Over the past several years, I have taught courses to seminarians and pastoral interns on the theology and practice of worship in the Reformed tradition. Part of the syllabus requires students to interact with worship services posted online, evaluating the elements, coherence, and execution of the liturgy. Services are not prescreened, and we select churches with various worship styles around the PCA.
The assignment requires students to critically engage worship services, cultivating a conscious interaction with matters that frequently fly under the radar. After reviewing a significant number of services, several consistent liturgical themes have surfaced that deserve comment.
Previously I surveyed the roles of the call to worship, confession of sin, and pastoral prayer in PCA worship services. This essay draws attention to liturgical practices in the PCA surrounding the Lord’s Table by exploring the historical and confessional roots of Presbyterian practice and reflecting on modern liturgical practices.
Historical and Confessional Roots of Presbyterian Liturgical Practice
Westminster Confession of Faith 29.3 provides clear liturgical directions for administering the Lord’s Supper:
In this ordinance the Lord Jesus has appointed his ministers to declare his word of institution to the people; to pray and consecrate the elements of bread and wine, and so set them apart from a common to a holy use; and to take and break the bread, take the cup, and give both to the communicants, and to partake with the congregation. But they are not to give the elements to any who are not then present in the congregation.
Our Lord Jesus appoints ministers to do three things with regards to this sacrament: (1) to declare the words of institution; (2) to pray and consecrate the elements, setting them apart from a common to a holy use; and (3) to distribute the elements to those present in the congregation. These three liturgical actions constitute what Westminster prescribes in accord with the assembly’s interpretation of the institution narratives of the New Testament (Matthew 26:26-27; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-26). Ministers are not to do more – WCF 29.4 lists several prohibitions – nor are they to do less.
It is helpful to consult The Directory for the Public Worship of God as a guide to interpret the liturgical practices prescribed by the assembly in the WCF. In the Directory, the minister begins with a short exhortation followed by the words of institution and a prayer of thanksgiving. This longer prayer includes a consecration by which the elements are set apart from a common to a holy use. However, the consecration is situated within a broader thanksgiving that recalls and declares the gracious benefits that belong to God’s people in Jesus Christ.
The prayer begins with an opening acknowledgement of our sinfulness and misery. The assembly’s directions for the prayer emphasize five infinitives:
(1) to give thanks to God for all his benefits, especially for our redemption through our Lord Jesus Christ, and for this sacrament;
(2) to profess that there is no other name under heaven by which we can be saved;
(3) to ask God to grant his presence and the working of his Spirit;
(4) to ask God to sanctify these elements; and
(5) to ask God to bless his own ordinance that we may receive by faith the body and blood of Jesus Christ.
This prayer is followed by the distribution of the elements to the congregation.
After the distribution, the minister exhorts the congregation to walk in a manner worthy of the gospel and offers another prayer of thanksgiving for God’s rich mercy and requests the Spirit’s help to strengthen the congregation in God’s service. After the prayer comes a collection for the poor, weaving a diaconal concern into the liturgical order.
The Directory borrows heavily from John Knox’s prayer which blends rich theology with rhetorical power in his liturgical prayer. After opening with the words of institution and an exhortation, Knox’s prayer begins with two reasons that we are to worship God: (1) we are his workmanship created in his own image; and (2) chiefly, because of our redemption in Jesus Christ.
Knox proceeds to emphasize the means of our redemption through the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He does not simply emphasize the redemptive benefits sinners receive through faith in Christ, but gives extended attention to the history of redemption.
Knox turns to confess our inability to comprehend the breadth, length, height, and depth of God’s love that moved him to show mercy. This is followed by a rhetorical flourish in which Knox declares and professes that by Christ alone we have received life and liberty, are acknowledged as children of the living God, gain entrance to the throne of grace, and have possession in a spiritual kingdom to eat and drink at his table.
Knox celebrates that we commune with the ascended Lord who will return to raise our bodies from the dust. A fourfold emphasis on the words “by him alone” form a powerful rhetorical device in which the benefits of knowing Jesus Christ—past, present, and future—are enumerated to the world.
After the prayer the elements are distributed. Following the distribution, Knox offers a prayer of dedication that thanks God for the gift of being received into the fellowship of our Lord Jesus Christ and requests God’s help that we not forget his benefits but grow daily in true faith. The congregation then sings Psalm 103 in unison before hearing the benediction.
Though there are notable similarities between the Directory and Knox’s prayer, there are three distinct differences.
First, Knox, following an ancient Christian tradition, bases his thanksgiving to the Father on God’s creation of humanity in his own image and God’s redemption of sinners through Jesus Christ.1 The Directory, regrettably, does not include God’s gift of humanity’s creation in his own image and God’s redemption of sinners through Jesus Christ as the basis for its thanksgiving.
