The Observance versus the Day.
Rabbi Dr. Hirsch, editor of the Reform Advocate, complains that “the synagogues have everywhere lost influence over their own members.” He accounts for this condition in this way: “On Saturday the majority can not attend, and on Sunday they are urged to stay away by the fanaticism which resulted in the preposterous declaration that he is a more pious Jew who will not go to the synagogue on Sunday than he who will.” A prominent Christian paper concludes that Dr. Hirsch would be willing to accept Sunday if thereby he could secure a better attendance at the services in the synagogue, and adds; “That is, the observance is more than the day.” This conclusion is nullified by the fact that it was the day that was “blessed” and “sanctified;” and for this reason the observance was commanded to be perpetuated. Gen. 2:3; Ex. 16:22-26; 20:8-11; 31:12-17; Isa. 58:13,14; Jer. 17:21-27; Eze. 20:19, 20. In all these scriptures the day is made prominent—the institution is fixed in regard to time. It was the day that was made holy, and the commandment enjoins that the day be kept holy. The observance is the means to that end, because the day is the memorial of an event, the time of which could not be commemorated on any other day. That day is made the sign between God and His people, therefore no other day could be that sign. To do an act on any other day than that on which it is commanded to be done, is just as much an act of disobedience as tho it were not done at all. Such proceeding would not stand even in a human court, and such dalliance with even human law would not be tolerated. To make the observance of God’s law a matter of convenience is the height of disobedience.