<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Goodwin on Weekly Communion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/</link>
	<description>It&#039;s a Seventeenth Century World</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 21:12:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tnelson</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-235</link>
		<dc:creator>Tnelson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:44:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-235</guid>
		<description>Super-Duper site! I am loving it!! Will come back again - taking your feeds too now, Thanks.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Super-Duper site! I am loving it!! Will come back again &#8211; taking your feeds too now, Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Wilson</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-90</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2009 02:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-90</guid>
		<description>Hi Patrick,

According to Horton Davies -- the *The Worship of the English Puritans* -- Although they differed from congregation to congregation, the Independents mostly preferred weekly communion, and it was never less frequent than monthly. The Presbyterians preferred quarterly communion, probably due to the influence of the Scottish Presbyterians, who often had it less frequently than that. A few Presbyterians urged more frequent communion, even weekly, but the general Presbyterian custom was quarterly communion. I think that Davies is regarded to be generally reliable, but if anyone can supplement or correct that, I&#039;d be grateful.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Patrick,</p>
<p>According to Horton Davies &#8212; the *The Worship of the English Puritans* &#8212; Although they differed from congregation to congregation, the Independents mostly preferred weekly communion, and it was never less frequent than monthly. The Presbyterians preferred quarterly communion, probably due to the influence of the Scottish Presbyterians, who often had it less frequently than that. A few Presbyterians urged more frequent communion, even weekly, but the general Presbyterian custom was quarterly communion. I think that Davies is regarded to be generally reliable, but if anyone can supplement or correct that, I&#8217;d be grateful.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-86</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:44:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-86</guid>
		<description>I think I read somewhere that the English Presbyterian Puritans advocated monthly communion.  Has anyone else come across this?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think I read somewhere that the English Presbyterian Puritans advocated monthly communion.  Has anyone else come across this?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason Smathers</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason Smathers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 14:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-82</guid>
		<description>When did the Lord&#039;s supper get reduced from part of a meal down to a cracker and a thimble of grape juice?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When did the Lord&#8217;s supper get reduced from part of a meal down to a cracker and a thimble of grape juice?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Larry Wilson</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-81</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 14:37:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-81</guid>
		<description>Thank you for this information. This is very helpful. In its Directory for the Publick Worship of God, the Westminster Assembly included this provision -- &quot;The communion, or supper of the Lord, is frequently to be celebrated; but how often, may be considered and determined by the ministers, and other church-governors of each congregation, as they shall find most convenient for the comfort and edification of the people committed to their charge.&quot; This provision has been repeated in various Presbyterian directories, such as those of the PCUSA, the OPC, and the PCA. 

What I find striking is that the Assembly also included this provision -- &quot;Where this sacrament *cannot* with convenience be frequently administered, it is requisite that publick warning be given the sabbath-day before the administration thereof: and that either then, or on some day of that week, something concerning that ordinance, and the due preparation thereunto, and participation thereof, be taught; that, by the diligent use of all means sanctified of God to that end, both in publick and private, all may come better prepared to that heavenly feast.&quot; In other words, &quot;frequent&quot; communion was to be the rule. Infrequent communion with preparatory services was to be the exception when it was not possible to follow the rule. Ironically, what was intended to be the exception became the rule in actual Presbyterian practice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for this information. This is very helpful. In its Directory for the Publick Worship of God, the Westminster Assembly included this provision &#8212; &#8220;The communion, or supper of the Lord, is frequently to be celebrated; but how often, may be considered and determined by the ministers, and other church-governors of each congregation, as they shall find most convenient for the comfort and edification of the people committed to their charge.&#8221; This provision has been repeated in various Presbyterian directories, such as those of the PCUSA, the OPC, and the PCA. </p>
<p>What I find striking is that the Assembly also included this provision &#8212; &#8220;Where this sacrament *cannot* with convenience be frequently administered, it is requisite that publick warning be given the sabbath-day before the administration thereof: and that either then, or on some day of that week, something concerning that ordinance, and the due preparation thereunto, and participation thereof, be taught; that, by the diligent use of all means sanctified of God to that end, both in publick and private, all may come better prepared to that heavenly feast.&#8221; In other words, &#8220;frequent&#8221; communion was to be the rule. Infrequent communion with preparatory services was to be the exception when it was not possible to follow the rule. Ironically, what was intended to be the exception became the rule in actual Presbyterian practice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny Hyde</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-77</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny Hyde</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:19:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-77</guid>
		<description>Hi Mark,

It is interesting that Calvin argued for &quot;at least weekly&quot; communion, but I think he was saying on the Lord&#039;s Day and during the week. As well, in my preaching through the book of Exodus I am more and more convinced that a weekly celebration is a biblical pattern. Basically, whenever there is sacrifice and covenant renewal there is a meal in the presence of God.

