Covenant Renewal Worship and The Lord's Supper

[Beth Ellen Nagle]

Does covenant renewal in worship necessarily entail weekly observance of the Lord's Supper? I am asking this so as to understand if it is only proponents of the Federal Vision in their emphasis on worship as covenant renewal that believe in the necessity of weekly communion. Is covenant renewal and the Lord's Supper intrinsically tied together? Is making it a weekly necessity problematic?

I hope my questions are clear. I am a bit tired.

 

[ww]

 

[KMK]

It is the Reformed view that the 'oftenness' of the LS is a circumstance of worship and not an element. It is therefore up to the elders to decide. Are there really people out there that make weekly observance a 'necessity'?

 

[ww]

Does covenant renewal in worship necessarily entail weekly observance of the Lord's Supper? I am asking this so as to understand if it is only proponents of the Federal Vision in their emphasis on worship as covenant renewal that believe in the necessity of weekly communion. Is covenant renewal and the Lord's Supper intrinsically tied together? Is making it a weekly necessity problematic?

I hope my questions are clear. I am a bit tired.

Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.

 

[CharlieJ]

Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.

I don't have any real stake in this issue, but the article failed to convince. The first negative was that people coming from churches who practice weekly communion might prefer churches that practice weekly communion. Really, the author of the article equivocates, because his problem is not with the fact of weekly communion, but with how some people have presented it, as biblical. Well, just because some people may have presented it wrongly does not in any way invalidate the practice. In other words, the author did not show any problem with weekly communion, only with one attitude that is sometimes attached to it.

The second objection is, I think, laughable. We don't want to seem weird to people? What, does he only invite people to church on Sundays that he doesn't practice the Lord's Supper? Does he conduct the Lord's Supper in some sort of mystical way that scares visitors? Would he avoid baptizing an infant if visitors were in attendance? The outreach excuse is a lame one. Anecdotally, a Presbyterian church in my town that practices weekly communion is one of the fastest growing churches I know of, with lots of visitors coming and staying, mostly from non-Presbyterian backgrounds.

 

[ww]

Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.

I don't have any real stake in this issue, but the article failed to convince. The first negative was that people coming from churches who practice weekly communion might prefer churches that practice weekly communion. Really, the author of the article equivocates, because his problem is not with the fact of weekly communion, but with how some people have presented it, as biblical. Well, just because some people may have presented it wrongly does not in any way invalidate the practice. In other words, the author did not show any problem with weekly communion, only with one attitude that is sometimes attached to it.

The second objection is, I think, laughable. We don't want to seem weird to people? What, does he only invite people to church on Sundays that he doesn't practice the Lord's Supper? Does he conduct the Lord's Supper in some sort of mystical way that scares visitors? Would he avoid baptizing an infant if visitors were in attendance? The outreach excuse is a lame one. Anecdotally, a Presbyterian church in my town that practices weekly communion is one of the fastest growing churches I know of, with lots of visitors coming and staying, mostly from non-Presbyterian backgrounds.

I prefer Weekly Communion myself but willing to concede as Calvin if neccessary. Also regarding the 2nd point I also questioned his line of thought however I am now wondering if he isn't implying the difficulty of fencing the Table on a Weekly basis to the exclusion of unbelievers. But even so with that being a reason the Sacrament is the Visible Word and conveys the Gospel message of Christ's Body being broken and blood shed for the remission of sins so not the best of arguments. In any event it is a rare article addressing the move by many Reformed Churches to a weekly observance regardless of how convincing it may or may not be to the reader.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 01:16:52 EST-----

Here's another one by Dr FN Lee regarding Quarterly (Seasonal) observance of the Lord's Supper. Quarterly Communion at Biblical Seasons Annually

 

[brymaes]

Its my understanding, though I cannot remember where I read it, that James Jordan has argued that communion is necessary to Covenant Renewal. I will look up a link.

 

[MW]

Sacrifice was essential to covenant renewal and was an integral part of the history of redemption culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ offering Himself without spot to God, whereby He ushered in the final renewal of the covenant in the heavenly tabernacle.

