# Covenant Renewal Worship and The Lord's Supper



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 27, 2009)

Does covenant renewal in worship necessarily entail weekly observance of the Lord's Supper? I am asking this so as to understand if it is only proponents of the Federal Vision in their emphasis on worship as covenant renewal that believe in the necessity of weekly communion. Is covenant renewal and the Lord's Supper intrinsically tied together? Is making it a weekly necessity problematic? 

I hope my questions are clear. I am a bit tired.


----------



## ww (Mar 27, 2009)




----------



## KMK (Mar 28, 2009)

It is the Reformed view that the 'oftenness' of the LS is a circumstance of worship and not an element. It is therefore up to the elders to decide. Are there really people out there that make weekly observance a 'necessity'?


----------



## ww (Mar 28, 2009)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> Does covenant renewal in worship necessarily entail weekly observance of the Lord's Supper? I am asking this so as to understand if it is only proponents of the Federal Vision in their emphasis on worship as covenant renewal that believe in the necessity of weekly communion. Is covenant renewal and the Lord's Supper intrinsically tied together? Is making it a weekly necessity problematic?
> 
> I hope my questions are clear. I am a bit tired.



Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.


----------



## CharlieJ (Mar 28, 2009)

whitway said:


> Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.



I don't have any real stake in this issue, but the article failed to convince. The first negative was that people coming from churches who practice weekly communion might prefer churches that practice weekly communion. Really, the author of the article equivocates, because his problem is not with the fact of weekly communion, but with how some people have presented it, as biblical. Well, just because some people may have presented it wrongly does not in any way invalidate the practice. In other words, the author did not show any problem with weekly communion, only with one attitude that is sometimes attached to it.

The second objection is, I think, laughable. We don't want to seem weird to people? What, does he only invite people to church on Sundays that he doesn't practice the Lord's Supper? Does he conduct the Lord's Supper in some sort of mystical way that scares visitors? Would he avoid baptizing an infant if visitors were in attendance? The outreach excuse is a lame one. Anecdotally, a Presbyterian church in my town that practices weekly communion is one of the fastest growing churches I know of, with lots of visitors coming and staying, mostly from non-Presbyterian backgrounds.


----------



## ww (Mar 28, 2009)

CharlieJ said:


> whitway said:
> 
> 
> > Here's an informative article called "Rethinking Weekly Communion" that may be helpful. Covenant Presbyterian Church of Fort Worth: Papers Typically those who utilize the term "Covenant Renewal" most often associate the need for a weekly observance of the Lord's Supper to renew the Covenant in Worship however that is not always the case. In the article above it expresses some concern with weekly observance however I don't neccessarily see it as problematic as it is a decision that is left up to the Session based on the need in their particular congregation.
> ...



I prefer Weekly Communion myself but willing to concede as Calvin if neccessary. Also regarding the 2nd point I also questioned his line of thought however I am now wondering if he isn't implying the difficulty of fencing the Table on a Weekly basis to the exclusion of unbelievers. But even so with that being a reason the Sacrament is the Visible Word and conveys the Gospel message of Christ's Body being broken and blood shed for the remission of sins so not the best of arguments. In any event it is a rare article addressing the move by many Reformed Churches to a weekly observance regardless of how convincing it may or may not be to the reader.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 01:16:52 EST-----

Here's another one by Dr FN Lee regarding Quarterly (Seasonal) observance of the Lord's Supper. Quarterly Communion at Biblical Seasons Annually


----------



## brymaes (Mar 28, 2009)

Its my understanding, though I cannot remember where I read it, that James Jordan has argued that communion is necessary to Covenant Renewal. I will look up a link.


----------



## MW (Mar 28, 2009)

Sacrifice was essential to covenant renewal and was an integral part of the history of redemption culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ offering Himself without spot to God, whereby He ushered in the final renewal of the covenant in the heavenly tabernacle.

Falling into the error of Romanists, modern covenant renewal advocates have revived sacerdotalism by making the Lord's supper a bloodless sacrifice and the minister the officiating priest. It is not only problematic, but a perversion.


----------



## ww (Mar 28, 2009)

armourbearer said:


> Sacrifice was essential to covenant renewal and was an integral part of the history of redemption culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ offering Himself without spot to God, whereby He ushered in the final renewal of the covenant in the heavenly tabernacle.
> 
> Falling into the error of Romanists, modern covenant renewal advocates have revived sacerdotalism by making the Lord's supper a bloodless sacrifice and the minister the officiating priest. It is not only problematic, but a perversion.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 28, 2009)

whitway said:


> CharlieJ said:
> 
> 
> > whitway said:
> ...



