Regulative Principle of Worship
Over a period of time, professing Christians formulated from scripture what was termed, “the regulative principle of worship.” I believe in that. This took awhile in the history of Christianity to develop. I believe it because it is scriptural and, therefore, I want to follow it. The Second London Baptist Confession of 1689 expresses it:
The acceptable way of worshiping the true God, is instituted by himself, and so limited by his own revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imagination and devices of men, nor the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representations, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures.
One example of the seriousness of regulating worship by scripture is that of Nadab and Abihu, when they offered strange fire to the Lord (Leviticus 10). Offering strange fire meant changing the recipe for the incense for the altar of incense in the holy place. Silence was not permission for them to offer a different recipe.
God prescribed a specific recipe, spelling out percentages of the ingredients. Scripture regulated the recipe. That was an element of Old Testament worship. Since God spelled it out, that’s all you could do. Nadab and Abihu changed it. God killed them for that. This indicates the seriousness of it.
What changes with observing Christ’s birth around December 25th? Next year Sunday is actually December 28. Emphasizing Christ’s birth changes nothing that God prescribed. It’s not like changing the recipe for the altar of incense. I contend it does not violate the regulative principle of worship.
Application of the Regulative Principle
Canon of Dort
Like one Reformation group, the Puritans, another, the Dutch Reformed Church, whom like the Puritans I’m not endorsing, committed to the Regulative Principle of Worship. In 1618-19, that group held their Second Synod of Dort, the Dutch term for the town of Dordrecht. This council explained its decisions in a document, The Canons of Dort. In Article 67 of the Canon, the council says:
The Churches shall observe, in addition to Sunday, also Christmas, Easter, and Pentecost, with the following day, and whereas in most of the cities and provinces of the Netherlands the day of Circumcision and of Ascension of Christ are also observed, Ministers in every place where this is not yet done shall take steps with the Government to have them conform with the others.
Earlier in Article 63, it writes:
The Lordly Supper shall be administered once every two months, wherever possible, and it will be edifying that it take place at Easter, Pentecost, and Christmas where the circumstances of the Church permit. However, in those places where the Church has not yet been instituted, first of all Elders and Deacons shall be provided.
Helvetic Confession of 1564
Another Reformation group in Switzerland wrote Helvetic Confessions in 1536 and 1564. The second of these writes:
THE FESTIVALS OF CHRIST AND THE SAINTS. Moreover, if in Christian liberty the churches religiously celebrate the memory of the Lord’s nativity, circumcision, passion, resurrection, and of his ascension into heaven, and the sending of the Holy Spirit upon his disciples, we approve of it highly. but we do not approve of feasts instituted for men and for saints. Holy days have to do with the first Table of the Law and belong to God alone.
Finally, holy days which have been instituted for the saints and which we have abolished, have much that is absurd and useless, and are not to be tolerated. In the meantime, we confess that the remembrance of saints, at a suitable time and place, is to be profitably commended to the people in sermons, and the holy examples of the saints set forth to be imitated by all.
Variations of Applications
All of these varied groups, including the Puritans, claimed the Bible as their final authority. They disagreed on the application of the regulative principle. Some said “no” on the organ. Certain ones said only psalms and no hymns. Groups differed on a liturgical calendar. They had their unique reasons for all of these variations, but all believed and practiced the regulative principle of worship.
Puritans sprinkled infants. How many infants do we see baptized in scripture, let alone sprinkled? Sure, Pilgrims and Baptists separated from the Church of England. Many Puritans, however, saw no problem with a state church as seen in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. Puritans heavily involved and led the English Civil War. Most Puritans would not use musical instruments and sang only Psalms (total Psalmody).
Word Meanings
“Christmas” derives from “Christ’s Mass.” “Sunday” derives from “Day of the Sun” and Hellenistic astrology. If I called you “gay” in the not too distant past, that was considered a compliment. Not anymore. The word “mass” comes from the Latin missa, which means “to send or dismiss.” You could argue that “Christmas” literally means “Christ sent,” like John 17:18, “As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.”
If I say, “Merry Christmas” to you, I’m not saying, “Go have a merry time at Roman Catholic Mass.” No. This is a joyous time, like when the ark returns to Jerusalem in 2 Samuel 6. This symbolizes God’s presence back in Jerusalem and David celebrates with all his might. Christmas means “Christ’s birth” to most. Be gone the idea that every word must revert to its original etymology. It’s one reason we revise our dictionaries — words change in meaning based on usage. Here’s a definition you might read: “the annual commemoration by Christians of the birth of Jesus Christ on Dec 25.”
