1. Could someone please very briefly explain to someone who is new to this issue and wanting to submit to God's laws, namely me (I come from an antinomian background), what exactly the differences and similarities are between the continental view and the puritan view of the sabbath?

2. is the continental view not allowed as an exception to the WCF? the puritan view not allowed as an exception to the 3 Forms of Unity?

3. when we use the term "continental", are we referring strictly to the Dutch?

4. when we use the term "puritan" are we referring strictly to the british?

5. how much room for disagreement over these 2 views is there in regards to fellowship with each other?

I'm looking for clarity on my questions before I delve into the arguments pro and con for each respective view.

My intentions are to learn how to glorify God in keeping the fourth commandment, at this point I am much less concerned about being able to debate and defend. Sorry if I am demanding more milk than meat, but I'd like to grow up healthy rather than choke on too much too soon. Thanks and please be gentle with me.

[Edited on 4-14-2005 by RAS]

__________________
Allan
attending CPC (PCA)
St. Louis, MO

There are doctrinal differences in Calvin's (the real continental view) and that of the Puritans, but the practical application is about the same: close the shops and devote the day to worship. This was made very clear by the writings of John Primus who was Reformed and not Presbyterian. This is covered to some degree in an article I wrote: Calvin in the Hands of the Philistines: Or, Did Calvin Bowl on the Sabbath? Reading some of the books referenced early in the article may be helpful.
See http://www.fpcr.org/blue_banner_arti...lvin_Bowls.htm

__________________
Chris Coldwell, Lakewood Presbyterian Church (PCA), Member
• Naphtali Press: Presbyterian & Reformed Books
• The Confessional Presbyterian Journal
• The Blue Banner Archive

The Regulative Principle: Samuel Miller gives a succinct statement of this principle when he writes that since the Scriptures are the “only infallible rule of faith and practice, no rite or ceremony ought to have a place in the public worship of God, which is not warranted in Scripture, either by direct precept or example, or by good and sufficient inference.”

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? Joining PB's Politics & Government Forum

We don't know it is a lie; it is simply unsubstantiated and as I try to show in the article noted above, unlikely. Someone who knows Sproul well should bring this to his attention as it really is not a story that bears repeating as fact; particularly to justify golfing on Lord's days if that is not simply a rumor like the Calvin story.

You may wish to read some Dutch theologians as well on the Sabbath to gain understand. A'Brakel is the only one that comes to mind at the moments but if I remember others who wrote on this topic I'll post them.

__________________
Patrick
OPC
MDiv, RTS Jackson.

"He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.

NaphtaliPress-

I am hoping that I have misread your post, when it seems like I have touched a personal nerve. That was not my intention at all. I only mentioned the Calvin and Sproul thing as a sidebar to my original intent of the post which was the questions I have. That is the context in which I am asking and pursuing these questions because it is all I know at this time in my life. If need be I will edit out the Sproul/Calvin stuff so as to not distract from my original intent of the post. I am not an ordained officer of the church, just a layman desiring to know God and His word. I do not have as strong an educational background in theology as most everyone else on the PB. So please forgive me if what I am asking is to basic for the PB. I am only seeking to learn. If I have misread you, I apologize for that also.

I guess to simplify parts of what I am asking, I'll request this instead: I am looking for a concise point by point summary of what the similarities and differences are between the two views. Similar to the format I saw elsewhere in the theonomy forum where a list was given of what theonomy is actually defined as and holds to.

This is the confessional stance of the (Dutch) Reformed Churches:

Heidelberg Catechism
Q103: What does God require in the fourth Commandment?
A103: In the first place, God wills that the ministry of the Gospel and schools be maintained, and that I, especially on the day of rest, diligently attend church to learn the Word of God, to use the holy sacraments, to call publicly upon the Lord, and to give Christian alms. In the second place, that all the days of my life I rest from my evil works, allow the Lord to work in me by His Spirit, and thus begin in this life the everlasting sabbath.