Interesting article by Dr. Lee - especially his discussion about Calvin's early and later views on communion.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 09:49:37 EST-----



armourbearer said:


> Sacrifice was essential to covenant renewal and was an integral part of the history of redemption culminating in the Lord Jesus Christ offering Himself without spot to God, whereby He ushered in the final renewal of the covenant in the heavenly tabernacle.
> 
> Falling into the error of Romanists, modern covenant renewal advocates have revived sacerdotalism by making the Lord's supper a bloodless sacrifice and the minister the officiating priest. It is not only problematic, but a perversion.



Thank you Rev. Winzer. 

This really gets to the heart of the issue of my concerns. Are you saying that understanding communion in the context of "covenant renewal" necessarily implies the belief that the supper is a "bloodless sacrifice"? I don't get that from my experiences within a covenant renewal service, at least not in explicit language. All I know is that they would believe something is "missing" if the services does not flow into the communion of the saints at the table. We would not be fed properly. I suppose there is some implication in making it an "element" of ordinary worship on a weekly basis vs "seasonal". I am trying to make sense of it all as I am currently gearing up for discussing this issue with those whom I wish to express my concerns with. I want to be sure I understand the issues clearly. 

I recall reading over at Greenbaggins that some were saying the WCF holds to covenant renewal in worship but it was not clear to me what the difference is and some were inquiring after that distinction. I did not see any clarity following that inquiry. So, I take that the idea of covenant renewal is not foreign to the WCF or Scripture but that there is a particular twist given it by FV advocates. 

Can you give any clarity to this?


----------



## J. David Kear (Mar 28, 2009)

Viewing Christian worship as a covenant renewal ceremony is not necessarily FV or Romish.

Michael Horton is a strong advocate for both the covenant renewal view and weekly observance of the LS. He is not (in any way that I am aware) associated to either Rome or FV.

For a clear explanation of the covenant renewal view I would recommend reading his book, A Better Way, which is subtitled, _Rediscovering the Drama of Christ-Centered Worship_.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 28, 2009)

J. David Kear said:


> Viewing Christian worship as a covenant renewal ceremony is not necessarily FV or Romish.
> 
> Michael Horton is a strong advocate for both the covenant renewal view and weekly observance of the LS. He is not (in any way that I am aware) associated to either Rome or FV.
> 
> For a clear explanation of the covenant renewal view I would recommend reading his book, A Better Way, which is subtitled, _Rediscovering the Drama of Christ-Centered Worship_.



Thanks for the book reference. Unfortunately I can't buy any books right now! Perhaps you have some articles online you know of? I will hope to hear Rev. Winzer (or others) chime in on this.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 11:55:28 EST-----



J. David Kear said:


> Viewing Christian worship as a covenant renewal ceremony is not necessarily FV or Romish.
> 
> Michael Horton is a strong advocate for both the covenant renewal view and weekly observance of the LS. He is not (in any way that I am aware) associated to either Rome or FV.
> 
> For a clear explanation of the covenant renewal view I would recommend reading his book, A Better Way, which is subtitled, _Rediscovering the Drama of Christ-Centered Worship_.




Oh wait...I do see that some used copies are not expensive...


----------



## Romans922 (Mar 28, 2009)

Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 28, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.



Can you address Mr. Kear here? He has given indication that some hold to covenant renewal and weekly communion (and not necessarily FV in persuasion) . Are you saying that it is impossible for the preaching of the Word to be central in such cases?


----------



## ww (Mar 28, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.


----------



## J. David Kear (Mar 28, 2009)

Below is a link to a short article by Michael Horton that is focused on the nature of worship as a service of covenant renewal.

The Ethnocentricity of the American Church Growth Movement


----------



## ww (Mar 28, 2009)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> > Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.
> ...



I think it can boiled down to the fact that one needs to be discerning on whether the one holiding the "Covenant Renewal" Service is a FV advocate or not. I wasn't an FV advocate but as one who embraced this type of service exclusively my attitude was almost one of "let's get on with it Preacher as I'm looking forward to the Covenant meal". I'm sure I'm not an exception to the rule. I don't think it is a bad thing to look forward to the LS every week but I was willing to forgo good preaching, tolerate contemporary worship, etc all for the sake of Weekly observance of the LS.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 28, 2009)

If one makes frequency of the Lord's supper elemental, how is that not contrary to the Westminster Standards? In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Public Worship of God, frequency is very clearly a circumstance which can be governed by many factors, the determination of which is wisely left to the elders of the local congregation.