That said, the question of why not in both services on the Lord&#039;s Day is an interesting question.

My answer is that while both services on the Lord Day are of the genus of &quot;service&quot; they are of different &quot;species.&quot; A communion service is a covenant renewal while for us in the Dutch Reformed tradition, the second service is public catechesis.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mark,</p>
<p>It is interesting that Calvin argued for &#8220;at least weekly&#8221; communion, but I think he was saying on the Lord&#8217;s Day and during the week. As well, in my preaching through the book of Exodus I am more and more convinced that a weekly celebration is a biblical pattern. Basically, whenever there is sacrifice and covenant renewal there is a meal in the presence of God.</p>
<p>That said, the question of why not in both services on the Lord&#8217;s Day is an interesting question.</p>
<p>My answer is that while both services on the Lord Day are of the genus of &#8220;service&#8221; they are of different &#8220;species.&#8221; A communion service is a covenant renewal while for us in the Dutch Reformed tradition, the second service is public catechesis.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steven</title>
		<link>http://www.meetthepuritans.com/2009/09/10/goodwin-on-weekly-communion/comment-page-1/#comment-75</link>
		<dc:creator>Steven</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 12:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.meetthepuritans.com/?p=490#comment-75</guid>
		<description>My church has the Lord&#039;s Supper only every other month, but my personal conviction is that it should be at least weekly. In something of an answer to your question, I wouldn&#039;t object to practicing communion in every service (thus twice on Sundays for those churches that have two services), but I&#039;m not pushing for it either. So, &quot;why not&quot; is a good question. My feeling is that the Lord&#039;s Day is one full day of worship, so that morning and evening service go together in one full day of worship. We could have only one service, or we could have more than two. At any rate, only one is necessarily required, though every member who is not providentially hindered ought to be at every service on the Lord&#039;s Day since the whole day is set apart. Second service is thus in my mind more of a continuation of the day&#039;s worship rather than a whole new service. For practical reasons some worshipers may only make it to the second service, and therefore it would be prudent to alternate the Lords&#039; Supper between morning and evening. But If we at least had the Lord&#039;s Supper as often as we have the Lord&#039;s Day, I feel we would be doing the ordinance justice (at least it would be a major improvement over much of protestant practice). In short my thinking is that the Lord&#039;s Day is the day we gather, and on the day we gather one of the things we do together is celebrate communion. So eating Christ&#039;s body and blood becomes a regular Lord&#039;s Day activity just like hearing His Word, praying together, and singing psalms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My church has the Lord&#8217;s Supper only every other month, but my personal conviction is that it should be at least weekly. In something of an answer to your question, I wouldn&#8217;t object to practicing communion in every service (thus twice on Sundays for those churches that have two services), but I&#8217;m not pushing for it either. So, &#8220;why not&#8221; is a good question. My feeling is that the Lord&#8217;s Day is one full day of worship, so that morning and evening service go together in one full day of worship. We could have only one service, or we could have more than two. At any rate, only one is necessarily required, though every member who is not providentially hindered ought to be at every service on the Lord&#8217;s Day since the whole day is set apart. Second service is thus in my mind more of a continuation of the day&#8217;s worship rather than a whole new service. For practical reasons some worshipers may only make it to the second service, and therefore it would be prudent to alternate the Lords&#8217; Supper between morning and evening. But If we at least had the Lord&#8217;s Supper as often as we have the Lord&#8217;s Day, I feel we would be doing the ordinance justice (at least it would be a major improvement over much of protestant practice). In short my thinking is that the Lord&#8217;s Day is the day we gather, and on the day we gather one of the things we do together is celebrate communion. So eating Christ&#8217;s body and blood becomes a regular Lord&#8217;s Day activity just like hearing His Word, praying together, and singing psalms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

