Calvin and Holy Days

This is by no means an exhaustive treatment of Calvin's view on Christians celebrating holy days. With so many of Calvin's theological progeny observing holy days (other than the Lord's Day-Sabbath), I have to write something on this.

First, there is an interesting statement from the French Confession worthy of quoting on this issue of the observance of ceremonies, which I believe is connected with the observance of holy days: "We believe that the ordinances of the law came to an end at the advent of Jesus Christ; but, although the ceremonies are no more in use, yet their substance and truth remain in the person of him in whom they are fulfilled." Calvin co-wrote this confession with one of his students, and it was published in 1559. This article (23) teaches that all of the ceremonial law has been rendered obsolute because it has been fulfilled in Christ.

Christ is the end of the law, according to Paul. Tied with the ceremonial law is the observance of Jewish festival days such as Passover, Pentecost, etc. Since God had commanded that the Jews keep these days they were in effect until changed. We have apostolic testimony that these feasts no longer have currency with the people of God. Paul makes this clear in two passages of Scripture: Gal 4:9-10 and Col 2:16-17. Calvin comments on the latter passage with some clear instruction: But some one will say 'We still keep up some observance of days.' I answer, that we do not by any means observe days, as though there were any sacredness in holidays, or as though it were not lawful to labour upon them, but that respect is paid to government and order--not to days." The immediate context of the passage has to do with Jewish mystical teachers (possibly Gnostics) who implored Gentile Christians to be circumcised and observe the Law including holy days. If it was wrong for Jewish teachers to impose upon Christians the celebration of biblical (OT) holy days, it is wrong for the Church to impose on Christians the celebration of holy days that have no warrant in NT.

Calvin's teaching (and Reformed teaching) was that Christians have been freed from the annual observance of festival days. The OT days have been abrogated owing to Christ's coming in fulfillment of the types and shadows. Christ is our Prophet, Priest, and King has given us no more annual festival days to celebrate. Where are they? Christmas, Easter, etc. are the creations of man, and have no binding power on the conscience of any Christian.

As Reformed Christians (or Reforming Christians) we must examine in the light of Scripture the things we do and celebrate in the name of Christ. Christmas and Easter diminished the weekly Sabbath. I know that Easter is always on the Sabbath, but Easter is celebrated as though it is holier than any other Sabbath. This is unbiblical. Every Lord's Day is a commemoration of Christ's resurrection from the dead because that represents his finished work of redemption for all of his people. Let us delight in the Sabbath always.

Biblical Worship

I've said it once and I'm re-stating this biblical principle that I believe with all of my heart: God commands us to worship him according to his Word. This has been re-affirmed in my heart by reading Exodus 34:12-17. In this passage, the Lord commands Israel through Moses that when they go into the Promised Land they are to destroy all of the altars, images, etc. of the people who dwelled in the land. They must worship God. How? This command implies that Israel is to worship the Lord his way.

If this is clearly written in the Scriptures, why do Protestants believe they can worship God in ways he has never proscribed? On the Lord's Day, I saw (live streaming) a church service at an African American Baptist church (a large one) where kids were engaged in stepping--the kind I used to do in college when I stepped representing my fraternity at Greek Shows. These kids stepped during worship; it was meant to be an offering to God. How can any Protestant who holds to Sola Scriptura believe that stepping is an appropriate sacrifice to the Lord!

Listen to God's Word regarding how he is to be worshiped, not the worship gurus of the day.

Remaining Protestant

In our day of religious pluralism, there is a tendency among Christians to be more inclusive than Christ. Who are Christ's people? Those who have repented from their sin and turned to Christ for the forgiveness of sin based upon his work on the cross. These have been baptized; therefore, they are members of the Church.

Should we be inclusive of Roman Catholics into the Church? There are two responses to this question: first, institutionally the Reformers of the 16th century declared convincingly that Rome is apostate. It has modified the gospel of grace and faith and turn it into one of grace, faith, and works to maintain justifying grace. Roman Catholics readings this may cry foul! It's okay. Second, I believe that there are members of Roman Catholic churches who are part of the Church; yes, they have repented from sin and have trusted in Christ alone for their salvation.

In 1545-1563, the Council of Trent (an ecumenical council of the Roman Catholic Church) declared that those who believe in justification by faith alone, or those who believe in two sacraments are anathema---accursed. The Canons of Trent are still operative and binding and dogmatic. How can Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Reformed speak of rapproachment with Rome when Rome has never retracted those anathemas against Protestants laid it in the Canons of Trent?

This is a gospel issue, not merely an intramural disagreement. Luther stated that the doctrine of justification of faith alone is the article by which the Church stands or falls. He was right. If a Church denies this doctrine, is it still a Church? No. Let us heed Paul's inspired declaration rather than Trent's: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." Compare the gospel revealed in the inspired Scriptures to what Rome promotes as the gospel. You will find that Rome, not historic Protestantism, is accursed.

I write this to help we who claim to be Protestant to preach the gospel clearly and with love, but also to encourage us to pray for Roman Catholics we know; let us pray that God would be pleased to gather his own from the ranks of that apostate church. Lord, have mercy!

Has our Culture become an Idol?