Falling into the error of Romanists, modern covenant renewal advocates have revived sacerdotalism by making the Lord's supper a bloodless sacrifice and the minister the officiating priest. It is not only problematic, but a perversion.

 

[ww]

Sacrifice was essential to covenant renewal and was an integral part of the history of redemption culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ offering Himself without spot to God, whereby He ushered in the final renewal of the covenant in the heavenly tabernacle.

Falling into the error of Romanists, modern covenant renewal advocates have revived sacerdotalism by making the Lord's supper a bloodless sacrifice and the minister the officiating priest. It is not only problematic, but a perversion.

 

[Beth Ellen Nagle]

Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.

I don't have any real stake in this issue, but the article failed to convince. The first negative was that people coming from churches who practice weekly communion might prefer churches that practice weekly communion. Really, the author of the article equivocates, because his problem is not with the fact of weekly communion, but with how some people have presented it, as biblical. Well, just because some people may have presented it wrongly does not in any way invalidate the practice. In other words, the author did not show any problem with weekly communion, only with one attitude that is sometimes attached to it.

The second objection is, I think, laughable. We don't want to seem weird to people? What, does he only invite people to church on Sundays that he doesn't practice the Lord's Supper? Does he conduct the Lord's Supper in some sort of mystical way that scares visitors? Would he avoid baptizing an infant if visitors were in attendance? The outreach excuse is a lame one. Anecdotally, a Presbyterian church in my town that practices weekly communion is one of the fastest growing churches I know of, with lots of visitors coming and staying, mostly from non-Presbyterian backgrounds.

I prefer Weekly Communion myself but willing to concede as Calvin if neccessary. Also regarding the 2nd point I also questioned his line of thought however I am now wondering if he isn't implying the difficulty of fencing the Table on a Weekly basis to the exclusion of unbelievers. But even so with that being a reason the Sacrament is the Visible Word and conveys the Gospel message of Christ's Body being broken and blood shed for the remission of sins so not the best of arguments. In any event it is a rare article addressing the move by many Reformed Churches to a weekly observance regardless of how convincing it may or may not be to the reader.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 01:16:52 EST-----

Here's another one by Dr FN Lee regarding Quarterly (Seasonal) observance of the Lord's Supper. Quarterly Communion at Biblical Seasons Annually

Interesting article by Dr. Lee - especially his discussion about Calvin's early and later views on communion.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 09:49:37 EST-----

Sacrifice was essential to covenant renewal and was an integral part of the history of redemption culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ offering Himself without spot to God, whereby He ushered in the final renewal of the covenant in the heavenly tabernacle.

Falling into the error of Romanists, modern covenant renewal advocates have revived sacerdotalism by making the Lord's supper a bloodless sacrifice and the minister the officiating priest. It is not only problematic, but a perversion.

Thank you Rev. Winzer.

This really gets to the heart of the issue of my concerns. Are you saying that understanding communion in the context of "covenant renewal" necessarily implies the belief that the supper is a "bloodless sacrifice"? I don't get that from my experiences within a covenant renewal service, at least not in explicit language. All I know is that they would believe something is "missing" if the services does not flow into the communion of the saints at the table. We would not be fed properly. I suppose there is some implication in making it an "element" of ordinary worship on a weekly basis vs "seasonal". I am trying to make sense of it all as I am currently gearing up for discussing this issue with those whom I wish to express my concerns with. I want to be sure I understand the issues clearly.

I recall reading over at Greenbaggins that some were saying the WCF holds to covenant renewal in worship but it was not clear to me what the difference is and some were inquiring after that distinction. I did not see any clarity following that inquiry. So, I take that the idea of covenant renewal is not foreign to the WCF or Scripture but that there is a particular twist given it by FV advocates.

Can you give any clarity to this?

 

[J. David Kear]

Viewing Christian worship as a covenant renewal ceremony is not necessarily FV or Romish.

Michael Horton is a strong advocate for both the covenant renewal view and weekly observance of the LS. He is not (in any way that I am aware) associated to either Rome or FV.

For a clear explanation of the covenant renewal view I would recommend reading his book, A Better Way, which is subtitled, Rediscovering the Drama of Christ-Centered Worship.

