THE PRIMARY IDEA OF SUNDAY OBSERVANCE.
By W.
SAYS the Christian at Work:— "As to Sunday itself, there ought to be no question as to the underlying motive for its maintenance by the State; with the religious features of the day the State has nothing whatever to do; the primary idea is Rest, with a very big R—Rest for man and beast; that was the fundamental idea of its establishment by divine authority." The editor of the Christian at Work should occasionally look over the files of his paper to refresh his mind as to what he has said in time past. No longer ago than February 18, 1886, he said:— "We hear less than we used to about the apostolic origin of the present Sunday observance, and for the reason that . . . it is now seen, as it is admitted, that we must go to later than apostolic times for the establishment of Sunday observance." And on January 8, 1885, the Christian at Work said editorially:— "We rest the designation of Sunday on the church's having set it apart of its own authority. The seventh-day rest was commanded in the fourth commandment. . . . The selection of Sunday, thus changing the particular day designated in the fourth commandment, was brought about by the gradual concurrence of the early Christian church; and on this basis, and none other, does the Christian sabbath, the first day of the week, rightly rest." Yet in the face of these candid admissions of fact, the same paper now speaks of the establishment of Sunday "by divine authority." We would like to ask a few questions: 1. Is "the church" divine authority for anything? 2. If it is, which part of the church has that exaltation? for it is well known that "the church" has many conflicting divisions, or as it is sometimes expressed, "There are many branches of our Zion." 3. Does the Christian at Work claim that "divine authority" rests in "the church" as a whole, and that, like the infallible Popes of Rome, it can make contradictory opinions equally true? or when it speaks of "the church" does it mean to be understood as referring to the Roman Catholic Church? 4. And if it means this, why does it not adopt all other festivals imposed by the same "divine authority"? The fact is, and the Christian at Work knows it very well, that there is no divine authority for Sunday-keeping. The fourth commandment is the only Sabbath commandment there is in the Bible, and that enjoins the observance of the seventh day of the week, and of no other day. It is also a fact that the Bible is the only "divine authority" in the world, because it is the only revelation of the will of God. Therefore, it is also a fact that Sunday has no divine authority whatever, commanding it as a rest-day of any kind. Moreover, divine commands are never gradually given. The ten commandments were given at one time, by the voice of God. But evil has always come in by the "gradual concurrence" of those who thought their own way preferable to the will of God. The fact that the observance of Sunday instead of the Sabbath was "brought about by the gradual concurrence of the early Christian church," after the days of the apostles, unmistakably stamps that institution as a product of the great apostasy. But granting the claim that Sunday was established by authority of some kind, let us notice the statement of the Christian at Work, that physical rest is the primary idea of that establishment. If that be the case, then no State has a right to enforce its observance upon those who do not feel like resting. Night is the time for sleep, but no Government has the power to enact that a man shall be forced to sleep if he is not sleepy. If Sunday is only for physical rest, then the State has no more right to say that a man must rest upon it if he is not tired, than it has to say that a dose of morphine shall be given to every man who does not feel like going to bed at ten o'clock at night. But if the advocates of Sunday shall, in order to avoid this dilemma, claim that there is a religious idea also to the Sunday rest, then we still insist that the State has no right to enforce its observance, for civil Governments have nothing to do with matters of religion. Gallio of old had a just conception of the extent of his power as a civil ruler, when he said to the Jews who wanted him to condemn Paul:— "If it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness, O ye Jews, reason would that I should hear with you; but if it be a question of words and names, and of your law, look ye to it; for I will be no judge of such matters." Acts 18: 14, 15. We leave Sunday worshipers to settle the matter among themselves as to the grounds upon which they observe Sunday, if it is possible to fix upon the "primary idea" of an institution that was established without precept. But for the Sabbath we can say that the primary idea in its establishment is worship, and not physical rest. The Sabbath was made for man, in order that he might know and remember God, and not for his personal ease. And here we will say that the man who labors so hard during the week that physical rest becomes of necessity the primary idea in his Sabbath observance, does not remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. If a man feels in need of physical rest and recreation, there is no objection to his taking it on Sunday; but there is a commandment from the Lord himself, for every man to rest on the Sabbath, and that without regard to the wants of his physical nature.