4th Commandment

There is a significant misconception in the Reformed community that there is a drastic difference between how the English and Scots (reflected in the Westminster Standards) and Continental Europe (reflected in the Three forms of Unity) viewed obedience to the 4th Commandment. The implication is that the so-called Continental View reflected in the Three Forms of Unity, is less rigorous than the British view reflected in the Westminster Standards. But the Consistory of RICCS is persuaded otherwise. Let us explain:

First, as the definitive representative of the Continental View of the 4th Commandment, John Calvin maintained a position on the Sabbath that was almost indistinguishable from those at Westminster Abbey. As R. Scott Clark points out in his substantial work, Recovering the Reformed Confession:

“In his 1555 sermons on Deuteronomy 5:12 – 14 and 5:13 – 15, Calvin clearly retained the “shadow versus substance” hermeneutic for understanding our relations to the typological Sabbath under Moses… the theological significance of the Sabbath is that believers have been redeemed from sin, but for Calvin the theological sense of the Sabbath did not exhaust its meaning. The moral implications of the Sabbath remained in force in every epoch of revelation and redemption. The 4th commandment is not “superfluous to us.” That is why Hebrews 4 speaks about the Sabbath’s true meaning is that we must die to ourselves and learn to be governed by the Holy Spirit.  The Sabbath requires us to rest because “we are unable to have a true union and sanctity with Christ unless we rest from our work. If we continue to hurry about and insist on being busybodies, engaging in what seems best to us, we shall certainly sever the tie between God and ourselves.” It is because the Christian Sabbath, the Lord ’s Day, is the fulfillment rather than the shadow, that it is rebellion to treat it as an opportunity for license.”

Calvin goes on to state the following with regard to Sabbath observance in his commentary on Deuteronomy 5:

“If we turn Sunday into a day for living it up, for our sport and pleasure, indeed, how will God be honored in that?   Is it not a mockery and even a profanation of his name?  But when shops are closed on Sunday, when people do not travel in the usual way, its purpose is to provide more leisure and liberty for attending to what God commands us ,so that we might be taught by his word, that we might convene together in order to confess our faith, to invoke his name, and to participate in the use of the holy sacraments.”

As R. Scott Clark points out, Calvin was impatient with those who “call themselves Christians, and think that Sunday exists for the purpose of enabling them to attend to their own affairs and who reserved this holy day for that purpose, as if there were no others throughout the week for deliberating their business.”  In fact, on the Sabbath in Calvin’s Geneva, there was little time for anything else but worship, rest, and works of mercy.

After Calvin’s return to Geneva and 1541, the petit conseil approved his Ecclesiastical Ordinances that stipulated that there was to be a morning Lord’s Day sermon and a midday catechetical service in each of the city churches. Whatever one makes of the details of Calvin’s theology of the Sabbath, his rhetoric and practice of the Sabbath were virtually indistinguishable from his successors at Westminster Abbey, Edinburg, and Leiden.

Second, after the international delegates returned home, the Synod of Dort (1618–19) dealt with many practical issues facing the Dutch Reformed churches. In its 164th session on May 17, 1619, the Synod issued the following doctrinal deliverance concerning the 4th Commandment:

1. There is in the fourth commandment of the divine law a ceremonial and a moral element.

2. The ceremonial element is the rest of the seventh day after creation, and the strict observance of that day imposed especially on the Jewish people.

3. The moral element consists in the fact that a certain definite day is set aside for worship and so much rest as is needful for worship and hallowed meditation.

4. The Sabbath of the Jews has been abolished, but the Lord’s Day must be solemnly hallowed by Christians.

5. Since the times of the apostles, the Lord’s Day has always been observed by the historical church.

6. This day must be so consecrated to worship that on that day we rest from all servile works, except those which charity and present necessity require; and also from all such recreations as interfere with worship.

The Synod of Dort adopted a doctrinal statement on the Sabbath in which its position was expressed in six points. In its first point, The Synod of Dort stated that the fourth commandment of God’s law has both a ceremonial and a moral element. In its third point, the moral element, it recognizes a definite and appointed day (Sunday) that has been set aside to the service of God. In its fourth point, it states that Christians are duty-bound to hallow the Lord’s Day solemnly. And in its sixth point, it states that this day must be so consecrated unto the service of God that upon it, men rest from all servile labors, except those required by charity and present necessities, and likewise from all such recreations as prevent the service of God. In other words, the Synod of Dort is recognizing, and stating in more detail, the essence of Heidelberg Catechism Q. 103. 

Heidelberg Catechism Q. 103, views the 4th Commandment of God as still applicable to the New Testament church, and that, “especially on the festive day of rest, I diligently attend the assembly of God’s people.” In other words, the attendance of Sunday worship is not optional, but is a direct command of God. The three main themes of the catechism’s treatment of the Lord’s Day are those we have observed in the main lines of reformed churches from Calvin to Hodge: rest, worship, and eschatological anticipation.

