The Westminster Confession devotes three chapters to the sacraments. This reflects not only their basic importance but also the fact that they were the subject of much disagreement in the Reformation period. Catholics, Lutherans, Zwinglians, Anabaptists, and Calvinists differed from one another on many points of baptism and the Lord’s supper. The most important differences were between the Catholic Church and most Protestants. Those differences form the immediate background of chapter 27.

If the reader has access to Calvin’s Institutes, it will be helpful to read his chapter on the sacraments (Book 4, Chap. 15). The Confession follows Calvin closely here, both in the order of topics, and in the doctrinal positions taken.

The first section gives a definition of sacraments, and states the functions they have in the church. The word sacraments is not found in Scripture. It is from a Latin word used in the Vulgate version to translate the Greek word mystery. In the early church, “sacrament” was used in the sense of “signs which reverently represented sublime and spiritual things” (Calvin).

Sacraments are “signs and seals of the covenant of grace.” As signs, they present to our senses the central truths of the gospel, “to represent Christ and His benefits.” As seals, they “confirm our interest in Him.” (“Interest” is used here in the sense of “having a claim on, or a share in.”) Calvin uses the analogy of a seal on a government document, which confirms what is written and gives readers confidence in it.

Legitimate sacraments are not invented by human authority, but are “immediately instituted by God.” In the controversy with the Catholic Church over the number of sacraments, the Reformers insisted that only two were authorized by God’s Word for the New Testament church. The point is made in paragraph 4 of this chapter.

In addition to portraying Christ and confirming our possession of Him and His benefits, two other functions of sacraments are mentioned. The sacraments “put a visible difference” between the church and the world, and “engage them (members of the church) to the service of God in Christ.” These two functions are related to another way the word “sacrament” was used in Rome: It meant a soldier’s oath of loyalty, and this is a secondary sense in which it is used of baptism and the Lord’s supper, understanding them as pledges of our loyalty to Christ.

The sacraments, then, must be seen from a covenantal perspective. As they point to the gospel, they confirm God’s promise, “I will be your God.” As they express our commitment to Christ, they indicate our response to God’s grace: “We are your people” (Rev. 21:3).

One of the Reformation debates was about how literally one should interpret biblical language about the sacraments. Paragraph 2 deals with this issue. Does baptism itself really wash away sins (Acts 22:16)? In the Lord’s supper, does one consume the actual flesh and blood of Christ (Luke 22:19-20)? Catholics took such statements quite literally. The result was a belief that grace and salvation come through the channel of the sacraments, and that outside the Catholic Church no one could be saved.

The response of the Reformers was that such language was figurative. There is a close connection between the sign and what it points to. In a kind of shorthand, the Bible sometimes speaks of the sign as accomplishing salvation, when the real meaning is that it is Christ who gives salvation, using the sacrament as a means of instructing and strengthening our faith.

Paragraph 3 is stated in largely negative terms, but it makes a very positive point: The sacraments are effective; they are means of grace. By them, grace is “exhibited” and “conferred.” These two words have the same meaning in this connection, with “exhibited” being used in its older sense of “granting” and “providing.” This grace is given to “worthy receivers” when the sacraments are “rightly used.”

As will be made clear in chapter 29, this requires faith on the part of the recipient. The Holy Spirit works in the life of the believer, enabling him or her to respond to the promises of the gospel. This is one of many places in the Confession where Word and Spirit are seen together. The Spirit works by and with the Word in our hearts to bring the benefits of Christ’s saving work to us.

The negative statements of this section reject the Roman Catholic teaching on this subject. Rome taught that the sacraments are effective ex opere operato, that is, “on the basis of the action performed.” This meant that the sacraments had the power to convey grace so long as the recipient did not place any barrier in the way. Active faith was not needed. The Confession rejects the view that the sacraments possess some inherent power to bless.

A second Catholic teaching was that, in order for a sacrament to be effective, the priest must have the intention to follow the teaching of the church about the sacraments. This was rejected by the Confession because it would make the efficacy of the sacraments depend on fallible men, whose real intention could never be known with certainty.

On the efficacy of the sacraments, Calvin cites Augustine regarding two errors to be avoided: “The first vice is for us to receive the signs as though they had been given in vain … to cause them to be wholly fruitless in us. The second vice is by not lifting our minds beyond the visible sign, to transfer to it the credit for those benefits which are conferred upon us by Christ alone. And they are conferred through the Holy Spirit, who makes us partakers in Christ” (Institutes, IV.XIV.16).

In addition to limiting the number of sacraments to two—baptism and the Lord’s supper—paragraph 4 restricts the administering of the sacraments. Only those who have been ordained as ministers of the gospel may administer them. One reason for this restriction is that the Catholic Church taught that in emergencies anyone could administer baptism, since it was necessary for salvation. Since the grace of Christ can come without baptism, lay baptism was rejected.

Another reason for the restriction is a matter of order. A. A. Hodge comments, “This is not said in the interest in any priestly theory of the ministry.…But since the Church is an organized society, under laws executed by regularly appointed officers, it is evident that ordinances—which are badges of Church members,…the instruments of discipline, and seals of the covenant formed by the great Head of the Church with his living members—can properly be administered only by the highest legal officers of the Church, those who are commissioned as ambassadors for Christ to treat in his name with men” (p. 335).

The final paragraph of the chapter expresses again the view that there is one covenant of grace in all periods of history. This covenantal theology leads to the statement, “The sacraments of the Old Testament…were, for substance, the same with those of the New.” Circumcision and Passover in the Old Testament system pointed to Christ, as do baptism and the Lord’s supper in the New.

Our discussion of this chapter may fitly be concluded with the words of Calvin: “I say that Christ is the matter, or (if you prefer) the substance of all the sacraments; for…they do not promise anything apart from Him.…Therefore, the sacraments have effectiveness among us in proportion as we are helped by their ministry sometimes to foster, confirm, and increase the true knowledge of Christ in ourselves; at other times to possess him more fully and enjoy his riches. But that happens when we receive in true faith what is offered there” (Institutes, IV.XIV.16).