# Could Calvin Be Ordained in Your Presbytery?



## Ben Chomp (May 28, 2019)

I post this in the general theology forum because it touches on multiple theological and ecclesial issues.

Could John Calvin be ordained in your presbytery? He probably could not be ordained in the PCA. This is because Calvin did not believe that Sunday had to be the Christian Sabbath. It appears he had a looser view on the Sabbath and would theoretically allow for churches to celebrate the Sabbath on any day that seemed best. This does not cohere with the Westminster Standards and I believe that the PCA GA has ruled that men should not be ordained who deny that Sunday is the Christian Sabbath.

But this also means that John Calvin could not be ordained in the PCA, which is just a little troubling. Could Calvin be ordained in your presbytery?

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## RamistThomist (May 28, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> He probably could not be ordained in the PCA. This is because Calvin did not believe that Sunday had to be the Christian Sabbath



I think Calvin's odds are pretty good, being that he didn't publicly come out as homosexual.

Reactions: Funny 3 | Sad 2


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 28, 2019)

Questions of this nature are silly for several reasons:

1) It assumes that John Calvin is the standard of truth; he is not.

2) It assumes that Calvin would not have changed his mind after receiving further instruction, which is a deeply cynical supposition. 

3) It forgets that we would not permit the likes of Augustine to be ordained without the forsaking of some of his oddities as well.

Reactions: Like 8


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 28, 2019)

Reformed Covenanter said:


> Questions of this nature are silly for several reasons:
> 
> 1) It assumes that John Calvin is the standard of truth; he is not.



I certainly don't make that assumption when I ask the question. I just think it is interesting that one of our most important theological forefathers could not be ordained in our presbytery. It's like how Abraham Kuyper would never be invited today to give the prestigious Kuyper Lectures at Princeton nor given the Kuyper award today. If Kuyper couldn't be given the Kuyper award, maybe something is askew!



> 2) It assumes that Calvin would not have changed his mind after receiving further instruction, which is a deeply cynical supposition.



Do you think that Calvin held his Sabbath views because he lacked information that we have?



> 3) It forgets that we would not permit the likes of Augustine to be ordained without the forsaking of some of his oddities as well.



Augustine is far more historically remote than Calvin, though. Presbyterianism comes from Calvin.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## jw (May 28, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Could Calvin be ordained in your presbytery?


Uhh . . . No!

He's been dead for over 400 years. DUH!

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 2 | Funny 14


----------



## Romans922 (May 28, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> This is because Calvin did not believe that Sunday had to be the Christian Sabbath. It appears he had a looser view on the Sabbath and would theoretically allow for churches to celebrate the Sabbath on any day that seemed best.



Agree with everyone above I think...

Calvin did not have a loose view of the Sabbath whatsoever. One merely needs to read his sermons on Gen. 2 and Deuteronomy to see that this is false. Most people in their reading of Calvin look at his Institutes only where he was primarily looking at the cermeonial aspects of the Sabbath, and completely fail to interact with his sermons and the applications he makes of the 4th commandment to the Christian life. Gaffin fails on this too in his book "Calvin and the Sabbath".

Reactions: Like 1 | Informative 4


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 28, 2019)

Romans922 said:


> Agree with everyone above I think...
> 
> Calvin did not have a loose view of the Sabbath whatsoever. One merely needs to read his sermons on Gen. 2 and Deuteronomy to see that this is false. Most people in their reading of Calvin look at his Institutes only where he was primarily looking at the cermeonial aspects of the Sabbath, and completely fail to interact with his sermons and the applications he makes of the 4th commandment to the Christian life. Gaffin fails on this too in his book "Calvin and the Sabbath".



