"We will now suppose, that a person wandering through the streets of some great city, suddenly comes to an enclosure containing a collection of spacious and beautiful buildings. On enquiring he finds that they are designed for a benevolent purpose—say, a home for friendless and indigent females. He obtains permission to enter the enclosure, and the first thing which attracts his attention is an imposing monument, upon which is an inscription to the effect, that the ground was given, the buildings erected, and the institution endowed by the munificence of one John Howard; and that this monument was raised to commemorate the fact. We will next suppose that after this monument has stood unmutilated for many years some person undertakes to demolish it, and build another in its place, for the purpose of commemorating a different event; or, if he should not choose to build a monument entirely new, that he removes the slab containing the inscription, and substitutes another having a new inscription which leaves out the name of John Howard, making no allusion to him, nor to the object for which he had caused these buildings to be erected. Would not the person, who would act thus, show that he did not feel towards the name and memory of John Howard as he ought to feel? Would it not be natural to infer, that he harbored some enmity against him?—that he did not wish his name perpetuated?—or, that he hated the work itself, and did not wish such a monument of god-like benevolence to be kept in memory? Some such inference, we think, would be perfectly natural. Indeed, we see no room for any other, unless it be this, that the destroyer of the monument was actuated by the mere love of mischief."
The advocates of the first day of the week may take notice that we have spoken this parable against them. The Sabbath is a monument, upon which is the plain and unmistakable inscription, that Jehovah created the worlds; that by power, wisdom and goodness, he formed and perfected all in six days, and rested on the seventh; and that for the purpose of commemorating this fact, the monument was erected, so that men might have no excuse for atheism, and none for idolatry. Ho! all ye that pass by, the way-faring man and the fool, as well as the philosopher and the learned, stop—read—and know, that Jehovah is the Creator of all things. Those who deny the obligation of the sabbath under the gospel, are represented by the man who tears down the monument, and builds another in its place. Those who pretend to admit the perpetuity of the Sabbath, but contend for a change of the day, on the ground of the work of redemption, are represented by the man who secretly removes the slab containing the inscription, and substitutes another, with a different inscription. And now, so far as the design of the Sabbath is concerned, what difference does it make whether the monument be altogether demolished and a new one built, or merely the slab of inscription removed, and another substituted? Practically it makes no difference.—The advocates of both these seemingly different views, are agreed in their object. They both desire to maintain the observance of a day different from that which the law of the Sabbath enjoins, and both desire it on the same grounds. They both wish to have the first day of the week considered holy, and not the seventh; and both are governed, in this, by a desire of commemorating—not the creation, but—the work of redemption.
Must we, therefore, conclude that the advocates of the first day observance are actuated by a feeling of enmity against Jehovah, as the Author of creation, and that they desire that his name should no longer be had in remembrance on this account? Must we conclude that they despise the work of creation?—that they see so little of beauty and glory in it—so little of benevolence and goodness—that they think it unworthy of any further commemoration? We had supposed that it were enough for unregenerate sinners to cherish enmity against Jehovah as the God of creation. "The CARNAL mind is enmity against God." We had supposed that when one was created anew in Christ Jesus, his enmity was destroyed, and that he then loved to contemplate Jehovah as the Author of his existence, and of all created things, and that he began to love the law which Jehovah, as Creator, enjoined. We always thought that the effect of redemption was to open the eyes to see, not only the beauty of redemption itself, but the beauty and glory of creation, and the goodness and benevolence of Jehovah as displayed in the works of his hand. This, at any rate, is our experience; and it is passing strange if the effect of redemption on every heart to which it is applied, is not to eradicate every thing like atheism, and to create that faith which is firmly persuaded that God exists, and that the worlds were framed by the word of his power.
But we are persuaded that our First-day brethren do not mean what their practice so clearly implies.—Still we cannot forbear asking why they go about to tear down the monument which proclaims Jehovah as the Creator of the world? Why seek to demolish that which was set up for the very purpose of being a standing testimony against Atheism and Idolatry? Surely you do not mean to strike hands with infidels and heathens! Or, why seek to alter the inscription which God originally placed upon this monument? Why seek to make it tell a different story, as if the old one was too old to be repeated any longer? You may, perhaps, reply, that a monumental institution, to proclaim Jehovah as the God of creation, is not necessary, inasmuch as it is so abundantly proclaimed by the works of his hand. If so, then it was never necessary; and for four thousand years the Sabbath was a useless institution.
The truth is, men are just as apt to be infidels now as they ever were, and the Sabbath is just as necessary now, as a testimony against their infidelity, as it ever was. Why, then, seek to destroy the Sabbath, or to modify it, and alter its character, so that it can no longer be recognized as commemorative of creation? We are astonished that Christians will act thus.
But that which makes their course in regard to the Sabbath still worse is, that they attempt to father it upon Jesus Christ! The Church of Rome, with all her impiety, has never been guilty of this. But you, who call yourselves Protestants, allege that Christ tore down the monument which God had set up to be witness against Atheism and Idolatry! You allege, at least, that he began to batter and deface the inscription, and gave his apostles instructions to complete the work of demolition after his resurrection! If Jesus Christ were an Atheist—if he taught that the world came into existence by chance, without any forming hand—if he desired to spread this belief among men, and blot out, as far as possible, every thing which attests that Jehovah was the Creator—we should suppose that one of the first things he would undertake would be to destroy the Sabbath.—But if, on the contrary, he came to declare the glory of the Father—if he came to bear testimony against infidelity, and by his redeeming power to lead men back to the acknowledgment and worship of the Creator, as we know he did—it stands to reason, that he would honor the Sabbath, that he would enforce it by his example, and that he would say of this, as of any other divine precept, "I came not to destroy the law—one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from it, till all be fulfilled."