Therefore, regarding the 4th Commandment, it is clear that the Synod of Dort’s understanding of the Lord’s Day and its duties was based on the doctrinal assertion that the 4th Commandment is not an obsolete ceremonial law of the Jews, but a perpetual, moral law, binding on all Christians until Christ comes again.

And lastly, though often the set against each other on this question, when read carefully with their different contexts and situations in mind, the Three forms of Unity and the Westminster Standards have substantially the same doctrine of the Christian Sabbath. Richard Gaffin is surely correct when he states in his theological work, Westminster and the Sabbath:

“The difference between the English Sabbath and the Continental Sunday should not be exaggerated, especially so far as the actual practices of the churches in the Reformed tradition are in view…here we may speak of a reformed consensus, or, as it may also be put, a consensus of general Calvinism.”

The Heidelberg Catechism was specifically composed to teach the Reformed faith to Germans who only a few years earlier had been Roman Catholic, then suddenly Lutheran, and now, just as suddenly, reformed. The oppressive legalism and moralism of the Roman theology, piety, and practice were all around them, and it is due to this chaotic and confused situation, that the authors of the Heidelberg catechism, set out to teach the people a simple theology and practice of the Sabbath.

The Westminster Standards were drafted and adopted about 80 years later in an equally chaotic situation, but within a different context and situation. Roman moralism was a more distant memory, and rather than moralism, the Westminster Assembly faced the crisis of antinomianism (as well as highly developed Arminianism, and Socinianism), which necessitated a more detailed and accountable doctrine of the biblical Sabbath to counter the pervasive neglect of the 4th Commandment at that time.

These different situations confronting the writing of these two confessional standards notwithstanding, the degree to which they agree is remarkable.  Therefore, the Consistory of RICCS is persuaded that there is no conflict in doctrine regarding the observance of the 4th Commandment between the Three forms of Unity and the Westminster Standards.

Second Service

Additionally, as a church based predominantly upon the Dutch reformed tradition and the church order of the Synod of Dort, the Consistory of RICCS believes that Lord’s Day worship consists of a divine service where Holy Scripture is exposited, as well as a second catechetical service where Holy Scripture is exposited from our reformed articles of faith.

Traditional reformed practice was to hold two worship services on the Lord’s Day as part of “keeping the day holy” in public worship. This is what is taught in Heidelberg Catechism Q.103:

Q. What is God’s will for you in the fourth commandment?

A. First, that the gospel ministry and schools for it be maintained, and that, especially on  the festive day of rest, I diligently attend the assembly of God’s people to learn what  God’s Word teaches, to participate in the sacraments, to pray to the Lord publicly, and to bring Christian offerings for the poor.
Second, that every day of my life I rest from my evil ways, let the Lord work in me through his Spirit, and so begin in this life the eternal Sabbath.

The phrase, that the gospel ministry and schools for it be maintained, is referring to the two worship services on the Lord’s Day.  As R. Scott Clark points out in his definitive work, Recovering the Reformed Confession, the morning Divine Service was to be an exposition of Holy Scripture directly (the gospel ministry), and the afternoon Catechetical Service was to be an exposition of the holy Scriptures using the catechism (and schools for it).

Confessional Dutch reformed churches have recognized this requirement throughout the centuries, as is reflected in our Book of Church Order, Article 22, as well as the church order of The United Reformed Churches of North America (URCNA), Articles 37 and 40 where both of these services on Sunday are called services by the church, and do not appear at all to be optional. In fact, the URCNA’s church order does not distinguish in importance between the services, only in content of the preached Word:

Article 37 – Corporate Worship and Special Services The Consistory shall call the congregation together for corporate worship twice on each Lord's Day. Special services may be called in observance of Christmas Day, Good Friday, Ascension Day, a day of prayer, the national Thanksgiving Day, New Year's Eve and New Year's Day, as well as in times of great distress or blessing. Attention should also be given to Easter and Pentecost on their respective Lord's Days.

Article 40– Catechetical Preaching At one of the services each Lord's Day, the minister shall ordinarily preach the Word as summarized in the Three Forms of Unity, with special attention given to the Heidelberg Catechism by treating its Lord's Days in sequence.

Therefore, due to biblical exegesis, the teachings of the Reformed Confessions, the church order of the Synod of Dort, and the church orders of other confessionally reformed denominations, the Consistory of RICCS shall call the congregation together for corporate worship twice on each Lord's Day. One for Divine worship and the second for catechetical instruction. Attendance at both of these are mandatory as reflected in the 4th Commandment to keep the Lord’s Day holy (HC 103).