# Puritan versus Continental Reformed Sabbath Keeping?



## rbcbob (Oct 8, 2012)

How does the Sabbath Keeping of those holding to the 3 Forms of Unity differ in principal and practice from that of those holding to the Westminster and London Baptist Confessions? The WCF and LBC, reflecting a Puritan view seem to set forth a more clearly defined manner of Sabbath Keeping than does the 3 Forms of Unity. What do these differences look like when practically lived out? 

*I would especially welcome 3 Forms of Unity responses*. 

*WCF 21:7*. As it is of the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so, in his Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto him: which, from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week; and, from the resurrection of Christ, was changed into the first day of the week, which in Scripture is called the Lord's Day, and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath.
*8.* This Sabbath is to be kept holy unto the Lord when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts about their wordly employments and recreations; but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.

*LBC 22:7*. As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God's appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord's day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.
*8*. The sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering their common affairs aforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all day, from their own works, words and thoughts, about their worldly employment and recreations, but are also taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.
*
HC Question 103. What does God require in the fourth commandment?*
Answer: First, that the ministry of the gospel and the schools be maintained; (a) and that I, especially on the sabbath, that is, on the day of rest, diligently frequent the church of God, (b) to hear his word, (c) to use the sacraments, (d) publicly to call upon the Lord, (e) and contribute to the relief of the poor. (f) Secondly, that all the days of my life I cease from my evil works, and yield myself to the Lord, to work by his Holy Spirit in me: and thus begin in this life the eternal sabbath. (g)


----------



## rbcbob (Oct 8, 2012)

Thank you Josh. That should occupy me this afternoon!


----------



## rbcbob (Oct 8, 2012)

Josh those threads did not quite hit the mark of what I am looking for. The HC seems to divert the practical implications of the Lord's *Day* to the remaining daily life of the believer on earth. That seems to side step the practical outworking of the Lord's Day itself.

One URCNA pastor posted here in 2005 

"Though most Reformed churches would follow the Presbyterian/Puritan view of the Sabbath *our official confessional stance is rather weak*. It rightly expresses our duties before the Lord but it does not forbid working on the Sabbath (though implied by calling it a day of rest)."

I tend to agree with him. Any 3Formers want to shed light on this?


----------



## Guido's Brother (Oct 8, 2012)

If I may:

Saying that the Heidelberg Catechism is weak on this is akin to saying that it is weak on same-sex marriage. Nowhere does the Heidelberg Catechism explicitly state that same-sex marriage or homosexual relationships are forbidden by the Word of God. But it emerges from a context in which homosexual behaviour as an abomination was widely recognized to be the clear teaching of the Word of God. I think the same can be said for keeping the Lord's Day holy by refraining from unnecessary labour. There were some things that just went without saying. By the time of the Synod of Dort, however, these things had become increasingly contentious and a synodical statement was issued -- you can find it here. 

And yes, generally speaking, churches which rigorously hold to the TFU do tend to be just as strict on the Lord's Day as their confessional Presbyterian brothers.


----------



## mvdm (Oct 8, 2012)

Guido's Brother said:


> And yes, generally speaking, churches which rigorously hold to the TFU do tend to be just as strict on the Lord's Day as their confessional Presbyterian brothers.



Agreed. I see no significant difference between the WCF and how continental Reformed view the Heidelberg on Sabbath keeping.


----------



## rbcbob (Oct 8, 2012)

Guido's Brother said:


> And yes, generally speaking, churches which rigorously hold to the TFU do tend to be just as strict on the Lord's Day as their confessional Presbyterian brothers.





mvdm said:


> Agreed. I see no significant difference between the WCF and how continental Reformed view the Heidelberg on Sabbath keeping.



I appreciate these responses. I have not had the pleasure of knowing any TFU folks personally and am happy to hear first hand of your strict Sabbath keeping!


----------



## Alan D. Strange (Oct 8, 2012)

Bob:

With respect to this question, you might find interesting what I posted a while back on Matthew Tuininga's blog, who, as a life-long member of a continental Reformed church, was musing about the differences between the Sabbath theology of the WSC and the TFU, noting that many TFU confessionalists were actually more observant of the Lord's Day than a number of us Presbyterians (particularly PCA and OPC). I agreed with him and made the following observations:

"I’ve often observed what you have from the opposite vantage point: that those who have a theology of strict Sabbatarianism, as do those Presbyterians who adhere to the WCF, ironically, have a lower view of it, at least in this country, than do those who come from a, supposedly, lower “continental” view of the Sabbath. 