 

[Beth Ellen Nagle]

Viewing Christian worship as a covenant renewal ceremony is not necessarily FV or Romish.

Michael Horton is a strong advocate for both the covenant renewal view and weekly observance of the LS. He is not (in any way that I am aware) associated to either Rome or FV.

For a clear explanation of the covenant renewal view I would recommend reading his book, A Better Way, which is subtitled, Rediscovering the Drama of Christ-Centered Worship.

Thanks for the book reference. Unfortunately I can't buy any books right now! Perhaps you have some articles online you know of? I will hope to hear Rev. Winzer (or others) chime in on this.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 11:55:28 EST-----

Viewing Christian worship as a covenant renewal ceremony is not necessarily FV or Romish.

Michael Horton is a strong advocate for both the covenant renewal view and weekly observance of the LS. He is not (in any way that I am aware) associated to either Rome or FV.

For a clear explanation of the covenant renewal view I would recommend reading his book, A Better Way, which is subtitled, Rediscovering the Drama of Christ-Centered Worship.

Oh wait...I do see that some used copies are not expensive...

 

[Romans922]

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

 

[Beth Ellen Nagle]

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

Can you address Mr. Kear here? He has given indication that some hold to covenant renewal and weekly communion (and not necessarily FV in persuasion) . Are you saying that it is impossible for the preaching of the Word to be central in such cases?

 

[ww]

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

 

[J. David Kear]

Below is a link to a short article by Michael Horton that is focused on the nature of worship as a service of covenant renewal.

The Ethnocentricity of the American Church Growth Movement

 

[ww]

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

Can you address Mr. Kear here? He has given indication that some hold to covenant renewal and weekly communion (and not necessarily FV in persuasion) . Are you saying that it is impossible for the preaching of the Word to be central in such cases?

I think it can boiled down to the fact that one needs to be discerning on whether the one holiding the "Covenant Renewal" Service is a FV advocate or not. I wasn't an FV advocate but as one who embraced this type of service exclusively my attitude was almost one of "let's get on with it Preacher as I'm looking forward to the Covenant meal". I'm sure I'm not an exception to the rule. I don't think it is a bad thing to look forward to the LS every week but I was willing to forgo good preaching, tolerate contemporary worship, etc all for the sake of Weekly observance of the LS.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

If one makes frequency of the Lord's supper elemental, how is that not contrary to the Westminster Standards? In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Public Worship of God, frequency is very clearly a circumstance which can be governed by many factors, the determination of which is wisely left to the elders of the local congregation.

 

[ww]

Below is a link to a short article by Michael Horton that is focused on the nature of worship as a service of covenant renewal.

The Ethnocentricity of the American Church Growth Movement

And Horton would be a good example of one who has a balanced and reasoned approach. This is the man who God used to bring me to the Presbyterian persuasion. I was able to meet him at a NAPARC conference in Pittsburgh shortly after his father had passed away.

 

[Beth Ellen Nagle]

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

f

I have to say, at least in my experience, the main focus has not been necessarily the LS but seen as a necessary part of a whole of covenant renewal worship. The preaching is solid. This is my experience. Perhaps this is more where Horton takes things. So I gather while CR might necessitate weekly communion that doesn't necessarily entail that the Word is not emphasized. I am not sure what is meant by "central" unless you mean to say making communion weekly pushes the preaching to the side. I don't see that it does in my experience. Perhaps it does in some places of worship.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:37:11 EST-----

If one makes frequency of the Lord's supper elemental, how is that not contrary to the Westminster Standards? In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Public Worship of God, frequency is very clearly a circumstance which can be governed by many factors, the determination of which is wisely left to the elders of the local congregation.

I agree here with you. So, in this case would you say there can be good reasons to make it weekly? Also, are you saying that the concept of covenant renewal doesn't make it necessary to practice weekly as a means of grace?

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:40:50 EST-----

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

Can you address Mr. Kear here? He has given indication that some hold to covenant renewal and weekly communion (and not necessarily FV in persuasion) . Are you saying that it is impossible for the preaching of the Word to be central in such cases?

