THE obligation of the fourth commandment of the decalogue is believed by many, in consideration of the supposed greater magnitude of the work of redemption as compared with that of creation, to have been transferred to the first day of the week,—on which Christ is said to have finished the work of redemption by rising from the dead,—ever after to be observed in its septenary order as a memorial of that event. But to this proposition objections of considerable weight are apparent.
1. The Sabbath according to the command must be preceded by six days of labor, which was not true of the resurrection day, the one preceding it being the seventh in septenary order from the creation, and termed by the Holy Spirit "the Sabbath according to the commandment." And since no provision has been made in the Scriptures for two Sabbaths in juxtaposition and opposed in their fundamental principles, we conclude that such an anomaly can only be located where it is placed by the well-known couplet,—
"Next day after never,
When two Sabbaths meet together."
2. But if it be urged that the law was abrogated at the cross, and that the day preceding that of the resurrection was not therefore the Sabbath, then a period of one and one-eighth days intervened between the crucifixion and the so-called Christian Sabbath for which no enactment of the Lawgiver has made any provision, and we cannot therefore exercise faith in the supposed change of the Sabbath law. If it could be proved that Christ wrought in the work of redemption just six days prior to that of his resurrection, and that his resurrection constituted no part of that work, it would relieve the question of this superabundant time, and overlap ante-crucifixion time four and seven-eighths days, thus making the amendment or re-enactment of the law antedate its supposed repeal. But if the work of redemption was not limited to the days in question, then no memorial of that event can rest upon any septenary period; and not otherwise limited, it could be as well celebrated on any day of the week, or month, or year.
3. There are three reasons adduced in the commandment for the observance of the Sabbath, none of which can ever be true of the first day of the week.
a. God labored six and only six days next preceding the Sabbath or seventh day. This is not true of the work of redemption, which extends from the fall of man when the promised seed of the woman purchased for Adam a reprieve and inspired the assurance of his final restoration to all that he had lost by sin, to the time when every creature in Heaven, and earth, and sea, will ascribe glory to God and the Lamb.
b. He rested the seventh day, which Christ did not do on the first day, as he rose from the dead (a part of redemption's work) on that day, and journeyed into the country with two of his disciples. Strange proceeding for one who would institute a new Sabbath, superior in its sacred associations to the old time-honored and God-instituted day of rest.
c. He hallowed it, or set it apart for holy uses. Not a word of proof that God or Christ ever so hallowed the first day can be adduced from the Scriptures.
For a great length of time, Christians have unwittingly observed as the Sabbath a day that had its origin in heathen mythology, was ingrafted into the dogmas of papal faith, and transmitted to Protestants, holding in solution, as it were, the corruptions of both systems. Should Christians who accept the Bible as their only rule of faith and practice any longer respect an institution of such questionable authority? Should they not rather accept those solemn and appropriate memorials which Christ and his honored apostles instituted as mementoes of the Redeemer's death, burial, and resurrection? "And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me. 'Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.' Luke 22:19, 20. "For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come." 1 Cor. 11:26. "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace.'' Eph. 1:7. "Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.'' Rom. 6:4.
How solemn, forcible, and appropriate are these memorials of the grandest scenes in the work of redemption! Instituted by Christ, and honored by his apostles; they compel the respect of every child of God; but the so called Christian Sabbath has not the sanction of so great authority.
Reader, you who accept the Bible as of divine authority, if you attempt to mutilate God's law, and adjust it in its application to the sanctification of a heathen festival day, how can you answer him in the Judgment? or what plea can you make in extenuation of your disregard of his own appointed Sabbath? Weigh the subject in the light of eternity, and let no mercenary or selfish motive prompt you in making a decision.
FALSE SCIENCE.
By C. Green
BY C. GREEN.
WHEN men seek to account for the creation of matter in some other way than that taught by the Spirit of God through his word, such teachings are denominated false science by the inspired writer.
At the present day, much thought is given to an attempt to prove the creation of our world by a process founded upon the eternal duration of matter; and many lengthy treatises are written, and intricate propositions are brought forward, to account for the creation on these principles. Much attention is also given to a discussion of the probable changes which would take place in matter during long periods of time, and by which the earth became fitted for the support of vegetable and animal life. In order to unite this theory with the Bible testimony of creation, each day in the creation week is made to equal a myriad of years. When through the process of constant agitation a change was about to take place, in which a higher state was to be developed, the Almighty's fiat went forth, and light beamed upon the darkened mass, producing what scientists term the first day.
