CLOSER COMMUNION

The Sacraments in Scripture and Tradition

by CLIFFORD KEW

Thou Shepherd of Israel, and mine, The joy and desire of my heart, For closer communion I pine, I long to reside where Thou art

D AND O F I O R

L

E B

T Y H M E R A SA N LVATIO SALVATIONIST PUBLISHING AND SUPPLIES, LTD, JUDD STREET, KING’S CROSS, LONDON WCIH 9NN © The Salvation Army 1980 CONTENTS First published 1980 Reprinted 1986 ISBN 0 85412 4810 Chapter Page

1. SUBSTANCE OR SHADOW? ...... 1

MAJOR CLIFFORD W. KEW, MA, 2. NO CONFIDENCE IN ANYTHING EXTERNAL . 7 became a Salvation Army officer in 1957. After serving as a 3. THE DEAFENING SILENCE—(i) BAPTISM . . . 11 corps officer in the United Kingdom he was appointed to the teaching staff of Mazoe Secondary School, Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) in 1968, becoming Vice-Principal in 1971. He HE EAFENING ILENCE HE ITUAL has served in the Literary Department, International 4. T D S —(ii) T R Headquarters, since 1972, as Editor of Bible Manuals, as MEAL ...... 17 Secretary for Missionary Literature, as Editor of The Soldier’s Armoury, and as Editor of The Officer magazine. He then served at the officers’ training college of the UK 5. WHICH BAPTISM? ...... 25 Territory, and retired in 1996. 6. THE ‘REAL PRESENCE’ ...... 34 The Major is author of The Good Life (studies of scriptural holiness), To Tell the Truth (on John’s gospel) and Question Time (Lent studies in Matthew’s gospel co-authored with his 7. NOT BINDING ON OUR CONSCIENCE...... 41 wife Maureen). He also edited a collection of essays on Catherine Booth—Her Continuing Relevance.

NB An earlier book referred to in this volume is The Salvationist and the Sacraments by William Metcalf, published by the Missionary Literature Section of the International HQ of The Salvation Army, 1965.

ii iii 1 Substance or Shadow? PERHAPS the most important difference between The Salvation Army’s way of worshipping and that of many other religious denominations is that it does not use certain fixed ceremonies or ‘sacraments’ which others regard as necessary. The Catholic and Orthodox branches of the Church list seven such sacraments— baptism, confirmation, eucharist, penance, anointing (extreme unction or ‘last rites’), ordination and matrimony. The Protestant Churches, however, recognize as sacraments only two of these—baptism and holy communion (eucharist), though even within Protestantism there is a good deal of disagreement about how they should be used. In this book, our consideration will be limited to the two ‘Protestant’ ceremonies. ‘Sacrament’ is not, of course, a biblical word. Its origin is found in the Latin word sacramentum which referred to a legal oath or solemn promise. It might be used of a soldier taking an ‘oath of allegiance’, or even refer to a deposit paid into court by a litigant who thereby bound himself to abide by the verdict handed down by the court. In the Vulgate—Jerome’s Latin translation of the Bible, accepted as the ‘authorized version’ of the early Roman Church—this word is used to translate the Greek word musterion, which did not carry the same meaning as the modern English word ‘mystery’, ie something secret to which the key has not been found. In the New Testament musterion had a more restricted meaning— that which was formerly unknown and can now be known only by revelation. (See Ephesians 1:9; 3:3,9; 5:32; Colossians 1:27 and 1 Timothy 3:9,16 for examples of the use of the word.) iv 1 Thus we may regard the modern use of the word The Salvation Army has never said that it is wrong to ‘sacrament’ as indicating some mysterious means by use sacraments, nor does it deny that other Christians which God communicates grace (the blessed and receive grace from God by using these aids to worship undeserved influence by which He creates and sustains and Christian living. What Salvationists do say is that spiritual life in believers). This process cannot be sacraments can be valuable only so long as their users do understood by ‘outsiders’, but only through revelation by not rely on the observance of the ceremonies instead of God and faith on the part of the believer. Traditionally, on the Holy Spirit. the word ‘sacrament’ has been applied to outward The Army itself might be said to have its own ceremonies which are deemed to be necessary to the ‘sacraments’—eg the public sign of surrender to God communication of such grace. But are such outward when a penitent kneels at the Mercy Seat; the swearing- ceremonies essential to grace? in of a soldier under the flag; or the dedication of a child The clearest, and perhaps the only, definition of by its parents. These are all outward signs with inner worship given in the Gospels is: ‘God is spirit, and those spiritual meaning, and they also may be dangerous if who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth’ regarded as anything greater than symbols of the inward (John 4:24).* To worship God, we may conclude, the acceptance of grace. only essentials are that we are aware of His presence in The Army’s position, then, is: (a) that none of these our inner being, and that we want to know all we can ways of receiving grace or blessing from God (including about Him because we realize that in Him is the whole those used by The Salvation Army) is essential to truth about life. That is, worship necessarily involves our salvation or to Christian living; (b) that these are only minds and our spirits; it does not necessarily involve outward signs of an inward experience, which is the things, including physical symbols or ceremonies. This really important thing; (c) that the full measure of whole passage (John 4:19-26) shows that true worship is Christian experience may be received by other means; not to be restricted to particular places or particular and (d) that there are disadvantages to the use of the modes of worship. traditional sacraments which have caused The Salvation Nevertheless, human minds are finite and men do find Army to cease to use them in its form of worship (see difficulty in understanding theological concepts without chapter 7). using things to represent their spiritual relationship with Salvationists feel also that they, with the Society of God. Therefore they have usually used aids to worship Friends (the ‘Quakers’), are a reminder to the whole which are pictures-in-action of what is happening within Christian Church that it is possible to live a holy life themselves. It was Augustine of Hippo (AD 354-430) without the use of particular sacraments. This, however, who first gave the classic definition of a sacrament as ‘an places upon them the responsibility to prove this claim outward and temporal sign of an inward and enduring in their own lives, a responsibility which should save grace’. them from adopting a self-righteous stance in their omission of the traditional sacraments from their pattern of worship. *Scriptural quotations are from The New English Bible unless otherwise stated. Many Christians would argue, however, that the

2 3 sacraments of baptism and holy communion are essential It is not to be assumed, therefore, that the Army’s because Jesus commanded their use, and commanded position is a negative one, merely countering the their use for all time. Had He in fact done so, then arguments of others in order to justify its own practice, Salvationists would have to observe these sacraments, for though, of course, Salvationists may have to clear the they claim that the Bible is the ‘rule of Christian faith ground of false assumptions made by others before they and practice’. In fact, as will be argued in chapters three are free to build their own beliefs and practices on that and four, there are very few reliable New Testament foundation of which 1 Corinthians 3:11 says: ‘There can references to these practices, and even fewer (if any) be no other foundation beyond that which is already laid; which show an intention on the part of Jesus, or even of I mean Jesus Christ himself.’ the Early Church leaders, that they should become fixed As a Movement the Army has rightly been more ceremonies to be used for ever. concerned with what is included in its worship than with In this connection, Dr T. R. Glover (Conflicts of what is excluded, but increasing contacts with other Religions in the Early Roman Empire) states: ‘There is a denominations make it necessary for its members to be growing consensus of opinion that Jesus instituted no aware of the strong arguments which can be produced in sacraments.’ And the pro-sacramentalist A. J. B. Higgins favour of the non-sacramentalist position. in his study in biblical theology (The Lord’s Supper in Further, The Salvation Army does the Church at large the New Testament) states: ‘We cannot really be certain a service when it asserts that no Christian should be whether Jesus in so many words enjoined the repetition satisfied with mere ceremonial observance. To quote the of what was done at the Last Supper.’ Army’s Handbook of Doctrine: ‘It is certain that the The eminent German theologian Emil Brunner writes: discharge of essential Christian obligations requires more ‘The “where two or three are gathered together in my than a ceremonial recognition. Such vital requirements as name, there am I in the midst of them” is still valid and communion with God in prayer, the constant receiving of real where there is no celebration of the Lord’s Supper.... His grace, open confession of Christ, the proclamation of The decisive test of one’s belonging to Christ is not His gospel, and the need to demonstrate the unity and reception of baptism, nor partaking in the Lord’s Supper, fellowship of His disciples, cannot be fulfilled but solely and exclusively a union with Christ through symbolically, nor by activities that are confined to the faith which shows itself active in love.’ sanctuary.’ The Baptist Professor H. H. Rowley writes: ‘What Nevertheless, in stating the reasons for the non- matters most is not that a man has been voluntarily observance of the sacraments of baptism and the immersed, any more than that he has been baptized in eucharist, Salvationists must ensure that they cling all the infancy, but that he has truly died with Christ and been more tenaciously to the positive spiritual experience raised again to newness of life in Him.... The symbol is which those two ceremonies may be used by others to worthless without that which it symbolizes.’ represent. As The Sacraments—the Salvationist’s Such statements are typical of many others that could Viewpoint puts it, every Salvationist should intensify ‘the be quoted from scholars who are certainly not seeking to search for the substance of which all… symbolism is disparage the use of sacraments in the Church.

