Roman vs. Re-formed Catholicism

Roman Catholicism is a deficient and degraded form of the apostolic faith. In many struggles with secularism and Marxism, conservative Protestants and conservative Catholics will often be found to have common cause as co-belligerents, but we should be aware that there is no fellowship between the light and truth of the evangelical, apostolic witness affirmed by the churches of the Reformation and the idolatry and errors of the Papacy and those congregations who render obedience to its Bishop who claims to stand in the place of Christ on earth.

Sometimes visitors to RPC remark on certain aspects of our liturgy that seem “Catholic.” It’s true that we desire to be catholic in the very best way, with a small “c,” describing the historical and universal faith of the Christian Church established by Christ on the teachings left to us by the apostles. We have little in common with big box mega-churches that structure their worship as part rock concert, part Ted talk, and part Time Share presentation. We do not believe the Church is a business or ought to be run as a consumer-oriented enterprise. The Church is the household of God, the Bride of Christ, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, and everything about it ought to be otherworldly, because it is. C. S. Lewis wrote in his Preface to Paradise Lost:

“The modern habit of doing ceremonial things unceremoniously is no proof of humility; rather it proves the offender’s inability to forget himself in the rite, and his readiness to spoil for every one else the proper pleasure of ritual.”

There certainly are things that seem strange about our worship in comparison to modern evangelicalism. The pastor wears robes in the pulpit and a collar among the people. The congregation stands at stated times and participates vocally and loudly throughout the worship service. There is a large amount of Scripture read throughout the service as well as the singing of psalms and the use of common prayers from the Church’s history. If Sundays at RPC feel differently than everything else in our lives, that’s because they are different. In corporate worship, God is meeting with us to renew his covenant and bless us. We are ascending into the heavenly realm to worship alongside the true catholic (universal) Church composed of believers in Jesus from among all tribes and nations and generations.

We do not do anything in worship simply because it seems more “Catholic.” We are re-formed catholics, Christians who desire to be part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church that is formed and continually reformed by the Spirit in obedience to the teaching of Scripture. We owe no allegiance, and will show no deference, to the Roman Pope, who as a eunuch is no one’s father, certainly not ours. We adore our sister Mary, the mother of our Lord, but refuse to pray to her or to any other saint who has passed into heaven. We affirm and celebrate the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, but there is no crucifix in our sanctuary because we do not regard the Lord’s Supper to be a re-presentation of his once for all offering but the New Covenant fulfillment of the Peace Offering in which we celebrate our reconciliation to God. Nor do we imagine the bread and wine to be transformed by any priestly ritual, instead being content with the teaching of Scripture as summarized by the Belgic Confession:

“But to maintain the spiritual and heavenly life that belongs to believers he has sent a living bread that came down from heaven: namely Jesus Christ, who nourishes and maintains the spiritual life of believers when eaten— that is, when appropriated and received spiritually by faith. To represent to us this spiritual and heavenly bread Christ has instituted an earthly and visible bread as the sacrament of his body and wine as the sacrament of his blood. He did this to testify to us that just as truly as we take and hold the sacraments in our hands and eat and drink it in our mouths, by which our life is then sustained, so truly we receive into our souls, for our spiritual life, the true body and true blood of Christ, our only Savior. We receive these by faith, which is the hand and mouth of our souls.” –Belgic Confession 35

Rome’s doctrines of justification by good works, obedience to the Papacy, veneration of Mary, prayers to other saints, and insistence of later dogmas nowhere taught in the pages of Scripture are incompatible with the faith once for all delivered to the saints. We do not seek to throw the baby out with the bathwater. We do not reject anything because it might “seem Catholic” anymore than we embrace whatever may seem current, relevant, and culturally acceptable. We seek to go back to the Bible and the faith of our fathers. To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to these words, it is because there is no light in them! (Isa. 8:20) --JME

An End of One Era and Beginning of a New

I am writing this as I sit at the Orange County airport in southern California. I have been traveling here for Presbytery and committee meetings since 2015. For the last several years, I have made eight or nine of these trips each year. But this was my last one, at least in that context. I will still do some traveling to California for Presbytery meetings and other church events, but this was my last one as a member of the OPC.

