Vaughnshire Farm

Like R.C. Jr. stated in his latest Kingdom Notes we too rejoice that God sent His Son!  In like manner, as R.C. is grateful for the Puritans and the good they did for the Kingdom of Heaven, we are grateful for R.C. Sproul Jr and the good he has done for the Kingdom of Heaven.  However, like R.C. disagrees with the puritans on Christmas, so must we disagree with R.C. on Christmas.

I agree with so much of what R.C. stands for and what he has given the church in this generation.  The entire idea of being “simple, separate, and deliberate” for the sake of the Kingdom is something that resonates within my very being.  So it is with inner turmoil that I even voice a dissent.  I will endevor to be as gracious as possible, while still seeking the truth on this important matter.  I have been asking questions on the issue of Christmas for several years as evidence by the postings from last year on December 25th and the summary post in march.

There are many points to this fairly deep theological discussion, many of which I have mixed feelings about.  But for this posts there are two points I’d like to address.  These are two particular items that seem to be ignored by my Presbyterian friends, which I would welcome an answer to.

First, the puritans where not alone in their rejection of the holiday. The Scotch-Irish Presbyterians where in league with them, along with many other reform minded groups.  In fact according to many of the articles and videos studied most of these groups did not embrace Christmas until the mid to late 1800’s; the obvious exceptions being the Anglicans and Lutherans.  (See section 6 on this article for one reference.)

Secondly, no one seems to address the issue of the second commandment as it relates to this subject and the regulative principle of worship.  Specifically I am thinking of the 109th question in the Westminster Larger Catechism.

Q. 109 What are the sins forbidden in the second commandment?

A. The sins forbidden are all devising, counseling, commanding, using, and any wise approving, any religious worship not instituted by God himself; all superstitious devices, corrupting the worship of God, adding to it, or taking from it, whether invented and taken up of ourselves, or received by tradition from others, though under the title of antiquity, custom, devotion, good intent, or any pretence whatsoever.

There seem to be some pretty strong points here against Christmas or other church sanctioned holidays that I have not seen my Christmas celebrating friends address.

I’ll grant some additional complexity to the issue as we look at jurisdictions or spheres of authority.  How do we answer the question of Christmas as it relates to family government, church government, and civil government?  Each of these are distinct jurisdictions created and ordered by God.  As such, he speaks to how each of these should operate.

I think most of those in the reformed faith would agree the civil government does not have the authority to establish a religious holiday other than specific days of fasting and thanksgiving.  If I remember my David Barton studies correctly this was a 3 day debate in the Continental Congress when it finally concluded in the affirmative, specifically and only, for days of fasting and thanksgiving.  In the story that David Barton relates the body drew heavily from the book of Ester, and ultimately concluded the matter with the following resolution: (- which I quote more for the separation of church and state folks than for the Christmas discussion.)

IN CONGRESS DECEMBER 11, 1776.
WHEREAS, the just War into which the United States of America have been forced by Great-Britain, is likely to be still continued by the same Violence and Injustice which have hitherto animated the Enemies of American freedom:

And, whereas it becomes all public Bodies, as well as private Persons, to reverence the Providence of GOD, and look up to him as the supreme Disposer of all Events, and the Arbiter of the Fate of Nations:

Therefore the CONGRESS hereby RESOLVE,

That it be recommended to all the States, as soon as possible to appoint a Day of solemn Fasting and Humiliation, to implore of Almighty GOD the Forgiveness of the many Sins prevailing among all Ranks, and to beg the Countenance and Assistance of his Providence in the Prosecution of this just and necessary War.  The Congress do also in the most earnest manner recommend to all the Members of the United States, and particularly to the Officers civil and military under them, the Exercise of Repentance and Reformation; and further, do require of the said Officers of the military Department, the strict Observation of the Articles of War in general, and particularly that of said articles which forbids profane Swearing, and all other Immoralities; of which all such Officers are desired to take Notice.  It is left to each State to issue Proclamations fixing the Day that appear most proper for their several Bounds.

Extract from the Minutes,
CHARLES THOMPSON, Secretary.
Hartford: Re-Printed by EBEN. WATSON.

All of that really to say the civil government can not “Biblically” declare a religious holiday other than days of fasting and thanksgiving. 

