Is baptism a local church ordinance?

This is the second in a series of blog posts in which we are seeking to answer one overarching question—is a properly qualified administrator essential to valid baptism? If you haven’t already read the first post introducing the series, you can find it here.

As we move forward, it will be necessary to address a number of more specific subordinate questions. To begin with, we’ll need to ask, is baptism a local church ordinance?

In its broadest sense, the word ordinance means something that has been ordained, or commanded. It is most commonly used in English Bible translations to refer to the various laws given by God to Israel in the Old Testament.

The word ordinance has also come to be used by Baptists in a more specific sense. When early English Baptists composed the Second London Baptist Confession in the late 17th century, they adopted much of the language of the Westminster Confession of Faith. However, they consistently replaced every instance of the term sacrament with the term ordinance.

Thus, while the Westminster Confession says that baptism and the Lord’s Supper are the “only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the Gospel” (ch. 27, sect. 4), the Second London Baptist Confession affirms:

Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are ordinances of positive and sovereign institution, appointed by the Lord Jesus, the only lawgiver, to be continued in his church to the end of the world. (ch. 28, para. 1)

As a result of this shift in terminology, it became common for Baptists to say that baptism and the Lord’s Supper are the only two church ordinances. However, as some have helpfully pointed out, this language is regrettable, since Jesus Christ has just as certainly commanded such duties as prayer, singing, and scripture reading, which would also properly be called ordinances.

When Landmarkism arose in the middle of the 19th century with its exclusive emphasis on the local church, some Baptists began referring to baptism and the Lord’s Supper as local church ordinances. This terminology reflects the view that these two ordinances are inherently and inseparably linked to each local congregation.

Baptism is often understood as a local church ordinance in two respects.

First, baptism is seen as the act which inherently unites a believer to a particular local church. In other words, baptism is the “door of the church”. In every case, the immediate result of baptism is church membership. Therefore, it can never be performed apart from a previously existing local church.

Second, baptism is seen as an act that is inherently performed by a local church. Of course, the congregation delegates the actual administration of immersion to an individual agent—usually, the pastor. Nevertheless, baptism is properly the act of the congregation itself. It is the church which baptizes, not any individual.

Although these two propositions would be widely accepted by Baptists today—even by many who would not identify themselves as Landmark Baptists—it’s vital for us to consider whether they are, in fact, biblical truths. We cannot receive them merely because so many others do. Rather, we must carefully test them in the light of scripture.

We intend to address each of these two propositions concerning baptism in the coming weeks. Our next post will consider the question, is baptism the act which joins a believer to a particular local church?