Yesterday the Presbytery of Southern California agreed to release me to the care of our Session given the congregation’s recent votes to withdraw from the Orthodox Presbyterian Church and petition to join the CREC. The vote was peaceful and without any drama. I had many conversations with brothers whom I love, and many expressed their love, appreciation, and regret at our departure. I look forward to welcoming some of these brothers again to our congregation and doing everything we can to promote fraternal relations and cooperation in gospel ministry. The CREC may not have formal ecumenical relations with the OPC, but I hope that RPC will continue to be loved and respected as faithful brothers and fellow-workers with them in the larger Body of Christ.

I was delighted to see the progress of the kingdom and gospel ministry in this corner of God’s kingdom. The mission work in Laveen, AZ that began as a Friday morning Bible study a few years ago was organized as a mission work of the Presbytery with funding from both the denomination and presbytery and a full-time church planter. The mission work in Hawaii that has been without a full-time church planter for some time will now have one as a capable young man passed his ordination exam with the unanimous consent of the body. A new pastor was called to Westminster OPC, a second pastor was called part-time to Covenant OPC in Tucson, and one local church that has operated for many years as two congregations—one English-speaking, one Korean—was peacefully divided into two. There were many wonderful things accomplished in yesterday’s meeting, and it was a joy to witness God’s blessing on these brethren to whom we remain connected in Christ.

My heart has been full of many different emotions. This trip and event was bittersweet. If you told me one year ago that within twelve months we would no longer be in the OPC, I would not have believed you. Even though we thought such a transition was possible, maybe even likely, at some point in the future, none of us on the Session thought it would happen this quickly or soon. No doubt, over time, we will reflect on things we could have, or should have, done differently, but in God’s providence, here we are. There is some sadness in this moment, but the future is bright. RPC is healthy, united, and strong. We remain faithful to Scripture and the Reformed confessions. We have welcomed many individuals and families who love the Lord and whose lives and households are being transformed by the Word and Spirit of Christ. The Lord has given us much work to do, and there are many opportunities on the horizon. May the Lord continue to help us, keep us faithful, and make our labors together fruitful.

There continue to be reports of division in our congregation and rumors about radical, theological changes that led us to this moment, but all of you know better. We were faithful during our time in the OPC, and we remain committed to the same biblical and Reformed worship, faith, and piety that has characterized this church since God first reformed it many years ago. I thank God for every one of you. I thank God for the extraordinary privilege of being your pastor, your brother in Christ, and your friend. I am thankful for the many relationships we have with brothers and sisters throughout North America that we would not have had if we had never joined the OPC, and I am thankful for the new friendships and relationships God has given us in the CREC over the last few years. God is good. His Church is not defined or delimited by denominations. We are one Body, one family, one community of grace. --JME

On the Eve of a Congregational Vote

Tomorrow is the Lord’s Day. It is a momentous day for our congregation. This will only be the first vote taken to decide whether to withdraw from the OPC. If the first vote is sustained, then a second vote will be announced and another congregational meeting called for tomorrow to be held on December 15th. But the fact that we are here is significant enough, no matter the outcome of the vote.

This congregation used to be known as Community Christian Church. It was a barely evangelical church, planted in the 1980s by Central Christian Church, and independent (non-denominational) from her founding until we voted to join the Orthodox Presbyterian Church in 2016. Kirstie and I first visited the church, at their invitation, to candidate, in the summer of 2012. We stayed at the Best Western on Apache Trail (it was not a Best Western at the time). I remember going for a run early on Saturday morning. As I ran down the Trail, I was struck by how hot it already was so early in the day. I tried to imagine living here, and I wondered what it would be like if God called us to move.

We flew home on Monday and decided to decline the church’s call. Eight or nine months later, in early 2013, I got an email from one of the elders at that time asking if I would be willing to come out and candidate again. We thought and prayed about it, and I returned alone, this time for a longer stay during the week. I met separately with the elders, deacons, and staff, and then did a Q&A with the entire church on Wednesday evening. I flew back to Atlanta and had not reached my house when my cell phone rang. It was one of the elders with an offer to relocate. We thought and prayed, sought counsel from a couple of other ministers in our area, and declined a second time. The morning after, my phone rang again. “We really want you to come here,” the elder said.

