The doctrine of the means of grace is understood properly only when it is considered in the light of Christ's redemptive work (satisfactio vicaria) and the objective justification, or reconciliation, 2 Cor. 5, 19. 20, which He secured by His substitutionary obedience (satisfactio vicaria.). If these two doctrines are corrupted (Calvinism: denial of gratia universalis; synergism: denial of sola gratia), then also the Scripture doctrine of the means of grace will become perverted. Calvinism thus regards the means of grace as unnecessary; synergistic rationalism (Arminianism), as mere incentives for virtuous efforts to obtain salvation. Hence, if the doctrine of the means of grace is to remain intact, the entire doctrine of the vicarious redemption of Christ must be taught in its Scriptural truth and purity. This becomes evident as we study the doctrine of the means of grace in detail.
According to Holy Scripture the preeminent means of grace is the Word of Reconciliation, 2 Cor. 5, 19, or the Gospel of Christ, Rom. 1, 16. The divine Law, or the immutable will of God, though in itself it is the inspired Word of God no less than the Gospel, nevertheless is not a means of grace, since it offers to the sinner only wrath and condemnation, Gal. 3, 10, not grace and the forgiveness of sins. In contradistinction to the Gospel, which is properly "the ministration of righteousness," 2 Cor. 3, 9, the Law is the "ministration of condemnation" (ibid.). For this reason the divine Law is rightly excluded from the means of grace.
The Gospel is a means of grace, not only inasmuch as it offers grace to the sinner, but also because it actually absolves him from all sins. Luther very correctly says: "The Gospel is a general absolution; for it is a promise which, according to God's will and command, all in general and every one in particular should accept." St. L., XXIb, 1849.
Moreover, the Gospel is a true means of grace in every form in which it is presented to the sinner, no matter whether it is preached publicly (Mark 16, 15. 16; Luke 24, 47), or whether it is read (John 20, 31; 1 John 1, 3. 4); whether it is directly pronounced as an absolution, either in public or in private (John 20, 23; 2 Cor. 2, 10: "To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also") or expressed by a symbol (John 3, 14. 15; crucifix), or whether it is considered in the heart (Luke 2, 51; Rom. 10, 8), etc. In short, no matter how the Gospel is brought before the minds of men, it is always a true means of grace, offering to them, and conferring upon them, the grace of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
Some modern theologians have argued that the Gospel is effective only when it is proclaimed or preached (the Dorpat school; Volck, etc.) ; but the passage on which they base their contention (Rom. 10, 17) does not support their claim, since the words "by hearing" (ἐξ ἀκοῆς) do not exclude other modes of receiving the divine Word, John 20, 31; 1 John 1, 4. The Word of God is always efficacious when it is applied, because it is spirit and life, John 6, 63. Our old dogmaticians rightly say that the Word is supernaturally endowed with efficacy, that is to say, it has an active, supernatural, and truly divine force or power of producing supernatural effects, i. e., of converting, regenerating, and renewing the minds of men. Doctr. Theol., p. 501.
This supernatural power, which must not be compared with the natural force which inheres in every human word and especially in every eloquent human discourse, is always inherent in the divine Word, because the Holy Spirit is indissolubly connected with it, so that we must never regard the divine Word as being without divine efficacy or as being in itself a "lifeless instrument" which the Holy Spirit employs efficaciously only under certain conditions, whenever it pleases Him.
On the contrary, wherever the divine Word is, there also is the divine Spirit; and whenever a person uses the Word of God in any form, God is divinely operative in it, . God's operation upon a person who reads the written Word is therefore not an "operation from a distance" (actio in distantia), but an operation which is directly mediated through the divine Word (: πίστις ἐξ ἀκοῆς). Christ Himself commands us not only to hear the Gospel, but also to "search the Scriptures," . , thus asserting efficacy of the Word also when it is being read.
With regard to the efficacy of the divine Word and the power of the Holy Spirit, who works through the Word, Quenstedt writes (I, 183): "The Holy Ghost does not by Himself do something and the Word of God by itself something else, but they produce the one effect by one and the same action." That is Scripture doctrine, ; .
