# Acts of Necessity and Mercy



## Scott Bushey (Jan 29, 2016)

http://www.semperreformanda.com/nicholas-bownd-on-acts-of-mercy-and-necessity/

Just received my copy of Nicholas Bownd's work on the Sabbath:

http://www.naphtali.com/2015/02/05/prepub-offer-sabbathum-veteris-et-novi-testamenti-or-the-true-doctrine-of-the-sabbath/

I was greatly interested in Bownd's understanding of Acts of mercy and necessity. It was of my opinion that doing any work on the sabbath day was frowned upon even in these instances if one was taking a salary. Bownd treats this subject excellently and seems to concur with my understanding.

I was recently approached by my manager about working various sabbath days. I told her that I cannot and when I was hired, that had been discussed. I did tell her however, that if she is stuck and no one available to cover the shift, I would gladly come in and then take my portion of gas and food from the payroll they give me and then give the rest of the funds to my church.


----------



## Ed Walsh (Jan 29, 2016)

Scott Bushey said:


> Acts of Necessity and Mercy



Several thoughts from Scripture and Fisher's Catechism:

Exodus 34:21 (KJV)
Six days thou shalt work, but on the seventh day thou shalt rest: in earing time and in harvest thou shalt rest.

Exodus 34:21 (NIV) “Six days you shall labor, but on the seventh day you shall rest; even during the plowing season and harvest you must rest.

From Fisher’s Catechism

Q. 6. If the weather is unseasonable through the week, do not reaping and ingathering, in that case become works of necessity on the Sabbath?
A. By no means; because any unseasonableness of the weather that may happen, being common and general, proceeds only from the course of God’s ordinary providence, which we ought not to distrust, in regard of his promise, that, “While the earth remaineth, seed-time and harvest — shall not cease,” Gen. 8:22.

Q. 7. If a field of corn is in hazard of being carried away by the unexpected inundation of a river, is it lawful to endeavour the preservation of them upon the Sabbath?
A. Yes; because the dispensation is extraordinary; the case not common nor general; and the damage likewise in an ordinary way, irrecoverable.


----------



## MW (Jan 29, 2016)

If it is a work of necessity the employee may work if asked, and should receive the wages of his hire; but if it is not a work of necessity the employer should not be operating on the Sabbath and the Christian should reject the offer to work on principle. Pragmatics have no place outside the boundaries of God's law. It is no part of Christian duty to help another transgress God's law and become a transgressor of the law.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 29, 2016)

MW said:


> If it is a work of necessity the employee may work if asked, and should receive the wages of his hire; but if it is not a work of necessity the employer should not be operating on the Sabbath and the Christian should reject the offer to work on principle. Pragmatics have no place outside the boundaries of God's law. It is no part of Christian duty to help another transgress God's law and become a transgressor of the law.



Matthew,
I agree. I guess I was speaking within a vacuum of sorts. My bad. I work in the medical field where this idea is abused, in my opinion.


----------



## MW (Jan 29, 2016)

Scott Bushey said:


> I work in the medical field where this idea is abused, in my opinion.



Scott, I can't comment without details, but there are obviously valid works of necessity in the medical field.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 29, 2016)

Matthew,
I get that...Bownd addresses some of that in the link (if you're interested).


----------



## MW (Jan 29, 2016)

Scott Bushey said:


> I get that...Bownd addresses some of that in the link (if you're interested).



Scott, I have the physical book, which I read with great interest; I appreciate you have made this section available for the internet.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 29, 2016)

Amen. I really loved this portion as this has been on my mind as of recent


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 30, 2016)

I reread the portion of Bownd's work; from what I can tell, nursing professions would get the green light. This does not mean that nurses would be able to work the Lord's day, perpetually, as that would be a matter of the heart and sinful. Periodic work, i.e your shift, would fall within the legal realm. Doctors, as well (except for elective work). Bownd does make mention of not taking a full days pay for doctors who are involved in services, just taking the cost for meds, etc. not labor. He goes on to imply that things of precaution, i.e. waiting for the chance that someone may break into a home, or there may be a fire are not lawful (of course, if I am understanding him correctly) and fall within the realms of faith that God is sovereign and will protect.

Additionally, in England, 1677, the civil law changed in that the 'Sunday Observance Act' was passed. In that, the law stated, 'all should spend Sunday, not in trading, traveling, worldly labor, business or work of their ordinary callings but in exercising themselves...in the duties of piety and true religion, publicly and privately'. Packer. Quest for Godliness. 236

Consider this in Bownd's day.


----------



## Wayne (Jan 30, 2016)

Do you know _why_ acts of necessity and of mercy are allowable?


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 30, 2016)

Of course...but these acts and these necessities have limits to which I believe are abused by some.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wayne (Jan 30, 2016)

I was looking for a fuller statement as to _why_--what's the foundational theological reason behind allowing for works of either necessity or mercy?


----------



## earl40 (Jan 30, 2016)

Wayne said:


> I was looking for a fuller statement as to _why_--what's the foundational theological reason behind allowing for works of either necessity or mercy?



Mark 2.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Jan 30, 2016)

earl40 said:


> Wayne said:
> 
> 
> > I was looking for a fuller statement as to _why_--what's the foundational theological reason behind allowing for works of either necessity or mercy?
> ...



Earl, 
I am pretty sure Mr. Sparkman knows the biblical references. 

Wayne,
Did you peruse the attached doc from Bownd as it pretty much answers that question.


----------



## earl40 (Jan 30, 2016)

Scott Bushey said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > Wayne said:
> ...



Indeed,  though I believe a work of necessity done on the sabbath and why Jesus allowed such is explained to us with verse 27. "And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:" A man who needs food or mercy to live on the sabbath would be allowed to do things that God providentially brings about on some occasions.


----------



## Wayne (Jan 30, 2016)

Scott:

I did not read the Bownd excerpt, but on scanning it just now, am surprised that, at least in this passage, he makes no reference to John 5:17. Anyway, that's the text I had in mind with my question, as it seems to more directly inform what is allowable on the Sabbath. The Father's work of providence (necessity) and the Son's work of salvation (mercy) inform what we, by analogy, may permissibly do. I don't disagree with Bownd's conclusions; I just think this verse relevant.



> But He answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working." (NASB)
> 
> But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. (KJV)


----------