We finally agreed to move to Arizona, even though doing so cost us a lot, and not just financially. I was already becoming persona non grata in the Churches of Christ, and we sensed that our ability to use my place there to advance the gospel was coming to an end. The Lord seemed to be calling us to Arizona, and we wondered what lay in store for us there. I have recounted in other places (HERE and HERE) some of what transpired in the next several years. CCC was the largest church in Apache Junction when I arrived. During the Q&A in 2013, someone asked me whether I was able to lead a church of 900+ people. I told them I didn’t know—I had never done it. One might conclude from the exodus that occurred during our reformation that the answer to that question is no.

When we came to Arizona, we had no plans to join a Presbyterian denomination. I was firmly committed to the five solas of the Reformation and the doctrines of grace. I began teaching on covenant theology within a year of my arrival, but I did not know that in a couple of years I would begin baptizing babies! The Lord was merciful and gracious, but at times his grace and mercy felt a bit more like a bath with a Brillo pad. It was the kind of tough love that one must show when a child scrapes his skin and embeds it with dirt and gravel. Cleaning out the wound is painful, but it is an act of love nonetheless.

We have been, for almost ten years now, a confessionally Reformed church, and no matter what happens tomorrow, that theological identity will not change. Earlier this year I used the analogy of buying a house. A denomination is not a marriage; it is the place where married people go to live. When Kirstie and I got married, we lived in a very tiny apartment, and it served the needs of our family for a few years. As our family grew, we moved into a three bedroom parsonage, then bought that house from the church and lived there comfortably as more children were born. We have lived in several different houses in the last 25 years. None of them were perfect, but we have pleasant memories (and a few unpleasant ones) from each of them.

The question before us tomorrow is what denomination best fits the needs of our family. The OPC is a good church, a faithful church, and it has been a blessing to be part of her for a little over 8 years. If we choose to remain, then I trust the Lord will bless us there. If we depart, then I trust our church family will continue to grow, mature, and enjoy life together in Christ. Every time Kirstie and I have moved to a new house, there have been things that we liked and things that we didn’t. We want to live in a house that is well-suited to our family, but the house is not the family. It is the people in our household that make the house a home.

We have important things to do tomorrow, but voting in a congregational meeting is not the most important thing on our agenda. Before we gather to vote, the Lord will call us to worship, and we will enter the heavenly court and lift our hearts, hands, and voices in praising the Triune God with our brethren both in heaven and around the world. We will confess our sins and be assured of God’s forgiveness. We will be sanctified by Word and Spirit, commune at the Lord’s Table, and be strengthened in the promises of God and the power of our risen Savior and King.

Tomorrow is the Lord’s Day, and I pray our focus will be first and foremost on the significance of that holy celebration. The Church assembles in festal gathering, to celebrate the God of covenant and of grace. We are brothers and sisters in the Father’s family, and in the eternal state, there will be no thought of the OPC, PCA, URC, or CREC. Our identity is, first, foremost, and fundamentally in Christ, and that identity abides no matter the denominational affiliation we may have for a time in this world. Who we are is determined by Christ’s work, God’s covenant, and the Spirit’s presence in our lives. We are called to life and faith in Jesus, and I pray this will always be the determining and driving factor in each of our lives. May the Lord so work to unite our hearts in love and truth, humility and courage, obedience and perseverance.

I never imagined what lay in store when I came to Arizona, but I thank God he brought all of us here and joined us in covenant, life, and love as members of Christ’s Body and of this congregation. Soli Deo Gloria --JME

Emails, Leverage, and the Error of Being "Moscow-friendly"

Readers of this blog may be familiar with the drama created by an email that was sent out to selected members of my Presbytery in January identifying me as “An FV Problem in the OPC.” You can read more about that 1-HERE, 2-HERE, and 3-HERE. This week, the original sender of that email contacted me to apologize, sort of. I have replied to him directly and personally, but since the narrative about this controversy has been manipulated by critics in unfortunate ways, I thought it best to publish an edited version of my reply. Names and information that would allow my correspondent to be identified have been removed. –JME

[Brother]:

Thanks for your note. I am happy to forgive you for handling things in the way you did. I do wish you had simply picked up the phone and called me first or even responded to the email I sent you when our Session was finally forwarded the packet a couple of weeks after you sent it out. The other brother who contributed to that analysis of my teaching replied when we sent it to him, but we never heard from you.