----------



## ww (Mar 28, 2009)

J. David Kear said:


> Below is a link to a short article by Michael Horton that is focused on the nature of worship as a service of covenant renewal.
> 
> The Ethnocentricity of the American Church Growth Movement



And Horton would be a good example of one who has a balanced and reasoned approach. This is the man who God used to bring me to the Presbyterian persuasion. I was able to meet him at a NAPARC conference in Pittsburgh shortly after his father had passed away.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 28, 2009)

Romans922 said:


> Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.


f

I have to say, at least in my experience, the main focus has not been necessarily the LS but seen as a necessary part of a whole of covenant renewal worship. The preaching is solid. This is my experience. Perhaps this is more where Horton takes things. So I gather while CR might necessitate weekly communion that doesn't necessarily entail that the Word is not emphasized. I am not sure what is meant by "central" unless you mean to say making communion weekly pushes the preaching to the side. I don't see that it does in my experience. Perhaps it does in some places of worship.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:37:11 EST-----



NaphtaliPress said:


> If one makes frequency of the Lord's supper elemental, how is that not contrary to the Westminster Standards? In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Public Worship of God, frequency is very clearly a circumstance which can be governed by many factors, the determination of which is wisely left to the elders of the local congregation.



I agree here with you. So, in this case would you say there can be good reasons to make it weekly? Also, are you saying that the concept of covenant renewal doesn't make it necessary to practice weekly as a means of grace?

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:40:50 EST-----



whitway said:


> Beth Ellen Nagle said:
> 
> 
> > Romans922 said:
> ...



I can see how some would go this direction especially if the preacher is bad. lol But seriously, I can see how this could happen if the emphasis moves away from the preaching. 

I am still trying to find necessary connections that some seem to find between CR and LS. I am not sure how Horton avoids making it a necessity. It is a means of grace...do it often and if it is a good means of grace do it weekly. Why would we skip it. There must be something to CR that warrants the implication to observe weekly.

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:42:25 EST-----



whitway said:


> J. David Kear said:
> 
> 
> > Below is a link to a short article by Michael Horton that is focused on the nature of worship as a service of covenant renewal.
> ...



Horton...but is he balanced and reasoned?? That is what I have to figure out.


----------



## ADKing (Mar 28, 2009)

In the afore-mentioned article by Horton, it seems to me all he does is _assert_ weekly sabbath worship is a "covenant renewal". Where is this demonstrated? The examples to OT renewal were _occasional _ covenant renewals. It seems to me this would be more aptly applied, as did our Presbyterian forefathers, by occasional acts of covenanting and covenant renewal.

http://www.apuritansmind.com/WCF/PDF/PublicSins.PDF
The Auchensaugh Renovation.

This of course is extremely unusual if not non-existent in our day.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 28, 2009)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> NaphtaliPress said:
> 
> 
> > If one makes frequency of the Lord's supper elemental, how is that not contrary to the Westminster Standards? In the Westminster Assembly's Directory for the Public Worship of God, frequency is very clearly a circumstance which can be governed by many factors, the determination of which is wisely left to the elders of the local congregation.
> ...


I can't say what covenant renewal makes necessary; but if anyone claims weekly is necessary, it is a change over Westminster; how contrary may depend. At the time the Directory was drafted, the Independents had communion weekly; the English Presbyterians monthly, and the Scots quarterly or less. The directions are geared specifically for frequent and infrequent observance. If the elders think it is for the benefit and comfort of their folks to observe weekly and there are no other governing factors, then weekly is certainly one of the circumstances in view by the Directory.


----------



## J. David Kear (Mar 28, 2009)

I agree that making the frequency of the LS an element of worship would be contrary to the WCF. However, the LS itself _is _an element of worship. Based on that realization I am having trouble agreeing that two means of grace _necessarily_ compete for centrality in the same service.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 28, 2009)

ADKing said:


> In the afore-mentioned article by Horton, it seems to me all he does is _assert_ weekly sabbath worship is a "covenant renewal". Where is this demonstrated? The examples to OT renewal were _occasional _ covenant renewals. It seems to me this would be more aptly applied, as did our Presbyterian forefathers, by occasional acts of covenanting and covenant renewal.
> 
> http://www.apuritansmind.com/WCF/PDF/PublicSins.PDF
> The Auchensaugh Renovation.
> ...



Thanks, I am wondering about this general trend in CR and I have often wondered at the assertions myself of the weekly sabbath being a "covenant renewal". This might be the key issue. Is it covenant renewal? Or if there are different schools of thought on this what is the difference between any in the FV and those who are more confessional? Is CR confessional?

-----Added 3/28/2009 at 12:53:54 EST-----



J. David Kear said:


> I agree that making the frequency of the LS an element of worship would be contrary to the WCF. However, the LS itself _is _an element of worship. Based on that realization I am having trouble agreeing that two means of grace _necessarily_ compete for centrality in the same service.



