Seven sacraments

[wolfpup]

I’m sure you have many threads on this, but I have not found one that definitly answers my queries - so here goes.

The CC says there are seven sacraments that were all instituted by Christ to give grace.

Yet in Scripture we see only three (eucharist, baptism, confession) directly being created by Christ. I can see other such as Confirmation, Holy orders being instituted indirectly (as he did not give a specific command), but most definitly come from God.
I have read on other threads that the others were instituted indirectly as a result of his teaching, not personally - civil marriage as a renewal into Sacramental Marriage by his teachings on the subject, and by fact of the two being baptised. Anonting of the Sick as a part of the Holy Orders and part of the forgiving of sins and healing powers that were given to the Apostles.

How does the church know that these two are Sacraments, when say - exorcisms are only a ritual? How can we know that these two were definitly instituted by Christ himself, and not, like exorcism, a ritual devised by the Church? I’m not denying that they are in Scripture, only trying to understand whether they are actually Sacraments. I think that Lutherans take this view because there is not any explicit evidence in scripture that they are sacraments vs a ritual.

I also have a question on confirmation and holy orders - I know some protestants say that these two are the same thing because both are done by laying on of hands and confer HS - and that all christians should take part in it. How do we know that references to these two things are not talking about the same thing? I’m not that well-versed in Scripture so please excuse my ignorance. Any hope in rebutting this?

 

[edward_george]

We know that there are seven sacraments because the consistent tradition of the Church has been that there are seven sacraments. Catholicism is not a sola scriptura faith, and revelation ended with the death of the last apostle. Scripture is but one part of the “three-legged stool” of Catholic teaching–the others being Tradition and Magisterium.

For more, check out catholic.com/library/sacraments.asp wherein the teachings of the early Church on each sacrament is detailed.

-ACEGC

 

[TheMc]

I’m sure you have many threads on this, but I have not found one that definitly answers my queries - so here goes.

The CC says there are seven sacraments that were all instituted by Christ to give grace.

Yup, that’s right.

Yet in Scripture we see only three (eucharist, baptism, confession) directly being created by Christ. I can see other such as Confirmation, Holy orders being instituted indirectly (as he did not give a specific command), but most definitly come from God.
I have read on other threads that the others were instituted indirectly as a result of his teaching, not personally - civil marriage as a renewal into Sacramental Marriage by his teachings on the subject, and by fact of the two being baptized. Anonting of the Sick as a part of the Holy Orders and part of the forgiving of sins and healing powers that were given to the Apostles.

How does the church know that these two are Sacraments, when say - exorcisms are only a ritual? How can we know that these two were definitly instituted by Christ himself, and not, like exorcism, a ritual devised by the Church? I’m not denying that they are in Scripture, only trying to understand whether they are actually Sacraments. I think that Lutherans take this view because there is not any explicit evidence in scripture that they are sacraments vs a ritual.

The church knows what is a sacrament and what is not through the gift of infallibility that Christ granted to her. The church’s sole rule of faith is not the bible, but scripture and inspired tradition, guided by the magisterium.

I also have a question on confirmation and holy orders - I know some protestants say that these two are the same thing because both are done by laying on of hands and confer HS - and that all christians should take part in it. How do we know that references to these two things are not talking about the same thing? I’m not that well-versed in Scripture so please excuse my ignorance. Any hope in rebutting this?

Baptism also confers the Holy Spirit. While baptism brings God’s life into our soul, confirmation confers the holy spirit in a complete way.

While holy orders does (I believe) also confer the holy spirit, it is specific. It gives the man grace for his ministry, and in the case of a priest, the power to forgive sins, consecrate bread and wine, etc…

Marriage, another “common” sacrament, gives people grace to parent, to stay committed to one’s spouse, etc…

Neither of these sacraments is for everyone, particularly holy orders. While it is possible for a Male to receive all 7 sacraments, it is quite rare.

 

[maryj]

Confirmation- 2 Cor 1:20-21, Acts 8:14-17, Acts 19: 1-6
Holy Orders John 20:21 He gave the Apostles the power to offer the Sacrifice Luke 22:19. and to dispense them Matt 28:18, John 20:22-23

It is true that every Christian receives Sanctifying grace which confers on him a priesthood. Evan as Israel under the Old dispensation was to God “a kingly priesthood” 1 Peter 2:9, but now as then the special and Sacramental priesthood strengthens and perfects the universal priesthood, 2 Cor 3:3,6 Romans 15:16

Timothy is exhorted to appoint presbyters by the same rite 1 Tim 22, Acts 13:3, Acts 4:22

 

[maryj]

The special mission that Christ gave His Apostles, their successors, and the priests they were to ordain-which includes,among other functions, presiding at the Eucharist and administering the sacrament of reconcilliation- was not to be shared with all of his followers. " For…all the parts (of Christ’s body) do not have the same function" Romans 12:4

 

[wolfpup]

The church knows what is a sacrament and what is not through the gift of infallibility that Christ granted to her. The church’s sole rule of faith is not the bible, but scripture and inspired tradition, guided by the magisterium.

Thanks, and while I certainly hope to be able to trust the Church I am still at the doubting stage. I am just wondering as to what the evidence that magisterium used to decide that this is a sacrament… and this is a ritual, was. Both are seen in scripture and neither seem to be directly instituted by Christ.

The special mission that Christ gave His Apostles, their successors, and the priests they were to ordain-which includes,among other functions, presiding at the Eucharist and administering the sacrament of reconcilliation- was not to be shared with all of his followers. " For…all the parts (of Christ’s body) do not have the same function" Romans 12:4

Ok. I am just wondering because both are confered by laying on of hands and since both make reference to the seal of the holy spirit, what scriptural proof that they are different sacraments is. Its pretty ridiculous now seeing the scripture quotes you offered, not to mention the history in the early church of having bishops and elders ordained. Thanks.

