Why Was it not Known Before?
By George I. Butler
When the proof that the seventh day is the only Bible Sabbath has been brought to bear upon the mind of those who do not keep it, and their opposing arguments all met, the next query is, “Why was this not known before?” Many are willing to admit that the proof looks convincing. They can see no way of escaping the conclusion that the day the commandment designates is the one they should observe. But they think of many who have given evidence of piety and love of God’s word, who have kept the first day of the week. Their ancestors kept it, and it really seems to them that all these good people could not have been mistaken in so important a matter as the Sabbath. The question, perhaps, deserves an answer, not so much for any real strength in itself as because it is so often asked, and has a seeming force. It may be well to notice, before we come directly to the answer to this question, that if it bears against the Sabbath because it was not generally known before, the same objection would stand against the discovery of any truth in any age, against all discoveries, in fact, in science, mechanics, or physical law. The same objection would have stood in the way of Copernicus in his investigations of the movements of our earth, and the rest of the planets of our solar system around the sun, or of Sir Isaac Newton in proclaiming the law of gravitation, or Columbus in the discovery of the new world, as really as it does against the Sabbath truth; and it must occur to the reader that an objection that would thus stand in the way of all progress and discovery could not, in the nature of things, be a valid one. The only true course is to investigate and decide questions on their own merits: Is it the truth? are its evidences sufficiently clear and convincing? and not, What did our fathers think about it? They were men of like passions with ourselves, and possibly had not all the light to guide them which we have. If any one will pursue this course, relative to which day of the week God has set apart for man to observe as a day of rest and worship, we have no fears for the result. Ever since the fall of man there has been a conflict between error and truth. This conflict has not been confined to one and the same point, but has been changing continually. From the commencement, error has held the greater portion of the race in its shackles. For many ages all the Gentile nations seemed given over to go their own way. As the great apostle puts it, “Because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind;” and this terrible result has been seen in the moral darkness which was spread over them like a pall of darkness for so many ages. The Jewish people were separated out of these and kept by themselves in a position where he brought to bear upon them especial light, and barely a few of them were preserved from the moral contamination around them. The apostle tells us the main benefit the Jews received from this separation was that to them “were committed the oracles of God,” or the law of the great Jehovah. This was no small benefit either—to know just what he required them to do, in order to meet his approbation. While other nations were groveling in moral darkness and offering their own children to appease their idol gods, the Creator made himself known to them as “merciful and gracious, longsuffering and abundant in goodness and truth.” And in nothing do we see more of his mercy than in revealing to them that law which the psalmist says is “perfect,” and which Solomon declares contains “the whole duty of man.” And as moral character is that which decides the future destiny of all men, it is not strange that since the “great controversy” commenced between error and truth the contest has always been upon some of the principles of this law. This was seen in the former dispensation when the reproofs of God’s servants were generally upon some transgression of this law, such as idolatry, profanity, Sabbath-breaking, murder, adultery, or covetousness. It was ever Satan’s object to lead them into these sins and cause them to lose the favor of God. And in the Christian dispensation, we think the same general plan of the great enemy can be seen. In the commencement of this dispensation, He came, of whom the prophets had spoken, for the purpose of putting away sin, or the transgression of this law, by the sacrifice of himself. In order to do this, he gave the most perfect commentary upon its principles ever seen, showing that it took hold of the very thoughts and intents of the heart, and that a person could break it in motive and thought without violating the letter of it. “He magnified the law and made it honorable,” drawing out of it principles not known or discovered before. He then gave us the only perfect example of keeping it, declaring at the very close of his ministry, “I have kept my Father’s commandments.” He declared that those who kept it “should be called great in the kingdom of Heaven,” while those who did not should be least there, or, as rendered by others, of no esteem in the reign of Heaven—that so far from becoming obsolete in consequence of his coming, not a letter or point of a letter should pass from it till Heaven and