 |
|
F > GUIDANCE CONCERNING PRESIDENCY AT THE SACRAMENTS
PRESIDENCY AT THE SACRAMENTS
The General Assembly
received statements on this subject in 1980, 1991 and 1995.
For the guidance of local churches and district councils, the last
two of these are reprinted below. 1991
Assembly report (pages 36 -
41)
1.
Introduction
At the last
Assembly the Doctrine and Worship Committee was asked to think further and
more deeply about lay presidency and indeed, presidency itself. There were
three reasons. (i) The Guidelines and explanation provided for the
Assembly were found to be unclear and inadequate by a number of speakers.
(ii) The basis of presidency and its relation to ordination needed
exploring. (iii) A promise as
made to the West Midland Province to consider the resolution they had
brought which would have allowed students on internships to preside at the
sacraments. In this paper no
distinction is made between stipendiary and non-stipendiary ministers.
2.
The Basis of
Union.
Readers may find it helpful to have before them the parts of the Basis
which are relevant:-
21. Some
are called to the ministry of the Word and Sacraments.
After approved preparation and training, they may be called to be
ministers of local churches or missionaries overseas, or to some special
or approved ministry, and are then ordained and inducted to their office.
They are commissioned to conduct public worship, to preach the Word
and to administer the Sacraments, to exercise pastoral care and oversight,
and to give leadership to the Church in its mission to the world.
Others serve as non-stipendiary minister, continuing in other
occupations and earning their livelihood within them.
25. The worship of the local church is an expression of the worship of the whole people of God. In order that this may be clearly seen, the United Reformed Church shall (a) take steps to ensure that as far as possible ordained ministers of the Word and Sacraments are readily available to every local church; (b) provide for the training of suitable men and women of the United Reformed Church, to be accredited by District Councils as lay preachers; (c) make provision through District Councils in full consultation with the local churches concerned, for the recognition of certain members of the United Reformed Church, normally deaconesses, elders or accredited lay preachers, who may be invited by local churches to preside at baptismal and communion services where pastoral necessity so requires. The pastoral needs of each situation shall be reviewed periodically by the District Council in Consultation with the local church. Apart from ordained ministers of the United Reformed Church and of other Churches, only such recognised persons may be invited.
3.1.
Traditions
brought together
The Presbyterians normally had a minister for each church who
presided at the sacraments. Communion services were usually quarterly so that even if a
ministers charge was more than one congregation it was not difficult to
preside in every case. During
vacancies the interim moderator would preside.
There were some places where elders were authorised to function. 3.2.
In Congregational churches there were monthly or twice monthly
communion services. Again, where a minister looked after a single church
it was not difficult for him or her to preside.
Where the minister had a group of churches or where the church was
too small to have its own minister, it was agreed that lay persons,
especially lay preachers, would preside. Officially church meetings were responsible for authorising
lay people to preside but this largely went by default. It was not unknown for the preacher to arrive at the church
and discover there was communion or even a baptism in store.
3.3.
In 1981 the United Reformed Church united with a large part of the
Churches of Christ and their tradition, though of less antiquity, was
different again. In early
times local leaders, elders, would preside. There were also peripatetic evangelists.
In time, most churches ordained elders to preside, while the
full-time ordained ministers concentrated on preaching and teaching.
3.4.
Those who drafted the Basis of Union endeavoured to make a suitable
compromise which would continue to allow sufficient flexibility to ensure
congregations enjoyed the sacraments while maintaining control in the
hands of the Districts. Considering our diverse backgrounds, what they devised has
not worked out badly for getting on for twenty years. But the West Midlands resolution and remarks made at the
Assembly, not to mention elsewhere, show that re-examination is necessary
again.
4.1.
Three views.
There are three views one hears expressed. (i)
The position held by the greater part of the Church universal is
that ordination places the care of the sacraments firmly in the hands of
the minister, who is therefore the proper person to preside and administer
them. It is a most ancient
view. It recognises that it
is the responsibility of the wider church, not the local one, to supervise
both ministry and sacraments. Those
who hold this view, nevertheless, have to be pragmatic and so provision
has to be made for lay people to preside where ordained people are not
available.
4.2.
(ii) Another view frequently heard is that the preaching of the
word and the conduct of the sacraments are so closely related to those
recognised as lay preachers should also have authority to preside at the
sacraments.
