Calendar distraction: Many Presbyterians Be Like....
- Thread starter NaphtaliPress
- Start date
- Status
No Other Name
Puritan Board Sophomore
I do praise the Lord for what seems like? hopefully? a growing recognition of the elephant in the room. May the Lord give us all courage to put away and more, speak the truth about monuments of idolatry.
jwright82
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Being someone who does not have a dog in this fight, I post sincerely just to learn not debate. I'm trying to understand the "logic" behind the debate. I'll lay out the argument as I understand it and sit back and wait for any responses.
The church as a visible institution on earth ought not to celebrate any other holy day other than those commanded by scripture. Since the Sabbath is the only holy day commanded by scripture for the church to celebrate we ought not as a visible community to celebrate any other holy day.
Obviously it seems, unless I'm mistaken, that secular holidays are outside the scope of what a visible church does to make their secular celebration irrelevant to the point (unless mandated by the state and/or church hence violating the conscience of individual believers).
Do I have the basic argument down? Again I'm not trying to debate this only wrap my head around the basic argument. Thanks for any corrections and/or replies.
The church as a visible institution on earth ought not to celebrate any other holy day other than those commanded by scripture. Since the Sabbath is the only holy day commanded by scripture for the church to celebrate we ought not as a visible community to celebrate any other holy day.
Obviously it seems, unless I'm mistaken, that secular holidays are outside the scope of what a visible church does to make their secular celebration irrelevant to the point (unless mandated by the state and/or church hence violating the conscience of individual believers).
Do I have the basic argument down? Again I'm not trying to debate this only wrap my head around the basic argument. Thanks for any corrections and/or replies.
Solparvus
Puritan Board Senior
I agree. It's no sin to celebrate Independence Day. This is a political holiday and not a religious one, so the RPW has no jurisdiction here.
No Other Name
Puritan Board Sophomore
I don't know if my answer will help or even if I am aware of the basic argument myself:
A while ago, I figured the right to celebrate traditional holidays is simply a matter of liberty of conscience and separate from worship- and I still can see it that way (but to a degree - there are always instances of outright idolatry out there).
Honestly when family worship became unable to be ignored by me any longer and my life became more devotional then my conscience just happened to change.
I haven't cared about December 25 for the last 3 years and I never had an argument for why it should (should not) be so. I always saw myself as perfectly free to celebrate it any time I wished, but I just don't want to and I do not forsee ever "needing" to.
I guess I am not answering you at all. It just kind of happened for me.
But as to the OP, I agree wholeheartedly with that meme. I know many who will speak out against members celebrating Lent but have no problem with Christmas.
Not only is it inconsistent, I also notice that these only really get into the theological particulars of the Nativity only during December, but they will advocate for ignoring Lent (and they honestly only mention Easter in passing) because they feel they are always focused on the Cross and the atonement and preparing for resurrection all year long and rightfully so.
Why that doesn't likewise translate to the doctrine of the Incarnation, the nature of the Trinity during the Incarnation, the birth narratives and infancy hymns and all these connected Scriptures and doctrines is honestly beyond me.
Except for the simple fact that 4 years ago, that was me and now it is not me. God works as he wills on those who hear him when they hear him.
What do you mean you don't have a dog in the fight? Your presbyterian, well, PCA.
jwright82
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Oh I think the joke is funny. I've just never to my knowledge gotten involved in one of these because I don't feel one way or the other. Out of respect for any brothers or sisters who a feel a particular way I stayed out of it. But I want to try and wrap my head around it.
jwright82
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
I meant no disrespect to the issue only I don't think/feel one way or the other. I do think its important only I never thought about it, other things seemed more pressing to me, that's all. So I thought I'd sit back and be educated on the issue.
One way or the other about what aspect of this exactly? I assume being PCA you believe there is only one true holy day.
Eyedoc84
Puritan Board Sophomore
How does a church celebrate Christmas and Easter “secularly”?
jwright82
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
What I meant was it's not an area I've studied so I have no qualms either way. I don't have a position on this. That's all. Is my logic as I layed out, which I don't disagree with, essentially the argument or not? I'm just to understand the logic of it to then go back and study.
jwright82
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
It doesn't or at least ought not. The state is different unless these holidays are compulsory, which is wrong.