From Calvin's commentary on Galatians 4:10 - 

"When certain days are represented as holy in themselves, when one day is distinguished from another on religious grounds, when holy days are reckoned a part of divine worship, then days are improperly observed. The Jewish Sabbath, new moons, and other festivals, were earnestly pressed by the false apostles, because they had been appointed by the law. When we, in the present age, intake a distinction of days, we do not represent them as necessary, and thus lay a snare for the conscience; we do not reckon one day to be more holy than another; we do not make days to be the same thing with religion and the worship of God; but merely attend to the preservation of order and harmony. The observance of days among us is a free service, and void of all superstition.”

That looks to me like he would not be in line with the Westminster Sabbatarian view. Could you provide a quote from him demonstrating that he is?


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 28, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Do you think that Calvin held his Sabbath views because he lacked information that we have?



The doctrine has been developed more comprehensively since his day. 



Ben Chomp said:


> Augustine is far more historically remote than Calvin, though. Presbyterianism comes from Calvin.



And Calvinism comes from Augustine.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Jake (May 28, 2019)

I would hope that the Reformed church is one that continues to reform. The Westminster Assembly members in particular wrote and thought a lot about the Sabbath and thinking on the topic matured from the time of Calvin. I would expect Calvin today to first interact with their works. I think Anselm, Augustine, Calvin, etc. served the church well in their days, but they are coming from another time so they probably wouldn't be ready to drop in and answer our presbytery exams built on the foundation many generations of theological issues and interacting with modern issues.

You could also look at this from the perspective of awareness and understanding of sin. I think we have a better understanding of the sin of man-stealing (and related issues like chattel slavery) than some did in the past. Another example is abortion, which many Evangelicals, including in the OPC, were more open to back in the early 1970s than they are today. Largely this was because of a lack of understanding and clarity that we now have today. 

One other interesting point, if we remove the anachronistic element a bit. Calvin actually disagreed with the Belgic Confession on the issue of Pauline authorship of the letter of Hebrews. Some strictly confessional churches which hold to the Belgic Confession do not allow an exception here and so this might limit Calvin's ability to be ordained there: "In your confessional statement, we have not noticed anything which does not agree with the holy oracles of God and the orthodox faith. Therefore, we willingly approve the summary of the doctrine contained in it. However, we would wish the letter to the Hebrews was not attributed to Paul, for we are convinced by strong arguments that the author is someone else." [source]

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (May 28, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Presbyterianism comes from Calvin.



And all the Baptists and Congregationalists say, "Yeah! We know!"


----------



## TylerRay (May 28, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Could John Calvin be ordained in your presbytery?


Nope. He's dead.

Reactions: Amen 2


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 28, 2019)

Calvin would be too strict a Sabbatarian for the PCA, and he'd be done as far as ordination particularly if he denied he ever played lawn bowling on the Lord's Day. 
From my preface to “John Calvin’s Letters to the Ministers of Montbéliard (1543–1544): The Genevan Reformer’s Advice and Views of the Liturgical Calendar,” _The Confessional Presbyterian_ 13 (2017), 199, footnote 14.

Farel and Calvin wished “to establish the sabbatarian principle as the law of Geneva.” Thomas Lambert, “Preaching, Praying and Policing the Reform in Sixteenth-Century Geneva.” Ph.D. dissertation (University of Wisconsin, 1998), 190. This early Sabbatarianism was not as developed as that of English Puritanism and Scottish Presbyterianism, but it is clear Calvin not only shares a practical agreement with how the Sabbath was to be kept, but stands much closer theologically to the later views than is usually granted. On Calvin’s ‘practical’ Sabbatarianism see John H. Primus, “Calvin and the Puritan Sabbath: A Comparative Study,” in _Exploring The Heritage Of John Calvin: Essays In Honor Of John Bratt, _ed. David E. Holwerda (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1976), pp. 40–75; _Holy Time: Moderate Puritanism and the Sabbath _(Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1989); and “Sunday: The Lord’s day as a Sabbath—Protestant Perspectives on the Sabbath,” in _The Sabbath in Jewish and Christian Tradition, _ed. Tamara C. Eskenezi, Daniel J. Harrington, S. J., and William H. Sher (New York: Crossroads, 1991). For an argument that Calvin was closer theologically to later English Puritanism than generally conceded, see Stewart E. Lauer, “John Calvin, the Nascent Sabbatarian: A Reconsideration of Calvin’s View of Two Key Sabbath-Issues,” _The Confessional Presbyterian _3 (2007); and reprinted in volume 12 (2016).

