I’m also not that keen on the expression “means” of grace – it still seems to imply that these are conduits through which “grace” is transmitted. I think I prefer the idea that I read once of these practices (ordinances? )being “means of growth” perhaps.

In his Summary of Christian Doctrine Berkhoff defines a sacrament as “…a holy ordinance instituted by Christ, in which by sensible signs the grace of God in Christ is represented, sealed, and applied to believer, and they, in turn express their faith and obedience to God.” I am ok with the representation bit but when it comes to sealing and application I wonder. Even if he says that they need faith to be effective he still seems to be putting some power, some effect in the sacraments themselves.

I’m nitpicking – lots of Berkhof’s stuff is great.

Then again I’ve never liked the word “sacrament” – too many connotations of something that transmits “grace” in someway as if grace is a substance or a power rather than an attitude of God towards us. All the “means of grace” discussion in Berkhof leaves me trying to work out how he really differs from roman catholicism.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/malcolmbowden/indexx.htm

We could always go back to Egypt someday!