We celebrate the Lord’s Supper every Lord’s Day in our
congregation. Though weekly observance is not commanded in the Scriptures, it
seems evident this was the practice of the early church (Acts 2:42; 20:7; 1Cor.
11:17-34; cf. 16:1-2) and that frequent observance is desirable even if not
required (Luke 22:19-20; 1Cor. 11:26, 33). The frequency of communion is not
mandated by the OPC, so different intervals (including weekly observance) are
found in different congregations within the denomination. But so long as
circumstances permit, our local church will continue to observe the Lord’s
Supper weekly in one of our Lord’s Day services.
In 2015 when our elders began studying the Westminster
Confession together, one of the issues that had to be considered was the proper
administration of the sacraments. Many of us had been in churches before where
the Lord’s Supper and baptism were observed very casually. In modern times it
is common for non-ordained persons to administer both sacraments and even for
them to be observed privately away from the gathered Church. This is largely a
modern practice and result of individualism in western culture. The Reformed
tradition in general and the Westminster Confession of Faith in particular take
a very different, far more historical view of the sacraments.
There be only two sacraments ordained by
Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, baptism, and the Supper of the
Lord: neither of which may be dispensed
by any, but by a minister of the Word lawfully ordained. (WCF 27.4, emp.
added)
The OPC’s Book of Church Order describes the proper administration
of the sacraments:
4. The Sacraments
a. The sacraments, baptism and the Lord's
Supper, as visible signs and seals of the Word of the covenant, are important
elements of public worship. They represent Christ and his benefits, confirm his
people's participation in him, visibly mark off from the world those who belong
to his church, and solemnly bind them to covenant faith and loyalty.
b. Because the sacraments are ordinances
of Christ for the benefit of the visible church, they are to be administered
only under the oversight of the government of the church. Moreover, in ordinary
circumstances they are properly administered only in a gathering of the
congregation for the public worship of God, baptism being a sacrament whereby
the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church, and the
Lord's Supper signifying and sealing the communion of believers with Christ and
with each other as members of his mystical body. Nevertheless, if a session
judges that circumstances require otherwise, the sacraments may be administered
elsewhere; but, in any event, the church must be represented in the service.
c. Although the efficacy of the
sacraments does not depend upon the piety or intention of the person
administering them, they are not to be administered by any private person, but
only by a minister of the Word. (Directory of Public Worship II.a.4)
Why have the Church in general and Reformed Christians in
particular only allowed ordained teachers to administer the sacraments? It is
not because of a misguided tradition left-over from Roman Catholicism, nor is
it because we believe the effectiveness of the sacraments depends upon the
person administering them. As a general rule, we regard a person who is
baptized in a Trinitarian context whether by an ordained minister or not as
truly baptized. We would regard baptisms by a non-ordained person as irregular, though not invalid, because we believe it is not
only historical but biblical under ordinary circumstances to limit
administration of the sacraments to ordained ministers. What follows are four
reasons for this conviction.
1) Ministers of the
Word are stewards of the mysteries of God
(1Cor. 4:1). A steward is a servant, but much more
than a servant. A steward has special responsibility (cf. Luke 16:1-2) and thus
a higher degree of accountability to his master (1Cor. 4:2; cf. Jas. 3:1).
Every Christian is a servant of Jesus Christ, but not every believer is a
steward of the mysteries of God. Teaching ministers are. What is this mystery
committed to their care? It is the gospel of Jesus Christ, the message which
brings life and death to those in the world (2Cor. 2:15-16). Ministers are
specially “commissioned by God” to administer this mystery of grace (2Cor.
2:17); the sacraments are an intrinsic part of it.