Lauer’s article is online here: http://www.cpjournal.com/articles-2...of-two-key-sabbath-issues-by-stewart-e-lauer/

An older version of my article on the Calvin bowling mythology is here: http://www.naphtali.com/articles/ch...hilistines-or-did-calvin-bowl-on-the-sabbath/
A slight update was published in the CPJ 6 (2010).

Reactions: Like 4 | Informative 2 | Amen 2


----------



## Romans922 (May 28, 2019)

Chris has it above with clarity.




Ben Chomp said:


> From Calvin's commentary on Galatians 4:10 -
> 
> "When certain days are represented as holy in themselves, when one day is distinguished from another on religious grounds, when holy days are reckoned a part of divine worship, then days are improperly observed. The Jewish Sabbath, new moons, and other festivals, were earnestly pressed by the false apostles, because they had been appointed by the law. When we, in the present age, intake a distinction of days, we do not represent them as necessary, and thus lay a snare for the conscience; we do not reckon one day to be more holy than another; we do not make days to be the same thing with religion and the worship of God; but merely attend to the preservation of order and harmony. The observance of days among us is a free service, and void of all superstition.”



As I said previously, he's talking there about the ceremonial aspects. As I encouraged you before, go and read his sermons on Gn. 2:1ff and Deuteronomy.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Bill The Baptist (May 28, 2019)

Joshua said:


> Uhh . . . No!
> 
> He's been dead for ver 400 years. DUH!



You mean to tell me that being alive is a requirement for being an ordained Presbyterian minister? I thought y’all were the frozen chosen

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Reformed Covenanter (May 28, 2019)

I did a bit of digging around in my archives and found one quote that supports what @Romans922 is saying: John Calvin on the morality of the Sabbath.

Reactions: Informative 1 | Edifying 1


----------



## TylerRay (May 28, 2019)

Bill The Baptist said:


> You mean to tell me that being alive is a requirement for being an ordained Presbyterian minister? I thought y’all were the frozen chosen


Pastor Bill,
There's an important difference between being _alive _and being _lively_. If you'd like, I can present an extensive and detailed treatise on the subject, describing the various aspects of living, simpliciter, over against lively living. Such a prospect almost makes me want to straighten my back with excitement.

Reactions: Funny 1


----------



## Bill The Baptist (May 28, 2019)

TylerRay said:


> Pastor Bill,
> There's an important difference between being _alive _and being _lively_. If you'd like, I can present an extensive and detailed treatise on the subject, describing the various aspects of living, simpliciter, over against lively living. Such a prospect almost makes me want to straighten my back with excitement.



Only if you give it title that takes up a full page.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Andrew35 (May 28, 2019)

Not sure, but I always found it extremely ironic as a recovering fundamental Baptist that the Lord Jesus wouldn't be allowed to join most of our churches--him not being a teetotaler and all.

Reactions: Like 1 | Funny 2


----------



## ZackF (May 28, 2019)

I think I remember from a lecture by Robert Godfrey where Calvin negotiated several barrels of wine as part of his salary. Do callings today provide that option?