4 5 but the shadow’. We are to seek a totally sacramental attitude to life: So shall no part of day or night From sacredness be free: But all my life, in every step, 2 No Confidence in Anything External Be fellowship with Thee. THE first chapter stated that this examination of beliefs Horatius Bonar about, and use of, sacraments is not prompted by a (The Song Book of The Salvation Army, No 4) negative or destructive spirit, but is undertaken in order to ‘clear the decks’ of the false assumptions which have historically grown up around this subject. We will then be able to come to positive conclusions which may govern our own thoughts and actions. If this is not done Salvationists may have a subconscious guilt complex about the non-observance of the sacraments, even though they may accept the Army’s position in practice. However, before looking at the two sacraments in detail, we should note the general biblical attitude towards ritual ceremonies. Both Old and New Testaments are agreed that the receiving of grace does not necessarily depend on any type of ceremonial, though ceremonies may be a means of grace. The Bible writings and the subsequent history of the Christian Church prove that such means of grace are subject to abuse, and that there tends to be a gradual drift from their first purpose into a rigid ritualism, in which the symbol comes to be regarded as the reality, the means becomes the end, and the spiritual reality is lost sight of. What was once a meaningful ceremony may easily become a meaningless observance for a later generation which has lost sight of the original spiritual reality. In the Old Testament we can see that this happened repeatedly in such matters as circumcision, the use of the Temple, the Passover meal, and the whole sacrificial system. The people frequently lost touch with the Spirit

6 7 of God, even though they were rigidly observing the pians 3:5, ie brought up to observe the Law in its ritual requirements of their faith. minutest detail), he did not require, or even advise, the The prophets continually challenged the current use of ritual ceremonies. Indeed, the general tendency of dependence on outward signs. See, for example, Psalms his arguments is against their use—see, for example, 40:6-8; 51:17,19; Isaiah 1:10-17; Jeremiah 7:21-26; Philippians 3:2-11, especially verse 3: ‘We are the 31:31-34 (where the ‘new covenant’ requires no outward circumcised, we whose worship is spiritual, whose pride signs); Hosea 6:4-6; Amos 5:21-27 and Micah 6:6-8. is in Christ Jesus, and who put no confidence in anything Prophecy, however, died out during the Exile, a priestly external.’ element in the religious life of the Jews became Paul has much to say against requiring circumcision predominant, and the ritual aspects of religion were (‘the first great sacrament of Judaism’) as a condition of reemphasized. Early evidence of this can be seen in membership of the Church, or as an essential for spiritual chapters 40-48 of Ezekiel, where material symbolism is life. This may be seen in Romans 2:25-29; 4:1-12; central, and in the legalism of Ezra. 1 Corinthians 7:17-19; Galatians 5:2-6; 6:12-16; It was the chief contemporary proponents of this ritual Colossians 2:11,13 (NB the phrase ‘not in a physical and legalistic emphasis with whom Jesus in His day had sense’) and 3:9-11. a head-on confrontation, opposing them whenever He Passages of a more general nature which emphasize saw legalism and ceremony taking the place of that the importance of spirituality as against ritualism and religious and spiritual reality which the symbolism was legalism may be found in Romans 5:1,2; 8:1-16; intended to represent. For Jesus’ statements on the 14:22,23; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18; Galatians 2:16-21; subject, see Matthew 5:17-48; 12:1-13 (with Mark 3:29,13,14,24-29 (especially verse 3—‘You started with 2:27,28); 22:34-40; 23:1-39; Mark 7:1-23 and Luke 18:9- the spiritual; do you now look to the material to make 14. you perfect?’); 4:6-11; 5:18-25 and Colossians 2:6-23. It would seem unlikely in the light of these passages The epistle to the Hebrews clearly teaches that, (especially Matthew 23) that Jesus would have because of the work of Jesus, much of the Jews’ commanded new ceremonies with similar dangers. ceremonial was no longer necessary: Moving on to The Acts of the Apostles, it is worth (a) The priesthood is replaced by our ‘high priest’— noting that, when the Jerusalem Church gave judgement Jesus (7:20-26,28; 10:11-14,19-22). In practice, the on what was to be required of non-Jewish converts to administration of the sacraments has usually led to the Christianity, no rituals were included in the essentials maintenance of an exclusive priesthood. The Salvation which ‘it seemed good to the Holy Ghost’ to require Army does not accept the concept of priesthood in that (Acts 15, especially verses 11 and 28, Authorized exclusive sense but believes in ‘the priesthood of all Version). believers’, including women, who are still barred from The letters of Paul show how much he endorsed this the administration of the sacraments in many places. decision. Though he could claim to be ‘a Hebrew born (b) The sacrifices on the altar are replaced by Christ’s and bred; in my attitude to the law, a Pharisee’ (Philip- sacrifice of Himself (7:27; 9:9-15,27,28; 10:1-6).

8 9 (c) The ‘old covenant’ is replaced by a ‘new covenant’ written ‘on their hearts’ (8:7-13). (d) The sanctuary in Tabernacle or Temple is replaced 3 The Deafening Silence—(i) Baptism by a sanctuary ‘not… made by men’s hands’ (9:1-8,24). (e) What is now required from the worshipper is THE word ‘baptize’ comes from a Greek word ‘sincerity of heart’ and ‘assurance of faith’(10:22). (baptidzein) which means ‘to dip’. In many religions On this basis, is there any justification for abolishing bathing has been used as a sign of spiritual cleansing circumcision and the Passover meal, only to replace them and, in the time of Jesus, gentiles who wanted to become with baptism and holy communion? Jews were baptized as a sign of repentance and conversion to the Jewish faith. There is a further strong argument against any dependence on ritual ceremonies in the silence In the New Testament, at least five other kinds of concerning this matter of sacraments in most other New baptism are mentioned, and it is important to know which Testament writings. If sacraments were central to the verses refer to which type. We shall find that many faith and practice of the Early Church, surely we would references have little to do with the ceremony of water expect them to be of central importance throughout the baptism as practised in the churches today, and this New Testament. Yet so often sacramental ceremonies are should help us to avoid unnecessary confusion. not mentioned when one would expect them to be 1. John the Baptist’s baptism. This was different from mentioned if Jesus had really commanded their normal Jewish baptism in that he included people who observance. Again and again the most important things in were ‘born’ Jews. He told them that they, as well as the Christian faith and practice are listed, and again and gentiles, needed to repent, and that they should not think again there is no mention of the sacraments (eg Romans that they would enter the coming Kingdom just because 12:6-16; 2 Timothy 4:1,2,5; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Peter 4:7-11). they were ‘sons of Abraham’ (see Matthew 3:8,9). The silence is deafening! 2. The Christian ceremony of physical baptism. This was the baptism of adult believers by dipping them completely under water (total immersion). The accompanying formula was ‘in the name of Jesus’, and only much later ‘in the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit’. We should note here that in various branches of the Church other forms of baptism have been used; for example, by sprinkling with water rather than by immersion, and infant baptism as against adult baptism. These are not found in the New Testament and have been, and to some extent still are, the focus of much argument among Christians. Infant baptism has often

10 11 been regarded by parents almost as a magical charm to type 4 above), ie in the sense of undergoing a particular safeguard the child’s place in the Kingdom of God in experience (Mark 10;38,39; Luke 12:50). case of early death, in much the same way as the Jews The only places in the synoptic Gospels where Jesus trusted in being ‘sons of Abraham’. appears to require baptism are: (i) in a late addition to 3. Baptism with the Holy Spirit. This is a spiritual Mark’s Gospel (16:16), not included in early experience rather than an outward sign. manuscripts and translations; and (ii) in a verse which 4. Baptism into Christ’s sufferings. In many places uses the words ‘Father, Son and Holy Spirit’, which ‘baptism’ is used as a figure of speech meaning to many scholars believe Jesus would not have used at that undergo a certain experience and emerge ‘a new man’. time (Matthew 28:19). Both these verses may therefore reflect the later customs of the Early Church rather than 5. Proxy baptism for the dead. A believer would be the thinking of Jesus Himself. There is no evidence in baptized on behalf of someone who had died without the Acts of the Apostles that the second formula being baptized. Paul stated (in 1 Corinthians 15:29) that (‘Father, Son and Holy Spirit’) was known and used. he believed this to be a misuse of baptism. The words used were ‘in the name of Jesus’ or ‘the Lord’ (eg Acts 10:48). Note further that even if the two * * * commands mentioned above (Mark 16:16 and Matthew Let us now study the New Testament references to 28:19) are the original words of Jesus, water is not baptism with these different categories in mind. specifically mentioned in either. When Jesus sent out ‘the twelve’ (Matthew 10:1 to The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) 11:1) and ‘the seventy-two’ (Luke 10:1-16), He gave no Jesus showed that He supported the call to national instruction to baptize, nor is there any report of the repentance, made by John the Baptist, by Himself being apostles having done so (Luke 10:17-20). baptized, the ceremony of baptism being accompanied in His case by a special sign that He was blessed by the John’s Gospel Holy Spirit. However, when John protested that he was In John 1:32-34 it is reported that John the Baptist unworthy to baptize Jesus, Jesus said, ‘Let it be so for said that Jesus would baptize in the Holy Spirit, in the present; we do well to conform in this way’ (see contrast with his own baptism in water, and though it is Matthew 3:13-17), which suggests that baptism was not said that Jesus Himself baptized in water at the beginning necessarily to be a permanent practice. However, the of His ministry (3:22, 23), this is contradicted (or at least important thing was not the use of water, but the clarified) in the next chapter (4:2), where it is said that experience of the Holy Spirit within Him. John himself only His disciples did so. Even if Jesus did baptize on suggested that his baptism was not satisfactory and occasions, He did not always do so. Therefore water would be replaced by a more spiritual baptism (Matthew baptism was not essential for those who wished to enter 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16). His Kingdom. (It should be noted that there is no account Jesus clearly used the word ‘baptism’ on occasion, not of Jesus’ baptism in John’s Gospel.) in the sense of water baptism but in a spiritual sense (see When John quotes Jesus as speaking of being ‘born

