baptism we likewise become members of Christ, of His flesh and bones, and grow into one body with Him, even though no such change occurs in the water.

Master. Continue.

Scholar. In both sacraments, the physical substances remain unchanged. Yet when the word of God and heavenly grace are joined to them, such power is at work that just as baptism regenerates us in Christ and first grafts us, so to speak, into His body, so when we rightly receive the Lord's Supper, we are continually nourished and sustained toward eternal life. This happens through the truly divine nourishment of Christ's body and blood, full of health and immortality, given to us by the work of the Holy Spirit and received by us through faith as the very mouth of our soul. In both sacraments together, we grow into one body with Christ.

Master. Then Christ gives Himself to us, and binds us to Himself in the closest possible union, through means other than the Supper alone.

Scholar. Christ gave Himself to us as the author of our salvation most fully when He gave Himself to death on our behalf, so that we would not perish the death we deserved. Through the Gospel He also gives Himself to the faithful, teaching plainly that He is the living bread that came down from heaven to nourish the souls of those who believe in Him. And in baptism, as noted earlier, Christ gave Himself to us in a real and effective way, for it was then that He made us Christians.

Master. And do you hold that the bonds of union in the Supper are no less close than these?

Scholar. In the Lord's Supper, the communion I described is not only confirmed but deepened. Each person is assured, through both the words and the mysteries of God, that this communion belongs to him personally, and that Christ is given to him in a uniquely intimate way, so that he may enjoy Him in the fullest and closest possible union. Through this, not only are our souls nourished by His holy body and blood as by their proper food, but our bodies also share in the sacraments of eternal life, receiving, as it were, a pledge of the certain hope of resurrection and immortality. The end toward which all of this moves is that Christ abides in us and we in Christ, and that through Christ abiding in us we obtain not only everlasting life but also the glory that His Father gave Him. To put it plainly: I do not imagine any crude or physical joining, yet I affirm that this secret and wondrous communion of Christ's body in His Supper is the closest and most binding, the most certain, the most real, and altogether the highest and most perfect union possible.

Master. From what you have said about the Lord's Supper, it seems I can conclude that it was not ordained for the purpose of offering Christ's body as a sacrifice to God the Father for sins.

Scholar. That's not what's being offered here. When Christ instituted His supper, He commanded us to eat His body, not to offer it. The prerogative of offering for sins belongs to Christ alone, as the eternal Priest; and when He died on the cross, He made that one, everlasting sacrifice for our salvation, completing it fully and for all time. Nothing remains for us to do but receive the benefit of that eternal sacrifice, which the Lord Himself has given us, and this is precisely what we do in the Lord's Supper.

Master. Then I understand that the holy supper directs us to the death of Christ and to His sacrifice, offered once on the cross, by which alone God is reconciled to us.

Scholar. That is exactly right. Through the bread and wine as symbols, we are assured of this: just as Christ's body was once offered as a sacrifice to reconcile us to God's favor, and His blood was once shed to wash away the stain of our sins, so now in His holy supper both are given to the faithful, so that we may know with certainty that this reconciliation belongs to us, and may receive the full fruit of the redemption purchased by His death.

Master. Are the faithful, then, the only ones who are fed with Christ's body and blood?

Scholar. They alone. For those to whom He gives His body, He also gives, as I said, everlasting life.

Master. Why do you not accept that the body and blood of Christ are contained within the bread and cup, or that the bread and wine are transformed into the substance of His body and blood?

Scholar. Because to do so would cast doubt on the reality of Christ's body, dishonor Christ Himself, and fill those who receive the sacrament with revulsion. We would be imagining His body either enclosed within so small a space, or present in many places at once, or His flesh chewed between our teeth, torn apart and eaten like ordinary food.

Master. If receiving the sacrament can be damnable for the wicked, why does that follow if no change has taken place in the elements?

Scholar. Because they approach these holy and divine mysteries with hypocrisy and pretense, wickedly profaning them to the great injury and dishonor of the Lord who ordained them.

Master. Then explain what our duty is, so that we may come rightly to the Lord's Supper.

Scholar. Precisely what the Holy Scriptures teach us: to examine ourselves and determine whether we are true members of Christ.

Master. By what signs and marks can we know this clearly?

Scholar. First, by whether we sincerely repent of our sins, which drove Christ to His death, whose mysteries are now given to us. Second, by whether we rest on a firm hope in God's mercy through Christ, with a grateful remembrance of the redemption purchased by His death. Third, by whether we hold a genuine and settled intention to live a godly life from this point forward. Finally, since the Lord's Supper also signifies friendship and love among people, by whether we bear brotherly love toward our neighbors, that is, toward all people, free from ill will or hatred.

Master. Is any person fully and perfectly capable of doing all these things you describe?

Scholar. Complete perfection in every respect, leaving nothing lacking, cannot be found in any person as long as he remains in this world. Yet the imperfection that holds us back should not keep us from the Lord's Supper, which the Lord intended as a help for our weakness and imperfection. Indeed, if we were already perfect, there would be no further need for the Lord's Supper at all. What these requirements point toward, then, is that each person bring to the table repentance, faith, and love that are, as far as possible, genuine and sincere.

