Sacramental theology has to be understood in the context of ecclesiology, in the context of the doctrine of the church. That’s not always the way that sacramental theology has been understood. Many of the debates about the Lord’s Supper, for example, seem to be based on a forgetfulness that the Church is present at the Lord’s Supper. The debates have been about the mode of Jesus’ presence in the bread and the wine. All of those questions are important questions, but they all can be asked without even considering the fact that the Church has gathered at the Lord’s Table to do something. All of those questions assume that our only concern with the Lord’s Supper is the bread and the wine set out on the table. In order to understand sacraments properly, we have to put the sacraments within that ecclesial context, within that liturgical context. If we don’t, we are liable to ask bad questions and come up with bad answers. In laying out that primary point, in this course, we will look at first the question of, what are sacraments? Are sacraments signs, are they symbols, are they something else?
“Again, sacraments are not simply things to be looked at, things to be interpreted; they aren’t simply things, but they’re actions.” (source)
“Circumcision was given as a sign of lack of confidence, of disbelief, of lack of trust in the power of flesh” (source)
“sacramental theology has to be understood in the context of ecclesiology, in the context of the doctrine of the church.” (source)
“Many protestants define sacraments as things to which the word of promise has been added” (source)
“A sacrament is not something to be seen and to be understood and interpreted, but something that is to be practiced. And using the word ‘sign’ will sometimes mislead us into thinking it’s just there to be viewed.” (source)