In the footnote on page 245 of Chad Van Dixhoorn’s Confessing the Faith, regarding the WCF chapter 19.4…Van Dixhoorn states that both William Ames and William Gouge see ‘general equity’ applying to both the ceremonial law and the judicial laws. For example, the existence of Old Testament holy days shows that certain days can be set apart for worship in the new covenant era.
The Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God has this in an appendix:
"Touching Days and Places for Public Worship.
THERE is no day commanded in scripture to be kept holy under the gospel but the Lord’s day, which is the Christian Sabbath.
Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days, having no warrant in the word of God, are not to be continued.
Nevertheless, it is lawful and necessary, upon special emergent occasions, to separate a day or days for public fasting or thanksgiving, as the several eminent and extraordinary dispensations of God’s providence shall administer cause and opportunity to his people." (bold for emphasis is mine)
Were Ames and Gouge using ‘general equity’ to argue for the observance of “Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days” (e.g. Christmas, Easter, the church calendar, etc.) or were they only arguing for the day(s) of “public fasting or thanksgiving”?
Is this a valid application of ‘general equity’, and if so, what is its significance for how we apply the regulative principle of worship (RPW)? This application of ‘general equity’ seems to imply that if we can find an example of X in the OT, then X has biblical warrant for worship in the new covenant era. But this would seem to conflict with the more narrow application of the RPW.
The Westminster Directory for the Public Worship of God has this in an appendix:
"Touching Days and Places for Public Worship.
THERE is no day commanded in scripture to be kept holy under the gospel but the Lord’s day, which is the Christian Sabbath.
Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days, having no warrant in the word of God, are not to be continued.
Nevertheless, it is lawful and necessary, upon special emergent occasions, to separate a day or days for public fasting or thanksgiving, as the several eminent and extraordinary dispensations of God’s providence shall administer cause and opportunity to his people." (bold for emphasis is mine)
Were Ames and Gouge using ‘general equity’ to argue for the observance of “Festival days, vulgarly called Holy-days” (e.g. Christmas, Easter, the church calendar, etc.) or were they only arguing for the day(s) of “public fasting or thanksgiving”?
Is this a valid application of ‘general equity’, and if so, what is its significance for how we apply the regulative principle of worship (RPW)? This application of ‘general equity’ seems to imply that if we can find an example of X in the OT, then X has biblical warrant for worship in the new covenant era. But this would seem to conflict with the more narrow application of the RPW.