It is interesting to me that you sent your apology to the church’s email account. Maybe you forgot that you have my personal one from corresponding before, or you might have used my alias account that other OPC ministers use when they want to contact me. Or you might have called me since we know each other, or you might have mentioned these concerns to me directly when we chatted at GA six months before. I did think we had the kind of relationship that would allow you to share concerns with me. You might remember us chatting several years ago when I needed advice about a difficult pastoral issue, or going together to meet with a widow after [her husband’s] suicide. I understood that we had different views on some things, but it was disappointing that you would send a warning about me to men in my Presbytery without even bringing those concerns to my attention.

You said:

“When we first met, I had no idea that you were at all ‘Moscow-friendly’ as averred, though I’ve come to be concerned from things you’ve written (and also said at GA) that you have tendencies in this direction. This does concern me, as you would know from things I’ve published.”

I’m not exactly sure what “Moscow-friendly” means. I try to be friendly with brothers and sisters wherever I find them. For what it’s worth, almost no one in Moscow knows who I am. I’ve never been there, and while I appreciate the culture and a lot of the content that comes from there, I generally like my beer a bit darker than what is on tap at Christ Kirk. When your email was finally forwarded to me, it was interesting to read that, in the analysis of my preaching, nothing was identified as outside the standards or in contradiction to my ministerial vows. Yet I am a “Federal Vision problem in the OPC.” It seems the primary concern is that I am not willing to call Doug Wilson, Rich Lusk, Peter Leithart, et. al. heretics. If I am teaching something contrary to our Confession of Faith, I expect someone would have filed charges rather than simply circulating emails that amount to slander and gossip.

While I do not have many friends in Moscow, I used to have a lot of friends in NAPARC, and I can tell you that has changed since your email at the beginning of this year. You may have meant it for good, but others have used it as leverage for evil. Men that once were personal friends no longer answer my emails. I have been contacted by men in the OPC (from Florida to northern California), PCA, URC, RPCNA, and the Canadian Reformed Churches that have been warned I am a Federal Visionist. Members of my church have been told I am a false teacher and teach heresy. People have been pressured to leave or not to come to ROPC. We even had a ruling elder in our Presbytery visit a Reformed Baptist Church where he was warned about Joel Ellis. I never desired to be widely known, much less infamous, but the email you sent has been used to propagate a narrative that has damaged our congregation and its reputation far and wide.

Despite that, God has continued to pour out blessings on our church. Our congregation continues to grow and is remarkably unified. Recently a presbyter prayed publicly about the divisions at ROPC and the doctrinal problems that exist. That was news to me and to the ruling elder that attended Presbytery with me. We are not aware of any division or disunity. If anything, this year’s drama has brought our congregation closer and made us more united. The Lord works all things together for good.

An OPC minister in another Presbytery contacted me several months ago to defend the email you sent out. He encouraged me to leave the OPC. “We don’t believe the things you do, and you would be happier in the CREC,” he said. In two weeks, our congregation will have the first of two votes deciding whether to leave the OPC. Such a decision might have eventually happened anyway—our elders talked about the possibility before we were labeled “a Federal Vision problem”—but it would not have happened this year without the email you sent out. We would not have lost an intern and a ruling elder over the summer if the pressure campaign arising from your email had not brought the conversation to a head in our congregation. I love the OPC, and I would be happy and content to remain and continue serving as an OPC minister until I die. That is unlikely to happen now. We have spent a lot of time talking to members and trying to convince them that the pressure we have received to leave does not represent the OPC as a whole. No one man, or group of men, can speak for the denomination. But they can make it difficult for one man, or one congregation, to remain in the denomination, and I don’t have to tell you that this is not the first time something like this has happened in the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.