12 13 from water and spirit’ (3:5), it is quite possible that by Elsewhere in Acts ‘John’s baptism’ by water is shown being ‘born from water’ He meant physical birth, to be unacceptable as the mark of a Christian. Only the especially as this is specifically mentioned in the baptism with the Holy Spirit can make a complete previous and following verses. Being ‘born from water’ Christian (11:15,16; 18:24-26; 19:1-7). There are other might well be a valid description of physical birth. Yet instances where water baptism is probably intended— this text has often been taken as the scriptural foundation 2:41; 9:19 (with 22:16); 16:15,33 and 18:8—but of Christian baptism. In another verse of the same wherever ‘baptism’ and ‘the gift of the Holy Spirit’ are passage (verse 8) there is no reference to water—just mentioned side by side (1:5; 2:38; 8:13-17), either they ‘born from spirit’. are regarded as the same or Holy Spirit baptism is clearly In other parts of this Gospel, ‘water’ is obviously used seen to be the more important. We may therefore as a figure of speech, eg 4:13,14 and 7:37-39. In the conclude that, though the pre-Christian custom of water latter passage John clearly states that Jesus is using the baptism did, to some extent, continue in the Early phrase ‘streams of living water’ to mean ‘the Spirit’. Church, the experience of the gift of the Holy Spirit was Even if the interpretation of ‘born from water’ as not dependent on water baptism and was regarded as of referring to physical birth were to be rejected, is there much greater importance than the external ceremony. not any reason for supposing that water is being used to The Epistles symbolize spiritual life in chapter 3, even though it is clearly being used in this way in chapters 4 and 7? The practice of water baptism receives even less support in the epistles. The statements concerning Thus there seems to be no compelling evidence in this baptism in Romans 6:3; 1 Corinthians 12:13; Galatians Gospel to require Christians to practise water baptism. 3:27; Colossians 2:12 and 1 Peter 3:21,22 seem certainly The Acts of the Apostles to refer primarily to a spiritual experience rather than to an outward ceremony. Even if the outward ceremony Even when we come to the practice of the Early took place, the inward experience was what mattered. Church, there is no strong evidence to prove that it required all Christians to undergo water baptism. The In Hebrews 6:1-3 there is a reference to ‘cleansing ceremony did take place without doubt, but only as a rites’ which may include water baptism, but if so it is useful symbol of entering into new life. (The Salvation included in the ‘rudiments of Christianity’ (6:1) which Army is not against baptism as a sign, but only against the writer exhorts the Jewish Christians to ‘stop regarding it as an essential to becoming a Christian.) discussing’ (6:1) and ‘advance towards maturity’ (6:3). It is worth noting that in Acts baptism is clearly shown In 1 Corinthians Paul seems to be actively to be water baptism in only two cases—8:36-38 and discouraging water baptism. Verses 10-16 of chapter 1 10:47,48 (with 11:16,17). In the latter case, baptism with show that he considered it a divisive practice which he the Holy Spirit took place before the water baptism (10:44) had used only on rare occasions at Corinth, and verse 17 and therefore cannot depend upon it. In contrast, Simon the makes it clear that it was certainly not the main feature, Sorcerer was condemned by Peter as unchristian although if indeed it was a part at all, of his own ministry. As was he had already been baptized (8:9-24).

14 15 noted earlier, chapter 15 contains a reference (verse 29) to the possibility of the misuse of the rite (proxy baptisms on behalf of the dead) which had already become an actuality at Corinth. 4 The Deafening Silence—(ii) The Ritual Meal * * * THE sacramental ceremony of the Lord’s Supper is also If, therefore, as is stated in Ephesians 4:5, there is known in various churches as holy communion, the only ‘one baptism’, that surely must be baptism with the eucharist and the mass. Its historical foundation is Holy Spirit. It is that ‘baptism’ that is the distinguishing usually thought to be in ‘the last supper’ held by Jesus mark of the Christian (Romans 8:9; Ephesians 1:13). with His disciples. This, it would seem, was a Passover That divisions and misuse in the matter of baptism meal, a pre-Christian Jewish celebration held annually to have occurred can be seen from the ensuing history of remind the Jews of the time when their ancestors escaped the Church (to which we shall return in chapter 5). If, from slavery in Egypt (the Exodus). therefore, there is no firm evidence that Jesus intended all In order to understand Jesus’ ‘last supper’ we need to Christians to be baptized in water, or that the Early know what the pattern of the Passover meal was: (1) The Church regarded baptism as essential to spiritual president of the group (including not less than 10 nor experience and church membership, is it not an allowable more than 20 men) prayed at length, blessing the first of course to seek the experience of Holy Spirit baptism four cups of diluted red wine, which was then passed without being tied to an external sign that can create round. (2) All present washed their hands. (3) Each serious difficulties? One anonymous Salvationist writer person took bitter herbs and dipped them in a dish of put it this way: ‘Baptism without water, but with the vinegar and salt water. (4) The second cup of wine was Holy Ghost, is far more scriptural than baptism with circulated. (5) One of the young boys asked questions water, but without the Holy Ghost.’ about the meaning of the feast and the president of the group gave the answers (see Exodus 12:26,27; 13:8). (6) Psalms 113 and 114 were sung. (7) The main meal took place, consisting of the roast lamb previously sacrificed at the Temple, unleavened bread, and herbs in a fruit sauce. (8) The third cup of wine was drunk. (9) A prayer of thanksgiving was made. (10) The fourth cup was shared. (11) Psalms 115 to 118 were sung. We can now see how Jesus followed this pattern while emphasizing certain elements of it and thus adding to its significance. He took the place of the father or president of the group. Instead of the washing of hands (2), He washed the disciples’ feet (John 13:3-17). The handing

16 17 of a piece of bread to Judas (Mark 14:18-21; John 13:21- therefore omitted from the text of such modern 30) and the reference to the broken bread as a symbol of translations as The New English Bible and some editions His body (Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19) of The Revised Standard Version. Other editions, and the probably refer to (7). Jesus’ reference to His Blood Good News Bible, have footnotes stating that these words (Matthew 26:27-29; Mark 14:23-25; Luke 22:17,18) are not included in some manuscripts. would come at (8) or (10). The singing of the psalms (11) As far back as 1881 Westcott and Hort, in their is referred to in Matthew 26:30 and Mark 14:26. standard text of the Greek New Testament, wrote: ‘The There is, however, some doubt as to whether this was evidence leaves no… doubt that the words in question a ‘proper’ Passover meal. Matthew, Mark and Luke firmly were absent from the original text of Luke....’ If this suggest that it was, ie that it took place on the Thursday command in Luke 22:19 is not part of the original evening (the start of the Passover ‘day’), but John says it Gospel, it must be very doubtful whether it was actually was ‘before the Passover’ (13:1), ie probably on an original statement of Jesus, especially as it is not Wednesday evening, so that he links the Crucifixion with found in any other Gospel. If, for example, one the killing of the paschal lambs in the Temple on remembers that Mark is presumed to have been a ‘ghost Thursday afternoon (19:14,31). Because of the rather writer’ for Peter, it seems most unlikely that the careless haphazard nature of the Jewish calendar we cannot even omission of what has since been taken to be a crucial be sure on which day the festival began, but the important command of Jesus would have been permitted in that thing is that the meal followed the Passover pattern. Gospel. Yet the practice of this sacramental ceremony takes its authorization from these few words in some * * * manuscripts of this Gospel of Luke alone. Even if Jesus did speak these words, He might easily The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) have meant, ‘In future think of Me at the Passover meal, Compared with Matthew’s and Mark’s accounts, instead of, or in addition to, remembering Moses and the Luke’s seems rather muddled. In the passage as given in Exodus’ (see Exodus 12:14; 13:3,9). The words may have the Authorized Version the cup of wine is mentioned been directed to the disciples without being intended to twice, the first time before the breaking of bread (Luke be observed by all Christians (Jews and non-Jews) for all 22:17,18), and the second time in apparent contradiction time. The Passover was an annual occurrence, and if any of Jesus’ earlier words that He would not drink wine command was given it would surely have instituted an again until the Kingdom came (22:20). Some scholars annual remembrance. have concluded that Luke, or more likely a later editor, To quote William Barclay’s commentary on Matthew: put alongside each other two traditional accounts of what ‘The Last Supper was a real meal; it was, in fact, the law happened (22:15-19a and 22:19b,20) without that the whole lamb and everything else must be eaten.... harmonizing their inconsistencies. This view is This was no eating of a cube of bread and drinking of a strengthened by the fact that in the oldest manuscripts sip of wine. It was a meal for hungry men.... Jesus is not verse 20 does not appear, nor (in verse 19) do the crucial only Lord of the Communion Table; He must be Lord of words, ‘Do this as a memorial of me.’ These words are the dinner table too.’

