Text: "The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work." Ex. 20:10.
GOD never stultifies himself by introducing into the same law conflicting provisions. He never enjoins in one clause a duty in which is implied the right of choice as to the time and manner of its fulfillment, and in the next prevents you, either from enjoying this franchise yourself, or requires at your hands, that which would render it impossible for others to do so. In other words, applying the principle to the case in hand, God either meant to confer upon all the right of deciding for themselves which day they would keep, or else he intended to withhold it from them altogether. If the latter be true, it was done for good and sufficient cause; if the former, then he was moved to this course by considerations equally weighty. There is no half-way ground in this matter. The right of choice in this thing is either a positive good or a positive evil. If the latter, then he has, unquestionably, guarded against it in every reasonable manner; if the former then he has, doubtless, shielded it with the most scrupulous care, in order that the greatest good might be accomplished, by leaving to the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the master and the servant, the right as against every other man, of saying, not only that they would keep the Sabbath, but that which was equally God-given, of determining when they would do so.
But this is just what our friends argue that he intended to do in the decalogue. If they are right we shall, undoubtedly, find it constructed upon this principle throughout. Let us test the matter. Perhaps the best method of doing this would be that of allowing some one of their number to attempt, practically, to carry out his conception of this doctrine.
(1.) Let him be a man of family, say a farmer, a portion of whose children are grown up, and who is surrounded by much hired help; also, a man who is not only conscientious in his notions, as doubtless many of that faith are, but a somewhat ardent advocate of them; and one who would spurn the idea of depriving others of that which he believed to be their rightful prerogative.
Having kept Sunday for the whole of his life thus far, he concludes that a sentiment which can never be enjoyed is hardly worth the holding, and decides to deviate from the practice of years, so far as to substitute Wednesday for it in the future. His wife consenting, they gather the household about them, and make known their intentions. While he invites all, as far as they can consistently do so, to unite with him and wife in this thing, he nevertheless gives them to understand that he shall by no means attempt to coerce compliance, since that would be an infringement on their undoubted freedom to consult their own wishes in such matters. However, it would be exceedingly gratifying if all would make the change with them.355The young people, seeing that such a step would be very inconvenient, and many times in the way of their enjoying society as they otherwise would, decide not to take it. The hired help, also, for one cause or another, determine not to depart from the custom of their fathers.
Wednesday arrives at last, and with it the appointed rest. Our venerable friend, true to his convictions of duty, having previously assigned, to all who thus desire, the field of their labor during his Sabbath, in order that his mind might not be turned away from its devotions by the intrusion of matters of a secular nature, withdrawing, in company with his wife, to a retired portion of the house and congratulating himself upon the liberality of sentiments which, instead of holding all to the same inflexible rule, furnishes so much scope to the gratification of personal tastes and the consulting of individual interests, enters upon this rest. In this mood, the Bible is taken from the shelf, and opened to the 20th chapter of Exodus. The gray-haired man reads: "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy." Yes, Lord, he replies, we are endeavoring thus to do. "Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work." Yes, he responds, we have already done. "But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work." Once more he ejaculates, This has reference to one day in seven, and means that it should be celebrated as we are celebrating this. He begins back a little: "In it thou shalt not do any work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates." He pauses. A new idea strikes his mind. He again reads the passage. He is not mistaken. In the light of those words he is a Sabbath-breaker. For, waiving all questions in regard to time, he is guilty in respect to the manner of keeping the Sabbath; as, by every rule of fair construction, these words clearly imply that his sons, his daughters, his man-servant, his maid-servant, his cattle, and even the stranger that is within his gates, are to abstain from labor on the same hours on which he does; and yet, by his own direction, his daughters and his maid-servants are hard at work in the kitchen; his sons are employed in like manner in one field, while, in another, his oxen, under the goad of a hired man, are pressing their weary shoulders against the yoke, in order that in due time their master may reap in a rich harvest of golden grain—the reward of their Sabbath toil.
Do you say that we are begging the question in saying that the words in controversy, when rightly understood, teach what we claim? We reply, the verdict of all ages and races is in our favor in this matter. From Sinai to the present time it has been the practice of both Jews and Gentiles to hold church members responsible, under the principle enunciated in this language, for the conduct of those under their roof on the Sabbath day. So general, and so deep seated, is the conviction that this practice is in every way commendable, we venture the prediction that should a conscientious Sabbatarian in search of labor among equally sincere Sunday-keepers, who needed his services ever so much, propose the idea of working for them on the latter and resting on the former day, his proposition would be spurned with contempt by nine out of ten, on the ground that they could not grant it without sin.