4.3.
(iii) A third view has been growing of late.
There are a number of places with collegiate ministries and others
where there is a need for local lay leaders and these could well be
authorised. It is felt that
it is more important to have someone presiding who is recognised as a
leader in the local church than someone who is not of the family.
Which
way are we to go? Or do we go
off in different directions?
5.1.
Looking Back We were asked to explore the past, so we turned to John
Calvin, who did not give us as much help as we hoped.
It seems that no one in his day questioned the rightful place of
the ordained minister at the Lord's Table.
If anyone imagines the Reformers had an easy time they should know
that Calvin faced considerable opposition from lay people who refused to
accept the elements from elders. The
idea of a layman presiding would have caused rebellion!
In principle any believers might preach or preside, but in practice
there had to be order. Thus
Calvin in his Genevan Catechism of 1545 says:-
Does
the administration both of baptism and the Lord's Supper belong
indiscriminately to all? By
no means; but these duties you speak of are the peculiar functions of
those to whom the public office of teaching has been committed.
That this view was widespread among the Reformed Churches is
substantiated by instances of congregations going without the LordŐs
Supper for long periods because they had no pastor.
Perhaps the best known is that of the Pilgrim Fathers.
5.2.
It should be noticed that the emphasis in those times was
disciplinary. The pastor was
both the teacher and head of the household, responsible with the elders
for the witness and good behaviour of the flock.
The troops were expected to be on parade on sacramental days
especially, as part of the church militant.
No doubt, some will rightly ask why the Reformers believed the
teacher/pastor should preside at the sacraments?
They appear to have accepted the practice of Christians all down
the centuries, going back to the early church and to our Lord himself at
the Last Supper. It is
Richard Baxter who expresses what many of us would recognise and for which
we would be thankful:
Look
upon the minister as the agent or officer of Christ who is commissioned by
Him to seal and deliver to you the covenant and its benefits; and take the
bread and wine, as if you heard Christ himself saying to you, 'Take my
body and blood.' Moreover,
Jesus was carrying on the old Jewish Passover custom when he, as head of
the band of disciples, a 'household;' presided.
5.3.
It was inevitable that, cast into a pagan environment, sacrificial,
priestly notes became dominant. that
was what Gentiles understood and wanted.
So there arose a divide between those with power to absolve sin and
the mass of people. The
Reformation brought us back to the old and paramount role of the minister,
that of teacher in the local church, just as Jesus was rabbi among his
followers. Not, of course,
like a modern school teacher, but as the shepherd who leads and feeds the
flock.
5.4.
Presbyterian and Independent/Congregational churches appear to have
maintained the Reformed tradition until the early part of the last
century. Then the impact of
the Evangelical Revival became noticeable; many small churches were
planted which had no ordained minister readily to hand. By the mid-fifties the old discipline, with the minister and
elders/deacons guarding the table, was rapidly crumbling away.
Furthermore, in reaction against the Oxford Movement, respect for
symbols and sacraments withered away.
By the twentieth century the sacraments did not seem vitally
important to many people. Attendances
were often poor and many people were never baptised.
Communion rolls were less often kept and the use of tokens often
fell into disuse. In such a
climate the question of presidency was of little consequence.
6.1.
In our time great changes have come about.
Today the sacrament of the Lord's Supper is no longer an appendage
of the main preaching service, nor is baptism a family affair on Sunday
afternoon. Communion is
regarded as the most significant act of the church family.
The biggest congregations gather for it at the festivals.
More and more churches want children involved in it.
6.2.
The notion of the priesthood of all believers and the ministry of
the whole people of God is beginning to take hold of both ministers' and
lay people's thinking. When
baptism is celebrated the whole congregation is involved and the renewal
of baptismal promises may be taken by everyone.
When the Lord's Supper is celebrated everyone is a celebrant,
though one has to preside and speak for all present.
6.3.
An unwelcome change is the smaller congregations of our day and the
proliferation groups of churches, served mostly by one stipendiary
minister. In places people
seem to go to extraordinary lengths to have the sacraments administered by
the minister, no matter that it binds that person to a tight schedule and
entails driving miles on busy roads between services.
The minister is thus always with an eye on the clock rather than
the congregation, and constantly saying, 'I must fly!'
