SUNDAY IN THE DUMPS

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 8, 1876

SUNDAY IN THE DUMPS.

We find the following in the April number of The Sabbath Memorial, the quarterly issued by Eld. W. M. Jones, London.

The following letter recently picked out of some waste paper appears to be too good to be lost to the Sabbath cause. The manuscript was written forty years ago, and is in the clear, bold hand of a gentleman of former days. Though unknown to us, we rejoice to find that there were then, here and there, independent readers of the Bible and advocates of the Bible Sabbath, who refused to abide by mere dictatorial theological opinions, and who considered it an outrage upon the consciences and rights of men to enforce such opinions by the law of the land. Truly, “there were giants in those days.” Would to God there were more of them now.

SUNDAY IN THE DUMPS; or, Sunday no Sabbath, established by the Sacred Records, in a Letter from Sir Charles Wolseley to Sir Oswald Moseley, occasioned by Sir Andrew Agnew’s Bill for the Sanctification of Sunday.

“Sir: As one of your constituents, and one, also, who voted you into the House of Commons, I suppose I have a right to ask you, thus publicly, By what authority do you presume to legislate for me in matters of conscience? I did not aid your return to Parliament to make laws respecting my behaviour, either in one doctrine or another. You are sent, sir, principally to secure our rights as Englishmen, and to see that our proper pleasures were not played the fool with. But, and I protest! because your religious feelings are offended by the harmless recreations of the people on the only day they have to amuse themselves, you are to show your Pharisaical spirit and coerce them into your views of keeping the Sabbath holy. Pray, sir, has a festival made you a judge in these matters? that you may ‘fast twice in the week,’ and ‘give tithes of all that you possess;’ but be kind enough to leave us Publicans alone, and do not affect to be ‘Master of Israel;’ for we can keep our consciences without your aid as well as that of your saintly coadjutor.”

“I have been taught by a far greater authority than either of you that ‘the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath;’ but you would seem inclined to reverse the order, even of the Scriptures, and lay down the law to suit your ‘Judaizing’ ideas! Allow me, sir, although not a teacher of Israel, to presume to set you right, by telling you plainly, in the first place, that I defy you to show us any authority from Scripture for the Sunday to be kept holy at all; and I believe it would puzzle you to be obliged to prove when, and at what time, the Sunday was set apart as a holy day; I, however, know thus far, that the Sabbath of the Jews, the Saturday, was ordered to be observed, not as we are obligated by law to observe our Sunday, from midnight to midnight, but from ‘even to even,’ as we find in Leviticus; and, therefore, in all countries, except in this, either Catholic or Protestant, as soon as the vesper or evening service is over, it is considered that the remaining part of the day may be passed in recreation. It is my intention to give you the substance of all that the Scriptures, at least, say on the subject, and then the public may judge on what authority you act; first, however, observing that I am of an age to remember ‘the good old times,’ when there were full as many ‘saints’ as there are at present, and of a better caste also. I can remember when the young men, even of my own parish—on my own estate—used to meet on Sunday evening and play a harmless game of ‘Prison Bars,’ and the good people of those happy days were not scandalized thereat; on the contrary, they rejoiced to see the people gay and contented on that day ‘anciently set apart as a day of recreation.’ We had, in those days, no burnings of farm-houses, no gin palaces to add to the revenue! and, shall I be bold to say, there were then more piety and morality in this nation than at present exist, notwithstanding the Agnew of the day or his like.

“But, sir, ‘to the law and to the testimony:’ 1. The fourth commandment (Ex. 20) enjoins to keep holy the Saturday, and according to Leviticus 23:32, to keep it holy from ‘even to even.’ 2. Our Saviour made no alteration in this commandment. 3. He himself and his disciples invariably observed the Saturday. 4. The apostles are not recorded to have altered the day in their council of Jerusalem. 5. Nor do we read in any part of the New Testament of any such change having been made. 6. Nor is there a single passage in the whole Scripture implying a command to ‘keep holy’ the Sunday, or a prohibition to work thereon. 7. And, whereas, the Bible, in Exodus 20, assigns a reason for ‘keeping holy’ the Saturday, there is not in the whole Scripture a single passage professing to assign ‘a reason’ for keeping holy the Sunday. 8. And, whereas, the reason assigned in Exodus, 20th chapter, is as good a reason now as it was formerly,—and the commandment itself has never been abrogated,—both one and the other (as far as Scripture alone is concerned) stand good, and of full force to this day.

“1. ‘The same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.’ John 20:19. 2. ‘Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them.’ Acts 20:7. 3. ‘Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.’ 1 Cor. 16:2. 4. ‘I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day.’ Rev. 1:9, 10.

“Now, what, let it be asked, is there in any of these passages, or in all of them together, to imply an abrogation of the law of the seventh day, or an injunction with reference to the first? From the first passage, we learn that Christ miraculously appeared to his disciples, after his resurrection, on the first day of the week. So he did afterwards, not less miraculously, on a certain day, when they were fishing. John 21. From the second passage, we learn that, on the individual occasion therein recorded, the disciples came together to break bread on the first day of the week, and Paul preached unto them, but we learn from other passages that they were accustomed to meet every day for the said purpose, and that Paul is more frequently recorded to have preached on the seventh day, than on the first; for example:—

“1. ‘And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple.’ Acts 2:46. 2. ‘And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.’ Acts 5:42. 3. ‘Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.’ Acts 17:17. 4. ‘They came to Antioch, in Pisidia, and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day.’ Acts 13:14. 5. ‘And the next Sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.’ Acts 13:44. 6. ‘And on the Sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made.’ Acts 16:13. 7. ‘Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures.’ Acts 17:2. 8. ‘And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath.’ Acts 18:4.

“The third passage does not speak of any meetings for prayer, or for any other purpose, on the first day of the week! nor yet does it order it to be observed as a day of rest; it merely contains an injunction to the Corinthians for each to lay by him weekly, in store, pro bono publico, a sum proportionate to his means; which, unless you, Sir Oswald, think that Sunday is a proper day for people to look over and balance their accounts, you would probably allow might be better done on the day after the Sabbath, than upon it. The argument is as much against you as for you. To argue, then, from Scripture for the observance of the Sunday, is childish and weak; it amounts to a nullity; a logician would be ashamed of it. Scripture is entirely for the observance of the Saturday—the fourth commandment itself,—the recorded practice of our Saviour,—the same of his apostles, both before and after his ascension,—and the fact that no dispute is recorded to have taken place among the Jewish converts about the change of day, as there did respecting circumcision, &c. One word more and I have done: The tenth clause of your coercive bill, I perceive, is against riding on a Sunday! The only day our Saviour is recorded to have ridden, unfortunately for you, was on Palm Sunday!—”