(2.) The understanding of the clause which you suggest involves absurdities too great to be entertained for a moment. Take example, the first two classes mentioned, i. e., sons and daughters. In the majority of cases, they would include children of immature years. Does it seem probable that God would subject a father to the humiliating necessity of consulting the whims and caprices of boys and girls, as to when they should observe the Sabbath on his premises and under his roof? Yet he has done so unless the language in question confers upon him the power of compelling them to rest at a time either fixed by the Almighty, or to be fixed by himself.
(3.) The third class produces an illustration of the folly of such a sentiment, as clearly marked as does that of the second. For it cannot, with any show of reason, be urged that the servant should be made superior to the master by conferring upon him the privilege of deciding in reference to the day upon which he will rest, and at the same time, the latter be held responsible for the manner in which he passes it.
And, besides, is it not manifest that the workings of such a system would be disastrous in the extreme, and that the efforts of every family conducted upon this principle would inevitably be marked by confusion and failure? Surely, nothing is more indispensable to success than the presence of the leading mind at the time when the subordinate ones are to carry out the plans of operation which he has formed. But this, in the case under consideration, would be rendered impossible for at least one day in every week. Not only so, but the sentiment in question, in the hands of skillful shirks, especially where the service, as among the Jews, was many times for life, would prove the never-failing source of vexation and trial; for a change of Sabbath would ever afford a plausible pretext for absence, whenever extraordinary or unpleasant labor was to be performed.
(4.) Again, the fact that cattle are mentioned in this connection in common with sons, daughters, men-servants, maid-servants, and strangers, throws light upon the intention of the Lawgiver; for, as it is said of them, in common with the others, that they shall do no work in it (i. e., the seventh day), it becomes too plain to admit of argument that the words "in it," as here read and applied to them in common with the other classes, does not refer to the day of their choice, since cattle cannot exercise volition—but must be understood as alluding to the one in which the master himself refrains from labor.
Thus we think we have established that which we at first assumed to be true, namely, that the head of a family does not wholly comply with the law by simply resting on the Sabbath day. He must do more than this. He must compel those about him to follow his example.
The bearing of this fact upon the general issue is too plain to require comment; for you will remember that the "Seventh-part-of-time theory" is but the enunciation of the principle, that God has clothed every man with authority to decide for himself when he will hallow the Sabbath; and yet we discover that, by a decree of the same God, three-fourths of the race, or at least all embraced in the various orders of children abiding at home, men-servants, maid-servants, and strangers, are most effectually debarred from the benefits of this provision. One of two things, therefore, is true: Either the Lord has, in the details of his law, defeated its general purpose and plan, or else this theory does not accord with its original intention. The reader will not be slow to decide which of the hypotheses he will adopt.
Fourthly, the providence of God is against this exposition.
Having found that the internal evidence of the law is overwhelmingly against our opponents, we might rest here in the confident conviction that our case is fairly made out. But, remembering that men who are called upon to change opinions of long standing, desire, if they do not require, all the light which can be given, we pause before submitting it to them to pass upon, that we may present testimony drawn from the providence of God, showing that his dealings with his people, during the forty years in which he walked and talked with them in the wilderness, were such as to render it utterly impossible for them to keep any day but the last of the week.
If we shall succeed in doing this, as there is in Him "neither variableness nor shadow of turning," as he never does anything the effect of which he does not previously comprehend, and, as the rule of action is precisely the same now as then, we shall be condemned for attempting, now, that which the Hebrew then found it impossible to accomplish. Or, to state the proposition in another form, as there can never be any shade of conflict between God's revealed will and his secret purpose, as his words and his acts always tend to the same end, if the former were designed to vindicate the idea of a variable Sabbath, the latter would have been equally decided in its favor. We will for the sake of brevity, suppose that some one of the mighty hosts of Israelites had been seized with this modern notion. He has conformed to the usage of the multitude a long time; but finally he grows restless, and makes it manifest by intimating that Moses takes too much upon himself, in that he teaches the people that all are to keep the Sabbath simultaneously, since this, to his mind, was by no means a part of the original plan. Weary, at last, with simple remonstrance, he takes a step further, determined either to become a martyr to his own faith, or revolutionize that of the camp.