In the matter of family government, I’ll readily grant that a father has the right within his home to set aside special days throughout the year to help catechize his family.  The question for each head of household would then be one of wisdom and prudence in what he is communicating and the time he is communicating it.  It seems that by choosing December 25th to study the incarnation he would be promoting the publicly understood and culturally normal idea of the holiday.  There is a strong possibility that no matter what truth was read or stated it would appear the culture was driving it because of the events taking place outside of the home.  But all of this seem to me to be a matter of conscience for the heads of household to wrestle with.  As R.C. said we would not require one to violate their own conscience for the sake of conformity in this matter.  (There is a great summary of the challenges for the heads of households in this matter and additional considerations here.) 

This does lead us to the final sphere of authority, that is the church.  How is it that a church could have a Christ-mass service such as the Romans do and not infringe upon a man’s conscience who descents from embracing these very activities?  We are absolutely commanded to attend church and to partake of the divine benefits of the teaching of the Word and of the sacraments practiced.  What then becomes of a man who for matters of conscience does not wish to embrace the culture of Christmas but finds his church, his very place of worship, decorated in the themes or participating in the practices that he finds objectionable?

The second objection in this sphere goes back to the regulative principle and how God commands us to worship him.  If we are free to impose devices of our own choosing within the church service then why do reformed churches not practice drama and other such follies in the midst of a church service?  (We will let alone the traditional Christmas plays that take place during the normal weekly church service in much of American Christendom today and just focus on those of a reformed belief that embrace the regulative principle of worship.  See this post if this idea is new to you.)  If we are free to add seasonal decorations of Christmas trees and holly then on what grounds does one deny strobe lights in the church?  If we are free to leave off our normal order of service to focus on a specific seasonal theme or aspect of the Scriptures in December then what rule is there to keep us faithful the remainder of the year?  Why not just adopt the entire Roman church calendar?  Lastly, where are we a) commanded or allowed to set the time of Christ’s birth and b) commanded or allowed to make a hollowed day out of it, as a person, a church, or a civil government?  I’m sure there are other aspects of the 2nd commandment to be considered, but I’d be happy if someone could just answer these few questions.

I’ll close with yet another thing we agree with R.C. Jr. on.  We agree that indeed there is ”something worth celebrating in the birth of Jesus”.  However, we would say that God’s Word commands us to celebrate it 52 times a year in our regular Lord’s Day service.  It is also true, as R.C. said, that God does not “require” us to celebrate a special day as the day of his birth.  However, the real issue, that R.C. does not address, is that neither does God command it.

While we may be confused by our Presbyterian brothers who seem to depart from orthodoxy in the matter of Christmas, we still are very excited about the good work they do.  Specifically I would give an endorsement to anything R.C. has recorded or written.  If you don’t have the basement tapes, I think no library is complete without them.  If you have not read R.C.s books then I would recommend that you get some as soon as possible.  If you are a home school family I couldn’t recommend a more encouraging book than, “When You Rise Up, A Covenantal Approach to Homeschooling“.  And by the way, just for the record, I don’t think I have seen someone do as much justice to the santa hat as R.C. does.  Simply as a winter fashion statement, it works for R.C.

I’m about to post an article or two that reference the regulative principle of worship.  Realizing that this is mainly a reformed doctrine I thought I’d make a post with some links about the principle itself.  For those familiar with the principle you might find these refreshing.  For those not familiar with the principle you might find these challenging.  But either way I pray they bring you closer to Christ. 

This principle is stated in the Westminster Confession Chapter 21 paragraph 1 and in the London Baptist Confession in Chapter 22 paragraph 1.

The light of nature showeth that there is a God, who hath lordship and sovereignty over all, is good, and doth good unto all, and is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served, with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might.[1] But 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 imaginations and devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scripture.[2]

1. Rom. 1:20; Psa. 19:1-4a; 50:6; 86:8-10; 89:5-7; 95:1-6; 97:6; 104:1-35; 145:9-12; Acts 14:17; Deut. 6:4-5
2. Deut. 4:15-20; 12:32; Matt. 4:9-10; 15:9; Acts 17:23-25; Exod. 20:4-6, John 4:23-24; Col. 2:18-23

The London Baptist Confession also adds these scriptural references with close to the same wording as the Westminster. 
Jeremiah 10:7; Mark 12:33; Deuteronomy 12:32; Exodus 20:4-6