earth pass. He tells those who apply to him to ascertain what they must do to inherit eternal life to “keep the commandments.” He constantly exalts it above all the traditions of his age, and informs those who were inclined to observe tradition, that it was utterly vain to worship God and take for their rule of action the commandments of men. His immediate followers and apostles who certainly knew his religion best, and who were divinely instructed to teach others, talk in the same way. They pronounce an emphatic, “God forbid,” to those who would abolish the law through faith. They tell us all the world were under its righteous penalty; that it shows what sin is, and is the divinely appointed instrument to convince of sin; that in its nature it is spiritual, holy, just, and good, and that, in order to keep it, we must strictly observe every precept of it, showing that all its precepts are equally obligatory. And in the very last words of the canon of inspiration, some sixty-five years after the Lord had ascended to his Father, in speaking through his servant John to the church he had left on earth struggling for victory over sin, he encourages them by saying, “Blessed are they that do his [the Father’s] commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Here we see the position of the law of God in the clear-shining light of the gospel dispensation in its purest age. But the great controversy with Satan is not ended. The battle with error is to become hotter. This blazing light, thrown upon the world by the Sun of Righteousness, is to be met by the mist, and fog, and darkness, of the great apostasy. And, as the stream issuing from the fountain pure and sparkling soon becomes soiled and impure, so the gospel truth soon became mixed with error. The great apostle says, respecting his own age, “The mystery of iniquity doth already work,” and he tells us what would be the result. The man of sin would be developed, who would exalt himself in the very church, or temple of God. This expression “man of sin” is a peculiar one. As sin is defined by the sacred writer, “Transgression of the law,” we have here brought to view a character who would occupy especial prominence in the church, as a breaker of the law of the Lord. And when we realize that the power in question, the papacy, as generally understood by Protestant commentators, claims the right to change any of the ordinances of God, and has notoriously exercised it in ages past, we see a special force in the designation of the apostle. He is the “lawless one” claiming to be God’s vicegerent on earth. Let us notice several references to him in the Scriptures. Daniel, the prophet, describes him in his seventh chapter as the little horn which plucked up three others as it came up, “which had eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.” He further said, “He shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. But the Judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion to consume and to destroy it unto the end.” Verses 25, 26. There is a remarkable uniformity among Protestant commentators in applying this language to the papacy. Let us notice it. This power is especially warring against God: “He speaks great words against him” by taking titles and attributes to himself that can only be exercised by the Creator, thus placing himself in the position belonging to God. “He wears out the saints of the Most High” finally destroying them, but being a very long time about it to cause them the greater suffering. How clearly this short sentence describes the lengthened tortures of the rack, and stake, and the cold, dreary dungeon. How else does he war against God? He thinks to change his “times and laws.” Nothing can be more certain than that reference is here made to the same characteristic that Paul speaks of above. He was to be called the man of sin, one who tramples upon God’s law with apparent impunity. Thus we see this great enemy of God, who was to arise as it were in the very church, was to do just as his master, Satan, had always done—do what he could against the law of God. The facts of history bear us out in saying this is just what the papacy has done. In the celebrated debate of Alexander Campbell and Bishop Purcell, of Cincinnati, one of the most telling points Mr. C. made upon the Catholics was in reference to this scripture. He took their catechisms and showed that in many of them the second command of the decalogue was left entirely out. And we all know that it is through their catechisms that Catholics get most of their knowledge of the Bible; and it is no wonder that the commandment forbidding the making and bowing down to images should be left out when this practice is so common in their churches. Here is one great fact that shows their treatment of the law of God. Another to which we can appeal with equal confidence is, that through the traditions of the Catholic church the first day of the week has come to be regarded by the mass of the religious world as the Sabbath of the Lord. The fourth commandment requires us to keep holy the seventh day. Here we claim this power has again tampered with God’s law. And we can show a large amount of testimony from Catholic authors claiming that “the church” has