Marriage as Sacrament

[ericfromcowtown]

I attended a wedding this past weekend at a Pentacostal Assembly of Canada (PAOC) church.

During the ceremony, the pastor referred to the "sacrament of marriage," which brought to my mind all of the sacraments held by the RCC in addition to baptism and the Lord's Supper.

I would like to think that if I asked the pastor about his wording he would have said something like "yes, it's not a real sacrament, but that's how people talk."

My first question is, am I correct in thinking that Protestant denominations are generally in agreement that the only two sacraments are baptism and the Lord's Supper, and that this is something that Pentacostals and Presbyterians would generally agree on? Secondly, do you think that I am making a "mountain out of a mole hill," and that I might similarly hear a pastor refer to the "sacrament of marriage" in a reformed wedding ceremony, or do you think that such wording is an example of a general lack of emphasis placed on theology in Pentacostal circles?

 

[CovenantalBaptist]

Hi Eric,

You are correct that in Protestant theology there are only two: baptism and the Lord's Supper. It is also one reason why Reformed Baptists have not historically used the word "sacrament" and have preferred the use of the word "ordinance" to avoid confusion (the 1689 LBCF does not use the word sacrament at all, preferring to use the word "ordinance"). This does not lessen the fact that these ordinances are still a "means of grace" as part of our union with Christ (I along with many RB pastors hold to Calvin's view on the Lord's supper, not Zwingli's pure memorial view for example). I would also, however, definitely affirm that there is a proper (and Reformed) understanding of the language of Sacrament that is divorced from the distortions of Rome, but, I prefer the clarity of the term "ordinance." The fact that a PAOC minister is using this terminology is indeed a sad reflection on his understanding and training. May God grant us more men who can rightly divide His word and properly instruct their flocks.

 

[SolaScriptura]

The word "sacrament" is simply the english-ization of the latin "sacramentum" which is simply the translation of the greek "mysterion."

Interestingly, though I could be in error, as I recall, the word "mysterion" (again, greek for the latin "sacramentum") is applied in Scripture to marriage, but not to baptism or the Lord's supper. But in our theology, we say that baptism and the Lord's supper are sacraments while marriage is not. This is very interesting to me.

 

[Scott1]

Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter XXVII
Of the Sacraments

I. Sacraments are holy signs and seals of the covenant of grace,[1] immediately instituted by God,[2] to represent Christ and His benefits; and to confirm our interest in Him:[3] as also, to put a visible difference between those that belong unto the Church and the rest of the world;[4] and solemnly to engage them to the service of God in Christ, according to His Word.[5]

II. There is, in every sacrament, a spiritual relation, or sacramental union, between the sign and the thing signified: whence it comes to pass, that the names and effects of the one are attributed to the other.[6]

III. The grace which is exhibited in or by the sacraments rightly used, is not conferred by any power in them; neither does the efficacy of a sacrament depend upon the piety or intention of him that does administer it:[7] but upon the work of the Spirit,[8] and the word of institution, which contains, together with a precept authorizing the use thereof, a promise of benefit to worthy receivers.[9]

IV. There are only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the Gospel; that is to say, Baptism, and the Supper of the Lord: neither of which may be dispensed by any, but by a minister of the Word lawfully ordained.[10]

V. The sacraments of the Old Testament in regard to the spiritual things thereby signified and exhibited, were, for substance, the same with those of the new.[11]

A biblical church ought be teaching its people what a sacrament is, and using them as an ordinary part of its faith and practice.

 

[Andres]

My first question is, am I correct in thinking that Protestant denominations are generally in agreement that the only two sacraments are baptism and the Lord's Supper, and that this is something that Pentacostals and Presbyterians would generally agree on? Secondly, do you think that I am making a "mountain out of a mole hill," and that I might similarly hear a pastor refer to the "sacrament of marriage" in a reformed wedding ceremony, or do you think that such wording is an example of a general lack of emphasis placed on theology in Pentacostal circles?

As a former Pentecostal, I think you are giving them far to much credit to assume they would have any idea about what sacraments are/mean. Yes, I think it is a direct result of a general lack of emphasis on theology in Pentecostal circles. I blogged about the lack of formal education/training in Pentecostal circles here if you'd care to read more.
Lastly, no I do not think this is a small matter and I think you would have been justified in talking to the minister later and asking him about his wording.

 

[jwithnell]

To be consistent, a church that views marriage as a sacrament should refuse marriage to unbelievers.

 

[MarieP]

To be consistent, a church that views marriage as a sacrament should refuse marriage to unbelievers.

I agree, sacraments are for believers only! (I know, I know, the parents are believers in your view...but just the way you said it...)

 

[jwright82]

I doubt this pastor will even care much less understand what your talking about. But to give him the benifit of the doubt he might be using it, the word sacrament, to mean something other than what we mean by it, like that marriage is something special not profane. So this would make his error one of ignorance rather than an intentional theological agreement with rome. It doesn't sound like his denomination is reformed so he has taken no vows to teach any reformed confession, so he can be loosey goossey with terminology. I think this is one of the benifits of being reformed is that we have confessions that bring a normativity to how we talk about things and what we believe about them. If christian discourse was not given a normativity like our confessions give than everybody would use whatever words they wanted to talk about things and no one could have real dialoge. With this normativity I can have a discussion on the sacraments with a fellow reformed beleiver and we will use the same words to talk about it and mean roughly the same thing.