The waters yet enveloped the earth wherein hideous monsters dwelt. Another lengthy period must pass, and wonderful changes take place, before another command from the Creator could separate the waters, allotting to the earth and the heavens their respective shares, and the second day of the first week of time be placed upon the calendar.
The earth now assumed a globular form, having been freed from water and mists which had heretofore held it without shape or order, and awaited, during another period of time, the word of God whereby the waters were to be gathered together, and the dry land made to appear. When this was done, its barren surface was ready for a higher state and a new order of things. The necessary changes take place in their proper order and at the proper time, and prepare for the ushering in of another creation day.
But why go on presenting this theory of creation, in which a natural cause for the formation of matter and the worlds is given a primary place, and the authority of God becomes a secondary consideration? We will suppose this theory to be true: that ages are required to produce certain changes; and that when a change takes place a period denominated a day is passed. Six of these periods are required to effect the creation of our planet—for, according to this theory, the sun, moon, and stars, had long shone in all their brilliancy, but the darkness and mist enveloping the earth, had prevented their rays from reaching its surface—then comes Jehovah's rest; for this must be included in the weekly cycle or the Bible testimony of this event must be set aside. Can this seventh day compare for length of time with the preceding ones? It should, in order to keep up the harmony; but if it does, Jehovah's rest is not yet ended. And the testimony given declares that that day ended, and was blessed and set aside, to be observed by man ever after as sacred.
We can see in this scientific theory of creation nothing but infidelity and confusion. When men will set aside the plain narrative of the manner in which the worlds were "created by the word of God," and "seek out many inventions" of their own, they expose their own weakness, and confirm the declaration that "the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God."
Are men made better morally by such teachings? And are these teachers themselves patterns of piety, zealous for the honor and glory of God? Are they reformers? Are they affected by their teachings, and converted from the error of their ways? We fear not. Yea; we can see in them that which goes to destroy faith in the Bible, and in the plan of salvation through the sacrifice of Christ, our Saviour and Redeemer.
Battle Creek, Mich.
PIETY AND PUTTY.
THERE are some of whom the apostle said, “With good words and fair speeches, they deceive the hearts of the simple.” Some judge of truth by the sound of the voice that utters it, rather than by its intrinsic quality, which is as if persons should decide that everything which was sweet was healthful, and everything that was bitter was poisonous. There are some persons who will accept a smooth lie in preference to a rough truth; and a man who has what they call “a good spirit,” may say things which are utterly untrue, and yet they will believe his statements rather than the indignant denials of those whom he has wronged or slandered.
There is something in this world besides softness and sweetness. The men of God whose voices have shaken the wilderness and awakened the nations, have told some very plain and unwelcome truths. All things have their place in the divine plan, but it would be hard work to make a good plough-share out of a piece of putty. You may get the shape, and mould it after the most approved fashion, but when you come to breaking up turf and tearing up rocks and stones, you would find it unfit for use. So there are many people whose putty-like piety is good in soft and easy places; and who are regarded as patterns of what is proper and Christian-like, but yet who are far from being such Christians as those whom God has specially honored in days gone by. In the fight of faith, hard blows must be given. That word which is “a hammer” has a steel face. It smites, it crushes, it breaks in pieces the flinty rock.509Within the family of God, and in toiling with the sad and weary and the broken-hearted, gentleness, tenderness and compassion are the most essential requisites in Christian character; but there are times when the sternest elements of human and divine nature are brought into play, when God makes his servants like brazen walls and iron pillars, when he makes their faces harder than a flint, yea, hard as an adamant. We may well be cautious lest we exchange the sterling virtues of the Christian character for a few smooth sayings, and a little vapid, empty talk. Piety and putty are very different articles.—The Christian.
TEST OF OBEDIENCE.
By R. F. Cottrell
BY ELD. R. F. COTTRELL.
MEN can see the propriety and the reasonableness of all the ten commandments except the fourth. And they admit also that it is reasonable that man should devote a portion of his time, say one-seventh, to religious duties. But that a particular day should be required to be regarded as more sacred than the rest, and men be required to abstain from worldly employment on that day, and that the consecration of another day will not answer the purpose just as well, they cannot see to be reasonable.
Such should remember that God has a right to test their loyalty and fidelity. God had the right to reserve one tree in Eden; and it was not man's prerogative to question the propriety of the prohibition, and say, If I leave another to God, I may partake of the fruit of this; though he might see no reason why that particular tree should be withholden.