Reactions: Amen 2


----------



## alexandermsmith (May 29, 2019)

Jake said:


> One other interesting point, if we remove the anachronistic element a bit. Calvin actually disagreed with the Belgic Confession on the issue of Pauline authorship of the letter of Hebrews. Some strictly confessional churches which hold to the Belgic Confession do not allow an exception here and so this might limit Calvin's ability to be ordained there: "In your confessional statement, we have not noticed anything which does not agree with the holy oracles of God and the orthodox faith. Therefore, we willingly approve the summary of the doctrine contained in it. However, we would wish the letter to the Hebrews was not attributed to Paul, for we are convinced by strong arguments that the author is someone else." [source]



Even the greats can be wrong from time to time.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Blueridge Believer (May 29, 2019)

I doubt that Calvin or hardly any preacher from the 16-19 century could get ordained in the PCA or other denominations because his views on social issues would not be progressive enough.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## jwithnell (May 29, 2019)

Where in the world is Calvin saying he doesn't hold to the Christian sabbath? He rejected the Jewish Sabbath with its load added by the Pharisees and the days added by the Roman church.


----------



## greenbaggins (May 29, 2019)

Yep, lots of misinformation out there on Calvin's view of the Sabbath. I think the question does involve a good deal of anachronism. It assumes that Calvin's way of expressing himself would look the same now as it did then. As many have pointed out, Calvin would have known and appreciated many of the writers who came after him, and would have engaged with them in order to formulate his views. Many doctrines came into greater clarity and precision after Calvin, though the post-Reformation Reformed authors are not departing from some supposedly clear stream.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (May 29, 2019)

According to a trusted Bible Teacher that I greatly respect, Calvin had said that his Institutes are the true and full expression of his religious opinion and that anything that the conflicts between the Institutes and his commentaries etc. are to be resolved in favor of the Institutes.

In the Institutes (8.28 - 8.34), Calvin makes it pretty clear that he thinks that the principle of the Sabbath (rest, worship, focusing on God, etc.) remains, but that the specific fixed day is not important. He acknowledges that the early church chose Sunday for good reasons (and lists them), but also made it clear that he didn't think that it was strictly necessary to observe Sunday specifically and that he wouldn't pass judgment on a church that regularly attended to the duties of worship on a different day.

He lays this all out quite unambiguously in the Institutes.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 29, 2019)

NaphtaliPress said:


> Calvin would be too strict a Sabbatarian for the PCA, and he'd be done as far as ordination particularly if he denied he ever played lawn bowling on the Lord's Day.



I've never seen nor heard of a candidate being turned down in the PCA because they were a strict Sabbatarian or because they took no exceptions to the Standards. I took no exceptions to the Standards when I was being examined and my presbytery had no problem with that.


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 29, 2019)

Blueridge Believer said:


> I doubt that Calvin or hardly any preacher from the 16-19 century could get ordained in the PCA or other denominations because his views on social issues would not be progressive enough.



Views on social issues are not typically examined when candidates come for licensure or ordination.


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 29, 2019)

jwithnell said:


> Where in the world is Calvin saying he doesn't hold to the Christian sabbath? He rejected the Jewish Sabbath with its load added by the Pharisees and the days added by the Roman church.



From his Institutes, Book 2, Chapter 8, paragraph 34:

"I do not cling so to the number seven as to bring the Church under bondage to it, nor do I condemn churches for holding their meetings on other solemn days, provided they guard against superstition. This they will do if they employ those days merely for the observance of discipline and regular order. The whole may be thus summed up: As the truth was delivered typically to the Jews, so it is imparted to us without figure; first, that during our whole lives we may aim at a constant rest from our own works, in order that the Lord may work in us by his Spirit; secondly that every individual, as he has opportunity, may diligently exercise himself in private, in pious meditation on the works of God, and, at the same time, that all may observe the legitimate order appointed by the Church, for the hearing of the word, the administration of the sacraments, and public prayer..."

He seems to have held the continental view. The big thing for Calvin was a weekly public day of worship. If that day was not Sunday, it didn't seem to bother him much.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 29, 2019)

As there is obviously some dispute as to what Calvin really believed, I welcome anyone to quote him to the contrary. An embedded quote and not a link would be helpful.


----------



## TheOldCourse (May 29, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> I've never seen nor heard of a candidate being turned down in the PCA because they were a strict Sabbatarian or because they took no exceptions to the Standards. I took no exceptions to the Standards when I was being examined and my presbytery had no problem with that.