As an OP minister in NJ for ten years, I sought to inculcate a healthy Sabbatarianism in my flock. It was hard, particularly given the atmosphere there, with Little League and soccer on Sunday mornings. Not so here in the Midwest among the Dutch. It was my delight in coming to Mid-America to witness, among many other things, the wonderful way that the Sabbath was observed in “Dutch” churches, even though they did not have a Sabbath theology like Westminster’s. 

Churches filled with folk morning and evening on the Lord’s Day and a serious yet joyful observance of it. I have found many Reformed, at least those who have remained confessional, I think especially of the URC, to have a sounder Sabbath practice than many Presbyterians."

Having also gotten to know many good Canadian Reformed brethren as well (as Wes, above), I have found them to be committed Sabbatarians. May the Lord use them, and other WCF adherents, to provoke our churches to a more serious Sabbath practice.

Peace,
Alan


----------



## jogri17 (Oct 9, 2012)

In my own reading I have come to the opinion that the Continental Traditions (more than just the Dutch including French!) tend to not put too much accent on the theology of the Sabbath/Lord's Day, while the later Puritan/Westminster documents do (probably because of King James's Book of Sports). In my own experience, with the exception of the RPCNA, the major Presbyterian bodies (OPC and PCA) tend to have a very laxed view, while the more Dutchy (Reformed) Churches (URC, Canref, and even the RCUSA and CRC believe it or not in my experience!) tend to have a more ''Daylong centered'' mentality than Presbyterian's who put the emphesis on 1-2 hours a Sunday. 

There are some who believe that there was no historical difference between two points of view ( Did Calvin go bowling? Coldwell, Chris. Calvin in the Hands of the Philistines, Or, Did Calvin Bowl on the Sabbath? 6.31.) but I do think there is a legitimate difference but in terms of accent and not of substance.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Oct 9, 2012)

Isn't the Continental view of the Sabbath equivalent to saying that after I've done my duty and gone to church, then I get to have the rest of the day to do whatever I want?

Oh, wait, that's just what "some" PCA ordination candidates appear (to me) to mean when they say "I take a continental view of the Sabbath."

I'll never forget what happened when I went for ordination and I thought I was going to take an exception to the Standards on the 4th Commandment... what an eye opener!


----------



## rbcbob (Oct 9, 2012)

jogri17 said:


> There are some who believe that there was no historical difference between two points of view ( Did Calvin go bowling? Coldwell, Chris. Calvin in the Hands of the Philistines, Or, Did Calvin Bowl on the Sabbath? 6.31.) but I do think there is a legitimate difference but in terms of accent and not of substance.



I recently acquired a book written in 1862 by a Presbyterian who defended Calvin and the other Reformers against the generalized charges of being anti-Sabbatarian. Here are a few choice quotes:

"In yet another way did the Reformers show their faith in the doctrine of a divine and permanent Sabbath. They considered the Lord's day as coming under the authoritative direction of the Fourth Commandment. They erred, indeed, as we conceive, by regarding this commandment as partly ceremonial, an error which has involved some of their other statements in confusion, if not contradiction, and has been turned to bad account in anti-Sabbatic opinion and practice, both on the Continent and in this [Scotland] country." p.418 - THE SABBATH VIEWED IN THE LIGHT OF REASON, REVELATION, AND HISTORY, WITH SKETCHES OF ITS LITERATURE, James Gilfillan, 1862

"... it may even be allowed that the Reformers erred to some extent in regard to the weekly holy day, while it is held that they did not thereby forfeit their claim to be ranked among the friends of the institution, inasmuch as the truth decidedly outweighs the error. Calvin, Luther, and, indeed all the principal men of the Reformation except Knox, were of the opinion of Augustine and others of the Fathers, that the fourth was distinguished from the rest of the commandments by being partly of a ceremonial character. They seemed not to know how the transference of the sacred rest from the last to the first day of the week could be reconciled to the doctrine of a moral, unchangeable precept and therefore adopted the theory of a double aspect of the commandment, one part being ceremonial which has passed away, the other being moral and binding. The distinction is as unnecessary as it is untenable. ... The Sabbath had a ceremonial or typical character under the Levitical economy, but not so its royal precept, This was the distinction that ought to have been made by the Fathers and Reformers, but their adopting another, though an error, did not originate in a low estimate of the day of rest, which they regarded, the typical aspect having disappeared, as still the charge of a moral statute. The error, however, had the effect of perplexing their views on the subject, and leading to the use of certain expressions, which have exposed their respect for the institution to suspicion, and the cause itself to practical injury."-pp.467-468 THE SABBATH VIEWED IN THE LIGHT OF REASON, REVELATION, AND HISTORY, WITH SKETCHES OF ITS LITERATURE, James Gilfillan, 1862