Big question. I'll make this point short though. I have noticed African American Christians (I can't speak for European-Americans, or other hyphenated Americans) have a rather chauvinistic view when it comes to church and worship culture. I have been criticized for teaching my little one psalms set to "European" tunes. I had to think: is this a sin? At the same time, we have sung a psalm set to an African tune. Go figure.

Does the communion of the saints mean that ethnic groups remain segregated and worship in cultural ways nullifying the commandments of God? Can we draw from reverent and appropriate tunes from the global church?

If churches reformed their worship to the elements we see in NT, maybe the cultural questions and chauvinism will fade away.

Worship that is a Covenantal Dialogue

For readers who are African American Baptist or outside of the Reformed tradition, the title of this blog entry may sound strange, or may seem as though I'm referring to the traditional "call and response" mode of worship in traditional African American Baptist worship. What I am referring to is an ordered way of liturgy. In the annals of this blog, I've written about liturgy so I'll refrain from warming cold soup this time. What is behind this worship principle is the covenant. The Church is a covenant community and worship is covenantal. God greets us, we respond through praise and prayer, and God speaks to us (Scripture read and preached). This is biblical call and response.

I want to focus on the response. We respond in prayer and praise as a covenant community, a community of priests. This is why I believe the Scriptures teach that worship song is congregational, not choir or soloist alone. In African American Baptist churches, the choir has near top-billing. While the choir does its thing, the congregation has an option to sing with the choir (granted if it is a song known), or just to clap and stand and encourage. In this we have a bifurcated priesthood.

Oh, would African American church return (yes, I said return) to congregational singing. That would mean going back to singing psalms and doctrinally correct hymns. Return, my people, return.

Regulative Principle is Biblical

A friend of mine told me that his pastor upon learning that we coming here to Grand Rapids to study and worship told him "to watch out for that regulative principle." The pastor is a Calvinist, and offers words of warning about the regulative principle. In my estimation, to be a Calvinist is to hold to the regulative principle. In posts long ago, I made the case (convincingly, I pray) that historic Baptists do hold to the regulative principle in agreement with the Calvinistic wing of the Reformation.

Yesterday as I thought about defending the practice of congregational psalm-singing using the NT I re-read portions of 1 Corinthians 14. To refresh some memories, the regulative principle asserts that God must be worship according to his commands; we must worship God within the confines he has set. In NT we see Jesus and his apostles regulating worship. Jesus regulates the Sabbath Day, and he renders the Passover obsolete by insitutionalizing the Lord's Table that points to him. Paul in Corinthians regulates the worship practices of the Corinthians. Note in this chapter that Paul approves of the singing that took place at the Church of Corinth. He approves of psalm-singing. He deems psalm-singing a part of New Covenant worship never to be neglected. Also note that he mentions no other type of singing. The Church at Corinth practiced exclusive psalm-singing.

For those who rail against exclusive psalm-singing, would you substitute coffee for the fruit of the vine at the Lord's Table? Would you substitute good Christian literature for reading the Scriptures in corporate worship? Why not? We know that there are clear commands behind our rituals in worship, and we have no liberty to do as we please. This is all the regulative principle argues. Is this something to be warned about? Or is it something to be joyful about?

Can We Do Better?

As Christians in this world we must live in the very presence of sin all around us. We must also live with the reality that sin dwells in us. I wish I would never sin now that I am in Christ, but Christ and the apostles teach us that we do. This is why the doctrine of justification is so vital, and Luther called it the article by which the Church rises or falls. Without justification, Christians are left to attempt to earn our salvation. This is impossible. Without justification, all will go to hell. Thank God that by the merits of Christ all believers are justified.

In light of this, I'm referring to the day-to-day struggle with indwelling sin, two psalms come to my mind immediately. As I have stated over and over again, the psalms are for singing not only for reading. Psalm 51 and Psalm 32 come to my mind. Since I began to sing psalms in my devotional life, I've sung Psalm 51 the most. The gospel is there; forgiveness through the gospel is there. The assurance of a sinner's salvation is there.

As I ruminated on this today, I said to myself: "Can we do better?" What I meant is that we can write nothing better that gets at the heart of our sinful condition and the remedy provided by God through Christ. Psalm 51 is sufficient if read, and it is sufficient when sung and prayed. This is why I love to sing the psalms, and this is why I believe we should sing the psalms to the exclusion of all humanly written and devised compositions. We can do no better; it is no contest. The Holy Spirit is God Almighty, and he inspired David, Asaph, Moses, and other psalmists and prophets to write spiritual songs. God has given us these to praise him with, to pray, and to learn of our conditions. If we believe in the sufficiency of Scripture we must believe that the psalms are sufficient for our praise of God. Oh, would the words of the Holy Spirit rest upon our lips as we praise our God! Think about it: is Charles Tindlay greater than the Spirit? Is Thomas Dorsey? Alex Bradford, Andre Crouch, Donald Lawrence, etc.? These gospel song writers are fallible and subject to error. What the Spirit has written is inerrant. Every word is pure; the doctrine is perfect. Perfect praise available to the imperfect.

Pray and sing with me: "God, be merciful to me, On Thy grace I rest my plea; Plenteous in compassion Thou, Blot out my transgression now; Wash me, make me pure within, Cleanse, O cleanse me from my sin."