Brother, I have no malice toward you. I love you. I respect the concerns you have for me grounded in what you perceive are important theological differences. But I would be glad to know what they are. If there are real theological differences, I would have been glad to have been asked about them, confronted about them, even brought up on charges so I could identify them. Being “Moscow-friendly” is not a chargeable offense, so far as I know, but evidently it is sufficiently egregious to warrant sending a warning to a brother’s Presbytery. You apologized for not handling things in a better way. “It would have been better to send it to the clerk if I just wanted the presbytery to look at it or, even better, to have contacted you and talked with you about it.” For what it’s worth, I would encourage you to reflect on whether your concerns are valid at all. We’ve known each other for quite a few years, but so far as I know, you’ve never visited ROPC. At the very least, when someone contacts you with concerns in the future, maybe you should seek the other side first before getting involved. 

Proverbs 18:13: He who answers a matter before he hears it, It is folly and shame to him.

Proverbs 18:17: The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbor comes and examines him.

Your fellow-servant,

Joel Ellis

A Vision for Reformation

When I accepted the (third) call to become the pastor of Community Christian Church in 2013—which would later become Reformation Bible Church and then Reformation OPC—I arrived in town with a one-year, two-year, five-year, and ten-year plan outlined on a legal pad. The goals for year one were: (1) Build trust and relationships, and (2) Introduce the church to expository preaching. Six months after my arrival, the Lord began teaching us that a man’s heart plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps (Prov. 16:9). The plans we had made would not be fulfilled in the way we had envisioned — we wondered at times in 2014-2016 if the church would even survive — but the Lord had something better for us, grander than anything we had imagined.

Strategic vision has been part of the ministry here for more than a decade. When those original drafts on a legal pad changed, new versions were created, and they have continued to be updated, discussed, prayed about, and perfected over time. The Lord has gathered, and continues to gather, men, women, and households at ROPC that have a kingdom mindset, that long to see gospel transformation in the community through godly families, Christ-honoring businesses, and biblically ordered ministries established and bearing fruit for the glory of God.

Three years ago I sent the elders an outline of this evolving strategic vision. These are simply my ideas, desires, and plans. This is not a document or vision that was adopted by the Session, but it has been the template for how some of us have thought about what the future may hold, if the Lord wills, for ROPC and the larger community in which we find ourselves.

I should say three other things about this vision. First, this is a plan for seeing the kingdom of God grow by biblical application and sanctification. It is not a political plan, per se, and it is not even a plan for what the church as the church would do. It is a model for how members of the church might extend and apply our theology of work and kingdom in tangible ways. Second, this is an hundred year plan, not one we expect to be fulfilled in 12 months. I pray regularly for the ministry of this church in the days of my great-great grandchildren. I expect Reformation Church to still be here proclaiming Christ and edifying the saints long after I am dead, and I pray they will be more faithful and more fruitful than we have been during my tenure. Third, this vision is limited and incomplete. However it turns out, it will not be exactly as we have envisioned. We must proceed humbly even though confidently and courageously. Wiser men will have better ideas for how to be fruitful, fill the city, and subdue it to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. This is only a starting point, and once the vision is caught, this version of it can be discarded like ideas sketched on a napkin. Let the Lord’s will be done.

(June 2021)

Brothers,

I want to outline part of the vision, hopes, and dreams I have for our congregation. We have referred to this plan from time to time, but I have never provided [the current Session] a comprehensive summary. This will only be a brief outline, but I hope it will be useful in evaluating the wisdom (or lack thereof) of what I would like to see us pursue. This may not be God’s will for our congregation, and that may be discovered, in part, by criticism and resistance from you. I am prepared to receive and accept such feedback. Our fundamental goal is to be faithful. Anything beyond that is God’s extraordinary goodness.