18 19 John’s Gospel Christ, nor at His Ascension, nor in the genesis of the When we come to the much later Gospel of John we Christian Church at Pentecost. find a noticeably different account. It seems as if John The community of Christians did meet together (2:42) has deliberately diversified the symbolism regarding the ‘to break bread’ (New English Bible) or have ‘fellowship efficacy of Jesus’ life and death, perhaps to counter a meals’ (Good News Bible), no doubt as part of their ritual concentration on bread and wine already evident in sharing of all their possessions (2:44-46; 4:32). These the Church at the time when he wrote. Instead of the meetings took place in private houses (2:46) and there is Passover bread, he speaks of ‘the bread of life’ in no suggestion of ceremonial (20:7,11; 27:33-38), or of connection with the feeding of a multitude (chapter 6). the use of wine. ‘It was not a symbolic meal at which a Instead of the wine, he speaks of Jesus as ‘the real vine’ mouthful of bread and a sip of wine were taken, but a (chapter 15). Instead of the Passover bread and wine, he real meal’ (Maurice Goguel—The Primitive Church). gives a lengthy account of Jesus’ discourse with the All that is recorded in Acts is a statement that they disciples about the spiritual life (chapters 13-16), in sometimes ate together in fellowship. Is it not remarkable which the symbolic act (13:3-17) is feet-washing, and the that in the records of the Church in Peter’s time there is only reference to bread is when Jesus hands the sop to not one reference to the observance of the ceremony that Judas. Jesus says quite clearly, ‘You ought to wash one Jesus is supposed to have instituted so recently? Is it not another’s feet’ (see 13:14,15,17). Why do Christians not remarkable that in all the accounts of Paul’s travels we observe this command, and make of it a perpetual have no record of an observance of the ceremony? The necessity for Church members, if they do that with a only possible, but by no means certain, exception is in command that is less likely to be part of the original Acts 20:7, but there is nothing in the description to words of Jesus (ie ‘Do this as a memorial of me’)? preclude the possibility that this was a simple common It is as if John is acknowledging the need for meal, preceded by a grace. symbolism, but after much reflection is saying, ‘Use as Remember too that this book is by the same writer many symbols as possible, so that you may avoid a ritual (Luke) who wrote the only Gospel which has ever concentration on one or two. And don’t take any of them included the words, ‘Do this as a memorial of me.’ If literally. It is their spiritual meaning which is of Luke had in fact quoted a clear command of Jesus in his paramount importance’ (see John 6:63). If we interpret Gospel, would he not have recorded its being obeyed in literally passages like John 6:26-35,48-58 or 7:37,38 we Acts? completely miss the writer’s point. Perhaps we should adopt an approach similar to John’s in reading the The Epistles synoptic accounts of ‘the last supper’. Next we must look at 1 Corinthians, which also The Acts of the Apostles includes the ‘Do this’ sentence (11:24). We need to remember that this letter was almost certainly written Furthermore in the Acts of the Apostles we find no before the Gospels, and that the late inclusion of these reference to instructions for, or observance of, a ritual words in Luke may in fact derive from Paul’s use here. remembrance—not in the appearances of the Risen

20 21 Passover bread is spoken of in 5:6-8, but purely as a Church, a formula which Paul believed had the authority figure of speech. Then in chapter 10 there is more vividly of Jesus. Cullmann goes on to say that in other similarly figurative language which refers to those Israelites under worded statements where instructions ‘from the Lord’ are Moses who were involved sacramentally in God’s chosen mentioned (l Corinthians 7:10,25; 9:14; 1 Thessalonians people and yet ‘God was not pleased with most of them’ 4:15) Paul is in fact referring to the accepted teaching of (verse 5, Good News Bible). ‘the body of Christ’, ie the Church. In 10:16,17,21,22 there are undoubted references to a It may well be that to correct the abuses mentioned sacramental remembrance of ‘the last supper’, but these earlier, Paul is here trying to bring about a new attitude verses teach that such observances must not, as they to the common meal, an attitude which will ensure that easily can, lead to spiritual arrogance and false the food value of the meal becomes minimal and that its confidence. We must not ‘sit down to a feast, and rise up spiritual value is emphasized. If so, this is a move away to revel’ (see verse 7) in the belief that our sacramental from the material towards the spiritual, a move which observance safeguards us from judgement. ‘You will not we non-sacramentalists have carried to its logical escape because you have been duly baptized and have conclusion. partaken of the eucharist. There is no magical power in Therefore, the present observance of the Lord’s the sacraments’(A. J. B. Higgins). Supper may well owe more to the interpretation of Paul In the latter part of chapter 11 (verses 17-34), Paul in this particular situation at Corinth than to any continues to warn against the dangers of the sacramental intention of Jesus that it should be observed for all meal. In Corinth the common meal had become an eating time. Note the warning (1 Corinthians 11:29) that, if occasion rather than a worshipping occasion. Each anyone fails to recognize the meaning of the ceremony, believer brought his own food with the result that some he is condemned by his own attitude, ie the symbolism were having a ‘slap-up’ meal while others were almost must not be separated from the significance, whatever starving (verses 20,21). The concept of sharing all things happens. had been forgotten, and there is nothing worse than a ‘Paul orders that the common meal is to cease being a common meal where it is not ensured that everybody gets satisfaction of hunger.... He thus initiated a process which the same. Some even became drunk (verse 21) at the ended in the separation of the eucharistic celebration meal. This brought into disrepute the whole idea of the from the community meal’ (A. J. B. Higgins). common meal. It should be noted here that in his description of the * * * Lord’s Supper (verses 24-26), which differs in some respects from that in the Gospels, Paul says that his Having looked at those verses of Scripture which may teaching on the subject came to him ‘from the Lord be regarded as relevant to this sacrament, we should note Himself’, but he also states that it was a ‘tradition’ which also the very large proportion of the New Testament in he had received and passed on (verse 23). Oscar which there is no reference whatever to this ceremony, Cullmann suggests that Paul is not speaking here of a which is so often thought to have been commanded by direct revelation, but of a formula current in the Early

22 23 Christ and to have been central to the Church’s worship from the earliest times. The four letters to the Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians; the three letters to Timothy and Titus (all of which are about Church 5 Which Baptism? procedure); the seven letters written by James, Peter, John and Jude; the letter to the Hebrews; and the WE have already referred to Paul’s unenthusiastic Revelation are all silent on this matter. They must passage concerning baptism in 1 Corinthians 1:10-17 (see together heavily outweigh the evidence of one passage in page 15) where baptism is linked to divisions in the 1 Corinthians which, as we have seen, may have had only Church. He said that a Christian’s loyalty should be to a local and temporary application. It is also notable that Jesus and not to any Christian leader, and in retrospect in Romans, which sets out to give the essence of the rejoiced that he had baptized only a very few gospel, there is no mention of the Lord’s Supper. Corinthians. His comments were made probably about AD 55, but similar statements about the divisive effects We may therefore conclude that those who regard the of baptismal practices could have been made at many essential sacraments as are looking back at Early Church stages of the history of the Church, as we shall see. practice through centuries of tradition, and may well be reading back into ancient writings practices about which There was, however, a profitable by-product of they are already convinced and which they are already baptismal procedures in the Early Church in that they led practising, rather than trying to discover with fresh eyes to the development of creeds. From an early date baptism and unbiased minds what actually happened. was accompanied by the making of baptismal vows which included ‘a renunciation of sin and everything ‘The heart-searching question to which Salvationists associated with demonic powers, idols, astrology and have always had to submit their lives is not: “Ought I magic; and a declaration of belief in God the Father, in regularly to participate in the Lord’s Supper as a the redemptive acts of Christ’s life, death and religious ceremony?” It has always been and is: “Is there resurrection, and in the Holy Spirit active in the Church’ a real communion between myself and my Lord? Do I (Henry Chadwick, The Early Church). The ‘declaration The Sacraments— possess His Spirit and do His will?”’ ( of belief’ was often made in answer to doctrinal The Salvationist’s Viewpoint ). questions, and often there was a threefold baptism, each This Salvationist attitude is well expressed in one of immersion being preceded by a question about one General Albert Orsborn’s songs, which begins: member of the Trinity. My life must be Christ’s broken bread, As time went on, the period of preparation for My love His outpoured wine, baptism was gradually extended (to as much as three A cup o’erfilled, a table spread years in many cases) and more thorough instruction in Beneath His name and sign, doctrine took place. Thus the doctrinal questioning led to That other souls, refreshed and fed, a crystallizing of Christian beliefs into creeds, and the May share His life through mine. Apostles’ Creed, for example, originated in a baptismal (The Song Book of The Salvation Army, No 462) creed used in Rome late in the second century. By the

