I've listed where in Scripture and where in the confession a half dozen times now. Why are you asking?
If he can convene the church to adjudicate something, he can convene the church to remember something, yes?
Regulative Principle and Christmas
- Thread starter Rescued
- Start date
- Status
If he can convene the church to adjudicate something, he can convene the church to remember something, yes?
Which is the greater and which is the lesser? Why?
Are you quite sure this is not a straw man?
You did say there were many instances in Scripture. I’ve seen you mention one. And if you are referring to the WCF, I think you’re going to find it hard to show that the Divines were in favour of holy-days.
Is this not a conflation of issues? Is a special worship service identical to “remembering something”?
Define “remembering.”
Is it within the magistrates power to declare holy days?
www.naphtali.com
Part 1: Holy Days take away our Christian Liberty Proved Out of the Law (EPC 1.7 31-36) - Naphtali Press
George Gillespie Holy Days take away our Christian Liberty Proved Out of the Law Copyright © 1998 Naphtali Press The following are chapters and sections taken from George Gillespie, A Dispute Against the English Popish Ceremonies Obtruded on the Church of Scotland, ed. Christopher Coldwell...
www.naphtali.com
Yes, singing and preaching are fine and normal ways to remember a thing, and doing so in light of a special event or circumstance is part of the normal and broad mandate to elders and magistrates.
I don’t think so as there would be no end to the “remembrances” mandated as the the history of the Roman church has proved.
Then the sin would be the lack of restraint, the idolatry of the events, or any number of other problems, and the solution is not to neuter the office itself
JH
Puritan Board Sophomore
Jeremy, this point of the magistrates authority and his limits have already been set forth in the Westminster's Directory for Publick 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 publick fasting or thanksgiving, as the several eminent and extraordinary dispensations of God’s providence shall administer cause and opportunity to his people."
The view of the Westminster divines was such that allowed for a calling of emergent and extraordinary circumstances; their view did not permit a annual, ordinary, reoccurring observance of pretended holydays. One of the chief members of the Westminster Assembly, Gillespie, himself said in that particular regard that no man no matter how high ecclesiastically or civilly can make a day holy, but God alone. You are confusing extraordinary circumstances of separating a day unto fasting/thanksgiving, with tolerating Christmas. That is essentially looking for a crevice in a sealed tight door, and trying to pry it open with a crowbar.
"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 publick fasting or thanksgiving, as the several eminent and extraordinary dispensations of God’s providence shall administer cause and opportunity to his people."
The view of the Westminster divines was such that allowed for a calling of emergent and extraordinary circumstances; their view did not permit a annual, ordinary, reoccurring observance of pretended holydays. One of the chief members of the Westminster Assembly, Gillespie, himself said in that particular regard that no man no matter how high ecclesiastically or civilly can make a day holy, but God alone. You are confusing extraordinary circumstances of separating a day unto fasting/thanksgiving, with tolerating Christmas. That is essentially looking for a crevice in a sealed tight door, and trying to pry it open with a crowbar.
Again, where are you getting this from? Please refer to a location in the Confession. I have reviewed your posts and found nothing.
You are confusing our use of the word holy, which might simply mean set apart for a remembrance and not equated to normal Sunday worship, or one in which non-attendance could not be a discipline issue, with the Catholic understanding of 'holy days' that the Divines were rejecting. It's large-scale equivocation.
It is wrong to decalre Holy Days as Rome declared Holy Days, equal in stature or purpose or discipline wiht the Lord's Day itself, or giving special privileges for participation. That's their context.
We’ll there’s also destroying the monuments to idolatry which would include Ebeneezer and definitely Christmas.
Edit: sorry I meant could include ebeneezer and definitely Christmas or any other circumstance that devolves into idolatry. See Gideon or the brazen serpent.
Yes, actually. Catholic Holy Days that compete with the Lord's Day, are held equivalent to it, and impart special privileges, and are subject to discipline, are wrong.So… holy days are OK, but holy days are to be avoided.
Glad we cleared that up.
But set apart days for topics or worship in response to a special thing are fine.
Yes. Holy Days are wrong in the Catholic sense. Holy days are fine in the Thanksgiving and Christmas sense.
We that seemed needlessly petty. Good night.
That took a very long time to get to the point. We've been over this many times actually. Whether a pastor should preach an advent sermon or have a special service on the old monuments of idolatry should be undertaken with the duty to guard and remove such fully in view and with a view toward other rules such as avoiding offense (and Durham in Concerning Scandal classes the question of preaching on one of the old idolatrous days to be of that nature, and in his country they had been outlawed by Knox et al in 1560 and the civil observance in Scotland only resumed in the 1950s). Sure call such a day and preach against the superstitious observance of days and all the abuses of this time of year; knock yourself out. Otherwise, it's a stumbling block and not guarding against the observance of these old days flooding back, just like in the PCA where Lent with ashes is starting to be observed. It is naive in the extreme to think such services can be observed with no need to warn. It's how close to the fire can I stick my hand and not get burned.
JH
Puritan Board Sophomore
Jeremy, apologies as I re read your original response to my post several times, and am still confused. Although in response to your second post and question, yes, I do believe the magistrate/church has the right to call for extraordinary circumstances of thanksgiving or fasting (such as the King of Nineveh did in the time of Jonah call for the entire nation to fast). The underlying reason and motive for it not being one that immediately trifles with the second, third, and fourth commandment respectively, unlike Christmas.
Today isn't really the best day for a heated topic as such (is it ever a good day for it?) Regardless, blessings upon you and yours this Lord's Day, you're still a brother to me.
Today isn't really the best day for a heated topic as such (is it ever a good day for it?) Regardless, blessings upon you and yours this Lord's Day, you're still a brother to me.
This is perhaps not the best way to win over others who disagree, or to get them to even take your viewpoint seriously.
Eyedoc84
Puritan Board Sophomore
The state calling a synod for the church to resolve a theological problem causing civil unrest is not “greater than” the state calling the church to worship and giving it a topic for preaching, singing, and “remembrance”. The state has absolutely no authority to do the latter.
Laughing at posts is perhaps an even worse way.
Heart reactions, on the other hand, are rather endearing!
Moderating. Jeremy, I know it is very common on Facebook, but using the laugh react to dismiss someone's statement is immature, disrespectful, and unloving. It has never been done before to my knowledge, which is a testament that despite many disagreements over the twenty years of this board no one has done this. It has only happened twice now, and on a Lord's Day in one thread and by you. Don't do it again.
Indeed, a man after my own hart
All my best friends have already been banned.
Do what thou wilt.
Send it up to Colonel L-eino, the origin of my first ban, because he couldn't read a cartoon.
He even changes his name so that it can't be typed. What a pusillanimous little 'marine.'
- Status