I desire to see ROPC grow in its vision, pursuit, and application of the supremacy, sufficiency, and sovereignty of Christ in every aspect of life. This starts with a faithful ministry of worship and preaching on the Lord’s Day, but it goes far beyond just that. I hope to see ROPC become the center of a new and ever-expanding Christian community, the hub from which households, ministries, businesses, neighborhoods, and new congregations arise and extend. I hope to see families choosing to move [here] so that they can attend ROPC and be part of a redeemed and vibrant community. I want to see families who move away from ROPC take the vision and energy of this congregation with them in order to build and grow like-minded churches and villages elsewhere.

What is necessary in terms of theological vision?

• A strong commitment to the Reformed faith: the sovereignty of God, the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, the sufficiency of Christ, and the efficacy of grace.
• A strong commitment to Reformed Catholicity, not to the OPC or any particular sectarian tradition.
• A strong commitment to traditional Christian households and gender roles and a willingness to irenically but unapologetically stand against evangelical feminism that has made significant inroads to the OPC and against the sexual perversion that has significant support in the PCA.
• A strong commitment to the primacy of the means of grace coupled with a confidence in and pursuit of the transformational implications of the Lordship of Christ for civil society. We don’t need a progressive, worldly, Sunday-only R2K Christianity. We need to think Christianly, build Christianly, trade Christianly, and be Christian in our worldly occupations.
• A strong commitment to liturgical, reverent, and enthusiastic worship, to an optimistic eschatology, and to a cheerful attitude in life and suffering grounded in a keen sense of God’s providence and promises.

What kinds of ministries and associated community structures might grow out of such a vision?

• A Classical Christian school that is unapologetically Christian, explicitly (though humbly) Reformed, and robustly Classical (i.e. students will learn Latin, Logic, Greek, Recitation, History and ignore the nonsense that wastes much of their time in most other schools).
• A Community Bible Academy where church members and those from the community can register to take classes during the week on Bible Literature, History, and Geography; Systematic Theology; Church History; Introductions to Greek, Hebrew, and Latin; and great works of Christian literature.
• A Ministerial Training Institute, whether in partnership with an existing seminary or not, where students with gifts may train for ordained ministry in the context of the local church, without incurring debt, while serving alongside and being shepherded by pastors and elders there.
• Satellite Bible classes for outreach and edification at locations throughout the east Valley.
• A Publishing House dedicated to producing books, literature, and curriculum from the ministry here.
• A Crisis Pregnancy Center with a gospel-focused ministry to expectant moms and young families.
• A Soup Kitchen/Homeless Ministry focused on sharing the gospel and connecting those seeking help with day-work, job-training, and housing so that they climb out of poverty through gleaning the fields.
• A Directory of Businesses and Services owned by church members which are eager to serve church members and with opportunities for employing covenant teenagers, new converts, and those the church or associated ministries are seeking to help.

Ideally, I would have an associate pastor and only preach once a week. I would focus roughly half my time each week on writing, the other half on sermon prep, visitation, and pastoral care. We would have a church office with administrative help. We might have a counseling center. We might do away with midweek classes such as we have currently and use the Community Bible Academy, satellite Bible classes, and morning prayer services at the church instead for midweek edification ministry.

Regarding… Sunday School, we would have eight types of classes, some of which could meet at other times as small groups or midweek classes. The eight types of classes would be regular Q&As with the pastor(s) and elders, discussion of assigned Bible reading using the method I implemented successfully in Mississippi and Georgia, deeper dive discussions of the sermons, the Bible Foundations curriculum, membership classes, leadership development classes, catechism classes, and special topics (e.g. marriage, parenting, etc.). These eight would not all run continuously and concurrently, but some of them (Q&A, Bible reading discussion, Bible Foundations, Catechism) would be scheduled every year.

This is only my vision. It is subject to your questioning, critique, and disapproval. It may be the Lord will not allow these things to happen. It is certainly not a typical OPC vision for the local church. The Lord may have something very different in store for us all. But this is the vision that began as sketches on a legal pad in 2013. It has grown and evolved in many ways since then. We pursued portions of it before without success. If it is the Lord’s will, it will happen when the time is right. But if we don’t know where we are going, we won’t know which road we are supposed to follow. I submit this brief outline for your review. May God give us clarity and confidence in pursuing and doing his will, whatever it may be.