Since God has connected His most gracious promise of forgiveness with Baptism and the Lord's Supper, these also are true and efficacious means of grace, namely, by virtue of the divine promises that are attached to them.
Of Baptism, Scripture teaches expressly that it is "for the remission of sins," εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν, , and "for the washing away of sins," ἀπόλουσαι ἁμαρτίας, ; ; .
In the Lord's Supper Christ offers to the communicant the body and blood shed for the remission of sins, ; , so that also in this Sacrament we have God's gracious offer of pardon for the sake of Him who died and shed His blood as a ransom for sinners.
Since the sacred actions of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, to which the divine promises are attached, can be perceived by the eye, they are called the "visible Word" (Verbum visibile), or "Sacraments."
The Apology explains this expression correctly when it says Art. XIII (VII), 4-5: "These rites have God's command and the promise of grace, which is peculiar to the New Testament. For when we are baptized, when we eat the Lord's body, when we are absolved, our hearts must be firmly assured that God truly forgives us for Christ's sake. . . . But just as the Word enters the ear in order to strike our heart, so the rite itself strikes the eye in order to move the heart. The effect of the Word and of the rite is the same, as it has been well said by Augustine that a Sacrament is a visible word, because the rite is perceived by the eyes and is, as it were, a picture of the Word, signifying the same thing as the Word."
In order that we may rightly understand the doctrine of the Sacraments, we must bear in mind that all means of grace have the same purpose and effect; that is to say, on the one hand, they offer to men God's gracious forgiveness of sins (vis collativa); on the other, they engender and strengthen faith (vis effectiva).
The divine pardon proclaimed in the Gospel is therefore the same as that offered and conveyed by Baptism or the Lord's Supper, so that we do not obtain one·third of God's forgiveness through the Gospel, another third through Baptism, and a last third through Holy Communion. Scripture expressly describes the whole forgiveness of sins which God purposes to give to sinners for Christ's sake as mediated through the Gospel, , or through Baptism, ; , or, again, through the Lord's Supper, .
In short, by whatever means God offers grace to men, He always offers His entire grace and not merely a part of it, so that every means of grace instituted by God conveys to the believer His full forgiveness with life and salvation. The Augsburg Confession Art. V says: "For through the Word and Sacraments, as through instruments, the Holy Ghost is given, who works faith when and where it pleases God." For this reason it is unscriptural to attribute to the various means of grace specific functions in an exclusive sense, as, for example, to Baptism the working of regeneration, to Holy Communion the implanting of the resurrection body, and even physical benefits.
It is true, Holy Scripture indeed ascribes to Baptism the power of regeneration, for it calls this Sacrament "a washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost," ; but it ascribes the same regeneration also to the Gospel, : "Being born again by the Word of God," and no less to Holy Communion, : "This is My blood, shed for the remission of sins," since it is the gracious assurance of the forgiveness of sins that works regeneration. The Augsburg Confession Art. XIII therefore teaches that "the Sacraments were ordained to be signs and testimonies to awaken and confirm faith in those who use them," the same as the Gospel itself. Cp. Apology, Art. XIII (VII), 3-5.
All who deny that the Sacraments offer to the sinner the same grace and pardon that are proffered to him in the Gospel pervert the Scriptural doctrine of the means of grace and, in particular, that of the Sacraments. Those who ascribe to the Sacraments a lesser or partial grace do so in the Calvinistic interest of reducing the value of the Sacraments ("Sacraments are mere signs or memorials"), while those who ascribe to them "a physical operation" dothis in the interest of the Romanistic error of an operation without faith, or ex opere operato, sine bono motu utentis.
According to the Calvinistic conception the means of grace are not necessary for salvation; according to the papistic view the Sacraments require no receiving means (medium ληπτικόν) on the part of the sinner, since grace is infused by mere physical contact with the Sacrament. Both errors equally corrupt the comforting doctrine of Scripture regarding the divine way of applying to the sinner the forgiveness of sins which Christ has secured for him by His perfect obedience. Calvinism substitutes for the Scriptural way (through means, by faith) the man-made way of faith without means (faith through immediate divine operation), while Romanism substitutes the man-made way of means without faith (operation by physical contact, ex opere operato).