It is a shame when pastoral work is reduced to this state when
there are probably good lay people in the congregations who would make
good presidents.
7.1.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
Lay
Presidency and Ordination
The objection is raised that if lay presidency became common, it would
diminish the significance of ordination and ministry.
If we held a sacerdotal doctrine of the ministry this might be so,
but as we do not, there is no cause for concern.
Ordination or commissioning (as for lay preachers) is for the good
order of the church. Ministers,
elders and lay preachers each have their different calls to different
responsibilities for the building up and the mission of the Church.
An elder who has authority from the District to preside over a
specific congregation for a specified time is in a different position from
a minister ordained to the word and sacrament.
In any case questions about the status or rights of various
officers are hard to sustain in the light of the gospels.
7.2.
The Linkage of
the Word and the Sacraments The
insistence that the two be joined was, for the Reformers, the guarantee
that the medieval practice of holding mass without preaching the faith
would not happen in their churches, and thus superstitious ideas would be
eradicated. We all know that
the Reformers placed great emphasis on people having an intelligent faith.
The earliest Congregationalists tried to resurrect the New
Testament prophets as distinct from pastors and teachers.
In puritan times lots of towns had lecturers, preachers in fact;
they had no pastoral duties. There
has always been room for the preacher who was not tied to a congregation.
Lay preachers with a roving commission came to the force in the
wake of the Evangelical Revival. Just
a few of them felt called to become local pastors.
What we are saying is that in our tradition holding either
sacrament without attending to GodŐs word is open to abuse; but not all
preachers are necessarily the proper people to preside at what is a
pastoral celebration.
7.3.
Lay Presidents The
good character and standing must be the first consideration of the
District in seeking lay presidents. It
is also of cardinal importance that they know what they are doing.
It is obvious that for anyone to be authorised to preside at
baptism, that person must be competent to undertake the necessary pastoral
work with the candidate or the parents, in some cases both, should the
believer be of tender years. Moreover
the elder must be fully aware of the policy of the United Reformed Church
on baptism and be able to discuss it.
There seems to be no reason why a District should not authorise
someone to preside at the Lord's Supper but not at baptism, if it saw fit
to do so. It is perhaps less
obvious that to preside at the Lord's Supper it is not good enough simply
to say the words and go through the motions like an actor.
The president should have a sound understanding of what is
happening and believe in it to command respect.
He or she should be able to talk with anyone about membership of
the body of Christ. People
who come to the sacrament again and again, who are not on the church roll,
need to be approached sensitively and spiritually about their stage in the
Christian pilgrimage. Districts
should see that all those it appoints to preside have a spiritual
awareness of the importance of the role and a good grasp of its
responsibilities. They may
also need someone to consult if there are problems.
One hesitates about laying down formal training because
circumstances vary so much. If
a scheme of formal training were to be set out, while it would be
excellent for some elders in larger congregations, it might well result in
elders in small congregations of ten or fifteen people, refusing to accept
the responsibility.
7.4.
Order and
Variety Many Districts have used the 1980 guidelines without much trouble.
A number of districts seem not to have known of them.
There have been Districts which took a strict line, expecting to
authorise individual services, and others which went to the opposite
extreme and authorised every lay preacher.
Those who drew up the guidelines desired to keep Districts away
from such diverse interpretations of the Basis of Union.
The objective has to be to work out adequate cover for the
churches, which takes into account the variety of needs and styles of
ministry different churches may have today.
The 1980 guidelines anticipated such developments and spoke of new
patterns of ministry. Districts have to be prepared for this. There are churches developing a collegiate style of ministry,
resembling somewhat that which the Churches of Christ brought to the URC.
There
are groups with a pool of authorised persons and other groups where it may
be desirable for each church to have one or two elders who can preside.
There are churches with a minister which may want a presiding elder
to help during a sabbatical or holidays.
One or two presiding elders will be valuable during an interregnum.
Some churches may like one or two to preside at communion services
in rest homes for the elderly and for sick and housebound people.
But in all our dealing we must all endeavour to keep away from the
city of legality while not falling into the morass of disorder.
7.5.