In a very basic sense it says that the Creator alone can define how he desires to be worshipped by the creatures he created.  This revelation, of how he desires to be worshipped, is only to be found in the Word of God.  In short, we can’t put on pink robes and go out among the pine trees singing Mary Had a Little Lamb and call it worship.  Neither can we bring the pink robes into the church, no matter how it might make us feel inside.  If that makes sense and you’d like a less absurd and more relevant application check out the following links:

http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonRegulativePrinciple.htm

http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/YoungWilliamPuritanRegulativePrinciple.htm

http://www.reformedonline.com/view/reformedonline/xmas.htm

http://www.reformedprescambridge.com/articles/ICRC_RPW_Final.pdf

http://www.banneroftruth.org/pages/articles/article_detail.php?418

http://www.mctsowensboro.org/blog/?p=227

In addition here is a link to an on-line version of the London Baptist Confession of Faith.

http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html

Ok, so it’s March and we have been on a break from blogging for a while.  After all a man has to feed his family.  But what about all those Christmas posts back in December?  What about Christmas?  I promised I would share my thoughts….so, here are a few thoughts.

First nowhere in scripture does Christ tell us to remember his birth.  He tells us to remember his death and resurrection (as often as we come together), but not the birth.

Secondly, we do not even know the date of his birth.  The date that is celebrated is a date that belongs to a pagan deity.  It is and always has been a pagan celebration.

Commercialism and materialism do not glorify Christ.  Ask any child you meet in December what they like about Christmas.  It will not be the “idea” that Christ was born on that day… Oh not my child someone says, but if 99% of the children understand the day as “getting” something then why would we as Christians participate in it?  What is the most popular question asked by adults to children that are not theirs in December?  “What are you getting for Christmas this year?”  Or, “What is Santa going to bring you?”  Of course they always start with, “Have you been a good little boy or girl this year?”  After all we must be good to get our gifts.  Is there anything in the season that says we must obey the God who created us?

Christmas was not celebrated nationally until the mid 1800’s.  So what was wrong with all those Christians who lived in the country for the 200 years prior to this time?  Where they just not as well informed as we are today?  It is also interesting to note that the rise in the popularity of the Catholic holiday directly coincides with the industrial revolution.  Maybe dad felt guilty for leaving home and the giving of gifts helped to relieve that guilt.

Prior to this, the only groups to celebrate Christmas in America where the Anglicans and Catholics.  The Puritans, Baptist, and Presbyterians did not celebrate Christmas until the mid 1800s.

Lastly, here is the question I would encourage everyone to ask.  Does God look down from heaven during the month of December and see all the Christmas lights and think to himself, boy these people must really love me, look at all those pretty lights!  I wished they would hang lights like this up the rest of the year so I would know they love me.  After all my word says if you love me you obey me, and they aren’t doing that so this must be how they show their love to me… isn’t that sweet.  I sure am a blessed creator.

OK I know that was all pretty harsh, and I know that some people have a sincere heart when they purpose to do a “God honoring” Christmas celebration.  I appreciate that heart, but still cannot see any reason someone would participate in Christmas once they have reviewed the history of the holiday and the commands of scripture in respect to what is true worship and how we as Christians are suppose to engage in worship. 

The only reason I can see for people to celebrate Christmas is the fact that for the last several generation we have always “done” Christmas.  I can appreciate this as the strong influence that it is.  After all some of the best childhood memories I have are at the annual Christmas gathering.  But at the end of the day, shouldn’t we be concerned about what the one who is being “honored” thinks about the day set aside for his birth.

The history channel created a special on Christmas that is an un-biased look at Christmas and its history.  Honestly it is very pro-christmas with all its history.  But for the Christian it should be an eye opener for what we have been participating in without question for the last several generations.

http://www.history.com/minisites/christmas/

I would encourage Christians to review this or other material about the history of Christmas.  Research the scriptures and see if there is biblical warrant for the celebration.

Lastly, celebrate the fact that Jesus Christ was born, lived a sinless life, died on the cross, was buried, rose from the dead, and is seated at the right hand of God the father….every day!

December 25th is not special.  It’s just the day the rest of the world pretends to know Christ.  Those who do know him don’t need a worldly holiday to celebrate what that means.