24 25 fourth century it was the only baptismal confession in repents. This teaching was widely accepted, but was later use in the Western Church. (Converts who were martyred opposed by Novatian, a presbyter at Rome who split the before their preparation for baptism was completed were Church by his belief that those who had recanted under deemed to have had an effective ‘baptism in blood’.) persecution could not be forgiven and received back into Nevertheless, differences concerning the details of the the Church. This schism, dating from 251, lasted until the conduct of, and beliefs about, baptismal ceremonies soon seventh century. The Novatianists regarded sacraments assumed an importance disproportionate to the real value administered by anyone other than members of their own of the ceremony, and thus became the cause of many sect as invalid, and so they rebaptized those who wanted divisions in the Church. Originally, total immersion was to join them from other sections of the Church. They required (often out of doors in a river or lake), but from called themselves the Cathari (pure ones), a term which early in the second century baptism by sprinkling was was used also of a heretical sect in the 12th and 13th allowed in an emergency or in case of sickness. By the centuries. end of that century some people had come to believe that Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage in North Africa from 249 baptism had a magical effect, automatically washing to 258, took a firm line on the matter of those who had away sins irrespective of the state of heart of the person abandoned their Christian vows during persecution being to be baptized. Also at this period exorcism and anointing readmitted to the Church (though he himself went into with oil found place in the baptism ceremony in some hiding during the persecution). Later he came into areas. confrontation with Bishop Stephen of Rome (254-257) on In the third century the ‘laying-on of hands’ by a the question of whether those who had belonged to bishop was included in the service of baptism, together separatist sects could be readmitted to the Church. with prayer that the believer would receive the Holy Cyprian insisted that rebaptism was necessary, but Spirit. Child baptism (with faith supplied by an adult Stephen’s view was that baptism was valid whoever sponsor) was common by the middle of the century, administered it (so long as it was in the name of the though Tertullian of Carthage had earlier criticized it in Trinity), the value of the ceremony lying not in the his On Baptism, the earliest surviving book about person who administered it, but in itself. To this Cyprian baptism. In later life Tertullian joined the ascetic and retorted, ‘How can he who lacks the Spirit confer the adventist sect known as the Montanists, who believed Spirit’s gifts?’ Stephen argued that schismatics need not that serious sin committed after a believer had been be rebaptized but should be reconciled by the ‘laying-on baptized could not be forgiven (thus limiting the of hands’. ‘The sacrament is not the Church’s but universal application of the gospel). Other sections of the Christ’s,’ he said. Church, in return, refused to acknowledge baptisms The controversy reached such a heat that Stephen carried out by Montanists. denounced Cyprian as the Antichrist. Stephen died in Callistus, an emancipated slave who became Bishop 257 and Cyprian was martyred in 258, but a similar of Rome from 217 to 222, took a more moderate line, dispute arose in the Donatist crisis 55 years later, when arguing that no sin is unforgivable if the sinner sincerely the Donatists refused to acknowledge the Catholic Bishop of Carthage because he had been consecrated by

26 27 one who had later failed under persecution. Like the teaching that rebaptism of those originally baptized by Novationists, the Donatists consistently rejected the separatist sects was unnecessary since it was in fact validity of sacraments other than their own. Christ who really ministered to believers in the From 313 the Emperor Constantine made Christianity sacraments, even if the human ministers were unworthy the favoured religion of the Roman Empire. He men. However, he believed that the sacraments did not determined that the Church must be united and orthodox, benefit those who received them if they themselves and therefore made an attempt to suppress the Donatists, remained outside the Spirit’s unity and love. an attempt which proved unsuccessful. Constantine Augustine also set out the doctrine of original sin, himself refused to be baptized until near the end of his which at this stage included the idea that a man could be life (337), though he regarded himself as a Christian so evil that his will was unable to obey God’s commands. from 313 onwards. This delay in baptism was a common The only way the will could be freed to obey was by the custom up to the beginning of the fifth century, its grace which came through baptism. This logically purpose being to avoid mortal sin, since many believed, resulted in the belief that baptism was essential to with the earlier Montanists, that there could be no salvation and entrance into Heaven. Thus unbaptized forgiveness of serious sin committed after baptism. The people, even infants, must go to Hell. step of baptism was therefore taken with great This belief led to an emphasis on infant baptism, seriousness. especially as infant mortality rates were extremely high. During the fourth century baptismal ceremonies Baptism was often carried out within minutes of birth, gradually became more rigid in form. At Rome, for often by midwives and usually at a private ceremony example, all baptisms came to be conducted by the rather than in a church building. ‘Confirmation’ by bishop, who now reached that position by a ladder which laying-on of a bishop’s hands was delayed till later in the had to possess certain rungs: reader, acolyte (or child’s life, and often neglected completely. assistant), subdeacon, deacon (not before the age of 30), Therefore, the normal baptismal custom from the fifth priest (after five years as deacon), bishop (after 10 years century onwards became infant baptism, and adult as priest—and therefore at least 45 years of age). believer’s baptism declined (in fact the Syrian Church Also in the fourth century the system of preparation made infant baptism obligatory), so that the practice of for baptism reached its peak. Instruction classes were the Early Church was completely reversed, almost the held each year before Easter in the 40-day period later only similarity being the use of water. known as Lent. Those who were to be baptized spent Pelagius, a British monk, and even more his disciple Holy Week in a vigil and fast, and post-baptismal Celestius, opposed Augustine’s doctrine of original sin. instruction took place in the week following Easter. They believed that there can be no sin without personal There were many local variations in custom, however. In choice, and where there was no personal choice there Milan, for example, ceremonial foot-washing was part of could be no sin. Adam’s sin was just a fatally bad the baptismal ceremony. example of disobedience, but did not bring sin or death Augustine, Bishop of Hippo in North Africa from 396 automatically to men. So there was, he thought, no evil to 430, was a spiritual successor of Stephen of Rome in in newborn children. Therefore, children were baptized

28 29 into sanctification and not for the remission of sins, and Cathars delayed receiving this baptism till near death, as unbaptized children went, not to Hell, but to a ‘limbo’, a the way of life demanded after baptism was exceptionally place of vague happiness. rigorous. There was still, however, as far as they were Pelagius was much misunderstood and much concerned, an essential sign of spiritual baptism (ie the misrepresented by his followers and, at the Council of laying-on of hands). Ephesus (431), Augustine’s doctrine and practice The doctrine of baptism was not one of the main therefore won the day. However, agreement on baptismal targets of the Reformation. Luther (1483-1546) remained doctrine and practice was still not universal in the close to the Roman Catholic position, though he reduced Church. When, for instance, a later Augustine was made the number of sacraments to three (including confession). Archbishop of Canterbury at the end of the sixth century He emphasized infant baptism, though he admitted that in and tried to reconcile the Celtic Church to Rome, one of the New Testament adult baptism was regarded as the three stumbling-blocks was differing baptismal normal. He regarded total immersion as usual, though not customs. essential, and believed that baptism conferred forgiveness At the end of the Dark Ages, during which there was of sins and regeneration, even in infants. The position of little change in the situation, Peter Lombard (1100-1160) Anglican reformers also showed quite a large measure of reduced the number of sacraments from the 30 continuity with the Roman Catholic position in this enumerated by Hugh of St Victor, earlier in the 12th matter. century, to seven which were deemed to have been In Zürich, Huldreich Zwingli (1484-1531) pursued a instituted by Christ, and were not only, he said, ‘visible more extreme course than Luther. He reduced the number signs of invisible grace’, but also ‘the cause of the grace of sacraments to two and questioned the Roman they signify’. This scheme of seven sacraments was definition of the sacrament of baptism and even its confirmed by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215. Later necessity, thus reducing it to a sign not essential to in the 13th century each of the sacraments was salvation. Thus he is one of the forebears of present-day systematically defined by Thomas Aquinas (1225-74), non-sacramentalists. who taught that the only requirement for the receiving of John Calvin (1509-64), of Geneva, did not go so far, grace was for the sacrament to be performed. Baptism though, like Zwingli, he restricted himself to two was believed to be permanently indelible on the soul and sacraments. He held to the belief that baptism (even of therefore unrepeatable. Aquinas’s definition was restated, infants) brought about regeneration and the individual’s in the face of the Protestant reformers, by the Council of entrance into the new community of Christ, but limited Trent (1545-63), and in essence remains the Roman this, as in all his teaching, to those who were predestined Catholic position to this day. to enjoy salvation. The Cathar heretics of the 12th and 13th centuries Meanwhile, inhabitants of Zürich, for whom even practised spiritual baptism, signified by a laying-on of Zwingli was too conservative, formed the ‘first free hands, believing this to be the baptism instituted by church of modern times’. In them originated the loose Christ. This, they believed, imparted the Holy Spirit, but self-disciplined movement known by the nickname of removed original sin, and ensured eternal life. Most ‘Anabaptists’ or ‘rebaptizers’. This name reflected their