done this very thing. See the work published at the REVIEW Office, “Who Changed the Sabbath?” Here we have an important prophecy that this power should do this; and the power in question comes upon the stage of action and says it has done it. One thing is certain, the prophecy positively declares this power shall “think to change times and laws.” There is not a shade of doubt but the laws in question are those God has instituted. And the prophet continues, “They shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.” Whatever this period of time may be, the language is positive that this power shall seem to accomplish what he undertakes to do for the specified length of time spoken of. In other words, then, we have here a plain declaration that what Daniel regarded the law of God when he wrote, was to be interfered with and changed; and for a long period of time the change was to be acquiesced in, and what this power, namely, the papacy, saw fit to institute in place of it was to be accepted instead by those who were under its influence. And when we further consider that this power in question was one after whom the whole world should wonder, it becomes evident that the portion of God’s law, set aside by him, was to be ignored by a large portion of the human family. And if, as the sure word of prophecy declares, this was to continue until the period of time referred to closed, does it not become clear that previous to that time there could be no general reformation upon these truths? The same period of time above referred to and the same work of this power is brought to view in another prophecy. Rev. 12. Here the true church of Christ is represented by the symbol of a woman, a symbol often used by the ancient prophets to show forth God’s people. This “woman was clothed with the sun,” the light of the gospel dispensation, having the “moon under her feet,” the light of the Mosaic dispensation in the past, “upon her head a crown of twelve stars” representing the twelve apostles. “She brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron; and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne,” plainly representing the work of Christ and his ascension. In verses 6 and 14, we have the fact stated twice that this woman (the true church) fled into the wilderness where God had a place prepared for her, and where she was to remain a certain length of time. In one case this period is said to be a “time, times, and half a time;” the same period exactly that Daniel gave us in his seventh chapter. In the other, it is said to be a “thousand two hundred and threescore days.” As the period is the same in both instances, a time, times, and a half, must be just twelve hundred and sixty prophetic days. These cannot be twenty-four-hour days; for they162 evidently cover the prominent events in the history of the work to which they are applied, viz., the papacy; and we know that the work in question was of many centuries in length. We therefore conclude they are symbolic, each day for a year, as this method of reckoning is used in several instances in the Scriptures. Commencing, then, where the papacy became strong and began to exercise political power, they would extend down nearly to our own time. The church we see was to remain in the wilderness for the same length of time. The original word rendered “wilderness” signifies a solitude or desert place; and the idea seems to be that God’s true church during this period of time would remain hidden or obscure, so as scarcely to be observed, while the “man of sin” would exalt himself above all else. So while the latter holds his supremacy for twelve hundred and sixty years, the other is obscure for the same period. We have seen that the law of God was given into the hand of the papacy for this length of time. The prophet Daniel says until. The idea is plain, then, that when this period expires, his power in this respect will be broken. To illustrate: A man asks me to loan him fifty dollars. I tell him I can spare it until the last day of the month. When that day comes, every one would understand that the time of the loan had expired. Just so with the prophecy in question. When the twelve hundred and sixty years close, God’s law will be taken from the control of the papacy. This is plainly referred to in Rev. 12. After we have the account of the church going into the wilderness, there to remain the length of time the papacy had the rule, we are told in the 17th verse, “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” A “remnant” is the last part of anything. A “remnant” of the seed of the woman, then, would be the last age of the church. The commandments of God most generally refer to the ten commandments, spoken of by God and written by him on the tables of stone. I might quote many scriptures to prove this, but will simply refer the reader to several. Ex. 20; Matt. 19:16–19; Matt. 15:1–9; Rom. 7:7–14; Eph. 6:1, 2; James 2:8–12. The last of the true church, then, keep the commandments, and this peculiarity is spoken of specially to distinguish them from others around them. James plainly tells us in the text referred to above, that in order to be commandment keepers we must keep every one of them, while to break a single one