I think it can boiled down to the fact that one needs to be discerning on whether the one holiding the "Covenant Renewal" Service is a FV advocate or not. I wasn't an FV advocate but as one who embraced this type of service exclusively my attitude was almost one of "let's get on with it Preacher as I'm looking forward to the Covenant meal". I'm sure I'm not an exception to the rule. I don't think it is a bad thing to look forward to the LS every week but I was willing to forgo good preaching, tolerate contemporary worship, etc all for the sake of Weekly observance of the LS.

I can see how some would go this direction especially if the preacher is bad. lol But seriously, I can see how this could happen if the emphasis moves away from the preaching.

I am still trying to find necessary connections that some seem to find between CR and LS. I am not sure how Horton avoids making it a necessity. It is a means of grace...do it often and if it is a good means of grace do it weekly. Why would we skip it. There must be something to CR that warrants the implication to observe weekly.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:42:25 EST-----

Below is a link to a short article by Michael Horton that is focused on the nature of worship as a service of covenant renewal.

The Ethnocentricity of the American Church Growth Movement

And Horton would be a good example of one who has a balanced and reasoned approach. This is the man who God used to bring me to the Presbyterian persuasion. I was able to meet him at a NAPARC conference in Pittsburgh shortly after his father had passed away.

Horton...but is he balanced and reasoned?? That is what I have to figure out.

 

[ADKing]

In the afore-mentioned article by Horton, it seems to me all he does is assert weekly sabbath worship is a "covenant renewal". Where is this demonstrated? The examples to OT renewal were occasional covenant renewals. It seems to me this would be more aptly applied, as did our Presbyterian forefathers, by occasional acts of covenanting and covenant renewal.

http://www.apuritansmind.com/WCF/PDF/PublicSins.PDF
The Auchensaugh Renovation.

This of course is extremely unusual if not non-existent in our day.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

If one makes frequency of the Lord's supper elemental, how is that not contrary to the Westminster Standards? In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Public Worship of God, frequency is very clearly a circumstance which can be governed by many factors, the determination of which is wisely left to the elders of the local congregation.

I agree here with you. So, in this case would you say there can be good reasons to make it weekly? Also, are you saying that the concept of covenant renewal doesn't make it necessary to practice weekly as a means of grace?

I can't say what covenant renewal makes necessary; but if anyone claims weekly is necessary, it is a change over Westminster; how contrary may depend. At the time the Directory was drafted, the Independents had communion weekly; the English Presbyterians monthly, and the Scots quarterly or less. The directions are geared specifically for frequent and infrequent observance. If the elders think it is for the benefit and comfort of their folks to observe weekly and there are no other governing factors, then weekly is certainly one of the circumstances in view by the Directory.

 

[J. David Kear]

I agree that making the frequency of the LS an element of worship would be contrary to the WCF. However, the LS itself is an element of worship. Based on that realization I am having trouble agreeing that two means of grace necessarily compete for centrality in the same service.

 

[Beth Ellen Nagle]

In the afore-mentioned article by Horton, it seems to me all he does is assert weekly sabbath worship is a "covenant renewal". Where is this demonstrated? The examples to OT renewal were occasional covenant renewals. It seems to me this would be more aptly applied, as did our Presbyterian forefathers, by occasional acts of covenanting and covenant renewal.

http://www.apuritansmind.com/WCF/PDF/PublicSins.PDF
The Auchensaugh Renovation.

This of course is extremely unusual if not non-existent in our day.

Thanks, I am wondering about this general trend in CR and I have often wondered at the assertions myself of the weekly sabbath being a "covenant renewal". This might be the key issue. Is it covenant renewal? Or if there are different schools of thought on this what is the difference between any in the FV and those who are more confessional? Is CR confessional?

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:53:54 EST-----

I agree that making the frequency of the LS an element of worship would be contrary to the WCF. However, the LS itself is an element of worship. Based on that realization I am having trouble agreeing that two means of grace necessarily compete for centrality in the same service.

It is hard for me to understand that if it is an element then why it is not weekly then. ? What makes it an element? Should I go to the Reformed Wading Pool? lol

 

[Romans922]

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.