Sunday affords a convenient opportunity for carrying his plan into operation. As with the Hebrews, that day began with the setting of the sun on what is now Saturday evening, he assembles his family in his tent at that period, they having been previously notified, and having acquiesced in, his intention. As the shades of evening draw on, they retire to rest, wooed by the almost holy stillness of the night into the impression that they are keeping an acceptable Sabbath unto the Lord. Morning dawns at last; and as the rising sun throws for the first time his golden pencils of light across the landscape, they awaken to the consciousness that it is holy time. The first inclination is to break a fast which has been of so long duration that nature is somewhat importunate in her demand for food. This is especially true of the children, and they clamor for bread. But their appeals are unheeded; there is not a morsel of food in the tent.
It is true that the fields without are white with that most delicious substance, whose taste was said to be "like unto wafers mingled with honey;" but they remembered that the Lord had said that the people must not go out to gather it upon the Sabbath day. Ex. 16:29. The dilemma is an unpleasant one. The father appreciates the awkwardness of the situation, and, stung to the quick at the prospect that his first attempt at innovation must prove abortive, since it would be folly to persist in it under the circumstances and anxious to shift the responsibility of failure to the shoulders of another, reprovingly inquires of his wife why she did not foresee this upon the previous day, and guard against it by furnishing a double portion of manna, according to the usual custom. She gently reminds him that it was impossible; for, that being the seventh day, no manna had fallen, else the word of the Lord would have been broken. Ex. 16:26. Mortified, but not corrected, and failing to comprehend to its full extent the moral which this lesson ought to have taught, he attributes his first failure to the unfortunate selection of a day that had been preceded by one upon which there was no fall of manna, and decides to make one more effort. Monday furnishes the first opportunity for this purpose, and is therefore fixed upon; and Sunday, the very one which had witnessed his disappointment, becomes the preparation day for the second experimental Sabbath. There is no lack either of the material to prepare, or of a disposition to put it in a state of readiness for the morrow. When the seething and baking of a sufficient quantity is completed, it is viewed with evident satisfaction, since it is supposed to furnish a complete guaranty against a failure similar to the one which had occurred in the past. The sun goes down, and holy time is once more fairly entered upon, the night is passed in unbroken silence, and the first dawn is hailed as the arrival of the auspicious moment which is to witness the triumphant vindication of a theory, the enemies of which, through the merest accident, have been enabled to ridicule for a period.
Again, the family circle is complete. As they gather around to partake of the morning meal, the urn, in which is deposited that which is one and the same time the precious food of angels and that of God's wandering people, is brought forth and its cover removed, in order that each one may receive his portion of its most delicious contents. How perfect the revulsion of feeling and how great the chagrin, when they find in the living mass of loathsome worms. The words of Moses, that they should not keep any of that which was gathered on any day but the sixth until the morning, are brought to mind; and they perceive, at last, that they have but repeated the experiment of those who had formerly disregarded this injunction and found that "it bred worms, and stank." Ex. 16:20. But folly had not yet run her perfect round. Reason seemed to have been dethroned until Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday are tried with like success.
Upon the first day of the week, that which many are now solemnizing in supposed obedience to the commandment, there was found no food at all, while upon the remaining five, it was in such a condition as to forbid the entertaining, for a moment, the thought of being appropriated as food by mortal man.
Thus terminates the first attempt to confound the sacred with the profane. Its victim, thoroughly humbled and profoundly penitent, returns to the old way, a wiser and a better man, resolving in the future, to atone, as far as possible, for the past, by a faithful observance of the Lord's Sabbath. Making Friday the preparation day, he once more enters upon its solemn hours. How different the experience now! No hunger here, nor sight of nauseating food! The creature is in harmony with the Creator. The latter, to make up for the lack of manna on the seventh day, gives a double portion on the sixth; and to obviate the difficulty which would arise from the fact that the manna which ordinarily fell would become corrupt within twenty-four hours, by an exercise of divine power, he makes that of a nature to last forty-eight.
Thus did the Lord distinctly teach his ancient people that his Sabbath was a particular, definite day of the week. If you would feel the force with which this conviction must have rested down upon their minds, you have but to remember that there were in each week, three distinct acts of God, or, if you please, miracles, all tending to confirm them in it; viz., the falling of the manna on the six days, the giving of a double portion on the last of them, the preservation of this over the seventh, and the absence of any, whatever, on this. Also, that, as there are in each year fifty-two weeks, they must have witnessed in each year one hundred and fifty-six of these occurrences (there being three each week), and, in the forty years of their wanderings in the wilderness, the enormous aggregate of six thousand two hundred and forty.