 

[dmar198]

The reason why the Sacraments are numbered seven is because the Church, once the word Sacrament was defined, simply counted the number of things in Scripture that fit the definition of Sacrament, and discovered seven things that fit the definition.

The definition is this: a Sacrament is (1) an outward sign of some spiritual reality (2) instituted by Christ (3) which gives grace to the recipient.

Baptism – a sign, because the outer cleansing of the body is a sign of the inner cleansing of the spirit – instituted by Christ, because he took the Baptism of John, changed it to make it confer forgiveness of sins, and re-promulgated it with the new ability: see Matthew 28:19, John 3:5, etc. – which gives grace, because it forgives sins.

Confirmation – a sign, because the anointing with oil is a sign of the anointing with the Holy Spirit – instituted by Christ, because when we see the Apostles knowing to do it, even when they were in separate lands, that shows that they had to have been instructed to do this; but they had not received instruction from anyone yet, other than Jesus, so He must have been the one who instructed them to confirm people – which gives grace, because it completes your initiation into the Church. You wonder whether it is the same as Ordination, but there are components of Ordination that aren’t given in Confirmation, such as the ability to forgive sins through Confession. That shows that they aren’t the same Sacrament.

Confession – a sign, because the words and gestures of the priest signify the forgiveness of sin in the penitent – instituted by Christ, because He said “Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them” – which gives grace, the forgiveness of sins.

Eucharist – a sign, because the participation in the one bread is a sign of the unity of the Body of Christ (1 Cor. 10:16-17) – instituted by Christ, at the Last Supper – which gives grace, the grace of holiness, divine life, and, truly, everything that Christ is.

Ordination – a sign, because the laying on of hands is a sign that a mission is being conferred – instituted by Christ, because, although there were ordinations in other religions, no other ordination actually conferred the priestly mission that Christ had in mind – which gives grace, the grace of being able to forgive sins in Confession, consecrate the bread and wine of the Eucharist, etc.

Matrimony – a sign, because the union of the man and woman is a sign of the union of Christ and the Church – instituted by Christ, who is God, in the Garden of Eden – which gives grace, the grace to stay united, to sanctify the sexual embrace, to raise children, etc.

Anointing of the Sick – a sign, because the anointing of the various body parts (head, eyelids, palms, etc.) is a sign of the forgiveness of the sins of the sins of the mind, the eyes, the hands, etc. – instituted by Christ, because He sent His apostles out to anoint the sick with oil and heal them (Mark 6:13) – which gives grace, the forgiveness of sins and strength for the final journey into heaven.

How does the church know that these two are Sacraments, when say - exorcisms are only a ritual?

The exorcism ritual is not an outward sign of a spiritual reality. It certainly causes something very important, for the person exorcised, in the spiritual realm; but it doesn’t signify the spiritual reality it causes, so it does not fit the definition of a Sacrament.

How can we know that these two were definitly instituted by Christ himself, and not, like exorcism, a ritual devised by the Church?

Well, we have the testimony of Scripture that Jesus instituted them, for one thing, but not with exorcism.

I think that Lutherans take this view because there is not any explicit evidence in scripture that they are sacraments vs a ritual.

Once you know what a Sacrament is, the Scriptural evidence that these are Sacraments is unimpeachable. But even if it weren’t, we are not Sola Scripturists, we don’t believe it’s only true if Scripture says it. The fact that the Church teaches that there are 7 Sacraments, and the fact that the Church is infallible, is in fact unbreakable proof that Jesus instituted the 7 Sacraments, a proof that is equal in weight to the testimony of Scripture.

I also have a question on confirmation and holy orders - I know some protestants say that these two are the same thing because both are done by laying on of hands and confer HS - and that all christians should take part in it. How do we know that references to these two things are not talking about the same thing?

Since Confirmation doesn’t confer the abilities that Ordination does it cannot be the same thing. All the people were confirmed in Acts, but in order to offer the Sacraments, special people had to be chosen and another ritual performed. Both of those things show that these are different Sacraments – the new abilities of the ordained, and the fact that massive amounts of people were ordained but none of them offered the Sacraments except those who had a special ordination.

So I hope that helps. In my opinion, the Church’s teaching on the Sacraments is unimpeachable from the Bible; but again, even if Scripture was ambiguous, the infallibility of the Church, which can be proven on other grounds, is proof enough of that all her teachings are true, even those not clearly spoken of in the Bible.

God bless!
-Dan Marcum

 

[wolfpup]

dmar198: Thanks for all your help.

Matrimony – a sign, because the union of the man and woman is a sign of the union of Christ and the Church – instituted by Christ, who is God, in the Garden of Eden – which gives grace, the grace to stay united, to sanctify the sexual embrace, to raise children, etc.

Ok, that does make sense. When you hear “instituted by christ” you immediatly think during the incarnation, but if he elevated it to the level of a sacrament by his teaching during his earthly minsitry then that makes sense too.

Anointing of the Sick – a sign, because the anointing of the various body parts (head, eyelids, palms, etc.) is a sign of the forgiveness of the sins of the sins of the mind, the eyes, the hands, etc. – instituted by Christ, because He sent His apostles out to anoint the sick with oil and heal them (Mark 6:13) – which gives grace, the forgiveness of sins and strength for the final journey into heaven.

I wasn’t aware of the passage in Mark- so thanks for that. It really is concrete evidence that Christ instituted this as a sacrament.