It is hard for me to understand that if it is an element then why it is not weekly then. ? What makes it an element? Should I go to the Reformed Wading Pool? lol


----------



## Romans922 (Mar 28, 2009)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> Romans922 said:
> 
> 
> > Covenant Renewal necessitates LS every week. The whole point and the main focus of Covenant Renewal is the LS, NOT NOT NOT the preaching of the Word.
> ...



What I stated has nothing specifically to do with the FV. Only by implication because they do this. I am almost absolutely positive, someone more in tuned to Cov. Renewal can validate, that the Preaching of the Word CANNOT be central to Cov. Renewal Service, because the whole focus of the service (if understanding what you are doing, in line with Cov. Renewal) is for the believers (or non, if they do paedo-communion) to renew their faith or renew their covenant with the Lord AT the LS. So the focus is on the LS and not on preaching of the Word.


----------



## Prufrock (Mar 28, 2009)

NaphtaliPress said:


> At the time the Directory was drafted, the Independents had communion weekly; the English Presbyterians monthly, and the Scots quarterly or less. The directions are geared specifically for frequent and infrequent observance.



Chris,

In all your research associated with the time and people of the Westminster Assembly, do you know the causes of these pretty uniform trends? Why was it so uniform that the supper was had "as often as possible" for the Independents, and yet only monthly for the Presbyterians?

*Edit*
Not to exclude anyone else from answering. If anyone has insight into this, I'd love to hear.


----------



## Glenn Ferrell (Mar 28, 2009)

As every Lord’s Day public worship service is a gathering of God’s covenant people to hear him speak and offer him praise and prayer, is that not covenant recognition, if not covenant renewal? I’m not sure what the difference would be. 

As the WCF speaks of “religious oaths, and vows ... upon special occasions” as “part” of religious worship, are not the historic covenant renewals (e.g. National Covenant of 1638, Solemn League and Covenant of 1643, and other occasions of explicit covenant reaffirmation) as much “covenant renewal” as the Lord’s Supper?

Are not Joshua 24 and Nehemial 8-10 covenant renewals?

Is the making or renewal of membership or baptismal vows, or baptisms themselves, any less covenant renewal than the Lord’s Supper?

Though the Lord’s Supper may not be properly done without the preaching of the Word, the Word may be preached without the administration of the Lord’s Supper in any service of public worship. Is the latter any less authoritative worship of the covenant people of God, or any less cognizant of their covenant relationship with Him?

Speaking of Covenant Renewal Worship, and inseparably linking it with the Lord’s Supper, does not seem to help the discussion; but rather to obscure what our confessional standards teach about Regulative Principle Worship.

In addition: I’ve not yet worshiped with a congregation doing frequent communion where the Lord’s Table was adequately fenced. As discipline is an essential mark of the church, does not lack of fencing obscure the covenant relationship we have with Christ.

Though I recognize frequency of communion as a circumstance of worship to be determined by the pastoral wisdom of the elders, I’m concerned weekly communion and covenant renewal language is used to avoid the clear implications of our confessions.


----------



## Romans922 (Mar 28, 2009)

Glenn, 

Are you talking about Covenant Renewal Worship as in Jeff Myers Covenant Renewal Worship or something like that (not necessarily FV)?

Or are you talking about something else? I'm confused by your statements, as I believe most people here are talking about the 'Jeff Myers' type of Covenant Renewal.


----------



## Dearly Bought (Mar 28, 2009)

Glenn Ferrell said:


> In addition: I’ve not yet worshiped with a congregation doing frequent communion where the Lord’s Table was adequately fenced. As discipline is an essential mark of the church, does not lack of fencing obscure the covenant relationship we have with Christ.



I have. The Dutch Reformed practice of requiring attestations provides the perfect basis for properly fencing the table while administering the supper weekly.


----------



## markkoller (Mar 28, 2009)

I don't like the term "covenant renewal" (for some reasons listed above) and I like FV even less. 

Having said that I think its important that we don't victimize the concept of weekly communion simply because of who it is or isn't associated with. Since the Lord's Supper is a means of grace, there is nothing sinister or dangerous about simply celebrating it every week as a normal part of worship. After all, it is the Word in visible form. 

Calvin said himself he desired it every week but was limited by the decision of the city council.