Turned down? Perhaps not, but laughed at and criticized in disbelief for not taking any exceptions? Yes, that has certainly happened. I am personally familiar with those to which it has happened.

While Calvin did not hold the latter, more developed, Presbyterian position on the 4th commandment (nor on covenant theology, for another example of the development of Reformed theology), many in the PCA would still be under censure and discipline in Calvin's Geneva for their libertine treatment of the day. A good question to consider with yours is whether your pastor could be ordained in Calvin's Geneva.

Also, the "continental view," as opposed to the Presbyterian/Puritan one, is not a thing as has been demonstrated countless times here and elsewhere.

Reactions: Like 1 | Amen 3


----------



## Ben Chomp (May 29, 2019)

TheOldCourse said:


> Also, the "continental view," as opposed to the Presbyterian/Puritan one, is not a thing as has been demonstrated countless times here and elsewhere.



I know many Dutch Calvinists who hold to the continental view. It's articulated in the Heidelberg Catechism.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 29, 2019)

I was indulging in a bit of hyperbole. My point is despite his proto or nascent Sabbatarianism, to use Lauer's term, Calvin would be pretty much in the strict WCF camp.


Ben Chomp said:


> I've never seen nor heard of a candidate being turned down in the PCA because they were a strict Sabbatarian or because they took no exceptions to the Standards. I took no exceptions to the Standards when I was being examined and my presbytery had no problem with that.

Reactions: Amen 1


----------



## Romans922 (May 29, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> I know many Dutch Calvinists who hold to the continental view. It's articulated in the Heidelberg Catechism.



Dutch Calvinists from America...yes. The view you are attributing to those of the continent is an American invention. But the "continental view" is the historical reformed view from history (i.e. the German and Dutch Reformed from the time during and after the reformation - 1500-1700 AD), very similar if not the same as the Puritan or Westminster view.

Here's W. Robert Godfrey on the issue, "The Dutch Reformed view of the Sabbath developed over time and those who appeal to a “continental view” are usually appealing to a misunderstood moment in the history of the Dutch Reformed churches. The Heidelberg Catechism (1563) in its exposition of the fourth commandment certainly speaks very differently for the Westminster Confession written 80 years later. Still the HC does refer to Sunday as a holiday (Feiertag) which means a day of rest from ordinary work. At the Synod of Dort (1618-9) a question was posed about the Sabbath and the Synod offered a provision statement (saying that it did not have time to study this matter definitively.) These six points of Dort on the Sabbath are the only official synodical declarations of the Dutch Reformed churches although in later years the Dutch Reformed accepted and practiced the Puritan Sabbath expressed in the Westminster Confession."

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## NaphtaliPress (May 29, 2019)

The continental view has become a wax nose as far as definition. In practice, to go by Dordt, it is not much less strict than the puritan view. See Danny Hyde's :Regulae de Observatione Sabbathi: The Synod of Dort’s (1618–19) Deliverance on the Sabbath" appearing first in the PRTS journal and also in The Confessional Presbyterian 12 (2017), "sabbath" issue. I will refer again to the study paper done by my PCA Presbytery mentioned on other threads if not above, which is not known as a bastion of strict Sabbatarianism, whose study committee looking at what is the continental view, concluded it had become a useless term through modern redefinition. 


Ben Chomp said:


> I know many Dutch Calvinists who hold to the continental view. It's articulated in the Heidelberg Catechism.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Contra_Mundum (May 29, 2019)

Here is an excerpt from the Deuteronomy Sermons preached in the summer of 1555:
“Now from the foregoing we see what attitude68 we hold all Christianity and the service of God. For what was given to us in order to help us approach God, we use as an occasion for alienating ourselves from him even more. And as a result we are led astray. We must recover it all. Is not such a diabolical malice in men? Would to God that we had to look hard for examples and that they were more rare. But as everything is profaned, we see that the majority hardly care about the usage of this day which has been instituted in order that we might withdraw from all earthly anxieties, from all business affairs, to the end that we might surrender everything to God.