Master. But you said earlier that the sacraments serve to strengthen faith. How can you now say that we must bring faith to them?

Scholar. These statements don't actually contradict each other. Faith must already be present in us before the sacraments can do their work, and it is precisely to nourish and strengthen that faith that the Lord has given us the sacraments. They bring real, powerful help in confirming and, as it were, sealing God's promises within our hearts.

Master. There is still one thing left for you to explain: to whom does the administration of the sacraments properly belong?

Scholar. Since the duties of feeding the Lord's flock with God's word and administering the sacraments are so closely bound together, there's no question that the administration of the sacraments belongs to those who have been entrusted with the office of public teaching. The Lord himself, when He presided at His supper in the role of public minister, set the example to be followed, and He specifically committed the offices of baptizing and teaching to His apostles.

Master. Should pastors admit everyone to the sacraments without any discernment?

Scholar. In earlier times, when adults came to the Christian faith, they were not admitted even to baptism until they had first given clear evidence of their faith in the core articles of Christian belief. Now, since only infants are baptized, no such selection is possible. The Lord's Supper is a different matter. Since only those of mature years come to it, if someone is openly known to be unworthy, the pastor should not admit that person, because to do so would be a profane abuse of the sacrament.

Master. Why, then, did the Lord not exclude the traitor Judas from receiving His supper?

Scholar. Because, however well the Lord knew of his wickedness, it was not yet publicly known at that time.

Master. So ministers cannot turn away hypocrites?

Scholar. Not as long as their wickedness remains hidden.

Master. Since both the worthy and the unworthy receive the sacraments alike, what solid and reliable assurance for our consciences can the sacraments actually provide, as you were just claiming?

Scholar. While the ungodly, as far as it concerns themselves, do not receive the gifts God offers in the sacraments but instead refuse them and deprive themselves of their benefits, the godly who seek Christ and His grace through faith are never left without a clear conscience, the sweetest comfort, and a firm hope of salvation and perfect happiness.

Master. But if a pastor either knows personally, or is quietly informed, that certain people are unworthy, may he not exclude them from communion?

Scholar. He may address such people in public sermons, provided he does not name them outright or brand them with shame and disgrace, but rather presses on their conscience through suggestion and implication alone. He may also confront them privately with serious warnings. However, he may not bar them from communion until the church has first conducted a proper examination and rendered its judgment.

Master. What remedy, then, is to be found and applied for this problem?

Scholar. In churches that were well ordered and well governed, there was, as I mentioned earlier, an established form of discipline. Elders were chosen, that is, ecclesiastical magistrates, to maintain and uphold the order of the church. These men held the authority of oversight and correction, much like censors. When they, together with the pastor, became aware of anyone who was bringing serious public offense to the church of God through false teaching, disruptive errors, empty superstitions, or a corrupt and wicked way of life, and who could not participate in the Lord's Supper without profaning it, they would exclude such a person from communion. They would reject that person and refuse to readmit them until they had made public repentance and satisfied the church.

Master. What standard should govern public penance?

Scholar. Those who spread false teachings to undermine true godliness and destabilize religion, or whose corrupt and wicked lives have caused serious public scandal, must make public restitution to the church they have wronged. This means sincerely acknowledging and confessing their sin before the entire congregation, and openly declaring that they are genuinely sorry for having so gravely offended Almighty God, and for having, as far as it was in their power, dishonored the Christian faith they professed and the church in which they held a place. They must also acknowledge that they have harmed others not only through their sin itself, but through the destructive example they set. And so they must seek and ask forgiveness, first from God, and then from His church.

Master. What should happen next?

Scholar. They must then humbly ask to be received back into the church from which their conduct had excluded them, and restored to its holy sacraments. In brief, public penance must be handled with careful balance: it should not be so severe that the offender is driven to despair, nor so lenient that the church's discipline erodes, its authority weakens, and others are emboldened to commit similar wrongs. But when the elders and the pastor together determine that the offender has been sufficiently disciplined and that the lesson to others has been adequately served, the person who had been excommunicated was traditionally welcomed back into full communion with the church.

Master. I can see, my child, that you have a solid grasp of the heart of Christian godliness. Now what remains is that you shape your life according to this knowledge, so that your learning doesn't prove empty. It isn't those who merely hear and understand God's word who will be blessed, but those who follow His will and obey His commands. Indeed, the servant who knows his master's will and ignores it will be beaten all the more severely. Understanding true religion counts for very little unless it's joined to integrity of life, innocence, and holiness. So press on, my child; give your full attention and effort to this, so that you don't fall short in your duty or drift at any point from this prescribed pattern of godly living.

Scholar. I will do my best, honored master, and leave nothing undone that lies within my power. With everything I have, I will strive to live up to the name and profession of a Christian. And I will also humbly and continually ask Almighty God that He not allow the seed of His teaching to die in my heart like seed scattered on dry, barren ground, but that He would water and bring life to the dryness of my heart with the divine dew of His grace, so that I may bear abundant fruit of godliness, fruit that will be gathered and stored in the barn and granary of the kingdom of heaven.