To quote the good Dr. R. Scott Clark "It is passing strange that four hundred fifty years after Calvin's death most Reformed congregations still act as if they were bound to the decisions of the Genevan city council." See page 283 of Recovering the Reformed Confessions.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 28, 2009)

I have been too thankful and am out of thanks for the day. I appreciate the feedback here today. I have further questions/thoughts but will wait to see how this thread pans out later today (if it does). I hope Mr. Winzer swings by. I would like his thoughts expanded a bit more.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Mar 28, 2009)

I really don't know about the English groups; but the Scots they had minimum goals in their books of order. On Scottish and Reformation era practice, here is what Stewart of Pardovan says in his work (which I've posted before, see linked thread below) which was essentially an early book of practice for Scotland.23. In the manuscript acts of Assembly, there is an act, December 1562, appointing the communion to be celebrate four times a-year in towns, and twice a year in country parishes; yea, it was administered then once a month, as may be seen by the old discipline bound in with the old psalms, and forms for prayer in Mr. Knox’s time. And by the 14th article, cap. 12 of the French church discipline, it is recommended to their national synod, to give directions about the more frequent celebration of the Lord’s Supper, and their custom then was four times a-year: but our acts of Assembly 1638, sess. 23 act 12, act 19 of Assembly 1701, and Directory for worship, do only recommend the frequent celebration of the Lord’s Supper; but how often is to be determined by the kirk-sessions, as they shall find most convenient for the people, their comfort and edification. These recommendations seem to be treated with little or no regard among us; for as yet, so far as I know, not one parish hath celebrate it once more than ordinary upon their account. I am sure, if they would have it but once a-year, yet parishes in the neighbourhood may so correspond, as to have it in that bounds all the months of the year, which will supply the want of its frequency in one parish, at least unto such as may well travel unto their neighbour churches.​Frequency has come up before; but not in the context of covenant renewal; so maybe we should try not to hijack the original intent of the thread. Here is a previous thread.


Prufrock said:


> NaphtaliPress said:
> 
> 
> > At the time the Directory was drafted, the Independents had communion weekly; the English Presbyterians monthly, and the Scots quarterly or less. The directions are geared specifically for frequent and infrequent observance.
> ...


----------



## KMK (Mar 28, 2009)

Here is some insight from Rev Winzer from this thread a year or two ago: http://www.puritanboard.com/f67/covenant-renewal-worship-21106/#post265229



> Covenant renewal worship tries to introduce an element of the history of salvation into the order of salvation. On the basis of the same method Romanists teach the Mass as a sacrifice. And if anyone has studied covenant renewal in Scripture they will know that sacrifice is part and parcel of it. The Lord's supper is not a sacrifice, but a commemoration of a sacrifice. We do not renew covenant in worship but renew our commitment to the covenant of grace as ratified by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ.


----------



## MW (Mar 29, 2009)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> Are you saying that understanding communion in the context of "covenant renewal" necessarily implies the belief that the supper is a "bloodless sacrifice"?



Yes; it is either implied or stated. If the worship service is a renewal of the covenant of grace, then the parts of worship are re-enactments of redemptive events rather than commemorations of them. The Lord's supper is intrinsically tied to the sacrifice of Christ; when the Lord's supper is regarded as a part of a covenant renewal ceremony it is turned into a bloodless re-enactment of Christ's sacrifice, and is no longer celebrated as a mere commemoration of that sacrifice.



Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> I recall reading over at Greenbaggins that some were saying the WCF holds to covenant renewal in worship but it was not clear to me what the difference is and some were inquiring after that distinction.



The Confession (27:2) states clearly that in the Lord's supper there is "only a commemoration of that one offering up of Himself, by Himself, upon the cross, once for all." The Westminster Larger Catechism speaks of the communicants renewing their covenant with God in the time of the administration of the Lord's supper (answer 174). The Puritans were firm believers in personal covenanting with God, a practice which has sadly been all but forgotten today. There is no indication in the slightest that the Westminster divines conceived the celebration of the Lord's supper as a ceremony in which the covenant of grace is renewed by a response of faith and repentance.


----------



## Beth Ellen Nagle (Mar 29, 2009)

Ok, so far I am seeing a difference between renewing covenant with God and renewing the covenant of grace in worship. I take it the FV emphasizes the latter? Do they specifically say that covenant renewal in worship is renewing the covenant of grace? 

I appreciate the feedback on this. It is a matter of pressing concern on my heart.


----------



## MW (Mar 29, 2009)

Beth Ellen Nagle said:


> Do they specifically say that covenant renewal in worship is renewing the covenant of grace?



Jeffrey Myers, The Lord's Service, pp. 49ff, calls the weekly worship service a renewal of the "new covenant," equating the various parts of worship to the parts of God's covenant enactments in the history of redemption, and specifically refers to the Lord's supper as occupying the climactic position in this process.


----------