makes us guilty of all. So it will not be enough to keep God’s law as amended by the papacy. We must keep even those that have been trampled upon for twelve hundred and sixty years as well, to make us commandment keepers. This same fact is brought to view in Rev. 14:12 in the last message which precedes the coming of Christ: “Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” In these scriptures we have the very plainest evidence that the “little horn” was to change God’s law and at the close of his supremacy there was to be a work of reform in coming back to the principles of truth as taught by the apostolic church. We think these declarations have much to do with a proper answer to the question “Why was it not known before?” They have everything to do with it, for the sure word of prophecy plainly declares that the “times and laws of God” should be changed for many ages. The only one of the ten commandments which pertains to “times” is the fourth which requires us to keep sacred the “seventh day” as the Sabbath of the Lord. This is the very day of the week upon which God rested after his work of creation was finished. We are commanded to keep this very day of the seven. But the mass of the Christian world are keeping the first instead of the seventh, and without a particle of Bible authority for so doing, only such as we have seen the “man of sin” should introduce. This “man” who delights in the transgression of God’s law, changed the Sabbath so far as he could do so; but at the close of his work the people of God were going to have the light on this great truth, so that when Christ comes, they shall not be found trampling upon his Father’s law, and following the directions of the man of sin. So the word of God plainly tells us this Sabbath reform should be specially noticeable in the last days of time; and this is one great reason why it “was not known before.” But let no one suppose for a moment that the work of the “man of sin” was the work of an instant; such great changes always take time. The apostle Paul in the second of Thessalonians tells us the mystery of iniquity worked in his day, from which the apostasy would result and the man of sin be developed. But it was some five hundred years before this power could do the work prophesied by it. At first there was a gradual letting down in the practice of Christians, and as converts came into the church from the pagan world, they brought in some of their former ideas; and soon the purity of the faith was corrupted by this intermingling of pagan nations. But while the persecutions of the pagan Roman emperors continued, they had the effect to keep out many designing men and preserve the church from much evil. But any one who has read church history with reflection will admit that many of the corruptions which finally resulted in the papacy had their commencement back in a very early period of the church; and when Constantine was nominally converted to Christianity and it became popular to profess that faith, then it was that these corruptions increased marvellously, and soon resulted in the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome and the full establishment of his power. This gradual process of change is specially noticeable in the change of the Sabbath. The last account we have of the seventh day in the canon of inspiration, it is called the Sabbath and was still spoken of as a sacred day, and many religious meetings were held on it, and no other day of the week is ever called by this sacred title; and it is very apparent from reading the Acts of the Apostles that they still kept it sacred, and we have abundance of evidence from first-day writers that it was still kept so for some five hundred years after Christ, but gradually losing its sacredness in the minds of the people, as corruption increased, and purity of doctrine was lost, till finally the Roman bishops became mighty, and then it was lost sight of altogether, just as the prophet Daniel had predicted should be the case. Moser says: “The primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath, and spent the day in devotion and sermons.” Coleman says: “Down even to the fifth century the observance of the Jewish Sabbath was continued in the Christian church, but with a rigor and solemnity gradually diminishing until it was wholly discontinued.” I could multiply such extracts, but will refer the reader to Eld. Andrews’ History of the Sabbath, for sale at the REVIEW Office. Just in proportion as the Sabbath of the Lord lost its sacredness in the minds of the people, the observance of the first day of the week came in. It was a sacred holiday among the pagans, the day set apart in honor of the sun as its name indicates, and of course it would be difficult to get these pagans to change their practice in this respect to observe the seventh day much as it is to get people to make the change now. And as the Roman bishop often manifested a desire to interfere in behalf of Sunday and discriminate against the Lord’s Sabbath, it is not to be wondered at that as his power became mighty, the practice of keeping holy the seventh day should eventually be discriminated when even he had influence. This was finally brought about, and the little horn succeeded