Marrow Man
Drunk with Powder
I am interested in getting the opinions of the members of the PB with regard to Sabbath issues and the WCF. As most of us know, it has become fashionable in our day to mock the Puritan view of the Sabbath. I was wondering how members of the PB would view statements such as these below on the issue, and what responses might be appropriate. These are quotes from a much larger paper which, by necessity, must remain anonymous at this point. Suffice it to say, these are not my own personal views.
First, with regard to issues of the Law:
And now, with regard to Westminster Sabbatarianism:
I await your responses.
First, with regard to issues of the Law:
I do not believe in a strict division of the law into moral, ceremonial, and civic laws. Such distinctions are useful at some lower level, but cannot be maintained strictly. I believe the law should be treated as a unified whole. This is how the Bible treats it in both New and Old Testaments. It simply calls it “the Law.” I believe that the entire law, including the Ten Commandments, was a shadow or type of Christ. The law pointed forward to the person and work of Christ, and to the blessings of the Kingdom he would bring. The Ten Commandments point forward to the morality that will exist in the Kingdom of God, and, by the Holy Spirit, already do exist in the Church. I believe the Law is useful, and meant for meditation and moral reflection, and the Westminster Catechisms are faithful examples of the sort of reflection that Christians should do with the Law. However, I think the confession itself views the Law too highly, and does not acknowledge its limitations. All of the Law and the Prophets did not hang on the Ten Commandments, but on love. I believe the Sabbath was fulfilled by Christ, and Christians have, by the Holy Spirit, entered into the rest foreshadowed by the Sabbath law, such that they are freed from the bondage of sin, and also, such that labor is redeemed from the curse of Genesis 3, inwardly, if not yet outwardly (2 Corinthians 4:16, 5:17). At his second coming, the full Sabbath rest, inward and outward, will be brought by Christ. I believe that all days are equally holy (Romans 14:5, Colossians 2:16), and that nothing is lawful on one day and unlawful on another day. Christians should worship every day, and do good on every day. I believe that the first day of the week is especially appropriate for gatherings of public worship, because it commemorates Jesus’ resurrection, and the New Testament attests that Christian worship occurred regularly on this day. I believe, on the basis of the golden rule, that Christians should try to abstain from doing things that might keep other Christians from public worship. For instance, if one eats out for lunch on Sunday, chances are that some Christian was required to be absent from Church so that they could prepare the meal or wait tables instead. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This is to live by the rule of love under grace.
And now, with regard to Westminster Sabbatarianism:
The Christian ethic for the Lord’s Day is not “Sabbatarianism” based on an ideology of transferring the Old Testament Sabbath to the first day of the week. This misses the point of the Lord’s Day and woefully underestimates Christ’s fulfilling of the Sabbath and the Christian’s participation through the Holy Spirit in the eschatological rest of God. The Puritan view of the Lord’s Day, such as seen in the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, regulated by thorough restriction and exaction, is more in line with Jewish letter-of-the-law ethics, not Christian living-in-the-Kingdom-by-the-Spirit ethics. The austerity of the Puritan Sabbath seems to out-Pharasaize the Pharisees by even forbidding thoughts about “worldly employments or recreations.” This is a terrible mistake. The surpassing of the righteousness of the Pharisees (Matthew 5:20) is not achieved by fencing the law even more rigorously than the Pharisees did, but by tearing down the fences and being set free by the Spirit to live presently in the coming eschatological age of freedom, thereby giving willing obedience and submission to God. The Jews wanted to obey the law, so they went to synagogue on the Sabbath. Christians want to live in the Spirit, so they assemble as the Church on the Lord’s Day. There is a different principle and motivation at work. The ethic of the Lord’s Day is the same as for the whole Christian life: it is enabling, freeing, and positive, not restrictive or exacting. The willing obedience of God’s people, who through the Spirit already live in the reality of the eschatological kingdom, replaces and surpasses the Jewish system of restrictions and exactions according to the letter of the law. It is in this way that Christian righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees.
It is thus somewhat misleading to call the Lord’s Day “the Christian Sabbath.” The Christian Sabbath is the whole freedom of the Kingdom of God, obtained by Christ, and enjoyed through the Holy Spirit now. The Lord’s Day, then, is not best understood as the Christian Sabbath, but as an eschatological day in distinction from the old Sabbath. It is the Christian celebration of entering into Christ’s resurrection. Questions of what is forbidden or required on the Lord’s Day are out of place, and motivated by a wrong understanding. As on every other day, sin is forbidden and love is required. The letter of the law is transcended by the law of the Spirit of life and of liberty for the adopted children of God (Romans 7:6, 8:2-4, Galatians 5:18).Their days become days of worship as all life and all work are freed and sanctified under the banner of the new creation. The Lord’s Day becomes a particular day for worship as Christians assemble together on the day of their Lord’s resurrection to commune with him in and receive the blessings of his death, resurrection, ascension, and return.
I await your responses.