30 31 rejection of infant baptism and their custom of being forms of religion and abandoned the use of the two rebaptized as adult believers by total immersion. This sacraments. practice of ‘rebaptism’ gave opportunity to the authorities Thus Salvationists may trace a slow movement, to persecute them under the 1,000-year-old laws against through the centuries, away from an interpretation of the very different rebaptism by Donatists of converts baptism as an essential and causal means of regeneration from other sects. Even other reformers joined the Roman and entry to membership of the body of Christ, towards a Catholics in the persecution of Anabaptists, yet more spiritual understanding of it as a sign that is not Anabaptism spread throughout Europe and eventually led essential to salvation. Like the Quakers we have to the formation of the English Baptist Churches. abandoned even the sign, since, as Donald M. Lake These English Baptists were all opposed to infant writes: ‘More often than not it has been the sacraments baptism and practised a congregational form of church that have provided one of the greatest hindrances to government. Some (the ‘Particular’ Baptists) were achieving ecumenicity in spirit and form.’ Does not the Calvinists while others believed that all could be saved history of baptismal beliefs and practices as traced in this (‘General’ Baptists). The latter stemmed from a chapter amply bear this out? congregation of refugees in Amsterdam which was led by John Smyth, who baptized himself in 1608, presumably because he could not trust anybody else to do it properly. Part of this congregation later returned to England and formed the first English Baptist congregation at Spitalfields in 1612. The first ‘Particular’ congregation in England was formed at Southwark in 1638. The Civil War and Commonwealth period marked the ascendancy of Baptist influence (especially the ‘Particular’ form). Up to this time baptism by pouring on water (affusion) was often used, but in 1641 the ‘Particulars’ readopted the rite of immersion, which thereafter became predominant. By the 20th century, however, their Calvinistic outlook had been largely replaced, within the Baptist Union, by Evangelical influences. In the 17th century ‘Quakers’ (originally a term of abuse like ‘Anabaptists’, and for that matter ‘Christians’) formed a Society of Friends under the leadership of George Fox. Fox had a deep suspicion of the external

32 33 (thanksgiving). This steadily became more formal in ensuing centuries, partly under the influence of the ‘mystery religions’ of the first and second centuries, 6 The ‘Real Presence’ which were marked by the use of secret symbols and rites. The fellowship meal (‘agape’ or ‘love feast’) was IN his Pelican history of The Early Church, Henry held on Sunday evenings but gradually disappeared from Chadwick states that ‘the form and pattern of the actual use during the third and fourth centuries, one fifth- rites used in the period before Constantine… can be century Church council actually prohibiting its use. known only imperfectly from… fragments of evidence often contained in casual passing allusions’. However, it This hardening in ritualistic observance of the is clear, as we have seen, that even in Paul’s time misuse eucharist probably coincided with the move from ‘house of the ‘common meal’, such as that referred to in meetings’ to meetings in public buildings provided for 1 Corinthians 11:17-34, led to a separation of the the purpose of worship. The morning service fell into two sacramental and fellowship functions of the meal. The parts, the first open to all, but the eucharist being sacramental function then began to develop into a ritual, restricted to baptized believers. something which possibly neither Jesus nor Paul The Didache (a teaching tract which probably dates intended. from between AD 70 and AD 110) shows that set prayers The German biblical scholar Adolph von Harnack and a two-tiered ministry (presbyter-bishops and commented: ‘Paul was the first and almost the last deacons) had already begun to develop at that early stage. theologian of the Early Church with whom sacramental This division is also seen in the first letter of Clement of theology was held in check by clear ideas and strictly Rome (at the end of the first century), who was of the spiritual considerations.’ opinion that the celebration of the eucharist was worthy Since Sunday did not become a holiday until the only when conducted by a bishop. Emperor Constantine decreed it as such in AD 321, Ignatius of Antioch, who died about the year AD 115, Christian Sunday services had to be held at first in the placed high value on the eucharist as a means of early morning or in the evening. About AD 112 Pliny, the promoting unity in the Church. He also taught that it Roman Governor of Bithynia, wrote to the Emperor must be presided over by the local bishop. (At this time Trajan, explaining that the Christians ‘were in the habit a bishop was just the superintendent minister in one of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, town.) when they sang an anthem to Christ as God, and bound themselves by a solemn oath (sacramentum)... after The eucharistic ritual was often misunderstood. During which it was their custom to separate and then meet the second century there were rumours that Christians again to partake of food, but food of an ordinary and were cannibals because they ‘ate the body’ of Jesus. innocent kind’. Sacramental worship could also expose Christians to Thus the main service in the morning culminated in danger of another kind. A pagan writer—Celsus (probably the celebration of the Lord’s Supper or ‘eucharist’ about AD 180)—spoke of Christians worshipping in secret, and mentioned the fact that even the

34 35 smell of a sip of insufficiently diluted wine at the used by some who interpreted the eucharist as a eucharist might lead to a Christian’s arrest. ‘Christian sacrifice’ in which an offering was made to By the middle of the second century, then, the God to gain forgiveness of sins. common meal had been transformed into a ritual. ‘A The emphasis on a ritual presided over by a stratified century and a quarter were sufficient to transform the priesthood gradually separated clergy and laymen. In the spontaneous act of Jesus at His last meal… into a rite in third century bishops began to be addressed as ‘Your which the primitive Church expressed its faith, its holiness’. In the fourth century the Greek Church started services, its discipline’(Maurice Goguel). to veil the altar so that the congregation could not see it. About AD 150 Justin of Rome described the Next the congregation was deprived of the wine, ceremony (‘a memorial of the Passion’) in detail: receiving bread only. The use of candles and special clothes for the priesthood then developed, and by the ‘Then the president of the brethren is brought bread eighth century the wording of the mass (always in Latin) and a cup of wine mixed with water; and he takes them, came to be recited in a low voice which was inaudible to and offers up praise and glory to the Father of the the congregation. The pomp of worldly government universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy became reflected in the liturgy of the Church, and Ghost, and gives thanks at considerable length for our sometimes even doctrine and ritual became offensive being counted worthy to receive these things at his weapons to be used in the battles of Church politics. hands.... Then those whom we call deacons give to each of those present the bread and wine mixed with water During the fourth century there began to arise a belief over which the thanksgiving was pronounced, and carry that an actual change took place in the bread and wine. away a portion to those who are absent.... For we do not Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem (about AD 315-86), wrote: ‘I receive them as common bread and common drink; but as adjure you no longer to consider the elements as ordinary Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the bread and wine, for in accordance with the very words of word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation.’ Christ they have become His body and His blood.’ Thus was born the doctrine which was later identified by the Origen (185-254) insisted that the ‘union with Christ’ term ‘transubstantiation’ (the belief that the bread and which took place was spiritual, yet there arose the belief wine became the Body and Blood of Christ when the that the elements became a sacramental food by which priest consecrated them). worshippers could share the essence of God. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons about AD 180, concerned to counter the This doctrine was even more clearly stated in the Gnostic heresy that Jesus was not fully man, taught ‘that ninth century by Paschasius Radbertus, who declared that the eucharist contains an earthly and a divine reality’, the real presence of Christ’s body and Blood were and that there was ‘an altar in heaven’, thus in effect present in the eucharist. This belief was officially over-emphasizing the ritual aspects of the Lord’s Supper. accepted by the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215, in spite For the same reason he laid stress on the Church’s of the insistence of Berengar of Tours and others that the ‘tradition’. These ideas were developed in the third change was spiritual and the bread and wine remained ‘of century. Old Testament ideas of a priesthood were the same substance’. As we have seen (page 30), Peter Lombard and