in doing what the prophets said would do, making this “change of times and laws.” Then during the long night of papal darkness and corruption, this was completely consummated. The true church was in the wilderness, obscure and unobserved. But by-and-by light begins to dawn. Reformers begin to appear, crying out against the grossest corruptions of the papacy, but quickly silenced by the stake and dungeon whenever they could be got at. Finally Martin Luther and his co-laborers appear on the stage, and as the times were made favorable by God’s providence, they gave the man of sin a fearful blow from which he has never recovered. But did Luther and those with him discover all the truth? and did the church leap at once from the midnight darkness of papal corruption to the full light of the apostolic age? It would have been contrary to all analogy and experience if they had. The church was ages getting into this condition and it could not be expected in reason that all the light and truth should be discovered by one class of reformers. And as these men received their early training as Catholics, it would be natural that some of the doctrines and practices of their early teaching should cling to them and affect their after lives. That such was the case with Luther and Melancthon is very clear. Every one who has read the history of the Reformation is acquainted with the discussion between Luther and Zwingli, on the question of the actual presence of Christ’s body and blood at the eucharist. Luther appeared at great disadvantage on this occasion when simply reiterating the words, “This is my body,” in answer to the overwhelming arguments of the Swiss reformer; and yet he clung to this in spite of all logic or Scripture. And so of Melancthon, as great a theologian, perhaps, as the Reformation produced. He said that “the bread was not a figure only, but was truly changed into flesh.” He approved the canon of the mass, in which the priest prays that “the bread may be changed into the body of Christ.” —Mosheim, vol. ii, p. 82, note, Baltimore ed., 1832. It seems strange to us how such eminent men of God could stumble on a point so plain as this. But it is vastly more strange how they could discover so much truth as they did after being brought up under such influences as they were. We think the progress of truth has been after this manner: One reformer after another has arisen, and, taking his stand upon some important principle, has battled nobly for it; and as he did so, God blessed the honest effort to the good of souls. And this course has caused that especial truth to shine out clearly, and has benefited the world. And so Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Bunyan, and others, have enjoyed God’s blessing, as they have stood for the right; and this course has been pursued till many of the great truths of the apostolic age have again been brought to light. We believe that the denominations of this age have many of these truths divided up among them; and each one, in propagating its own views, makes these points of truth the means of gaining adherents, while their errors are kept in the background. In this way, God has blessed these bodies to the salvation of many precious souls. As they first came out, they were humble, sincere, and zealous in the service of God. What a mighty work for good was accomplished by the Methodists under Wesley; so of the Baptists and others. But while God has thus blessed honest men in leading out in important reforms, there has always been a disposition on the part of their followers to stop short at the termination of their work, and proceed no further than they did. As soon as such a stop was made, God’s blessing began evidently to be withdrawn. This shows that the Lord designed the church to go forward and continue in the same course, as there were still glorious truths to be discovered. And that some of the reformers realized this, and felt that still other reforms were before them, we think can be easily demonstrated. I have one extract which shows this so clearly that I ask pardon of the reader for introducing it, as it is somewhat lengthy. It is from the address of Robinson on the departure of the Pilgrims from Leyden to this country in the May Flower, 1620. “Brethren, we are now quickly to part from one another, and whether I may live to see you face to face on earth any more the God of Heaven only knows; but whether the Lord hath appointed that or not, I charge you before God and his blessed angels that you follow me no further than you have seen me follow the Lord Jesus Christ. If God reveals anything to you by another instrument, be as ready to receive it as you ever were to receive any truth by my ministry; for I am very confident, I am very confident, that the Lord has more truth yet to break forth out of his holy word. For my part, I cannot sufficiently bewail the condition of the reformed churches, who are come to a period in religion, and will go at present no further than the instruments of their reformation. The Lutherans cannot be drawn to go any further than what Luther saw, and the Calvinists, you see, stick fast where they were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. “This is a misery much to be lamented; for