What are the sacraments?

As we continue our discussion of sacraments, it seems helpful to offer a few definitions. According to the Catholic Church, there are 7 sacraments. I have listed them here with the common names associated with each of them:

1. Baptism

2. Eucharist/Communion

3. Penance/Reconciliation - Involving "conversion, confession, and celebration." (For Lutherans, this sacraments is often named Confession and Absolution.)

4. Confirmation

5. Marriage

6. Holy Orders/Ordination (vows of priests, nuns, monks) 

7. Anointing the Sick/Last Rites/Extreme Unction

The United Methodist Church (UMC) recognizes Baptism and Eucharist as sacraments. The other "sacraments" are practiced by the UMC, but they are not considered sacraments. The following is an excellent resource for what the UMC professes: Sacraments, Rites and Rituals. 

Finding a history of sacraments has proven somewhat difficult, and the sources are all extremely biased. An article from the Christian Courier states: 

"...the Roman Church has had a fluctuating recognition as to what constitutes a genuine 'sacrament.' The number of sacraments has varied from five to twelve. It was not until the session of Trent in 1549 that the number 'seven' became fixed as an article of faith."

A relatively thorough discussion of the sacraments can be found in the online Catholic Encyclopedia here: Sacraments. This article contains both history, definitions, and theological discussion of the sacraments. The following statements are of note:

According to the teaching of the Catholic Church, accepted today by many Episcopalians, the sacraments of the Christian dispensation are not mere signs; they do not merely signify Divine grace, but in virtue of their Divine institution, they cause that grace in the souls of men. 

Protestants generally hold that the sacraments are signs of something sacred (grace and faith), but deny that they really cause Divine grace. Episcopalians, however, and Anglicans, especially the Ritualists, hold with Catholics that the sacraments are "effectual signs" of grace. 

These statements get at one of the very, very tangled threads of this tapestry of church history and sacraments. There is a significant divide between the Catholic and Protestant churches along this line.

Positions on Public Confession

This week's homework regarding confession raises some questions for me about the practice of public confession and/or confession to those NOT involved with a particular offense. I have definitely experienced situations where public confession seemed to do more harm than good. As this article from Christianity Today so aptly describes  (The Trouble With Confessing in Church):

"In a church setting, I think public confession should be prefaced with a spiritual Miranda warning: Anything you say may well be used against you. Your confession might easily become a shorthand way to brand you: 'Jeff? He's the embezzler.' 'Cindy is an alcoholic.' 'Missy got pregnant at 16.'"

I ran across this article by D.A. Delafield from Ministry: International Journal of Pastors called The If and When of Confession. Essentially, Delafield makes the case that scriptures are very clear that we need to confess to God, but less clear about confession to others. The scripture most often cited for public confession is James 5:16

"Therefore, confess  your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed." 

Delafield takes a careful look at the word for "sins" in this passage, as compared to the word "sins" in other parts of the New Testament. There appears to be a distinction between sins that only God can forgive and sins that can be forgiven by people (and God, of course):

"Wrong deeds secretly done are to be confessed to God alone. Sins that involve others are to be confessed also to those who have suffered injury." 

In the cases where sin involves others, confession to those involved can help to heal the relationship. This is what the scripture in James seems to be saying, not necessarily that every sin needs to be confessed to others.

I can't say that I necessarily agree with the examples given in Delafield's article, but I lean toward agreeing with the general message. Some caution seems prudent in confessing sins that were previously unknown to the other person. Aside from the possibility that confessions may be simply fodder for gossip, as mentioned by the Christianity Today article, it is also important to be thoughtful about the motivation of a confession. Is it to assuage personal feelings of guilt? Will it help or harm the other person? Is it to appear "spiritual?" Is there an air of arrogance or piety about the confession? How will the confession impact the community?

Having said these things, though, I find that I can also see the other "side" of the argument. It would also be possible to misuse the above information as a defense for hiding sin, and, unfortunately, many sins that do not directly involve others still have an indirect impact on families and communities. In his book, Life Together, Dietrich Bonhoeffer states:

"...there is no sin in thought, word, or deed, no mater how personal or secret, that does not harm the whole community. When the cause of an illness gets into one's body, whether or not anyone knows where it comes from, or in what member it has lodged, the body is made ill."

When stated this way, it seems that public confession of sin is both necessary and beneficial. Families and communities are often harmed by secrets and sins that didn't seem necessary to reveal or confess. I find myself remembering conversations about family secrets from earlier this year when we were discussing Emotionally Healthy Spirituality.

I do not claim to have answers, but I think that studying the questions and the range of interpretations can help guide us as we make decisions for ourselves and seek to practice faith together.

Phyllis Tickle

The fourth session of Animate:Practices, Sacraments: A Tapestry of Traditions, is presented by Phyllis Tickle.



We have heard from Phyllis Tickle before, and you can read the previous post here: Phyllis Tickle.