Can you address Mr. Kear here? He has given indication that some hold to covenant renewal and weekly communion (and not necessarily FV in persuasion) . Are you saying that it is impossible for the preaching of the Word to be central in such cases?

What I stated has nothing specifically to do with the FV. Only by implication because they do this. I am almost absolutely positive, someone more in tuned to Cov. Renewal can validate, that the Preaching of the Word CANNOT be central to Cov. Renewal Service, because the whole focus of the service (if understanding what you are doing, in line with Cov. Renewal) is for the believers (or non, if they do paedo-communion) to renew their faith or renew their covenant with the Lord AT the LS. So the focus is on the LS and not on preaching of the Word.

 

[Prufrock]

At the time the Directory was drafted, the Independents had communion weekly; the English Presbyterians monthly, and the Scots quarterly or less. The directions are geared specifically for frequent and infrequent observance.

Chris,

In all your research associated with the time and people of the Westminster Assembly, do you know the causes of these pretty uniform trends? Why was it so uniform that the supper was had "as often as possible" for the Independents, and yet only monthly for the Presbyterians?

Edit
Not to exclude anyone else from answering. If anyone has insight into this, I'd love to hear.

 

[Glenn Ferrell]

As every Lord’s Day public worship service is a gathering of God’s covenant people to hear him speak and offer him praise and prayer, is that not covenant recognition, if not covenant renewal? I’m not sure what the difference would be.

As the WCF speaks of “religious oaths, and vows ... upon special occasions” as “part” of religious worship, are not the historic covenant renewals (e.g. National Covenant of 1638, Solemn League and Covenant of 1643, and other occasions of explicit covenant reaffirmation) as much “covenant renewal” as the Lord’s Supper?

Are not Joshua 24 and Nehemial 8-10 covenant renewals?

Is the making or renewal of membership or baptismal vows, or baptisms themselves, any less covenant renewal than the Lord’s Supper?

Though the Lord’s Supper may not be properly done without the preaching of the Word, the Word may be preached without the administration of the Lord’s Supper in any service of public worship. Is the latter any less authoritative worship of the covenant people of God, or any less cognizant of their covenant relationship with Him?

Speaking of Covenant Renewal Worship, and inseparably linking it with the Lord’s Supper, does not seem to help the discussion; but rather to obscure what our confessional standards teach about Regulative Principle Worship.

In addition: I’ve not yet worshiped with a congregation doing frequent communion where the Lord’s Table was adequately fenced. As discipline is an essential mark of the church, does not lack of fencing obscure the covenant relationship we have with Christ.

Though I recognize frequency of communion as a circumstance of worship to be determined by the pastoral wisdom of the elders, I’m concerned weekly communion and covenant renewal language is used to avoid the clear implications of our confessions.

 

[Romans922]

Glenn,

Are you talking about Covenant Renewal Worship as in Jeff Myers Covenant Renewal Worship or something like that (not necessarily FV)?

Or are you talking about something else? I'm confused by your statements, as I believe most people here are talking about the 'Jeff Myers' type of Covenant Renewal.

 

[Dearly Bought]

In addition: I’ve not yet worshiped with a congregation doing frequent communion where the Lord’s Table was adequately fenced. As discipline is an essential mark of the church, does not lack of fencing obscure the covenant relationship we have with Christ.

I have. The Dutch Reformed practice of requiring attestations provides the perfect basis for properly fencing the table while administering the supper weekly.

 

[markkoller]

I don't like the term "covenant renewal" (for some reasons listed above) and I like FV even less.

Having said that I think its important that we don't victimize the concept of weekly communion simply because of who it is or isn't associated with. Since the Lord's Supper is a means of grace, there is nothing sinister or dangerous about simply celebrating it every week as a normal part of worship. After all, it is the Word in visible form.

Calvin said himself he desired it every week but was limited by the decision of the city council.

To quote the good Dr. R. Scott Clark "It is passing strange that four hundred fifty years after Calvin's death most Reformed congregations still act as if they were bound to the decisions of the Genevan city council." See page 283 of Recovering the Reformed Confessions.