----------



## Romans922 (Oct 9, 2012)

This was helpful to me (especially #6) from another thread, written by Rev. Hyde:



> Finally, any doubts about whether the so-called "Continental" view of the Sabbath is in any way less strict than the English view are laid to rest by the Synod of Dort's doctrinal deliverance (things the Synod of the churches declares that are binding on all the churches) of its 164th session on May 17, 1619:
> 
> _1. There is in the fourth commandment of the divine law a ceremonial and a moral element.
> 2. The ceremonial element is the rest of the seventh day after creation, and the strict observance of that day imposed especially on the Jewish people.
> ...




I also in the few years of going to presbytery meetings have seen enough men come who state they hold to the continental view and they mean that they can do what they want on Sundays as long as they go 'to church'. And they all have the same example of what that means, throwing the ball with their kid in the backyard. Sickening. Where are they learning this heinousness?


----------



## Andrew P.C. (Oct 9, 2012)

Well, from Ursinus himself, he writes on the 103rd question:


> "Thou shalt do no manner of work". When God forbids us to work on the Sabbath day, he does not forbid every kind of work, but only such works as are servile -- such as hinder the worship of God, and the design and use of the ministry of the church. [Pg. 558 of his commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism]



This is after he wrote:


> "keep holy". To keep holy the Sabbath, is not to spend the day in slothfulness and idleness; but to avoid sin, and to perform such works as are holy. God is said to sanctify the Sabbath differently from what men do. God is said to sanctify the Sabbath, because he institutes it for divine worship. Men are said to sanctify it, when they devote it to the purpose for which God instituted it. [Pg. 558 of his commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism]


----------



## Andres (Oct 9, 2012)

Alan D. Strange said:


> many TFU confessionalists were actually more observant of the Lord's Day than a number of us Presbyterians (particularly PCA and OPC).



Regrettably, I also have found this to be far too true.


----------



## Dordts5 (Oct 9, 2012)

I have been a member of RPCNA, PCA, and OPC. in my experience the RPCNA holds the most consistent understanding and keeping of the Sabbath. In the local congregation that I was a member, every Lord's Day we ate at the Lord's Table only after we broke bread as a congregation with a fellowship meal. Sabbath keeping was kept in this way as we met from 9:30 am and communion would often linger past 3:30pm. 6 hours of worship? Yes, every Lord's Day. I don't know if this is common practice in other local congregations, but it was in the consistory/presbytery of which we belonged. It would be consistent to say that the OPC would come next in consistency and then the PCA. The deciding factor would be based on the seeming objectives of each denomination. The OPC keep with a more traditional view of evangelizing, while the PCA is much more contemporary. In my experience PCA is becoming more concerned with size of membership as opposed to the other two, more conservative, denominations. The larger the congregation the more influx of perspectives and opinions, and its harder to maintain close pastoral care of the members. 

There is a small community by the name of Pella, Iowa in the central part of the state. It is a classic Dutch town, and very conservative. I have an acquaintance that lives there and I think I remember him telling me there are 13 (or so?) Reformed churches there. Sabbath keeping, he said, is so honored there that there are absolutely no businesses open on Lord's Day and even pagans do not mow their yards. He also added that he knows of people that were brought before their consistory/session for discipline for not keeping the Sabbath Day holy. I have personal experience in other Dutch Reformed churches, as I have worked across the US and visited several, mostly in the Plains States, and notice that they are much more observant in their Sabbath keeping. Their Sabbath is to them a time of worship, fellowship and rest accompanied by nothing else. Whereas, in the Puritan churches there is a small amount of leeway in thought and habit to allow for a football game, take in a movie, or have the local restaurant host your family and friends.


----------



## Jackie Kaulitz (Oct 10, 2012)

I just want to say, what a great topic and question!  I'm learning lots from this discussion. Thanks for all who participated


----------