The Moderators One way of acting with hope of greater consistency is to
implement the instruction to be found in the Structures,
under the functions of District Councils (3.vi) where the District is to
consult not only with the local churches about authorising appropriate
persons to preside at the sacraments, but also with the Moderator of the
Synod. We do not suppose it would be a good use of ModeratorsŐ time
for them to become involved
in each individual case but if they have an opportunity to see what a
District plans and offer advice this would help to iron out gross
differences of practice between Districts.
Moderators should also be brought into the picture when the regular
review comes round. In our
relationships with other churches, in which the Moderators play a major
role, it is important we can affirm what our policy is over presidency and
be able to defend it.
In
Proportion
Presidency is something that matters, of importance to us.
Yet, when seen in the light of history or over against the great
issues facing the Church and the world, it is seen in its true stature, a
minor domestic issue, which it would be wrong to spend too much time and
energy upon. Nor is presiding
something any Christian can feel worthy to do, taking the place of him who
went straight from there to Gethsemane and then Golgotha.
1995
Assembly report (pages 124 - 125)
5.1
Presidency 5.1.1
Each local church needs someone who is able to preside at the
celebration of the sacraments. (In
passing we note that although most comment on this matter refers to
presidency at the Lord's Supper, the same need also applies to the
administration of baptism.) Many
of the responses we have received have been on this topic, and this has
reminded us of the significance of the commitments made by
Congregationalists and Presbyterians in 1972, and by Churches of Christ in
1981. Entry into a united
church has not removed differences
of conviction on this
issue. Some have told us that
lay presidency is as important to them as the ordination of women.
Others tell us they would rather not celebrate the sacraments than
have a non-ordained president. The
continuing practice of weekly communion among former Churches of Christ
reminds us that different congregations have different understandings of
what constitutes pastoral necessity.
The comments which follow attempt to enable us to continue to live
a common life together.
5.1.2
The Basis of Union provided a framework which enabled two smaller
churches (Presbyterian and Churches of Christ) and a larger church
(Congregational) to come together without hurting one another's
consciences. We believe that
it is of the utmost importance that the spirit of that union be observed
in this matter, for in the nature of the case it cannot be resolved by a
simple majority vote. Paragraph
24 of the Basis of Union provides for lay presidency in cases of pastoral
necessity, and for the
periodic review of each local situation.
There is wide variation in practice across the Church.
Some district councils treat each authorisation individually;
others give a general authorisation to all lay preachers. Such regional variations cause unnecessary hurt, particularly
when people move from one part of the country to another.
We believe therefore that there should be an agreed pattern for the
United Reformed Church as a whole.
5.1.3
As a Church we are committed to the ever-deepening unity of all God's
people. We have a particular
responsibility therefore to be sensitive to the ecumenical
dimensions of
presidency at the sacraments. More
than 10% of our congregations are joint United Reformed-Methodist
churches, and we are involved in many wider Local Ecumenical Partnerships
and ecumenical projects throughout the United Kingdom.
We need to be ourselves, but as we do so we must bear in mind the
comments of our ecumenical partners about the difficulties that some views
of presidency create for existing LEP's and future developments.
5.1.4 With this in mind we reiterate what we said in the Interim Report. Baptism and the Lord's Supper are Christ's gifts to the Church. Each in a unique way signifies and re-enacts the appropriation of Christ's saving work for his people. Those who preside when these sacraments are celebrated link congregations together in a common intention. That means that those who are baptised and admitted to communion in one place are gladly received in other places also. Thus tow principles should guide us in this perplexing and sensitive area. First, the sacraments belong to the whole Church as Christ's gift. Secondly, we must be sensitive to the ecumenical dimension of the way in which we order our sacramental life. The first principle means that no congregation should ever be deprived of the sacraments, and that there must always be someone available and authorised to preside. The second principle implies that those normally authorised to preside should be Ministers of Word and Sacraments.
5.1.5
We suggest the following pattern
of presidency -
(a) a Minister of Word and Sacraments should preside when available;
(b)
in situations of pastoral necessity where no minister is available,
the district council should make provision for lay presidency; Moderating
Elders and Lay Preachers should be considered first;
(c)
authorisation for lay presidency should not cover a period longer
than a year without consultation and review of the needs of the
congregations concerned.
We believe that such a process will remain true to the spirit of the Basis of Union. It will enable us to be ourselves, and it will be sensitive to our ecumenical context.
|
|