As always, I welcome and solicit your questions, concerns, criticism, and input on my ministry here.

In His service,

Joel Ellis

The Holy Supper: Corporate and Covenantal, Not Private or Personal

Last week we stopped having a musical interlude during communion and began singing Psalm 117 while the eucharistic bread is being distributed and reading Scripture during the distribution of the cup. A few members shared with me over the last few days they found this distracting or that they preferred having an interlude played so they could privately repent, pray, and meditate before partaking. This kind of feedback is understandable and was expected. The elders will continue to listen as we seek to arrange worship in a way that is not only biblical but also conducive to the edification of our congregation. But in the meantime, I wanted to offer some perspective on why we think this kind of change is appropriate.

The modern, American church has been trained to think of the Lord’s Supper as a private moment between me and Jesus with two hundred of my friends sitting quietly in the same room. But that is not how the Supper is to be celebrated. It is not private or personal, though each of us are to be personally engaged in partaking. It is corporate and covenantal. Look at the institution of the Supper in Matthew (26:26-30), Mark (14:22-26), and Luke (22:14-20). Did Jesus instruct his disciples to bow their heads and privately meditate before partaking? No, he blessed and broke the bread, gave it to them, and told them to eat it. Then he did the same with the cup. The Supper is celebrated by action, not reflection. That does not mean we are not to reflect. “Do this in remembrance of me,” the Lord said. But the evangelical church has placed emphasis on remember, while the Bible emphasizes do this. How do we remember? By doing this, i.e. eating the bread and drinking the cup. Not only that, but when Jesus speaks of remembrance in relation to the Supper, he is not talking about reminding ourselves. The Supper is a covenant memorial. It is an objective sign and seal of the covenant, and the remembrance involved is bringing the work of Christ and the promises of the gospel before God (cf. Gen. 9:13-17).

We spend a lot of time preparing for communion at ROPC, as much or more than any church I know. We begin with a preparatory email with spiritual reflection on Saturday evening. We share the order of liturgy so that songs and passages of Scripture can be reviewed in advance. We follow a covenant renewal form of worship in which we confess our sins, hear the gospel, and are assured of God’s pardon. We praise God with joy and thankfulness, reflect on God’s Word as we are taught, sing a prayer of preparation, confess our faith, lift up our hearts, and then get a second (or third?) homily before receiving the bread and wine. I’m genuinely curious, how much more preparation do we need to be ready to partake? We have been praying, singing, and sitting before the Lord for more than an hour by the time we come to the Table, usually an hour and a half. What does a four minute interlude do that hours of prior preparation did not?

We have been conditioned to celebrate the Supper like pietists and gnostics, making the celebration private and spiritual, rather than corporate and physical. But look at the text, all of the relevant texts, in both Old and New Testaments. What is the Supper? How does the Spirit teach us to receive and celebrate the signs and meal of the covenant?

We began singing Psalm 117 because it is part of the Great Hallel, the section of the Psalter sung by the Jews at the conclusion of Passover, the section Jesus and his disciples sang as they concluded the last Passover and the first Supper of the new Messianic kingdom (Matt. 26:30). It is a prayer, calling the nations to come and worship the risen King of glory. It is our plea to God that he would gather the nations to the Table, so that all of God’s chosen might celebrate the glory of his grace together. We are not singing instead of praying. We are praying as we sing.

Two other points to note quickly. First, we replaced the interlude with singing because the Bible commands singing not playing. We have no objection to musical instruments. They are an aid to worship and beautiful by design! But their place in the worship service is as an aid to what is commanded, the singing of the saints, not as background noise or aesthetic performance. Second, you should feel free to abstain from singing Psalm 117 or tune out the reading if you need to do so. If you have a burden of sin or anxiety upon your heart, bow your head and take it before the Lord. We deliberately create a period of silence at the beginning and end of the distribution for this purpose, but if you need more time, please take it. No one should feel rushed or obligated by singing the psalm. If you need to privately pray and meditate, then do so. But my hope is that over time, more of us will discover that we are praying and meditating… as we sing and hear God’s Word. –JME