The Sabbath of the Lord stands among the days of the week like the interdicted tree among the trees of the garden; and the commandment for its holy observance, in like manner, stands in the midst of the holy, just, and good precepts of the moral law. And a good and sufficient reason is given why it should be distinguished and honored above other days; it being the day on which God rested from the work of creation, for which reason it was set apart; so that to observe it, is to honor him; and to disregard it, is to dishonor him. To choose another in its place, is to choose our own will in preference to the expressed will of God.
The Sabbath is a good test of obedience. Therefore it was chosen in preference to any other precept, when God said concerning Israel, "That I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no." See Ex. 16:4, and the context following. And so this down-trodden precept is the grand test in the third angel's message (Rev. 14:9-12), well calculated to separate the worshipers of God from the worshipers of the beast. What God does is right.
READING ALOUD.
It is strange that in a country whose language is stored full of the choicest works of the human mind, and whose population is, as a whole, so well educated, reading aloud as a source of amusement and means of enjoyment is so little resorted to. There are many families, even in book-loving New England, where a book, or a chapter of a book, is never read to the family circle from one end of the year to another. The individual members of the family read, but all reading done in the family is silent reading. Father has his paper; mother her tract; Mary has a novel; Johnny his stories of wild adventure. Reading there is, enough of it; but each one reads for himself. There is no reading for the whole, and no grouping of the family into an audience for an evening's enjoyment, such as comes to people who hear a good bit of writing well read.
Only those who have visited in families where the gift of reading was cultivated as a source of family enjoyment, and the custom of reading aloud to the family practiced, can imagine what a help and blessing to the family life such a habit is. Music is well enough in its way, but its range of expression is far narrower than that of reading, and for that matter, far less practical in its adaption to the family wants. Then, too, singing requires an instrumental accompaniment, and an instrument costs money and requires too much practice on the part of the performer to be available for the many. The expressions of literature are abundant, and the art of reading well is easily acquired and cheaply taught; it brings the point out, and "sets the table in a roar." History, wit, pathos, sublimity, every spring at which the human mind loves to drink can be opened, and the sweet waters be given freely to every one.
How cosy those home readings may be made. Warmth, light, companionship, culture, happiness, are all included in them. How much you are missing, good people, if reading is not cultivated as one of the means of happiness and pleasure in your family circle; for in such an exercise there is quickening for the imagination, appeal to judgment, elevation of feeling, opportunity for criticism, which shall teach the children more of literature in three hours than they can learn at school in three weeks. Next to the impulse of love as a means of drawing families together is the influence of intellectual companionship. Cultivate this, good friends, and see how satisfactory will be the result.
The Sabbath School.
HEART TEACHING.
How much can a Sabbath-school teacher teach? Only so much as he has in his heart. Here is a truth but few teachers realize. They think if they have studied the lesson intellectually, obtained what may be called a fair analytical exegesis of the designated portion of Scripture, secured the geography, history, etc., connected with the lesson, they are prepared to teach. Not so. The Sabbath-school teacher can carry over into the hearts of his class only so much of the lesson as he has in his own heart. It is one thing to have a head knowledge of the lesson, another to have a heart knowledge. The teacher must be a thorough Christian in order to feel what he attempts to teach, for he can impress the hearts of others only as his own heart is profoundly moved.
What our Sabbath-schools need is teachers of deep piety, hearts that are molten love, from which flow out burning streams that melt their way into the hardened and indifferent hearts of others. Deep piety, sincere feeling, profound conviction, are easily discerned, and by none more readily than by children. The possession of these qualities will make almost any one a successful teacher, and without them no one can succeed in doing God's work in the Sabbath-school.
Granting that the teacher is a real Christian, he yet needs to have the particular lesson he teaches in his heart, and the question remains, How shall he get it there? Let him begin early in the week to study the lesson, Sabbath afternoon, an "eight days" before, is the best time. Now, every lesson, has a heart in it. Let the teacher go straight for the central thought. Suppose the central thought is Christianity, pure and simple, as set forth in Matt. 25:35, 36.