Though most Reformed churches would follow the Presbyterian/Puritan view of the Sabbath our official confessional stance is rather weak. It rightly expresses our duties before the Lord but it does not forbid working on the Sabbath (though implied by calling it a day of rest).

Why? If you read Ursinus' Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism you will see that he, like Calvin, believed that there was no special day in which to worship, and that one could be used as well as another as long as it was kept without superstition.

However it seems clear that their position must have changed over time:
http://www.reformed.com/pub/jc_sab_1.htm
http://www.reformed.com/pub/jc_sab_2.htm

At the time of Synod of Dordrecht a compromising position was hammered out that leaned towards the Puritan view but did not embrace it fully. Theologians such as Voetius and Cocceius had argued for quite some time about the nature of the Sabbath, and thus the Reformed churches were still divided.

Yet, by the Nadere Reformatie (Second Reformation - associated with such names as A Brakel, Van Maastricht, Witsius etc.), the Dutch and the Puritans were much closer in practice and from that time on the Dutch have been Sabbath keepers as much as if not more then their Puritan brothers.

__________________
Rev. Daniel Kok
Pastor of Grace Reformed Church (URCNA)
Leduc, Alberta CANADA
Church Blog

"there is no creature, either in heaven or on earth, who loves us more than Jesus Christ"
Belgic Confession, Article 26

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

No offense taken RAS. I simply have no time to do any more but cut and paste jobs right now. Here is a section of my paper on Calvin´s view for what it is worth.
[Edited on 4-14-2005 by NaphtaliPress]

I have searched and have found what I am looking for in a recent "tape of the month" from Ligonier about the 4th commandment. When I am done listening to it and pondering it, I will post the notes/outline I write down and seek some comments in response.

Also, thank you for the copies of Calvin's sermon on Deut. 34.

These are my notes from a Ligonier 'tape of the month':

There are 2 General Questions-
1. Is the 4th commandment still in effect for today?
2. If so, how is it to be observed properly?


As to question #1:
- there are those throughout the history of the church who have held that the sabbath was part of the ceremonial law, not the moral law and therefore is abrogated
- Augustine held that the 4th commandment was done away with in Christ
- Calvin didn't differ that much with Augustine

The heart of this question is essentially this subquestion:
Was the sabbath instituted at creation or at Mt. Sinai?
-Those who say creation, believe the 4th commandment is a
universal/natural law for all men/creation
-Those who say Mt. Sinai, say it is a ceremonial/covenant law for OT Israel

Arguments for Sinai view:
1. There isn't an explicit institution of the sabbath in the creation account

Arguments for Creation view:
1. when God sanctifies something it is usually for the benefit of His
creatures
2. Christ said the sabbath was made for man, not man for the sabbath
3. the institution of the sabbath at Sinai is based an an appeal to creation

As to question #2:
- Apostolic practice switched the sabbath from Saturday to Sunday(this has historically been the universal majority view)

Agreed essential general principles:
1. rest on 1 day, work on 6
a) primarily a physical emphasis which involves:
- rest from unneccesary labor
- rest from unneccesary commerce
b) this applies to us, our employees, our livestock, and the land (i.e. the
entire creation)
2. the corporate assembly of the body of Christ

Debated Principles:
- Is it appropriate, after worship, as we are resting to be engaged in recreation?

Continental View says: Yes, because it is re-creation, and so long as it does not interefere with or violate the agreed upon essential principles of corporate worship, unneccesary commerce, and unneccesary labor

Puritan View says: No, based on Isaiah 58:13 in which the Puritans took "pleasure" to be synonymous with "recreation"

The Puritan view also requires works of mercy on the sabbath.
The Continental view says works of mercy aren't required, but are allowed.

In Summary:
1. The 4th commandment is perpetual
2. The 4th commandment is a creation ordinance
3. The Sabbath is to be observed on Sunday not Saturday
4. The 4th commandment requires corporate assembly for worship
5. The 4th commandment requires cessation from unneccesary labor
6. The 4th commandment requires cessation from unneccesary commerce
7. The Continental view holds to all the above, plus allows for recreation
8. The Puritan view holds to all the above, but does not allow for recreation and also requires that works of mercy be done

The problem with the church today is that NEITHER view is held to.

