AGITATION OF THE SABBATH QUESTION.
By R. F. Andrews
Since the effort with our tent in Watseka, Ill., last Summer, there has been no public and open attack on our position till recently. Early this month bills were posted up all over town, announcing that “Rev. A. O. Burgess [Disciple], Principal of the N. W. C. University, Indianapolis, Ind., would preach on the subject of the Sabbath, Feb. 6, at eleven A. M.” (To accommodate the minister and members of the M. E. Church, the discourse was put off till seven P. M.). The subject to be spoken upon, and the position and reputation of the speaker, drew out an immense crowd. The following evening, the writer had the privilege of replying to the arguments offered, before a large audience. Mr. Burgess presented no new arguments, but made some good admissions. He did not deny the Edenic origin of the Sabbath. He said, “Christ kept the Sabbath as it ought to be kept;” and that “the observance of the resurrection day was a voluntary offering to Christ.” He asked, “Can we find the text in the Bible enjoining the observance of this day? No. Well, is it not dangerous to let people know there is no Bible for it? No.” The presiding elder of the M. E. Church, offered the opening prayer, and the preacher in charge the closing one. In the opening prayer God was thanked “for the blessings of that holy Sabbath.” But Eld. B., in his sermon, declared “Christ abolished it, as he did the rest of the law.” The discipline of the M. E. church makes a clear distinction between the moral and the ceremonial law, claiming that the latter “doth not bind Christians,” while the former does. See p. 17, Article 6. But Eld. B. strongly affirmed that no such distinction exists, and that Christ abolished both laws. Again the discipline teaches (Article 11, p. 19) that voluntary works cannot be taught without arrogance and impiety. But Eld. B. teaches, and truthfully, too, that the keeping of Sunday, or the first day of the week, is just such a work—that “there is no proof for it in the Bible.” Some of the Methodist brethren thought last summer that I was “a very bad man, because I told the people there was no proof in the Bible for Sunday-keeping, and it was dangerous to hear me.” But they did hear Eld. Burgess say it, and their minister ask the blessing of God on “the word spoken.” Of course, they have changed their mind. This rubbing has only made the truth shine the brighter. Quite a number of our brethren at Watseka were formerly members of the same church as Eld. Burgess. It was doubtless for their benefit he came. But their united testimony is that his effort has only strengthened them in the position they have taken in favor of the down-trodden Sabbath of the Lord. I would have given the learned professor’s arguments with my replies, had it not been that he followed in the old rut, and every reader of the Review is familiar with them. Gilman, Ill., Feb. 25, 1876.