# Am I violating the Sabbath?



## tellville (Mar 28, 2006)

I have a Sabbath question. I apologize if something like this has been discussed before, but I couldn't find anything on the board. 

I take the bus to church (I live quite far from my church). I then take the bus to a Bible study in the afternoon. Afterwords, I take the bus back home. Am I violating the Sabbath by buying a bus ticket and causing others to violate the Sabbath (bus driver for example)? 

Finally, I am in the military (Reserves). Sometimes my job forces me to work on a Sunday. Is this a violation of the Sabbath? 

Anyway, I was just curious at what I should be doing (or not doing ) on the Sabbath. Or at the very least, what the Reformed take on the subject is.


----------



## Peters (Mar 28, 2006)

If you are faithing in Christ, you are keeping the sabbath.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Mar 28, 2006)

Your transportation is not an issue. Serving your country on the sabbath is not an issue but raises some antenae; I will have to think more on that.....


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 28, 2006)

The use of public transportation to attend Lord's Day services is not a violation of the Fourth Commandment. Neither is military service _per se_ on the Lord's Day. Both activities fall under the category of "works of necessity or mercy." 

For further study I would recommend reading the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Westminster Larger Catechism 115-121, and a book by William Matheson entitled _May Sabbath-Keeping Prevent Church-Going?_.


----------



## matt01 (Mar 28, 2006)

Though you are causing a bus driver to work on the Sabbath, his is a work of necessity. As with serving in the Reserves, there are some functions in society that are unable to be stopped on the Lord's Day--doctors, police officers, sewage plant operators, bus drivers, etc...


----------



## py3ak (Mar 28, 2006)

I am pleased to hear that people do not think taking a bus to church is a violation of the Sabbath. I have thought for some time that the supporters of the other side in the Murray-Matheson controversy should come to Mexico City and tell all the people that they cannot use the bus to get to church. Basically, that would deny the worship services to the poor (who mostly make up the congregations I have been in here).


----------



## Myshkin (Mar 28, 2006)

> _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> The use of public transportation to attend Lord's Day services is not a violation of the Fourth Commandment. Neither is military service _per se_ on the Lord's Day. Both activities fall under the category of "works of necessity or mercy."



Hi Andrew-

I am still wrestling with my understanding of this issue; my desire is there, but my confusion gets in the way. 

How does one determine if something is a work of mercy or necessity?
With the example of the bus driver above, if his driving the bus keeps him from Sunday worship is he then also breaking the commandment?
(I am not making an argument either way; just fleshing things out in my mind) I don't intend to go into this specific example, I just mention it as an illustration for my general question of what criteria we use to determine what is merciful and necessary. I am not challenging your position, just wanting to understand it better. In my mind I am having trouble reconciling it. I want to avoid an arbitrary determination of what fits in the category and what does not, but I find this hard to do when the postion as I understand it reduces to all or nothing thinking if one wants to consistently follow the logic.

What steps, criteria, list, thinking process do you go through to determine what is and is not a work of necessity/mercy?

Thanks.


----------



## ChristopherPaul (Mar 28, 2006)

I believe it is much more difficult to obey the Sabbath then what is often assumed.

The Sabbath is the day God's people refrain from what must occupy their time during the week and use that time to be with God; to focus on God in a way that cannot be practically done the other 6 days of the week.

Circumstances occur that force us to continue in weekly obligations, but that shows how wicked the world is and does not excuse neglect on God's worship day set aside for a day of communion with the body of Christ.

Basically, Jesus' disciples did not sin when they became hungry and began to pick the heads of grain to eat on the Sabbath because they were with the Lord of the Sabbath at that time - while they picked and ate. If Jesus would not have been there with them, then I would say they were sinning. This is my perception and it could very well be misguided since I have not studied the topic nor has any teacher guided me through it.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Mar 28, 2006)

This will be of help:

March 19, 2006
The Creation Sabbath, Genesis 2:1-3, 
by Dr. C. Matthew McMahon
http://www.christcovenantrpc.org/AudioSermons.htm


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Mar 28, 2006)

> _Originally posted by RAS_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by VirginiaHuguenot_
> ...


 
Hi Allan, 

I hope you are doing well, brother. To answer your question, broadly speaking, I think that works of necessity or mercy are those which promote the values and principles of God's law even if the doing of them on the surface seems to violate the principle of Sabbath duties. In other words: "the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath." 

You will recall that Jesus said the priests profane the temple and yet are blameless, and that David had his men eat on the Sabbath and yet is not to be condemned (Matt. 12). 

On the Lord's Day, we are called to assemble for worship. That is a primary aspect of what it means to keep the day holy, according to the fourth commandment. Providential circumstances may hinder us in that regard, but our duty is to try to get to church and worship God with his people.

In my brief earlier response, I did not address a variety of other factors in the situation, but I will do so now to shed light on my thinking on the matter.

The bus driver in all probability is engaging in commerical commerce on the Lord's Day in violation of the fourth commandment. His purpose is not to make sure that those without transporation can get to church. His purpose is renumerative. 

The question is, it is sinful to pay the fare to ride the bus to church (assuming the person does not have their own transportation or cannot get a ride)? Does the likely sin on the part of the bus driver involve the church-goer in sin? 