though they were burning and shining lights in their time, yet they penetrated not into the whole counsel of God, but were they now living, would be as willing to embrace further light as that which they first received. I beseech you, remember it is an article of your church covenant that you be ready to receive whatever truth shall be made known to you from the written word of God. “But I must herewith exhort you to take heed what you receive as truth. Examine it, consider it, compare it with other scriptures of truth before you receive it; for it is not possible that the Christian world should come so lately out of such thick antichristian darkness, and that perfection of knowledge should break forth at once.” The italics are mine. There are no more noble, sensible words than these to be found in the writings of the reformers. This man was worthy to lead out that band of self-sacrificing pilgrims who scattered the rays of gospel light over the unbroken wilderness of the New World, and founded a colony which did more to give us the heritage of freedom we now enjoy than any other. How true his words are in reference to the reformed churches going no further than those who were instrumental in bringing them light. How plain that the great body of the Lutheran church have made no advance since Luther’s time, but have actually retrograded, till those State churches of Germany embrace millions who do not even make a profession; and so of the established church of England. And who would dare to say that the great mass of our Protestant churches to-day are real Christians in the sight of God? And we believe the same drawing in the direction of the world can be seen in all of them that has become so palpable in those mentioned above; therefore it is high time another real reform should take place. And a reform to be owned of God must embrace truths of real value, such as God has revealed in his word. Again, we believe it can be easily shown that we have reached the last days of time; that the great chains of prophecy have reached their closing scenes, and the signs in the sun, moon, and stars, have been seen, and soon the Lord will come. We have shown in a former part of this article that there was to be a reform connected with the law of God, especially the Sabbath, at the very time when the work of the papacy was drawing to a close, and that the last of the true church was to be specially distinguished by keeping all the commandments of God, showing plainly that others would not be doing this. And the last message to the world embraces the “commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.” And what can these be but a broad platform of truth, in short, the whole truth as revealed in the Old and New Testaments as a preparation for Christ’s coming? In every great epoch of the world’s history, God has had a special truth upon which to test the world, and one which has been long neglected, some plain truth easily demonstrated to all inquiring minds, and one which has a cross to it. How else can people be tested only by truth which is unpopular? In no other way can people show a greater love for God than for the world, but by having the claims of each forcibly set before the mind. When the current of the world presses one way and the claims of unpopular truth draw the other, there is a chance for the human heart to show which it desires most; and that which it chooses is the test of preference. We solemnly believe God is making such a test of his holy law, especially of the downtrodden Sabbath of the fourth commandment by which to try the last generation of men. It is just adapted to this end. It is a plain truth. It is never difficult to show to the unbiased mind what day God requires men to keep, so far as Bible testimony is concerned, and show there is no real testimony for any other day. In fact, thousands will admit it, who will not obey their own convictions. It is of such a nature that it will have a tendency to separate those who regard it from worldliness and make its adherents unpopular. This, we know, is a great objection to it in the minds of many, but we regard it as a positive benefit and an actual necessity for the accomplishment of the ends designed by God in giving a test; that is, to separate God’s people from worldly influences. The great danger is that they will be conformed to the world and be like them. And no doubt this was one reason why God permitted persecution to fall upon his people with such weight in ages past. We cannot suppose God would delight to have his people suffer, or, indeed, permit it only as it would benefit them and make them long for a better world, and shut out designing men, and hypocrites, and worldlings, from them. I have often thought what surprising changes we should see should there be an old-fashioned persecution, in which men’s lives would be forfeited for holding fast their faith. No doubt we should see some astonishing apostasies, and that it would greatly work for the purification of the163 church. This same end is partly attained by an unpopular doctrine which requires a practice different from, and conflicting with, that of the world around us. The Sabbath truth is eminently adapted to accomplish this end. We thank