Sometimes we can downplay the Third Use of the Law - we shouldn't but it can happen. I hear about it. No, the third use isn't Gospel, no, it doesn't aid our salvation - and I'd even argue that the third use is always accompanied by the 2nd use, for whenever I see and study what I am to do, I am also reminded of what heretofore I had failed to do.
But the third use of the law is still something we need - lest we become enthusiasts and seek to try to please God on our own terms. That's the main thrust that the Solid Declaration gives. . . even after regeneration, we listen to God's Word. I would say even in the garden, God gave to Adam a Word of Law.
However, the thought I have today is this. If we minimize the idea of the third use of the law, do we end up opening up a way for us to write off the liturgy. What I have seen is that the people who tend to disdain the third use point out how it isn't needed for salvation, that the renewed person should have all that He needs in Christ - what need of the third use.
This sounds like a lot of what I have heard in those who disdain and minimize the liturgy. What need do Christians have for an "order" (note: a legal sounding word) of worship, when they have the Spirit?
But what we must remember is that we were not only created by the Word but we are continually shaped by the Word. This is true in our life, whether it is dealing with the third use, or whether it is a liturgy which ensures that our worship is not done in our own image but in accordance with God's Word.
What do you think - is there a connection in thought? A lot of the guys who disdain the third use seem liturgical. . . but there seems to be a disconnect there.