36 37 Thomas Aquinas taught that the sacraments automatically ceremony in worship. He believed the real presence of conferred grace simply by being performed, and the Christ to be present in the eucharist and coined the word withholding of the cup of wine from the congregation ‘consubstantiation’. His successor, Philip Melanchthon was justified by the fear that the transubstantiated wine (1497-1560), continued to claim that the Scriptures (ie ‘the Blood of Christ’) might be spilled and cause a showed that communion was more than just a memorial. scandal. The practice of holding masses for the dead also Zwingli, on the other hand, ‘shrank from the idea that spread. physical objects might be vehicles of spiritual gifts’ and In the 14th century the pendulum swung in the ‘preferred to treat the sacraments rather as symbols and opposite direction. John Wycliffe (about 1329-84) argued signs… than as a means of grace’ (Owen Chadwick). that Christ was only spiritually present in the elements, Only faith could receive grace. With puritan-like zeal he and Jan Huss (about 1370-1415) and his followers cleared the churches of Zürich of medieval pomp and criticized the withholding of the cup of wine from the ritual. In a great debate at Marburg (1529) Luther and congregation. He went to the Council of Constance in Zwingli were found to be irreconcilably and bitterly 1415 to explain his views but was burnt at the stake for deadlocked on the matter of the meaning and them. administration of this sacrament. Then came the Reformation. The Reformers generally John Calvin, ‘the great systematizer’, tried to bring rejected ‘the medieval idea of the Church as a reconciliation. He ‘rejected Zwingli’s idea that the hierarchical institution… administering salvation through sacrament of communion was merely a symbol; but he sacraments’ (J. I. Packer). They reduced the list of seven also warned against a magical belief in the real presence sacraments to two or three, which alone, they argued, of Christ’ (Andreas Lindt). He taught that there is a ‘real could be deemed to have been instituted by Christ. participation’ of Christ but that He ‘is not affixed to the Salvationists may well claim that, if five sacraments elements’. could be dropped by earlier reformers because they could In 1547 the Council of Trent gave the Roman answer. not be shown to have been instituted by Jesus, surely Transubstantiation and the established medieval practices they may cease to use the two remaining sacraments on were upheld and the Council proclaimed that ‘the the same grounds. sacraments of the New Testament contain the grace that The Reformers were also united in their rejection of they signify’ and are not ‘merely outward signs’. the doctrine of transubstantiation, but there the The third mainstream of Protestant activity was agreement among them ends. Erasmus (1466-1536) Anglicanism. Here the reforms were more conservative wrote: ‘Read the New Testament as a whole, and you than those of Calvin, but the liturgy of the Book of will find no commandment referring to these ceremonies. Common Prayer (1552) was simplified and the wording Ceremonies cause differences.’ He is said to have ‘made of the communion service suggested a memorial the Reformation inevitable’ and to have ‘laid the egg celebration rather than one which actually which Luther hatched’. But Luther, who was in fact one communicated Christ to the believer. On the other hand, of the more moderate Reformers, was unwilling to go as among Puritans, Separatists and Baptists ‘there was a far as Erasmus, wishing to retain much medieval

38 39 Babel of dissenting schisms and mutual excommunications’. As we saw in the last chapter (page 32), the Quakers or Society of Friends ceased to observe the formal 7 Not Binding on our Conscience sacraments. ‘They would say that in meetings for IN discussing The Salvation Army’s position regarding worship and in their silent pause before meals they have the sacraments, we should first note that it did not known the real presence of Christ and that, though these originate in any ingrained prejudice against them, nor may be heightened moments, the whole of life is from any desire just to be ‘different’. The decision to sacramental’ (Encyclopaedia Britannica). discontinue their use was the result of a gradual process The 19th-century Brethren opted for a simple in the minds of the Army’s founders, to which practical communion service to emphasize Christian fellowship difficulties and growing conviction both contributed. and express the priesthood of all believers. We should remember that William Booth was baptized If, therefore, Salvationists are called to justify their in the Church of England when only two days old. He abstinence from the communion service they may partook of communion as a member of a Wesley chapel justifiably ask, ‘Which service?’ for there has never been and administered the sacraments as an ordained universal agreement on a liturgy and each group of Methodist minister. His first son (William Bramwell) was Christians has clung to its own observance in the belief born in Halifax in 1856 while the Booths were on an that it was the only right one. These attitudes have evangelistic tour. They moved on to conduct meetings in produced many of the divisions in the Church which the Macclesfield, and it was there that William himself ecumenical movement has lately tried to heal. In the baptized their baby with over 30 other infants. This was words of General Frederick Coutts (No Discharge in This done deliberately so that the evangelist’s child might not War): ‘The witness of the Salvationist is simply that the be made to seem ‘special’ by being given a separate presence of the risen Christ may be fully realized, and ceremony. divine grace freely received, without the use of any Further, William Booth was rather conservative by material element. The Salvationist believes most ardently nature, and after breaking away from Methodism he did in the Real Presence.’ not at first intend to found another denomination but only an evangelistic agency. The observance of the sacraments was continued throughout the lifetime of The Christian Mission. In his Echoes and Memories Bramwell Booth described the situation following 1874: ‘For some years we followed the practice of many Churches and baptized infants. I have in some cases myself “sprinkled” as many as 30 in one service! … This practice, however, died down gradually, chiefly because it had no very strong conviction behind it; and

40 41 in place of it the Army introduced a service of be abandoned. In fact, he was of the opinion that the Dedication.’ Regarding communion, he says: ‘When I impotence of the Church in reaching the masses might be came on the scene as a responsible official of the put down to formalized religion. Mission, in 1874, the Lord’s Supper was administered The Founder, on the other hand, was swayed much monthly at all our stations to all members of the Mission more by practical considerations. He had one overriding and… Christian friends.’ The 1870 Constitution had laid concern—that evangelistic enterprise should be down that unfermented wine should be used for these completely unhindered by anything that was unnecessary. monthly celebrations, but there are records which suggest Alongside this priority, the sacramental traditions of the that water was sometimes used. Church were secondary. ‘The central necessity of This position continued in the early days of the Army. conversion… was the heart and soul of his ‘Numerous instances of the administration of the teaching’(Harold Begbie). sacrament by officers, men and women, are to be found According to Begbie (William Booth—Founder of The in reports till well into 1881. A correspondent of the Salvation Army), William Booth came to believe towards Nonconformist and Independent (9 February 1882) called the end of Christian Mission days that, though ‘the attention to the fact that in The Salvation Army the Church teaches that an infant is cleansed from original sacrament had for the first time in the history of the sin by the sprinkling of water in baptism’, as far as he Church been administered by women’ (The History of was concerned ‘the sprinkling… could not by any The Salvation Army, Volume II). possible means be anything more than a symbol; it could There had been, however, no reference to sacramental not make the smallest difference to the character and doctrine or practice in the articles of doctrine which were temperament of the child.... Human personality is neither legally enshrined in the Deed Poll of 1878, and gradually to be regenerated by a ceremony nor to be transformed the leaders began to have misgivings about their by logic.’ For William Booth it was ‘a detail of continued use. symbolism, and he left it freely to his followers whether The ‘Army Mother’, Catherine Booth, was probably they would be baptized or not’. the first to experience these doubts. She felt very strongly Bramwell Booth testified to the spiritual help he had about the dangers of anything that might make Christians received from the Lord’s Supper and to his great rely on ritual rather than on a change in heart and life. reluctance to accept the views of the other leaders. ‘I She was also a champion of the ministry of women believe that I was the last officer… to administer the within the Church, and for women to administer the Lord’s Supper,’ he wrote. Eventually, however, he came sacraments was quite unthinkable in most church circles. to the same conclusions about the sacraments as other George Scott Railton, Booth’s chief assistant from leaders, though it would seem that for a time his father 1873-82, also argued the dangers of all ritualism, which had given him a special dispensation, which he did not he declared to be part of the ‘old dispensation’ rather grant to others, to continue to administer the sacraments. than Christian principle and practice. If such It appears that celebrations of the Lord’s Supper went ceremonies were not necessary, he thought, they should on routinely until about 1882. There is a record, for