So you don't have a position on whether there are other holy days to observe as holy to the Lord besides the Lord's Day? There are a lot of moving parts or subparts to it but at root it is the regulative principle and that God alone may appoint His own worship and alone may sanctify a day to set it apart as holy. You see the difference in the regulative principle and the normative, say in the 39 articles, that gives the church power to appoint holy days that should be observed. There are probably a hundred if not hundreds of threads on this topic and all the side issues on the board. Some should show up under Similar Threads below the comment box. It comes up multiple times every year.
jwright82
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Thank you. Very enlightening. I agree with your points.
There was a good discussion on the Covenanters FB group recently about the issues around celebrating it as a non-religious holiday. @Afterthought had a really helpful comment. Basically, that it's our duty not merely to abstain but to protest the false holy day; if that is true, and if we do protest the day as a false holy day, then our protest will be inconsistent if we partake in those things understood to part of the false holy day's observance; people won't take your protest seriously, etc. And he made other good observations around getting cozy with idols and examining the "Christmas spirit" as an aspect of celebrating a secular religion. Others also had some good points but I found his to be particularly useful.
So it made me aware that we may be called to take a stand on whether we are merely abstainers (if we are); or if we have a duty positively to protest, according to our opportunity and station.
So it made me aware that we may be called to take a stand on whether we are merely abstainers (if we are); or if we have a duty positively to protest, according to our opportunity and station.
I'm doin' some searchin', preparin' a potential 2024 Holiday Calendar. Boston (Works, vol. 2, p. 188):
What reason is there to think that when God has taken away from the church’s neck a great many holy days appointed by himself, he has left the gospel-church to be burdened with as many, nay, and more of men’s invention than he himself had appointed?
Ryan&Amber2013
Puritan Board Senior
For me, it is a matter of wisdom and preference, and not really a theological debate. I know there are various ways to interpret the passage in Romans, but I interpret it in a way that gives the Christian freedom to observe certain days. “Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To their own master, servants stand or fall. . . . One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord.”
With that being said, I don't think it is wise for churches to bind their members to celebrations and observances at certain times of the year. I don't think it is fair for Christians who wish not to partake. I also tend to see history moving in a linear way, and not repeating itself.
With that being said, I don't think it is wise for churches to bind their members to celebrations and observances at certain times of the year. I don't think it is fair for Christians who wish not to partake. I also tend to see history moving in a linear way, and not repeating itself.
Last edited:
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Sophomore
If you follow the interpretation of this passage as you have suggested, then there is no universal requirement to maintain the Sabbath as holy.
If you maintain the confessional teaching that the Sabbath is first found in natural law, then in "a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages," that it "is to be continued to the end of the world," and kept holy in both public and private (WCF 21), then this passage must not be allowing what the interpretation you have presented allows.
I acknowledge that PB allows for continental creeds and confessions, many of which I admire but most of which allow the continuance of so-called holydays, but is there any major Puritan forefather (as in pre-19th century) in the English-speaking world that approved of their continuation?
If there are various interpretations, then it is a theological debate...
Just to clarify, the three confessions of faith PB allows are the WCF, the LBCF, and the 3FU, none of which allow for man-made holy days, though the two may lack the precise language of the WCF.
J.L. Allen
Puritan Board Sophomore
T. V. Moore (and I believe edit A. A. Hodge) points out that days pressed upon the conscience don't actually pertain to the Sabbath but excludes the Sabbath as a day in question (negotiable to the conscience). The assumption here is that the Sabbath is observed, no questions asked. However, other days may be upon the conscience of others.
I think we should understand Ryan's comment this way, too, unless he says otherwise.
Last edited:
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Sophomore
That (excluding the Sabbath) is another interpretation of Romans 1. The interpretation I responded to did not make that distinction.
But, again, I ask: Is there any major Puritan forefather (as in pre-19th century) in the English-speaking world that approved of the continuation of so-called holydays?
Thank you for clarifying (I was thinking of the Dutch Book of Church order which is not technically part of the 3FU). But you bring up an important point - none of the confessions of faith PB allows allow for man-made holydays.