William Matheson answers this question as follows:



> A fourth scruple, however, and one which enters as deeply as any that has to be dealt with, concerns the payment of a fare, not as an inherently unsabbatic transaction, but as a compounding with a Sabbath-desecrating partner. To many this is the crux of the whole matter, and they can not see any way round this supposed obstacle to granting the lawfulness of the use of public conveyances for Sabbath church-going. If the payment of a fare on a public conveyance on Sabbath involves a person as a partner in the offensive Sabbath-breaking work of the running of it on that day then the matter is settled. Under such a condition no loyal Christian can arrive at any other conclusion than that he is not permitted to make use of such a conveyance. The question is, "Does the payment of a fare for church-going privileges on a public conveyance on the Lord's Day involve the payer in any way in any responsibility for the Sabbath-desecrating actions or motives that the running of it may involve?"
> 
> The party who pays the fare is conscious of the will to "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy" by joining in the public worship of God. He is able to build on the facts that both the running of a public conveyance to take people to church, and the payment of the fare for the use of it, on Sabbath are fully in accord with the terms of the Fourth Commandment.
> 
> He can find no reason to awaken any scruple of conscience at the use of the conveyance or at the payment of the fare until the fact of the excess in running it beyond the limits of strict Sabbath-keeping enters. Then the question is raised. But with the entrance of that excess he had nothing whatever to do. The fare that he pays he pays for service that was lawful before this entrance of excess, and continues to be quite as lawful after its entrance. The moral character of the payment for this service and of the acceptance of the payment can not be changed by this entrance of excess. The offence of which the owner or conductor of the conveyance is guilty does not enter into the action or the motive involved in the service which he enjoys and for which he pays. There is the indisputable fact that he is supporting materially by his fare and exemplarily by his patronage the running of the conveyance on the Lord's Day. But that support does not go beyond his use of the conveyance. Were it so that the fare paid could be considered as a merely voluntary contribution for the support of the Sabbath-breaking owner instead of being the payment due for a definite service, and that a strictly Sabbath-keeping one, the situation would be different. The fact that the payment of the fare is a business transaction on a definite contractual basis, clearly secures relief to the payer from all responsibility for the wrongdoing of the owner. The contract is a mutual and voluntary affair, and its terms bind no further than is agreed upon voluntarily by both parties. The man who pays the fare is not compelled to implicate himself beyond his own will in the running of the conveyance. His payment of a fare is for that measure of service only which he chooses to require. This enables him to keep within the bounds of the Sabbatic use of the conveyance whether it be run in excess of Sabbatic principle or not. Beyond that neither the owner, nor the worker who runs the conveyance, nor any other, can possibly drag him.



In other words, for the church-goer to use the public transportation for purposes beyond church-going or some other necessary or merciful duty (an example of another merciful duty being: visiting someone in a hospital), would be to join in the bus driver's sin, but paying a fare for purposes of church-going would not involve one in sin. 

Ideally, there would be no public transportation on the Lord's Day (or only such as is designed to help those with needs consistent with Sabbath-keeping). Ideally, there would be Reformed churches on every street corner and one could walk to church. Ideally, a person could get a ride with a fellow church-goer rather than resorting to public transportation. But I view taking advantage of public transportation for a necessary duty like church-going to be akin to eating the shewbread of the temple. 

Another way to ask the question (as seen in Matheson's title) is whether by keeping the Sabbath we should abstain from church? It would seem silly (or rather, Pharisaical), to me, to keep the fourth commandment by staying home when the fourth commandment calls us to public worship. (Again, there may be providential reasons why a person has to stay home, but I am speaking generally as to the public transportation issue.) The Sabbath is binding, yes, and requires us to abstain from renumerative work (and contributing to the same by others) which is lawful the other six days, but it also requires of us, when the situation calls for it, works of necessity and mercy because God requires mercy rather than sacrifice. 

Biblical and Puritan Sabbatarianism requires the exercise of prudence and judgment. It would be very easy, as the Pharisees did, to condemn certain activities on the Sabbath per se. They did not understand that the commandment to keep the day holy was not designed to prevent that to which God has called us to attend (his worship, the needs of the body). It is unnecessary servile work (albeit otherwise lawful and good), that which hinders true spiritual service, which the fourth commandment prohibits. Preparing to sanctify the day involves preparation to eliminate the mundane needs as much as possible, but not to the point of requiring believers to abstain from food or church-going. Those are necessary activities. 

So also are the duties involved in being a policeman, soldier, doctor, etc. In other words, there are exceptions to the general rule that are consistent with the principle of love which undergirds the Sabbath commandment as evidenced by the fact that God requires mercy above sacrifice and the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

The Westminster Directory of Public Worship puts it well, I think:



> Of the Sanctification of the Lord's Day.
> 
> THE Lord's day ought to be so remembered before-hand, as that all worldly business of our ordinary callings may be so ordered, and so timely and seasonably laid aside, as they may not be impediments to the due sanctifying of the day when it comes.
> 
> ...



I hope this helps, brother.


----------



## tellville (Mar 28, 2006)

Hey Everybody,

Thanks for all your replies! Very good information and food for thought!


----------



## Scot (Mar 28, 2006)

> _Originally posted by trevorjohnson_
> All of our electric meters still run on Sundays!!! And electricity is NOT a neccessity (less than 200 years old)..... If we were really pious we would demand electric meter shut-downs from Saturday night - to be resumed Monday morning.



Excellent point. From now on I'm going Amish on the Sabbath.


----------

