"Effective Means of Salvation"

bookslover · #1 (**permalink**) 08-30-2009, 08:19 PM

Why do both of the Westminster Catechisms (LC161 and SC91) speak of the sacraments as being "effective means of salvation"? I hope that the divines meant that phrase in the sense of "as a part of a Christian's progressive sanctification in this world," because I know the divines didn't believe that unbelievers could be saved by taking the sacraments.

It's an awkwardly worded question, to me, because if you take the phrase "effective means of salvation" at face value, you get the idea that you could get saved by taking the sacraments - and that can't be right.

Why would they word the question that way? Perhaps they're using the term "means" in a special way?

**Prufrock** · #2 (**permalink**) 08-30-2009, 08:40 PM

For something to be effective unto salvation does not indicate that its effectiveness works ex opere operato, as the LC question you referred to notes. The parallel may be drawn to LC155 which asks, "How is the word made effectual unto salvation," especially as the sacraments are often termed "The visible word of God." WCF XXVII.2 also comes into play here, with the attribution of names and effects from the thing signified to the sign.

When we say, "We are saved by the hearing of the word," we do not mean the mechanical act of hearing, but by the receiving of faith; likewise, when we say the sacraments are means of salvation, we do not indicate a mechanical receiving, but a true and sincere receiving of the true substance thereof, which is Christ (set forth under visible species).

bookslover · #3 (**permalink**) 09-01-2009, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prufrock

For something to be effective unto salvation does not indicate that its effectiveness works ex opere operato, as the LC question you referred to notes. The parallel may be drawn to LC155 which asks, "How is the word made effectual unto salvation," especially as the sacraments are often termed "The visible word of God." WCF XXVII.2 also comes into play here, with the attribution of names and effects from the thing signified to the sign.

When we say, "We are saved by the hearing of the word," we do not mean the mechanical act of hearing, but by the receiving of faith; likewise, when we say the sacraments are means of salvation, we do not indicate a mechanical receiving, but a true and sincere receiving of the true substance thereof, which is Christ (set forth under visible species).

OK, but are you saying that unbelievers should be allowed to take communion because they might get saved thereby, or am I misunderstanding you?

***toddpedlar*** · #4 (**permalink**) 09-01-2009, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bookslover

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prufrock

For something to be effective unto salvation does not indicate that its effectiveness works ex opere operato, as the LC question you referred to notes. The parallel may be drawn to LC155 which asks, "How is the word made effectual unto salvation," especially as the sacraments are often termed "The visible word of God." WCF XXVII.2 also comes into play here, with the attribution of names and effects from the thing signified to the sign.

When we say, "We are saved by the hearing of the word," we do not mean the mechanical act of hearing, but by the receiving of faith; likewise, when we say the sacraments are means of salvation, we do not indicate a mechanical receiving, but a true and sincere receiving of the true substance thereof, which is Christ (set forth under visible species).

OK, but are you saying that unbelievers should be allowed to take communion because they might get saved thereby, or am I misunderstanding you?

I'm sure you're misunderstanding him. The Lord's Supper is for the church of God, not for various and sundry. To the church, who alone can receive it by faith, it is an effectual means of grace.

**Prufrock** · #5 (**permalink**) 09-01-2009, 09:05 AM

Of course not (as Todd said), although even that statement must be qualified. The sacraments are given to the church; whether the recipients are true (inward, regenerate) believers or not is entirely out of our hands. Not being baptists, we do assume a mixed congregation, and that many of the recipients of word and sacrament stand yet in want of salvation.

That being said, the sacraments are (of course) effectual means of salvation for believers. A clue as to sense of "...to salvation" can be found in LC 155 again, which includes the following fruits of the hearing of the word as those things unto salvation:

... an effectual means of enlightening, convincing, and humbling sinners; of driving them out of themselves, and drawing them unto Christ; of conforming them to his image, and subduing them to his will; of strengthening them against temptations and corruptions; of building them up in grace, and establishing their hearts in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation.

This is clearly more than the colloquial sense of "Brother Jim 'got saved' yesterday." In that light, those things that the Confession and Catechisms ascribe to Baptism and the Supper are rightly understood as how it is understood as a "means of salvation."