The teacher should ask himself, Have I this kind of Christianity? If not, I must obtain it, or be set down at last as a hypocrite. If I have it, O God, give me more and more. The week previous to his coming before his class should be a period in which he has performed these very duties, or duties which involve the same spirit; then will he come with the lesson in his heart. He will not lack illustrations, for the past week has suggested a score or more. He will not lack pathos, for the spirit of the week has been a spirit of prayer and active Christian service, and he will realize with a realization fresher and deeper than ever before, that the spirit of these verses is the animus which brings him to the Sabbath-school, and renders his labors there a positive joy.
The following, touching another side of the subject, is to the point:—
"Every man has a heart, but not every man has a head," said an old minister to a younger one, on giving him his ordination charge; "therefore, if you go for the hearts in your preaching, you will be more likely to hit all your hearers than if you go for their heads."
YOUTH, THE TEACHABLE TIME.
By Alexander Hyde
It is manifestly much more difficult for mature men to come to Jesus than it is for the young. The latter have more leisure, their habits are not formed, they have fewer established and easily besetting sins to give up; in short, they can easily receive the simple truth in all its simplicity, and with equal ease open their mouths in prayer and exhortation.
There is more force than we are wont to suppose in the saying of our Saviour, "Except ye become as little children ye cannot enter into the kingdom of God." Childhood and youth are the periods for the easy reception of all truth, religious as well as secular. Whoever has undertaken to teach an adult the rudiments of education, has experienced difficulties, similar, though inferior, to those which the preacher of righteousness encounters in teaching men. It is not impossible for a man, who has passed his second or third decade, to learn his letters and make something of a scholar, but it is an herculean task, compared with the effort which a child makes to attain the same end. It would seem at first thought that the mature mind would comprehend and remember the rudiments of language and science with more ease than can the undeveloped faculties of youth, but we have taught both classes and have not found this to be the case. A freedman, naturally bright, once came into our family, and we used our best endeavors to teach him to read, but our success was limited. It seemed almost an impossibility for him to confine his attention to a book. The man of business finds the same difficulty in giving his attention to the subject of religion. He may desire to sit at the feet of Jesus and learn of him, but his thoughts wander, the docile spirit of a child is wanting, and the language of prayer is not easily learned.
It is a great mistake to suppose that a child must be ten or twelve years old before a Christian character can be developed. Timothy was doubtless instructed in the Scriptures by his mother Eunice and grandmother Lois in his earliest years, and received the truth in the love of it in the first dawn of his intellect, and in these latter days we have many examples of similar Christian development. What a heaven on earth would the family be if all children were thus early imbued with the spirit of Christ. We are confident that if there were more Hannahs and Eunices, there would be more Samuels and Timothies.—Alexander Hyde, in Christian Weekly.
PREACHING TO CHILDREN.
By E. A. Baker
This was the topic at one of the Monday morning "Ministers' meetings," in this place (Minneapolis, Minn.), and was very ably discussed, all present taking part in the discussion. The pastors were unanimous that the "lambs" must be fed; that the children have claims on the Christian teacher, and that the minister of Christ cannot afford to forget the "little ones" in his ministration in holy things. Three methods of accomplishing this very desirable object were suggested:—
1. That a five-minute sermon be addressed to the children before the regular Sabbath morning discourse.
2. That special lectures or sermons be preached for children monthly, or otherwise, to suit necessity and convenience.
3. That much of the lofty style, and pomp of learning, and book phrases be driven from the pulpit, and that men be natural, plain and simple; that they make the truth so simple that the smallest capacity in the congregation can understand it, and by doing this there need be no fear but that the learned and refined will discover the way of life.
In addition to this, let there be a part of each discourse directed particularly to the children present. May the Lord stir up all our hearts to look after the children under our care. Oaks are hard to bend—anything may be done with twigs, comparatively.—E. A. Baker.
FIRST STEP IN PRAYER
By John Donne
He that makes but one step up a stair, though he is not much nearer to the top of the house, yet has stepped from the ground, and is delivered from the foulness and dampness of that. So in the first step of prayer: "God be merciful to me a sinner." Though a man be not established in Heaven, yet he has stepped from the world and the miserable comforts thereof.
"THUS SAITH THE LORD."
By Dwight Lyman Moody
WHAT we want is to follow in the footsteps of our Master; and when we are attacked by infidels and skeptics, we must meet them with "Thus saith the Lord." That will settle it. I tell you, this one sentence, "Thus saith the Lord," is worth more than all the traditions of the fathers. It is not what the church teaches to-day, nor what our forefathers taught, but what is the word of God. That is what we want.