From what has been said, we may infer that this passage of Scripture gives no countenance to religious festivals, or holidays of human appointment, especially under the New Testament. Feasts appear to have been connected with sacrifices from the most ancient times; but the observance of them was not brought under any fixed rules until the establishment of the Mosaic law. Religious festivals formed a noted and splendid part of the ritual of that law; but they were only designed to be temporary; and having served their end in commemorating certain great events connected with the Jewish commonwealth, and in typifying certain mysteries now clearly revealed by the gospel, they ceased, and, along with other figures, vanished away. To retain these, or to return them after the promulgation of the Christian law, or to imitate them by instituting festivals of a similar kind, is to doat on shadows–to choose weak and beggarly elements–to bring ourselves under a yoke of bondage which the Jews were unable to bear, and interpretatively to fall from grace and the truth of the gospel. “Ye observe days and months, and times and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.” “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holiday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come.” Shall we suppose that Christ and his apostles, in abrogating those days which God himself had appointed to be observed, without instituting others in their room, intended that either churches or individuals should be allowed to substitute whatever they pleased in their room? Yet the Christian church soon degenerated so far as to bring herself under a severer bondage than that from which Christ had redeemed her, and instituted a greater number of festivals than were observed under the Mosaic law, or even among pagans.
To seek a warrant for days of religious commemoration under the gospel from the Jewish festivals, is not only to overlook the distinction between the old and new dispensations, but to forget that the Jews were never allowed to institute such memorials for themselves, but simply to keep those which infinite Wisdom had expressly and by name set apart and sanctified. The prohibitory sanction is equally strict under both Testaments: “What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.”
There are times when God calls, on the one hand, to religious fasting, or, on the other, to thanksgiving and religious joy; and it is our duty to comply with these calls, and to set apart time for the respective exercises. But this is quite a different thing from recurrent or anniversary holidays. In the former case the day is chosen for the duty, in the latter the duty is performed for the day; in the former case there is no holiness on the day but what arises from the service which is performed on it, and when the same day afterwards recurs, it is as common as any other day; in the latter case the day is set apart on all following times, and may not be employed for common or secular purposes. Stated and recurring festivals countenance the false principle, that some days have a peculiar sanctity, either inherent or impressed by the works which occurred on them; they proceed on an undue assumption of human authority; interfere with the free use of that time which the Creator hath granted to man; detract from the honour due to the day of sacred rest which he hath appointed; lead to impositions over conscience; have been the fruitful source of superstition and idolatry; and have been productive of the worst effects upon morals, in every age, and among every people, barbarous and civilized, pagan and Christian, popish and protestant, among whom they have been observed. On these grounds they were rejected from the beginning, among other corruptions of antichrist, by the reformed church of Scotland, which allowed no stated religious days but the Christian Sabbath. –Thomas M’Crie (minister, Associate Anti-Burgher/Constitutional Associate Presbytery; author and church historian), Lectures on the Book of Esther (1838).

That Christians did observe sacred days in the apostle’s time these writers [i.e., those who deny the divine sanction and authority of the Lord’s day] admit, and also that the usage was approved. But they say it was not founded on any divine authority; the apostle had just repealed all that. Then on whose authority? That of the uninspired church. Their view, then, is that the apostle, sweeping away all Sabbaths and Lord’s days, invites Christians to ascend to his lofty and devoted experience, which had no use for a set Sabbath because all his days were consecrated. But as it was found that this did not suit the actual Christian state of most Christians, human authority was allowed, and even encouraged, to appoint Sundays, Easters and Whitsuntides for them. The objections are: first, that this countenances ‘will-worship,’ or the intrusion of man’s inventions into God’s service; second, it is an implied insult to Paul’s inspiration, assuming that he made a practical blunder, which the church synods, wiser than his inspiration, had to mend by a human expedient; and third, we have here a practical confession that, after all, the average New Testament Christian does need a stated holy day, and therefore the ground of the Sabbath command is perpetual and moral. –Robert L. Dabney (professor, Union Theological Seminary, Virginia; Theological School at Austin, Texas; University of Texas; Presbyterian Church in the U.S.), “The Christian Sabbath,” in Discussions, Vol. 1 (1890).

Under the old dispensation, there were a number of days appointed for ceremonial observances. The Jews kept thirty-five in the year, but of these some fell on the Sabbath. While the Mosaic economy lasted, and while they remained in Palestine, these were to be observed; but at the death of Christ they passed away. Hence the apostle says to the primitive Christians, “Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath day” (Col. 2:16), or the Jewish Sabbath, on the seventh day of the week, which was now merged in the first. This shews how little they understand the liberty of the gospel, who prescribe for the observance of Christians, a variety of holy days, which are unauthorized in Scripture, and are found in experience to be lost in idleness, or abused in folly. Such days, originating in secular policy, or superstitious excitement, may be marked by names and rites solemn and imposing; yet, wanting the sanction of Jehovah, and the animating breath of heaven, they are soon disregarded as empty forms, hated as encumbrances on public industry, and welcomed only by those whose situation makes them wish for a season and a pretext for amusement and dissipation. –Henry Belfrage (minister, Associate [Presbyterian] Burgher Synod), A Practical Exposition of the Assembly’s Shorter Catechism (1834).