Special Occasions
Philadelphia Confession
A liturgical calendar acknowledges special occasions. The Philadelphia Confession of 1742 says:
The reading of the Scriptures, preaching, and hearing the Word of God, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord; as also the administration of baptism, and the Lord’s supper, are all parts of religious worship of God, to be performed in obedience to Him, with understanding, faith, reverence, and godly fear; moreover, solemn humiliation, with fastings, and thanksgiving, upon special occasions, ought to be used in a holy and religious manner.
Jesus and the Feast of Dedication
I call to your attention the words, “special occasions.” Churches advocated for special occasions. Regarding this, Stephen Doe writes concerning the regulative principle of worship:
God commands us to worship him once weekly in a corporate manner, but allows us to apply biblical principles to worship him at other times. The church under the new covenant does not have less liberty than the church under the old covenant; we are not the underage church, but the church which has been baptized in the Spirit of Christ. If we were to apply the regulative principle without clearly understanding these things, then we would have to condemn the apostolic church for meeting daily, since God had never commanded such meetings. Instead, they understood that what God was commanding was for them to worship him acceptably (cf. John 4:24; Rom. 12:2; Heb. 10:25; 13:15).
This balance is seen in the example of our Savior, who exercised his liberty of conscience, while not violating the regulative principle, when he attended the Feast of Dedication (that is, Hanukkah; cf. John 10:22). That was an extra-biblical feast not commanded by God in Scripture, but begun by the Jews to commemorate the rededication of the temple after the close of the Old Testament. Jesus was free to go up to Jerusalem or not to go up. God commands us to worship, and Jesus was using that occasion to obey the command of God.
The events on a liturgical calendar are not special occasions because a church sets them apart for observation. No, they are special because they are events in the life of Jesus Christ. If a church adds Thanksgiving, Mothers Day, and Fathers Day, those are justifiable. These do not violate a regulative principle.
Keeping Holy
The term holiday has diminished in its meaning. If I say, Happy Holiday, today, I might mean something akin to a Hallmark card greeting. It probably is the opposite of holy, the meaning of “Holy Day” or “holiday.” When we observe it, set apart for special emphasis, then it is holy, like the ground around the burning bush with Moses.
Exodus 20:8 says, “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” I could say, “Remember the birth of Christ, to keep it holy.” “Remember the resurrection of Christ, to keep it holy.” If we can keep something holy, then we can sanctify something. We can set something apart to keep it holy, rather than just being a worldly item during the year. Churches can and should do that. This is the value aspect, I’m advocating, for a liturgical calendar.
(More to Come)
Kent wrote:
” If we can keep something holy, then we can sanctify something.”
Are you trying to justify Christmas with statements as above?
Among many weak and false statements made to justify a day such as Christmas, the one above is as weak of an argument you can make.
You mentioned verses like Jesus attending a day to preach at the temple to justify a pagan day that the world celebrates to a false Jesus? He went to minister, just as he did when he went to a wedding. That does not justify “the church” justifyings days for the body of Christ to uphold.
What we do not need are Baal trees that the heathen use (Jeremiah 10) in churches or in our homes. I have no doubt that when they kill the two prophets of God in Revelation 11, they will be celebrating Christmas and saying “Merry Christmas”, taking presents from under their trees throughout the world, and saying “peace of earth and good will to men” by finally killing those two who “hate humanity” and that caused misery amoung the world for 3 1/2 years.
You really need to rethink your position.
Tom
Tom,
That statement in a three part series is not the argument. It is a challenge to keep something holy. We can honor the Lord’s birth as a church and should. What definitely is no argument is the speculation that the people who kill the prophets in Revelation 11 will have Christmas trees and be saying “Merry Christmas.” I’m fine publishing your comment and having people reading it, then judging its validity.
Kent,
Do you actually believe that Christmas is honoring Jesus Christ? It is no different than the pagan Easter.
Everyday is a holy day unto the Lord. When the world celebrates days that we are not commanded in the scriptures to uphold (according to the scriptures, there are good traditions), then we should separate ourselves from the world.