42 43 example, that in 1879 an observance took place in an In May of the same year the Convocation of officers’ meeting led by an aide of William Booth at Canterbury appointed a committee to investigate the Mountain Ash in Wales, and a report of the 1878 War possibility of attaching the Army to the Anglican Church. Congress indicates that both the sacramental ceremony The chairman was the Bishop of Truro (Dr E. W. and the love feast (common meal) were observed at that Benson) who later became Archbishop of Canterbury. In date: ‘After sacrament only a quarter of an hour remained the discussions with the Founder which followed, one of for the love feast.’ the main problems concerned the sacraments. In June, Dr In 1881 Booth issued a statement, drafted by Railton, Benson wrote to William Booth: ‘One thing I do look to that: ‘There must be no baptismal service that can delude with great anxiety—namely, that the church people who anyone into a vain hope of getting to Heaven without follow with you, or others who… may desire to being “born again”. There must be no Lord’s Supper communicate in church, should not be debarred by “administered” by anybody in such a way as to show compulsory arrangements of your own from the partaking anything like a priestly superiority of one over another— of the communion with their brethren.’ The Founder felt every saved person being a “priest unto God”.... There that he could not give this guarantee, and other difficult must never be a sacramental service at the end of a questions presented themselves. Would Army officers meeting so as to prevent the possibility of inviting have to be ordained by a bishop before they could sinners to the Mercy Seat.’ Begbie concludes: ‘He administer the sacraments? Would women be acceptable deliberately rejected the sacrament; but it was not until as ministers? Would the Army have to accept the use of he had studied the matter with care and with anxiety, not fermented wine? Would all Salvationists have to be until he had weighed with a grave deliberation all the baptized and ‘confirmed’ before receiving communion? consequences of that rejection.’ Would the very roughly ‘converted’ Army buildings be recognized as consecrated buildings? Would the proposal The final break with the sacramental tradition was that each corps should be asked to attend the parish brought about, strangely, by overtures from the Church church for communion at regular intervals mean that the of England. In February 1882, 500 uniformed observances which had been taking place within corps Salvationists had, by invitation, attended a service at St would become invalid? Paul’s Church, York, at 8 am where the sacrament was administered by two Anglican clergymen. The service The discussions took place in a friendly atmosphere, was timed so that ‘as our soldiers marched out, the but it soon became clear that both sides would have to ordinary congregation was waiting to go in’ (The War sacrifice principles which they regarded as essential and Cry, 16 March 1882). This in itself was not an that there would be many practical difficulties. Both uncommon event, but it sparked off an approach to the sides, therefore, began a hasty if dignified retreat. Founder by the Archbishop of York to see how far the On the Army side, Railton and Bramwell Booth Army could be recognized by the Church of England. In thought it essential that the Army should retain its his letter he mentioned that ‘bodies of The Salvation military structure and freedom of action, and the Army’ had ‘been admitted to holy communion at their Founder was concerned about ‘The Salvation Army’s request’ at two of his churches. essential unity’, believing that the proposed arrange-

44 45 ments would be tantamount to an admission that Army clergyman, who had interviewed the Founder, quoted him procedures lacked an essential of salvation, an essential as saying that, ‘some of his people on their own which its soldiers would have to seek elsewhere. responsibility had had a very simple “breaking of bread” On the Anglican side, there were emotive protests together, but that this was no part of the Army—as an from some who did not want to have the Salvationists evangelistic agency’. The History of The Salvation Army, inside their fold. The thought of having these rough Volume II, states: ‘For a time individual Salvationists soldiers in their pews, with timbrel and voice at full went to church communion services, but eventually this volume, was something of a nightmare. The Dean of St ceased, it being accepted that divided loyalty could Paul’s (R. W. Church), for instance, when Bramwell naturally not be anything but a source of weakness.’ Booth tried to arrange a service in the cathedral for Begbie (William Booth) quotes the case (date unspecified) Salvationists, did not wish any Salvationist to take part, of Lady Henry Somerset, who ‘was willing to join the although Anglican clergymen favourable to the Army Army... but she could not give up the rite.... She asked… would be included. However, the arrangements were if she might be allowed to go for holy communion to the finally aborted on the grounds that the dean was afraid Church of England. The answer was a negative.’ On the that the hobnailed boots of the Salvationists might other hand, Bramwell Booth wrote (in Echoes and damage the recently relaid marble floor of the cathedral. Memories): ‘Any soldier who declared a serious In other cases, as we have seen already, services were conviction in the matter and desired to participate… arranged in such a way that Salvationists and regular could receive a recommendation to go to some other parishioners would not be in church together. body for the purpose of partaking.’ Perhaps ‘circumstances altered cases’ for other reasons. So the negotiations for union faded out, though William Booth described them as ‘for ever a pleasant The Salvation Army, therefore, went on its course memory’. The Convocation of 1883 dissolved the without fixed ritual. Salvation Army Ceremonies gives committee set up the previous year, but not before some some suggestions concerning certain ordinances, but the speakers had made ludicrous accusations against the introduction makes it clear that no leader is restricted to a Army, such as that it was contributing to the rate of set form of words but must be open to the guidance of illegitimate births by holding late-night meetings. the Holy Spirit. Thereafter the only Anglican clergyman to make We may therefore summarize the reasons for the serious attempts to persuade the Army (through Bramwell Army’s abandonment of the traditional sacramental Booth) to reintroduce communion was Dean Farrar, but practices thus: Bramwell was unimpressed by his arguments. 1. The fear of ritualism. Catherine Booth and Railton It would seem that at this time there was still some especially regarded formalism as potentially very doubt in William Booth’s mind as to whether the Army dangerous. So many Christians relied on the signs of was a church with the right of determining its own spiritual grace rather than on the grace itself, but sacramental position, or an evangelistic agency looking to Catherine believed that salvation came solely by the the churches for this aspect of worship. In 1881 a grace of God personally received by faith. Much that passed for Christianity was primarily an observance of

46 47 outward ritual. In Popular Christianity she wrote of “‘a gone more strange perversions or has been more mock salvation” as distinct from “a real deliverance from grievously deflected and distorted.... If you wish to know sin”‘. ‘Another mock salvation is presented in the shape how Christians can hate one another, you have only to of ceremonies and sacraments… men are taught that by read the later history of the sacraments’ (Bishop Jayne). going through them, or partaking of them, they are to be 4. The conflict between the ‘separate priesthood’ saved.... What an inveterate tendency there is in the required by sacramentalists and the ‘priesthood of all human heart to trust in outward forms, instead of seeking believers’ to which the Army was committed, ie that any the inward grace!’ Christian may minister to others. This could not be 2. The belief that there was no scriptural basis for reconciled with episcopal ordination. regarding the sacraments as essential to salvation or 5. The position of women. They were already Christian living. William Booth, in a statement to officers established in the Army on equal terms with men, but on 2 January 1883, said: ‘I cannot accept any obligation would not be recognized by sacramentalists as qualified as binding upon my conscience, neither will I seek to to administer the sacraments. Women’s ministry was bind any upon yours, to do, or believe, or teach anything more important to Army leaders than the sacraments. As for which authority cannot be furnished from the word of Mrs General Minnie Carpenter wrote: ‘William Booth God, or which God Himself does not reveal to us by His was not willing to surrender the principle of the perfect Spirit, as our present duty.’ Again he writes: ‘If I believed equality of men and women in every activity of the that my Lord Jesus Christ required of me that I should Kingdom of Christ.’ Even the Church might well prefer take so many pieces of bread and so much wine every the Army to cease to use the sacraments altogether day of my life, I should unhesitatingly carry out His rather than for it to have ‘women priests’ administering commands. There is nothing that I am conscious of that them. He requires me to do that I leave undone.’ For it was the baptism with the Holy Spirit and constant spiritual 6. The fact that the Quakers lived obviously holy lives communion with our Lord through His Spirit that was of without the use of the sacraments showed that they were prime importance. Each meal should be sacramental—in not essential to Christian life. Multitudes unquestionably fact the whole of life should be. As William Temple have become ‘new Christians in Christ Jesus’ and (Christus Veritas) wrote: ‘It is possible to make a continued ‘steadfast in the faith’ without outward “spiritual communion” which is in every way as real as a baptism. In his Exeter Hall address on 16 April 1883, the sacramental communion.... Everywhere and always we Founder declared: ‘If it were proved [that the sacraments can have communion with Him.’ are conditions of salvation] you would shut out of heaven some of the best and holiest that ever walked the face of 3. The fact that the sacraments had been a divisive the earth.’ On the other hand, it is clear that many influence in the body of Christ throughout Christian baptized communicants do not show evidence of holy history. ‘Holy Communion has notoriously been the living. ‘You will recognize them by the fruits they bear’ storm-centre of bitter controversy and division throughout (Matthew 7:16). Christendom. No truth of Christianity has under- 7. Many Salvationists had been alcoholics or drunkards

48 49 and would have been tempted by the fermented wine in common use in churches, unfermented being difficult or impossible to obtain. Even unfermented wine could cause problems. 8. William Booth had not wanted to form a church, and the question of the administration of the sacraments within the Army might well have brought it into collision with the existing churches, which he strongly wished to avoid.

* * * Finally, here are four apt summaries of the Army’s position: (a) A reporter in India: ‘The Salvationists never for a moment lay aside their consciousness that they are in the immediate presence of the Deity. They never quit it. They are as close to His feet while singing a song, beating a drum, or talking to a crowd, as when prostrate in prayer.’ (b) Professor John McQuarrie (Principles of Christian Theology): ‘Although it [The Salvation Army] has no sacraments, we could not for a moment deny that it receives and transmits divine grace.’ (c) Paul to the Colossians (2:16,17): ‘Allow no one therefore to take you to task about what you eat or drink, or over the observance of festival, new moon or sabbath. These are no more than a shadow of what was to come; the solid reality is Christ’s.’ (d) William Booth at an Exeter Hall meeting on 13 March 1889: ‘Neither water, sacraments, church services nor Salvation Army methods will save you without a living, inward change of heart and a living, active faith and communion with God....’

50 51