Second, Knox focuses on the redemptive events, not simply the benefits of redemption, by reflecting on the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The Directory’s prayer emphasizes the redemptive benefits of God’s grace without reference to the redemptive history by which that grace was procured. In keeping with Scripture, thanksgiving should recall the saving acts of God, not simply the benefits of those actions.2
Finally, Knox does not incorporate a consecration into his thanksgiving. As Hughes Oliphant Old points out, Knox omits the consecration because he believes that our Lord’s blessing of the elements in Matthew 26:26 is simply a thanksgiving over the elements for God’s wondrous acts in creation and redemption.3
Though Knox follows Reformed precedent by not including a consecration in his prayer of thanksgiving, the Directory explicitly calls for a prayer that sanctifies the elements from a common to a holy use. Both Knox and the Westminster Assembly share a Calvinistic account of the Lord’s Supper. However, they differ over what it means to “bless” the elements.
Modern Liturgical Practices Around the Lord’s Table
In recent years PCA churches have demonstrated a renewed interest in the Lord’s Supper, increasing how frequently they participate in the sacrament. The Directory says nothing about frequency beyond that ministers and elders of each congregation should determine what is most convenient for the edification of those under their care.4 No church or minister should be held in suspicion for their practice regarding frequency of participation.
But this renewed interest in observing the Lord Supper has not been accompanied by a renewed interest in the Reformed liturgical practices connected with the Lord’s Table.
There are three dominant trends to note.
First, many ministers announce the words of institution and distribute the elements with only a brief prayer of thanksgiving, or without any prayer at all. In WCF 29.3, ministers are instructed to declare the words of institution, pray and consecrate the elements, and distribute them.
The elements are to be sanctified by the Word and prayer.5 To pray and not consecrate the elements, or to omit a prayer altogether, violates the Westminster Standards and also exhibits a remarkable degree of ignorance regarding the thanksgiving and prayer of consecration in our tradition. It is sad to observe these practices, especially by ministers pushing for more frequent observance of the Lord’s Supper.
If a minister conscientiously objects to the teaching of WCF 29.3, this constitutes a theological exception to the Westminster standards that requires the approval of a minister’s presbytery. There are exegetical arguments and Reformed liturgies that do not affirm Westminster’s notion of consecration. However, WCF 29.3 calls for a thanksgiving and prayer of consecration that, along with the words of institution, sets apart the elements from a common to a holy use.
After consecration, the bread and wine serve a holy purpose in that they are instruments employed by God for believers to commune with Jesus Christ. Consecration does not transform the elements into the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Consecration sanctifies the elements as holy instruments through which we commune with the risen Christ by faith. Consecrated elements are effectual when rightly used.
Second, other ministers announce the words of institution and offer a brief thanksgiving with a prayer of consecration before distributing the elements. While this practice does not constitute an explicit violation of WCF 29.3, it displays a lack of familiarity with our tradition’s approach to offering thanks to God in prayer at the table. In Scripture, prayers of thanksgiving recall the saving acts of God in a festive celebration with an expectation of final deliverance.
In keeping with the Psalms, Christian thanksgiving should highlight the mighty deeds of God in the incarnation, death, resurrection, and exaltation of our Lord Jesus, and enumerate all that is ours in union with Christ—past, present, and future. Knox’s thanksgiving serves as a wonderful example from which we can learn the art of crafting a thanksgiving prayer. To celebrate communion without robust thanksgiving strikes at the vitals of the Lord’s Supper.
Finally, most ministers fail to celebrate the Lord’s Supper with appropriate affections. Some approach the table with the solemnity of a funeral, others with the informality of a picnic. In the Directory, ministers are instructed to perform the liturgy with affections suitable to such a holy action, and to encourage the same in the congregation. These affections are not spelled out, but it seems that many affections are suited to the occasion, especially reverence, joy, and hope.
Conclusion
When it comes to the liturgical practices of PCA churches surrounding the Lord’s Table, many churches seem unaware of the Westminster standards and the liturgical practices of the Reformed tradition. Revived interest among PCA churches in the observance of the Lord’s Supper needs to be accompanied by a renewed interest in the theological convictions and liturgical practices of the Reformed tradition. Without this partnership, the revival will not bear the desired fruit.
When a renewed sacramental interest is wed to the wisdom of the tradition’s liturgical practices along with our robust Calvinistic doctrine of Christ’s presence, we offer a substantial means of grace that supports and sustains the faith of our congregations.
Chuck Colson serves as senior pastor of Christ Church Presbyterian in Jacksonville, Florida, and also serves as guest lecturer at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando.
1Hughes Oliphant Old, Holy Communion in the Piety of the Reformed Church (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2020), 251.
2Psalm 78; 105; 136.
3Hughes Oliphant Old, Holy Communion, 258.
4The Directory for the Public Worship of God (Glasgow: Free Presbyterian Publications, 2001, reprint), 384.
5Directory, 385.