J.L. Allen
Puritan Board Sophomore
I'm not all that familiar with the Puritans (I find more interest in 1800s OS Presbyterians), but I doubt that any of them approved of holy days hallowed to the same degree as the Sabbath.
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Sophomore
1800s OS Presbyterians were Puritans. I'm not trying to be difficult, but you are on Puritan Board saying that you are not all that familiar with the Puritans. Perhaps it would be edifying for you to read the Puritans on this issue.
J.L. Allen
Puritan Board Sophomore
I appreciate your concern. I'm not actually in conflict on the issue of holy days nor am I ignorant regarding the topic. I was simply trying to highlight a charitable reading of Ryan's comment that still upholds the primacy of the Lord's Day above any other day. I believe he was trying to bring forward a sensitivity to those who are navigating observing days (again not at all questioning the primacy of the Lord's Day). It is an issue of conscience for those people. Let us be careful how to tread lest we bludgeon someone with our purity of doctrine and practice. It's a great way of completely turning someone off from understanding the importance of the regulative principle and an adherence therein.
I hope that clarifies why I commented.
Ryan&Amber2013
Puritan Board Senior
Sorry I haven't said anything more in this thread. Yesterday I came down with a really bad fever and it's still lasting today. I would definitely appreciate all your prayers. Thank you brothers and sisters!
Northern Crofter
Puritan Board Sophomore
At the risk of being seen as insensitive, I cannot see how observing so-called holy days is a matter of conscience. Liberty of conscience is about not being forced to do something contrary to or added to God's Word in matters of faith or worship - it is not about the freedom to simply do something because it is not specifically forbidden in His Word (regulative vs. normative, Calvin vs. Luther).
If you cannot find a reason to reintroduce these so-called holydays either "expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence... deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men," (WCF 1.6), then where is the desire to do so emanating from? None of our Reformed, Puritan forefathers in the faith approved of the continuation of so-called holydays, so where does their reintroduction come from? Is the answer to both these questions not a lusting after the things of the world and the flesh? "They who, upon pretense of Christian liberty, do practice any sin, or cherish any lust, do thereby destroy the end of Christian liberty" (WCF 20.3).
Again, "the power which God hath ordained, and the liberty which Christ hath purchased, are not intended by God to destroy, but mutually to uphold and preserve one another.... maintaining of such practices, as are contrary to the light of nature, or to the known principles of Christianity, whether concerning faith, worship, or conversation; or to the power of godliness; or such erroneous opinions or practices as, either in their own nature, or in the manner of publishing or maintaining them, are destructive to the external peace and order which Christ hath established in the Church." (WCF 20.4).
With regard to the connection between the Sabbath and so-called holydays, albeit anecdotal, many of the same people I speak with who tell me it is a matter of conscience whether or not they celebrate so-called holydays are the same ones who tell me their various desecrations of the Sabbath are also a matter of conscience. Since you find more interest in 1800s OS Presbyterians
, I commend to you Reformed Covenanter's most recent blog post on the Sabbath: "Samuel Miller on the effect of uncommanded holy days on the sanctification of the Lord’s Day."As for the issue of sensitivity (by which I assume you mean brotherly love), I do not crusade on this issue in my congregation. When someone says "Merry Christmass" to me after worship on the Lord's Day, I reply "Merry Lord's Day." If they ask why I responded that way, I explain as humbly as I can. If unconverted coworkers invite me to a Christmass party, I tell them I'm afraid I cannot participate. If they ask why, I explain as humbly as I can (this year I was asked if I would attend if they called it a "Holiday Party" instead...). Perhaps the saddest commentary on this issue is that the latter are often more understanding than the former. I feel no such need to be similarly sensitive expressing these sentiments of Puritan Board as I have always acknowledged that I subscribe to the Westminster Standards, including The Directory for the Publick Worship of God which states that: "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."
I maintain the onus is on those who claim to be Puritan and Reformed to demonstrate how they arrive at a position allowing (instead of actively opposing) the reintroduction of so-called holydays into their lives and the life of the Church. As for those who say, "I just celebrate Christmass at home as a civil holyday," I note that our Puritan forefathers did not distinguish between a civil observation of Christmass and a religious one. "Festival days" = "holy-days." Syncretism is always an error, even in private.
- Status
