Liturgy and covenant/election
“The more I read Luther on this, as well as various Reformed Anglicans, the more I’m convinced that liturgy is the real key to properly relating covenant and election…However we formulate things behind the scenes in our systematics, the liturgy itself is going to embody a particular understanding of covenant and election that is pastoral and assuring. Liturgy forces us to speak the direct, personal language of the covenant, not the abstract language of the decree. It trains us in very biblical modes of speaking and thinking. It forces us to look at the decree through the lens of the covenant. When a pastor says ‘We are gathered in the name of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit’ he is speaking ovenantally.
Given the Puritan obsession with predestinarian theology, it is not surprising most Puritans rejected liturgical worship forms. I’m not sure about the cause and effect here, though given the political issues surrounding liturgy and RPW in Britian, I’d guess they gave up liturgy to escape tyranny and then then had nothing left but decretal theology…The loss of liturgy within Puritanism meant the loss of covenantal and sacramental objectivity.
A decretal theology, abstracted from the covenant, cannot support liturgical language. On the other hand, liturgical language virtually requires an objective view of the covenant and sacraments.
It looks like Luther really nailed this issue. In fact, I daresay Luther is at his pastoral best in dealing with the struggle to attain assurance. Through his “conversion experience”, he had passed through the valley of the shadow of death, and knew there was no need to return. He would simply take recourse to his baptism and the other objective means whenever doubts assailed him. That’s not presumption; just good tactical warfare against the enemy of our souls.”
Rich Lusk, quoted with permission