In both cases God's application of forgiveness to the sinner (through the means of grace, by faith) is obstructed by man-made impediments; for in the first instance God's conferring means (media douxa) are removed, and in the second, faith, or man's receiving means (medium ληπτικόν), is taken away, so that in neither case God's forgiveness is received by the sinner.
If, despite their errors, Reformed and papistic believers do receive forgiveness of sins, it is only because they, by the grace of God, correct their unscriptural theory by a Scriptural practise. In other words, the Reformed believer, in spite of the false Calvinistic teaching, faithfully clings to, and uses, the means of grace, while the papistic believer, in spite of the pernicious ex-opereoperata doctrine, confides in the gracious promises which are conveyed to him in the means of grace. (Cp. Apology, Art. XIII (VII), 18-23.)
When we consider the relation of faith to the means of grace, we must bear in mind that faith is not an essential part of the means of grace, nor does their efficacy depend on faith. The blessed promise of the means of grace always stands, and their power remains unimpaired, despite the unbelief of man. Yet the means of grace and faith are correlatives. The Apology says Art. XIII (VII), 20 : "The promise is useless unless it is received by faith." This truth we must hold against the Reformed. (Cp. Hodge: "The efficacy of the Sacraments is not due to their inherent virtue, but is conditioned on the presence of faith in the recipient." Syst. Theol., III, 501.) Hodge should have said: "The Sacraments do not profit without faith, since faith is the receiving means of their promises and blessings."
If the question is put,_ "Why did God ordain so many means of grace when one suffices to confer upon the sinner His grace and forgiveness?"_ we quote the reply of Luther who writes Smalcald Articles, (Part III) IV: "The Gospel not merely in one way gives us counsel and aid against sin; for God is superabundantly rich in His grace. First through the spoken Word, by which the forgiveness of sins is preached in the whole world, which is the peculiar office of the Gospel. Secondly through Baptism. Thirdly through the holy Sacrament of the Altar. Fourthly through the power of the keys and also through the mutual conversation and consolation of brethren, ."
The Scriptural explanation that "God is superabundantly rich in His grace" should induce us gratefully to consider and use all the means of grace with equal esteem and keep us from perverting the doctrine of the means of grace by setting one against the other or by denying the necessity of any or all of them. Also in the corruption of the doctrine of the means of grace the conceited reason of man reveals its ingrained blindness and perversity.
With respect to the number of the Sacraments there can be no controversy among theologians as long as they adhere to Scripture as the only rule of faith. If by the term sacrament we mean a sacred act in which the divine command and promise are attached to visible signs, or elements, prescribed by God Himself, there are only two Sacraments, namely, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. To these two sacred acts the term sacrament ought to be confined,. since otherwise confusion is bound to follow.
The additional "sacraments" of the Roman and Eastern Catholic churches (confirmation, penance, ordination of priests, marriage, extreme unction) are not commanded in Scripture; in their perverted forms (Catholic penance, for example, is not Scriptural repentance) they are "commandments of men," , and therefore "vain worship." Marriage, which likewise is a "Catholic sacrament," is indeed instituted by God, but to it is attached only the promise of propagation, , not that of forgiveness of sins.
In conclusion, we may say that, since the term sacrament is a νοπ ἄγραφος, or only an ecclesiastical term (vox ecclesiastica), it must not be taken amiss if orthodox teachers who adhere to the principle of Scripture (principium cognoscendi) occasionally employ the expression in a wider sense, as, for example, the Apology does Art. XIII (VII), 4 ff.: "Therefore Baptism, the Lord's Supper, and Absolution, which is the Sacrament of Repentance, are truly Sacraments."
In this wider use the term sacrament comprises all "rites which have the command of God and to which the promise of grace has been added." (Ibid., 3.) In other words, the visible, divinely prescribed earthly elements (water, bread, and wine) are in that case not regarded as essential parts of a sacrament. Since absolution has both a divine command and a promise, it may be called a sacrament in a wider sense.
However, to avoid confusion, our dogmaticians discourage the use of the term sacrament in this case, and they consistently speak only of two Sacraments, namely, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. So also our Confessions speak whenever they employ the term in its strict, or real, meaning.