2) The gospel and the
sacraments belong together (Matt. 28:18-20; Acts 2:36-42). The sacraments are only valid when coupled with the
gospel message. There is no spiritual power or value in getting a person wet or
eating bread and wine, but when these rituals are combined with the gospel
message, the water becomes a sign of the “washing of regeneration and renewing
of the Holy Spirit” (Tit. 3:4-5; cf. John 3:3, 5). The bread becomes Christ’s
body and the wine becomes His blood, not literally and metaphysically but
spiritually and symbolically (1Cor. 11:23-25). When the Church celebrates the
sacraments it confesses its faith in Christ (1Cor. 11:26). The gospel, the
sacraments, and the gathered Church belong together
(Acts 2:41-42; 20:7; 1Cor. 11:33). Though some may be baptized outside of the
gathered Church in unusual circumstances, there is no biblical evidence of the Supper ever being eaten apart from the
assembled local church. The unity of the gospel, sacraments, and local church
strongly support the administration of those sacraments by an ordained minister
of the word (cf. Heb. 13:7, 17).
3) Pastors and teachers
are given by God to the church to edify it (Eph. 4:11-12). This is a special function, ordained by God. How is the
Church edified? By meeting Christ in the Word and sacraments (Acts 2:42; 20:28;
1Pet. 5:1-5). The local church is not a democratically determined association.
Shepherds and teachers are given by
God to the Church for its up-building and welfare. Since the sacraments
are central to the local church’s faith, worship, and practice, it makes sense
their administration would belong to the stewards given to them by the Lord.
4) The administration
of the sacraments has historically been limited to teaching ministers and
elders since the earliest days of the Church.
Evidence from Justin Martyr and Tertullian demonstrates this as well as the
later, codified instructions in The
Apostolic Constitutions. In fact, it is hard to imagine this issue even
being debated—unless among some heretical sect—until the Reformation during the
revolutionary movement led by the Anabaptists. In western culture we take
individual liberties to such an extreme that we almost imagine any distinction
of functions to be unchristian, but we should recognize that there are
different roles in the Church without any difference in personal value (e.g.
1Tim. 2:11-3:13). Though we are all equal in Christ, not all Christians are
elders, and not all who are elders are devoted or appointed by God for the
ministry of the Word (1Tim. 5:17). The sacerdotal errors of the Roman Catholic
Church with an exaggerated clergy-laity distinction and a diminishing or denying
of the priesthood of all believers is clearly wrong, but denying this error
does not mean opening the sacraments and pulpit to anyone and everyone who
professes the name of Christ. There is a biblical and historical balance to be
found between those two extremes.
This is why we agree with the Westminster Confession that
baptism and the Lord’s Supper should only be administered by a lawfully
ordained minister, one recognized, called, and confirmed by the Church, not one
who made himself a minister by starting a church in his living room. The
sacraments belong with the teaching ministry of the Church, the preached Word,
and that ministry belongs to those whom God has gifted, called, and set apart
for that work and purpose.
There are consequences of this conviction. On the rare occasions when our congregation is without an ordained teaching minister on the Lord’s Day, the Lord’s Supper will not be celebrated. For example, the elders might invite a licentiate to preach on those days, but because he has only been licensed to preach and not formally ordained, the congregation would not observe the Lord’s Supper on those Sundays. This is unusual when a church has become accustomed to weekly observance, but it is important that we understand why we abstain on those Lord’s Days. Eating the Lord’s Supper is a privilege of God’s people, but when circumstances do not permit its proper observance, there is no fault in abstaining from its celebration. Just as we would not permit private observance of the Supper if a family simply decided to stay at home on the Lord’s Day, neither should we provide the Supper without the proper context for its celebration under the ordained ministry of the Word. –JME (September 2016)
There are consequences of this conviction. On the rare occasions when our congregation is without an ordained teaching minister on the Lord’s Day, the Lord’s Supper will not be celebrated. For example, the elders might invite a licentiate to preach on those days, but because he has only been licensed to preach and not formally ordained, the congregation would not observe the Lord’s Supper on those Sundays. This is unusual when a church has become accustomed to weekly observance, but it is important that we understand why we abstain on those Lord’s Days. Eating the Lord’s Supper is a privilege of God’s people, but when circumstances do not permit its proper observance, there is no fault in abstaining from its celebration. Just as we would not permit private observance of the Supper if a family simply decided to stay at home on the Lord’s Day, neither should we provide the Supper without the proper context for its celebration under the ordained ministry of the Word. –JME (September 2016)