It is our duty to attend faithfully and industriously to that secular business which is incumbent on us, during the six last days of the week, and not to institute or observe sabbaths of human invention; that we may be prepared for the sanctification of the Lord’s sabbath. “Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work.” Gal. 4:10,11. “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed labour upon you in vain.” –Ezra Stiles Ely (pastor, Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.), A Synopsis of Didactic Theology (1822).

Men cannot, without sin, appoint any holy days. (1.) God has marked the weekly sabbath with peculiar honour, in his command and word. But, if men appoint holy days, they detract from its honour; and wherever holy days of men’s appointment are much observed, God’s weekly sabbath is much profaned, Ex. 20:8; Ezek. 43:8. (2.) God never could have abolished his own ceremonial holy days, in order that men might appoint others of their own invention, in their room, Col. 2:16-23; Gal. 4:10,11. (3.) God alone can bless holy days, and render them effectual to promote holy purposes; and we have no hint in his word, that he will bless any appointed by men, Ex. 20:11. (4.) By permitting, if not requiring us, to labour six days of the week in our worldly employments, this commandment excludes all holy days of men’s appointment; Ex. 20:8,9. If it permit six days for our worldly labour, we ought to stand fast in that liberty with which Christ hath made us free, Gal. 5:1; 1 Cor. 7:23; Matt. 15:9. If it require them, we ought to obey God rather than men, Acts 4:19; 5:29.–Days of occasional fasting and thanksgiving are generally marked out by the providence of God: and the observation of them does not suppose any holiness in the day itself, Joel 1:14; 2:15; Acts 13:2; 14:23; Matt. 9:15. –John Brown, of Haddington (minister and professor, Associate [Presbyterian] Burgher Synod), A Compendious View of Natural and Revealed Religion (1796).

1. We think God has appointed one certain day in the week, for the thankful remembrance of those mercies, which he has in common bestowed upon us. Upon that therefore, as often as it returns, all Christians are bound to employ themselves in meditating upon God’s works of creation and redemption, in praising God, and in other religious exercises. Hence we judge it needless for men, by their authority, to appoint other days of the same nature; and desire them, who usurp such a power, to produce the commission they have for it.
2. It seems probable to us, that God would not have us observe these yearly Holidays; because we meet with nothing in his word, whereby we can fix the times of the year, when those things happened, which our Adversaries pretend are the occasion of them. –James Peirce (Nonconformist minister, Exon, England), A Vindication of the Dissenters (1718).

It is not a work but a word makes one day more holy than another. There is no day of the week, but some eminent work of God has been done therein; but it does not therefore follow that every day must be kept as a Sabbath. The Lord Christ has appointed the first day of the week to be perpetually observed in remembrance of his resurrection and redemption. If more days than that had been needful, he would have appointed more. It is a deep reflection on the wisdom of Christ, to say, He has not appointed days enough for his own honour, but he must be beholding to men for their additions. The Old Waldenses witnessed against the observing of any holidays, besides that which God in his Word hath instituted. Calvin, Luther, Danaeus, Bucer, Farel, Viret, and other great Reformers, have wished that the observation of all holidays, except the Lord’s Day, were abolished. A Popish writer complains that the Puritans in England were of the same mind. So was John Huss and Jerome of Prague long ago. And the Belgic Churches in their Synod, Anno 1578. The Apostle condemns the observation of Jewish festivals in these days of the New Testament, Gal. 4:10; Col. 2:16. Much less may Christians state other days in their room. The Gospel has put an end to the difference of days as well as of meats. And neither the Pope nor the Church can make some days holy above others, no more than they can make the use of some meats to be lawful or unlawful, both of which are expressly contrary to the Scripture, Rom. 14:5,6. All stated holidays of man’s inventing, are breaches of the Second and of the Fourth Commandment. A stated religious festival is a part of instituted worship. Therefore it is not in the power of men, but God only, to make a day holy. –Increase Mather (Nonconformist minister, New England), Testimony Against Prophane Customs (1687).