[end of notes]


Any comments?

[Edited on 4-18-2005 by RAS]

RAS,

I heard that tape too. I agree with Sproul. Niether view is really held to today. Richard Gaffin has a book out (hopefully still in print) that discusses Calvins view of the Sabbath.

__________________
~Wayne Wylie~
Member, Mid Cities Presbyterian Church (OPC)
Ruling Elder - Inactive
http://www.mcopc.org
Bedford, TX

Job 28:28 - And unto man he said, Behold, the fear of the Lord, that is wisdom; and to depart from evil is understanding.

Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

You may find F. Nigel Lee's The Covenantal Sabbath to be of interest in your studies. I personally adhere to the Puritan view.

__________________
Andrew Myers
Husband of Jessica, Father of Jackson, Katie and Samuel
Member, Presbyterian Reformed Church of Northern Virginia
Warrenton, VA USA
Editor, The Matthew Poole Project

"Let your Morning Thoughts, and your last Evening Thoughts, be what shall become of you to all Eternity." -- Matthew Poole

Gaffin's book is available at Amazon


[Edited on 4-18-2005 by NaphtaliPress]

[Edited on 4-18-2005 by NaphtaliPress]

[Edited on 5/20/2005 by fredtgreco]

Gaffin does a very good job at demonstrating Calvin's mistake of spiritualizing one commandment at the expense of the other 9.

__________________
C. Matthew McMahon, Ph.D.
John 5:39, "...search the Scriptures..."

Dr. C. Matthew McMahon.com, www.apuritansmind.com and www.puritanpublications.com
Member - Christ Presbyterian Church, Professor at WTS for Puritan History & Theology.

Suggested Tag: "I'm not user friendly."

Life Maxim: Everyone seems normal until you get to know them.
Like Card Magic? Check out: www.cardconjurer.com
Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Also, as it bears repeating again and agin (I don't recall if Gaffin goes much into it) Calvin's practice was better than his theory as his view was the day should be set aside strictly for worship activities; no laboring, shops closed, no recreations, per the previously mentioned Deut sermons.

Yes, that's true. He was a bit inconsistent in that. However, becuase of his view, he pressed the need to keep the Sabbath all week, every day. Its an intersting dilemma he placed himself into.

I once read a joke (at least I think it was meant to be a joke) somewhere that the continentalists don't believe in the sabbath but they practice it, while the puritanists believe in the sabbath but don't practice it.


Which leads me to ask, not to stir up anything, but I am seriously curious, of those who hold the puritan view on the PB, how many actually obey the WCF when it says "...but also are taken up, the WHOLE time, in the public and private exercises of His worship, and in the duties of necessity and MERCY." (WCF XXI.8)

I am probably reading this wrong by reading it in a very absolute way, but this seems to mean that unless I am praying, reading my bible, singing praise, and visiting the sick EVERY moment of the day (unless interrupted by things of neccesary labor and commerce), I am breaking the 4th commandment. The phrase "whole time" seems very black-and-white to me.

And who of the puritan view actually observes the duty of mercy every Sunday? (Again, not attempting a challenge or to offend, just honestly wondering and wrestling inwardly)

I can laugh at the joke, but I have yet to meet anyone who keeps the Lord's Day perfectly holy.

I think the emphasis on the whole day is in opposition to other views which maintain that church-going is the only duty required for the Lord's Day and once church is over it's time for recreation. Remember, only a couple of decades before, King James wrote the Book of Sports encouraging recreation on that day. Also, the Puritans were in opposition to the frivolity of Catholics and Anglicans who "kept" saints' days and the Lord's Day by turning them into days of personal pleasure (cf. Isa. 58.13-14). Thus, the Puritans emphasized morning and evening worship services, noting that Paul preached until midnight (cf. Acts 20.7) on the first day of the week. The Puritans saw the day not as a day of leisure, but as a day of rest in the Lord. Thus, private, family and public worship made up the bulk of a Puritan Sabbath day. Do I personally think its unlawful to take a nap on a Sabbath afternoon? No, I don't. The body needs rest too. However, the day belongs to the Lord, not to us. It's His pleasure we should seek above our own.