Very often I have heard men say, "You don't believe in the flood, do you?" Yes, I believe in the flood. I was going to preach about Noah, one time, and a man came to me and said, "Why, you are not going to preach on the old story of the flood?" "Yes." "Why, you don't believe that, do you?" "Oh, yes." "Well," said he, "I thought we had got beyond that. That is a fable." "Well," said I, "you believe in the New Testament, don't you?" Said he, "Yes, I believe in the New Testament." "Well, in the New Testament the Lord says, 'As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be in the coming of the Son of man.' The Son of God puts his seal to that very thing. If you throw out the flood, you throw out the whole book of Genesis."
Another man said, "You don't believe in the story of the destruction of Sodom, do you?" "Oh, yes. It says in the New Testament, 'As it was in the days of Lot, so shall it be in the coming of the son of man.' And the Son of God has put his seal to that very narrative." Another man said, "You don't believe in the story of Lot's wife, do you?" "Oh, yes, I believe in that because the Master said, 'Remember Lot's wife.'"
Now there is a class of people who tell us that they believe everything that corresponds with reason, but they are going to throw out everything that is supernatural. If you are going to throw out everything that is supernatural you have got to throw out the whole word of God. There is not any portion of that word that is not supernatural. If you are going to throw out of the book everything that has something in it that is supernatural, you throw out the whole thing, because the man who wrote that book must have known that he wrote a lie, if it did not take place; and if he would tell a lie about one thing, why isn't everything written a lie? If I go into court and testify to a thing that isn't true, that would break down all my testimony, and they would strike out all of it. If I lie about one thing, I will testify falsely about another. If you throw out the story of the flood and everything else in that is supernatural, then you throw out the whole book of Genesis.—D. L. Moody.
A SENSIBLE VIEW.
By John Harvey Kellogg
IN all that we have read on the Chinese question we have seen nothing which so commends itself to the consideration of Christian workers as the following from the Herald of Truth:-
"It is a matter of great surprise to us that men holding important positions at the head of several departments of Chinese Evangelization on the Pacific coast, should put upon Chinese converts the expectation that sooner or later they should become essentially Americanized, particularly in the matter of dress. This expectation evidently proceeds upon the assumption that the customs of dress among the Chinese are essentially heathenish, and for this reason are to be put aside, on the same grounds as those for which they have renounced their idols.
"In the matter of dress, the Chinese, as other people, are the children of fashion, with this peculiarity only, their custom does not often change. If it could be shown that an article of dress adopted by the Chinese was an offense to purity or good taste, there might be some ground of objection to it. As far as our observation goes, the garments of the Chinese for quality of cloth and cleanliness of fibre bears favorable comparison with that of any class of foreigners in the same rank of life, and their toilet is by no means objectionable.
"These words are suggested by a demand made by American missionaries at a recent Chinese picnic at San Rafael, California, that Chinese Christians would do well as soon as possible to cut off their queues; a requisition that seems to us altogether exacting. To make a Chinaman a Christian is the only interest we have in him at the present date. But to make him an American is not required by the genius of Christianity.
"Patting a high Chinese officer of the steamship Tokio on the shoulder, a prominent San Francisco missionary among the Chinese said to Rev. T. P. Crawford, D. D., just ready to return to China, 'Make a good American out of this Chinaman, Dr. Crawford!' 'I won't do it,' was the reply, 'I will make him, if I can, a good Chinaman.'
"To ask a Chinaman to clip his 'pig tail,' for the sake of a 'swallow tail,' is not an injunction of the sermon on the Mount. A Chinaman's queue is as dear to him as the blood that flows in his veins. Two centuries ago it was his badge of slavery to the Tartar throne. It is now his badge of loyalty, and no question of heathenism, but one wholly of patriotism is involved in his wearing it. It is neither disgusting nor impure.
"If our missionary brethren have not forgotten their school-boy declamation,
'Breathes there a man with soul so dead,
Who never to himself hath said,
This is my own, my native land,'
Or if they have read Edward Everett Hale's 'A Man Without a Country,' they may possibly conceive of a Chinaman not caring to sacrifice patriotism in his acceptance of Christianity. We wish, therefore, it might once for all be understood that to evangelize a Chinaman is one thing, but to denationalize him is another. To enforce upon him the sundering of his queue is an indignity that makes his patriotic blood mount in his veins. For, as Goldsmith says,
'Such is the patriot's boast, where'er we roam,
His first, best country ever is his home.'"