“Moreover, let us realize that it is not only for coming to the sermon that the day of Sunday is instituted, but that in order that we might devote all the rest of the time to praising God. Indeed! For although he nurtures us every day, nevertheless we do not sufficiently meditate on the favors he bestows on us in order to magnify them…. But when Sunday is spent not only in pastimes full of vanity, but in things which are entirely contrary to God, it seems that one has not at all celebrated Sunday [and] that God has been offended in many ways. Thus when people profane in the manner the holy order69 which God instituted to lead us to himself, why should they be astonished if all the rest of the week is degraded?”​From “The Fifth Sermon”, which, along with “The Sixth Sermon”, address the 4th commandment. Benjamin W. Farley, transl., _John Calvin’s Sermons on the Ten Commandments_ (Baker, 1980; paperback reprint 2000)

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (May 29, 2019)

So Calvin must have altered his view between 1555 when that sermon was preached and 1559 when his "definitive" edition of the Institutes was released, because his view in the Institutes is entirely at odds with what he said there, unless he was just using the word "Sunday" as a synonym for "the day that this particular church has decided to have it's weekly meetings on".


----------



## Romans922 (May 29, 2019)

SeanPatrickCornell said:


> According to a trusted Bible Teacher that I greatly respect, Calvin had said that his Institutes are the true and full expression of his religious opinion and that anything that the conflicts between the Institutes and his commentaries etc. are to be resolved in favor of the Institutes.





SeanPatrickCornell said:


> So Calvin must have altered his view between 1555 when that sermon was preached and 1559 when his "definitive" edition of the Institutes was released, because his view in the Institutes is entirely at odds with what he said there, unless he was just using the word "Sunday" as a synonym for "the day that this particular church has decided to have it's weekly meetings on".



No offense to your trust of your bible teacher or your bible teacher himself, but do you have anything to prove what he said? I've always been taught to consider the Institutes, Commentaries, and Sermons together and not separate to understand Calvin's views, with an understanding of when he wrote what he wrote.

And in the Institutes...very clearly he's speaking of the ceremonial aspects of the fourth commandment. So in this case of Sabbath keeping for the Christian, we'd all agree the ceremonial aspects have been abrogated. So even if you are correct, that doesn't change what Calvin wrote about the 4th commandment regarding it's moral nature.


----------



## Tom Hart (May 29, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Could John Calvin be ordained in your presbytery?



John Calvin's English was poor, so no doubt it would be difficult for him to pass an examination.

Reactions: Like 2 | Amen 1 | Funny 1


----------



## SeanPatrickCornell (May 29, 2019)

Maybe I am not clear on what it is exactly that I am trying to say about Calvin's view of the Sabbath, but I thought I made it plain in my earlier post. I am not trying to argue that Calvin considers the _whole _of the 4th Commandment to be abrogated (although in 8.32 he _does_ actually call it abrogated).

My only point is that in Calvin's Institutes, (contra all of the English Puritan derived Reformed Confessions) he very clearly states that keeping a _specific_ day of the week is a facet of the 4th Commandment that has been abrogated. He also very clearly states that the _reasons_ for the Sabbath have not changed; there still needs to be a day in which the church gathers for worship, men cease from their labors, masters cease from laying burdens on their servants, men focus more upon things of God and less on things of men, but exactly _which_ day that is, he makes it clear we are not bound by specifics.

"8.34 It was not, however, without a reason that the early Christians substituted what we call the Lord’s day for the Sabbath. The resurrection of our Lord being the end and accomplishment of that true rest which the ancient sabbath typified, this day, by which types were abolished serves to warn Christians against adhering to a shadowy ceremony.* I do not cling so to the number seven as to bring the Church under bondage to it, nor do I condemn churches for holding their meetings on other solemn days*, provided they guard against superstition. This they will do if they employ those days merely for the observance of discipline and regular order."

