Who may do the sacraments?

I was asked by the Pacific Northwest Presbytery to explain my views on whether an ordained minister must administer the sacraments, as the PCA Book of Church Order and WCF require. Here is part of my response to those inquiries.

My overall position on this is as follows: I believe that it is best for a minister to administer baptism and preside at the Supper, for the sake of order and for assurance that the sacraments are acts of Christ. I am not, however, convinced that this is absolutely necessary for the validity or efficacy of the sacraments.

First, the biblical case: Abraham, apparently, circumcised Ishmael and the other males of his household (Gen 17:23), and Zipporah circumcised Gershom (Ex 4:24-26). Even when the priesthood was organized at Sinai, there is no evidence that circumcision was carried out only by priests; Joshua appears to be doing the circumcising in Joshua 5:3-4 (though he surely did not circumcise all the men of Israel personally). Even when we get to the first century, circumcision is not done at the temple by priests (Luke 1:57-66, esp. v. 59; 2:21). Jesus gave the commission to baptize to the apostles, but non-apostles and men who were apparently not ministers performed baptisms. Philip was ordained to some office (Acts 6:5), but there is debate about what office he held. If, as many argue, he was a deacon, it is notable that he baptized the

Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:36-39). Further, Ananias apparently baptized Saul (Acts 9:18) though he is described only as “a certain disciple” (Acts 9:10). Of course, the Lord instructed Ananias to meet with Saul, and he could be described as a man ordained in an “extraordinary” fashion. But that would confirm my line of argument, namely, that “ordinary” ordination is not absolutely required to administer baptism. In fact, the biblical evidence (especially regarding circumcision) indicates that it was not even usual for an ordained man to administer the sacrament of initiation.

The biblical case for requiring a minister to preside at the Lord’s Supper is stronger. Sacrificial meals in the OT had to be celebrated at the sanctuary and certain actions had to be performed by the priest (cf. e.g., Lev 3). Passover and the other feasts of Israel, which provide much of the background of the Lord’s Supper, likewise occurred at the sanctuary and required the presence and activity of a priest (cf. Deut 12, 14-16). Given the early church’s tendency to see her ministry as a transformation of temple worship, there is good reason to think that this practice was generally retained. This would also fit neatly with Greco-Roman meal practices, in which a head of household or a senior leader of a community would serve as host of communal meals. It seems strained, however, to insist that an ordained minister was present every time believers met for house-to-house bread-breaking in Jerusalem in the weeks after Pentecost (Acts 2:42, 46). At Pentecost, it would seem there were only twelve “ministers” for 3000 new believers.

Second, the practical issues: One can easily imagine circumstances where no ordained ministers are available. I do not think it pastorally sensitive to insist that, say, a group of believers in a prison camp have to refrain from the Supper until they have an ordained minister. The prohibition of lay baptism in the WCF is directed in part at the practice of emergency baptism. Here too, however, pastoral sensitivity encourages rather than discourages lay baptism. Even though we deny that baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation (WCF 28.5), baptizing a seriously ill newborn brings comfort to a grieving Christian family. Though the infant already is Christ’s, the visible mark of baptism is additional assurance of his heavenly Father’s love. If a minister is readily available, by all means he should perform the baptism. If not, I do not see any biblical reason why the baptism may not be performed by any believer. Refusing baptism in such circumstances seems analogous to tithing dill and mint while ignoring the weightier matters of the law.