God for the cross. It does us good to raise it. Not that we would be different from others where no moral principle is involved, or set up some notion of our own to produce such an effect; but when some principle of divine truth is at stake, obedience to which will cause us to differ from others, the effect upon us must be elevating. ’T is then the cross raises us. Having now given good, substantial reasons from Scripture and history, showing that there was to be a coming back to primitive truth in the last days, especially upon the law of God, and that it would be too much to expect this to have been accomplished in a short time after ages of mental darkness and superstition, I have shown why the Sabbath with many was not known before. Although there have been, in all ages, those who have kept the Sabbath of the Lord, the masses of the people have been ignorant of its claims. Some of them have honestly lived up to all the light they had, and we believe God has accepted them. But this does not justify us at all, if we have more light than they had. We shall be judged according to that light. Says Jesus, “This is the condemnation that light is come into the world, and men love darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.” Our question should be, What does God require of us? His word affords the only answer. That word tells us the “seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God,” and commands us to “remember” it and “keep it holy.” There our duty is made so plain that a child may see it. It will not be enough for us to wonder why others have not kept it. The question will be, Why did not you keep it? This appeal to the practices of past times has been the hiding place of error in all ages, whenever light has been introduced. Says the pagan Roman Emperor, Diocletian, A. D. 296, in a law against Christianity: “The immortal gods have, by their providence, ordained and established that which is true and good. Many wise and good men are united in the opinion that this must be maintained without alteration. These we dare not oppose, as no new religion ought to venture to blame the old; for it is an enormous crime to pull down that which our forefathers established and which has dominion in the State.”—Rose’s Neander, Sect. 1, p. 84. How much that sounds like objections urged in these days against the Lord’s Sabbath. The same appeal is made to the laws of the land and the opinions of good men, as if these afforded any authority for religious practice. Had those who listened to the preaching of the gospel then pursued the course of many now, and been satisfied with the example of their forefathers, paganism would be the prevailing religion in our midst to-day. So it was in the great Reformation. Hear Dr. Eck, the most powerful opponent Luther found, while engaged in discussion with him: “I am surprised at the humility and modesty with which the reverend doctor undertakes to oppose alone so many illustrious fathers, and pretends to know more than the sovereign pontiff, the councils, the doctors, and the universities. It would be surprising, no doubt, if God has hidden the truth from so many saints and martyrs till the advent of the reverend doctor.”—Hist. of Ref., Vol. 2, p. 59. No doubt millions remained Catholics just because their forefathers were; and there is no one thing that is holding more of them where they are to-day than the common appeal which all of them make that it is the ancient religion. But it is very inconsistent talk for Protestants; and to be consistent they should become Catholics at once. How sensibly Dr. Adam Clarke talks on this point: “The antiquity of an opinion, if that be not founded on a revelation from God, is no evidence of its truth; for there are many ungodly opinions which are more than a thousand years old. And so as to great men and great names, we find them enrolled and arranged on each side of all controversies.”—Introduction to Songs of Solomon. John Locke, the great philosopher, says, “An error is not better for being common, nor the truth worse for having been neglected. And if it were put to the vote anywhere in the world, I doubt, as things are arranged, whether truth would have the majority, at least while the authority of men, and not the examination of things, must be its measure.”—Essay on the Human Understanding, Book 4, chap. 3, sect. 6, note. How thankful we should be that God has given his word as the rule of our lives, and not left us to grope our way in darkness, or to be directed by the ever-conflicting, ever-changing course of weak humanity! That man who takes that word for his guide in all things has planted his feet upon the rock of eternal truth, and need have no fears of the final result. Says the Saviour to the Jews, “In vain do ye worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” If this be so, how careful we should be that our practice in reference to so important a matter as the Sabbath of the Lord should have the explicit sanction of divine authority. We can most confidently claim this for the seventh day, it having the express appointment of the great God. While for the first day of the week, we have only far-fetched inferences and human tradition. Battle Creek, Mich., April 22, 1872.