Reading 8.28 through 8.34, it is very hard to come away with the opinion that John Calvin considered the Lord's Day _and only the Lord's Day_ to be the "absolute" Christian Sabbath.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## OPC'n (May 29, 2019)

I struggled a long while about the Sabbath. It was Calvin's writings that threw me over onto the Sabbatarian side. I don't think he would appreciate how lax some are on the Sabbath these days including me sometimes.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jun 1, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Views on social issues are not typically examined when candidates come for licensure or ordination.


That is categorically false.


----------



## Susan777 (Jun 1, 2019)

Semper Fidelis said:


> That is categorically false.


I hope so.


----------



## Ben Chomp (Jun 2, 2019)

Semper Fidelis said:


> That is categorically false.



I've never seen it done in my presbytery. I was not examined on such views when I was coming up.


----------



## NaphtaliPress (Jun 2, 2019)

The Sermons on the Ten Commandments, a subset of the Deuteronomy sermons, was published with a preface dated le dernier iour d'aoust (last day of August), in 1557 and reprinted, 1558, 1559 and 1562, in Calvin's lifetime. So it's a lot tighter than between 1555 and 1559 and one has to contend with the republication concurrent with the 1559 Institutes. I don't think his views changed. It is a matter of trying to make sense of the sermons and other material and the Institutes and Sermons as some have tried to do, such as Lauer. Here is my source for the dates. 


SeanPatrickCornell said:


> So Calvin must have altered his view between 1555 when that sermon was preached and 1559 when his "definitive" edition of the Institutes was released, because his view in the Institutes is entirely at odds with what he said there, unless he was just using the word "Sunday" as a synonym for "the day that this particular church has decided to have it's weekly meetings on".


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Jun 3, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> I know many Dutch Calvinists who hold to the continental view. It's articulated in the Heidelberg Catechism.




Whatever one might call the “continental view”, or have an idea of what it might be, we can be assured of it here in the 164 session of the Synod:

Session 164, May 17 PM
Trans. R. Scott Clark

Rules on the observation of the Sabbath, or the Lord’s Day, with the agreement of the brothers from Zeeland the following concepts were explained and approved by Doctor Professors of Divinity.


In the fourth Commandment of the divine law, part is ceremonial, part is moral.
The rest of the seventh day after creation was ceremonial and its rigid observation peculiarly prescribed to the Jewish people.
Moral in fact, because the fixed and enduring day of the worship of God is appointed, for as much rest as is necessary for the worship of God and holy meditation of him.
With the Sabbath of the Jews having been abrogated, the Lord’s Day is solemnly sanctified by Christians.
From the time of the Apostles this day was always observed in the ancient Catholic Church.
This same day is thus consecrated for divine worship, so that in it one might rest from all servile works (with these excepted, which are works of charity and pressing necessity) and from those recreations which impede the worship of God.
Source: H.H. Kuyper, De Post-Acta of Nahandelingen van de nationale Synode van Dordrecht in 1618 en 1619 gehouden een Historische Studie (Amsterdam, 1899), 184–86.

Reactions: Informative 1


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jun 4, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> I've never seen it done in my presbytery. I was not examined on such views when I was coming up.


I have, several times. It's asked both at Committee level as well as on the floor. I've served on exam committee for almost a decade now.


----------



## Ben Chomp (Jun 4, 2019)

Semper Fidelis said:


> I have, several times. It's asked both at Committee level as well as on the floor. I've served on exam committee for almost a decade now.



Interesting. During which exam do these issues come up?


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Jun 5, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Interesting. During which exam do these issues come up?


Typically during the Theology Exam. Progressive neo-Calvinists tend to be more concerned about social and racial justice than theological precision in other areas. They'll bristle at the idea of not ordaining a paedocommunionist but are concerned that a minister really understands and applies the idea that the Church should be about redeeming the City.