You have mentioned all kinds of reasons to separate from the other churches, some to which I agree and others I do not, yet you cannot accept biblical reasons for being separate from the world in celebrating a day that you know Jesus Christ was not born on? He came unto his own, the Jews, therefore fulfilled OT prophecies and types, therefore He was born on the Feast of Tabernacles or Trumpets (September-October).
Why would we accept mixture of trees, santa clause, presents and many other religious practices of pagans for a non scriptural Jesus?
Same arguments go for Easter. If it is not in the bible and Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants practice it, than it is dubious or just plain devilish.
Tom
Tom,
I think this will be it. You already made these points and now you’re just driving them into the ground. I don’t agree with you. I believe you are wrong. You can be over litigious, over scrupulous, like Peter not eating with the Gentiles, like the Amish wearing their muted clothing. It becomes virtue signaling. Look at how holy I am everyone!
One clue that someone is doing this is that he misrepresents what you’re saying. He also ignores what you’re saying. He doesn’t try to understand it.
It’s kind of tell tale here. I’m saying it’s unknown when he is born and I think people have good arguments for their given positions. I’ve read them. You’re saying it’s September-October, others say December (they’re the wicked ones), and Thomas seems to say that it is in May. What’s important to you and others seems to be, and I don’t fully know: “Do not celebrate Christ’s birth in December because that is wicked.” Why is it wicked? Because Christmas associates itself with trees of the nature of idols and then the darkness of paganism and the Winter solstice. No, people might do that. They also commercialize the time, as to take the focus off “the reason for the season” (quotes used purposefullY). Yet, people do a lot of things. They yield their body parts either to unrighteousness or unrighteousness, but that doesn’t mean the body itself is bad. If it were, how could the body be a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God ever?
I’m really arguing for in a distinct way, a purposeful way, keeping these events about Christ. You don’t even comment on that. You don’t really pick out anything positive. It’s all scorched earth, all bad. I don’t agree with you. There are many things you do say you believe that I think are far more problematic that I’ve heard you express, but you come down hard on someone who wants to celebrate Christ at Christmas. Nope, can’t be done in your book.
Kent,
“One clue that someone is doing this is that he misrepresents what you’re saying. He also ignores what you’re saying. He doesn’t try to understand it.”
I misrepresented nothing. I have heard you arguments from 100 different ways to justify “Christmas” and “Easter”. And your reply is “How holy I am” because I disagree with your arguments and ideas?
You and I agree that the church ought to be holy, live holy and teach holy doctrine, but then you accuse me of being too holy when I call out days that the world worships as being unholy?
Brother, when one gets offended that easy, it should teach you something about your own heart and beliefs.
Your right. Discussing this with closed minded individuals that talk themselves into anything is futile.
Tom
Tom,
I decided to allow you to make one more comment, but this is it. Towards the beginning of this discussion, Brother Mat came on with a pretty good comment. He seemed to lean in the Thomas Ross direction, but he understood Romans 14:5, there is liberty in this matter. I would allow for your stricter standard on this issue and wouldn’t judge you as wicked, but when you take it to the degree you do, I believe you add an unnecessary scruple to scripture, making your standard like it is a commandment of God. It isn’t. This post is not about that. It’s about the validity and value of a liturgical calendar. This isn’t personal, you really are still arguing a red herring or strawman. This is not listening, even like I said. If someone doesn’t want to take your extreme view on this, he’s closed minded and wicked. It really is just the opposite here. You can take your position. Your approach is litigious and over scrupulous.
Just to make sure I understand what you are arguing here:
Exodus 20:8 says, “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” I could say, “Remember the birth of Christ, to keep it holy.” “Remember the resurrection of Christ, to keep it holy.” If we can keep something holy, then we can sanctify something. We can set something apart to keep it holy, rather than just being a worldly item during the year. Churches can and should do that. This is the value aspect, I’m advocating, for a liturgical calendar.
Are you saying that in the same way that God set the sabbath day apart for Israel, so we have the authority to set apart sacred days that He never set apart for the church to celebrate, by creating a liturgical calendar never ordained by God? I tend to think that you don’t really believe that, but I would appreciate the clarification. Worshipping on the Sabbath was not a liberty issue in Israel. Failing to do it got you executed. Thank you.
Thomas,
I had a whole comment written, but I decided instead not to clarify, because I think you get it.