WHAT A SECULAR JOURNAL SAYS.
By Editor
THE Washington, D. C., National View of the 15th ult. has the following to say on the Sunday question:— “Negatively—what it is not. It is not ‘the Sabbath day.’ That is the seventh day, as established by God himself, through the law as expounded by Moses to the Israelites, some hundreds or thousands of years ago. So this day is the Sabbath. And without alteration by the same power that made it, it will so remain until the end of time for all who recognize the original authority to promulgate the same. It is now held by the Jews, for whom it was, and will, doubtless, continue to be. Some other Christian sects hold to the same view; and so regard the day. “But Sunday, the first day of the week, although set apart for religious purposes somewhat like unto the Sabbath, is not the Sabbath, and should not be so called, because it does not exist by the same distinctive authority. And no authority exists for changing the one for the other, neither by God himself nor by the Christ. So that we have only to submit that Sunday, the first day of the week, is a distinctive or holy day, like unto the Sabbath3only by the custom of the early Christians to meet together on this day; and later, the canons of the church established it, and through the civil law, which was made to correspond therewith. “This is the long and short of it. Multum in parvo, much in a little. And you can make no more out of it except the voluntary recognition which the people of Christian countries extend to it. And so, as a social and moral institution, it is accepted by the world at large; all of which is well enough of itself, but there is no justification for appropriating the name of the Jewish Sabbath. The Jewish Sabbath has a history by itself; and no manipulation of days or objects can alter or change it. It should be allowed to retain its own original status, without interference from without. “And Sunday should stand on its own bottom—so to speak—and perform its own independent functions, without any confusion of ideas, or the confounding of one day for the other. They are not one; but separate and distinct. Let each be recognized and respected according to worth and authority. But out with equivocation, deception, and misrepresentation. “Honor bright! Sunday for the first day of the week; the Sabbath for the seventh. This is fair play. This is consistent. It is just and true. So mote it be.” With the exception of a few careless expressions the above is a candid statement of fact. The “authority” which set Sunday apart is purely human. But the customs of the early church and any number of church canons or bulls can never make a day “holy,” or “moral,” any more than custom and the laws of some intra or extra governmental society can make a counterfeit bill genuine. Morality and holiness are intrinsic or imparted of God, but God has never thus invested Sunday. With the National View would we say respecting these two rival days: “Let each be recognized and respected according to worth and authority,” and we would add, let the word of God be the standard; “but out with equivocation, deception, and misrepresentation.” The Sabbath was given of God, not Moses. Sunday, as a so-called holy day, is only of human origin; in the word of God it ranks the same as any other of the six working days of the week.