Most are completely ambivalent about the Sabbath issue. Some Presbyteries won't even list a person's Sabbath differences as stated differences. A few years ago North Texas Overtured GA to remove parts of the Westminster Standards dealing with Recreation on he grounds that "...everyone takes that exception."


----------



## Ben Chomp (Jun 5, 2019)

Semper Fidelis said:


> Typically during the Theology Exam. Progressive neo-Calvinists tend to be more concerned about social and racial justice than theological precision in other areas. They'll bristle at the idea of not ordaining a paedocommunionist but are concerned that a minister really understands and applies the idea that the Church should be about redeeming the City.
> 
> Most are completely ambivalent about the Sabbath issue. Some Presbyteries won't even list a person's Sabbath differences as stated differences. A few years ago North Texas Overtured GA to remove parts of the Westminster Standards dealing with Recreation on he grounds that "...everyone takes that exception."



Our presbytery pretty much sticks to Westminster stuff during the theology exam and I am grateful for it. We have some more "progressive" types in our presbytery, but they are not very vocal. Asking about social justice issues during a theology exam seems out of place to me.


----------



## Romans922 (Jun 5, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> Asking about social justice issues during a theology exam seems out of place to me.



Where else would they be asked? Theology is the king of sciences, it touches everything. Theology gives us the study of justice (biblical). So to determine someone's view of justice and God's justice it is proper to ask about social justice issues.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ben Chomp (Jun 5, 2019)

Romans922 said:


> Where else would they be asked? Theology is the king of sciences, it touches everything. Theology gives us the study of justice (biblical). So to determine someone's view of justice and God's justice it is proper to ask about social justice issues.



I don't think that candidates should be examined on such views. This would imply that there are orthodox and unorthodox views on social justice and that a candidate could be dismissed for, say, personally supporting more democratic policies like universal healthcare. Or, conversely, a candidate could be dismissed for not supporting universal healthcare. It's just a little overkill.


----------



## Romans922 (Jun 5, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> I don't think that candidates should be examined on such views. This would imply that there are orthodox and unorthodox views on social justice and that a candidate could be dismissed for, say, personally supporting more democratic policies like universal healthcare. Or, conversely, a candidate could be dismissed for not supporting universal healthcare. It's just a little overkill.



It’s up to the presbytery to determine what they examine their candidates on. When a Pastor’s whole life is under scrutiny by the world and the church at all times, when the Pastor is to lead his people not just with his voice but his life, then everything can be examined. It is therefore up to the Presbytery to decide what each candidate is examined on. Your Church Government (BCO) provides the minimum a candidate must be examined on.


----------



## Ben Chomp (Jun 5, 2019)

Romans922 said:


> It’s up to the presbytery to determine what they examine their candidates on. When a Pastor’s whole life is under scrutiny by the world and the church at all times, when the Pastor is to lead his people not just with his voice but his life, then everything can be examined. It is therefore up to the Presbytery to decide what each candidate is examined on. Your Church Government (BCO) provides the minimum a candidate must be examined on.



I'm glad that we don't examine candidates on their political views. Do you think that this is helpful for the church to do so?

I would also add that if a presbytery refused to ordain a candidate because he did not believe in universal healthcare, I think that this could easily be overturned by our GA. So it's not just the prerogative of the presbytery that matters.


----------



## Romans922 (Jun 5, 2019)

Ben Chomp said:


> I'm glad that we don't examine candidates on their political views. Do you think that this is helpful for the church to do so?



Like I said it is up to the Presbytery to determine what a candidate needs to be examined on. If I saw online a candidate talking positively about critical race theory, BLM, planned parenthood, even the Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts...I’m going to ask them about it. Because as a Pastor and as a Christian - every view you hold ought to be shaped by God. You are a new creation. My being a Christian and being Reformed shapes my political views. So if there are questionable political views then absolutely I’m going to question a guy on that. I’d be negligent in my duty as a presbyter not to.

Reactions: Like 3


----------