I might be mistaken, but I have never understood the provision for allowing duties of mercy on the Lord's Day to mean that one has to go out and look for duties of mercy to fulfill in order to properly keep the Lord's Day. On the other hand, if it is within our power to help others and extend mercy on the Lord's Day, then by all means we should do so to the glory of Him who is the Lord of the Sabbath, which was made for man and not vice-versa.

[Edited on 4-20-2005 by VirginiaHuguenot]

This gets to the heart of what I am trying to understand. Does the WCF mean by duties of mercy those that we are required to go out and purposely look for, or does it mean as you have defined above, that duties of mercy are allowed and not to be neglected if one should arise? If it is the latter, then I have trouble seeing how the puritan view and the continental view are any different on this point (in reference to my outline on 4th commandment posted above); and if this is so then it seems to me that the only real practical difference between the two views is the concept of "recreation".

This seems to be a mischaracterization of the continental view. This makes it sound as if they view Sunday worship as something to get over with quickly so that they can devote themselves to recreational activities the rest of the day. Just as I don't think it is fair for me to think that the puritan view teaches that duties of mercy are required in a sense of them being sought out all day long (which I wrongly assumed by a misreading of WCF), I don't think it is fair to think that the continental view teaches recreation to be our primary focus or even a focus at all. It is my understanding that allowing recreation is quite different from focusing on it, just as I misunderstood the WCF to be saying that duties of mercy are to be focused on and not just allowed. If the allowing leads to a focusing then I see that as a misunderstanding of the view and not the view itself.


VirginiaHuguenot-

Sidebar questions: as one who holds the puritan view, is the continental view then considered "liberalism" (i.e. being liberal or loose with the truth), an isolated error, sytematic error, or heresy? I know by some its probably considered antinomianism (which is heresy isn't it?)

I know of two prominent elders who hold/held the continental view and subscribe to the WCF. Are they denying the WCF? Is it considered an exception to the WCF? I have been told (probably wrongly?) that the OPC does not ordain those who hold the continental view, while the PCA does? I have heard some say that the WCF does not assert the continental view or puritan view, but allows for both in that they agree on the essential principles of sabbath keeping and meaning? That the WCF being a confession and not a creed allows for diversity within the reformed world on this point, so long as one of these two views is held and not some other third option? Did all those at the westminster assembly hold the puritan view? What of those who didn't; we're they not considered acceptable within the WCF? Does sctrict subscriptionism to the WCF require adherence to the puritan view, and therefore allowance of one holding the continental view is considered "loose" subscription?

I know I have bogged you down with alot of questions, so please feel no hurry to answer. I am trying to take this all in as slowly as I can for a healthier understanding. Thanks

I think I'd agree with that assessment in general if we are strictly speaking about the Lord's Day alone. However, the subject of holidays falls under the purview of the Fourth Commandment, I believe, and in that respect the continental tradition allows for keeping of holy days besides the Lord's Day, while the Puritan tradition does not.

My comment here was not directed at the continental view of Sabbath-keeping. It was directed at the Anglo-Catholic view of Sabbath-keeping. However, as you mentioned, the continental view is more permissive with respect to recreation during the day after worship services.


Yes, that is a lot of (excellent) questions and I'm afraid I don't have time to give complete answers right now. I would defer to present officers in the PCA or OPC to give their perspectives on Sabbath-keeping views that are tolerated in their denominations. I've been a member of the PCA and have seen a huge spectrum of beliefs and practices with regards to Sabbath-keeping and other issues (ranging from very strict to very loose subscription). My own present denomination holds to the strict Puritan view/practice. Regarding the Assembly, I have not researched whether specific Divines held to a continental view, but I am certain that the majority if not consensus held to the Puritan view. I believe this is what is taught by the Confession and that it does not permit sports on the Lord's Day, for example. If someone were to assert that the Confession permits sports on the