It does seem strange, when we come to consider it, that Christians should ever have thought it essential in the conversion of the Chinese that they should adopt American manners and fashions in dress. Certainly American manners and fashions have no necessary relation to Christian character, and there is no reason whatever why the Christian Chinaman should be required to adopt them. We think this idea of Americanizing the Chinese has been quite too prominent among Christians, especially in California. When a more liberal spirit is manifested among missionaries; and when their efforts shall be directed solely to the work of evangelizing, and not at all to denationalizing, they may have greater success among the pagans whom the providence of God has placed in our midst.
Pagans though they are, the Chinese are not an ignorant or a dull people. To the contrary, they are proverbially shrewd and observing. They understand us, sometimes, better than we understand ourselves. We cannot hide from them the inconsistency of denying to them the rights and privileges of citizenship and of the public schools, and then complaining that they do not assimilate to our civilization; or, of depriving them of the privilege of holding real estate, and then complaining that they transfer their earnings to their native land. We believe that prejudice has often been excited against them by those who have acted from selfish motives and for selfish purposes. As Christians we should stand aloof from all this, and regard them as creatures of God who are entitled to our Christian sympathies, and to the benefits of our best efforts to do them good.
We heard Bishop Wiley, of the M. E. church, in an address to a missionary meeting in Los Angeles, say that we, in California, do not know the Chinaman. Bishop Wiley has had the experience of years of missionary labor in China, and may be considered well qualified to give a correct opinion. The traditions and habits of the Chinese lead them to exclude themselves from other people; and it would be strange indeed if they should appear open and frank, or try to affiliate with their neighbors, under the treatment which they have received in America.
J. H. W.
SABBATH IN THE EARLY RECORDS.
By John Nevins Andrews
HAVING last week examined the testimonies of the early fathers to the primeval origin of the Sabbath, and to the sacredness, and perpetual obligation of the ten commandments, we will now call attention to what they say relative to the perpetuity of the Sabbath, and to its observance in the centuries during which they lived. Tertullian defines Christ's relation to the Sabbath:—
"He was called 'Lord of the Sabbath, because he maintained the Sabbath as his own institution."
He affirms that Christ did not abolish the Sabbath:—
"Christ did not at all rescined the Sabbath: he kept the law thereof, and both in the former case did a work which was beneficial to the life of his disciples (for he indulged them with the relief of food when they were hungry, and in the present instance cured the withered hand; in each case intimating by facts, 'I came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.'"
Nor can it be said that while Tertullian denied that Christ abolished the Sabbath he did believe that he transferred its sacredness from the seventh day of the week to the first, for he continues thus:—
"He [Christ] exhibits in a clear light the different kinds of work, while doing what the law excepts from the sacredness of the Sabbath, [and] while imparting to the Sabbath day itself, which from the beginning had been consecrated by the benediction of the Father, an additional sanctity by his own beneficent action. For he furnished to this day DIVINE SAFEGUARDS—a course which his adversary would have pursued for some other days, to avoid honoring the Creator's Sabbath, and restoring to the Sabbath the works which were proper for it."
This is a very remarkable statement. The modern doctrine of the change of the Sabbath was unknown in Tertullian's time. Had it then been in existence, there could be no doubt that in the words last quoted he was aiming at it a heavy blow; for the very thing which he asserts Christ's adversary, Satan, would have had him do, that modern first-day writers assert he did do in consecrating another day instead of adding to the sanctity of his Father's Sabbath.
Archelaus of Cascar in Mesopotamia emphatically denies the abolition of the Sabbath:—
"Again, as to the assertion that the Sabbath has been abolished, we deny that he has abolished it plainly; for he was himself also Lord of the Sabbath."
Justin Martyr, as we have seen, was an outspoken opponent of Sabbatic observance, and of the authority of the law of God. He was by no means always candid in what he said. He has occasion to refer to those who observed the seventh day, and he does it with contempt. Thus he says:—
"But if some, through weak-mindedness, wish to observe such institutions as were given by Moses (from which they expect some virtue, but which we believe were appointed by reason of the hardness of the people's hearts), along with their hope in this Christ, and [wish to perform] the eternal and natural acts of righteousness and piety, yet choose to live with the Christians and the faithful, as I said before, not inducing them either to be circumcised like themselves, or to keep the Sabbath, or to observe any other such ceremonies, then I hold that we ought to join ourselves to such, and associate with them in all things as kinsmen and brethren."
These words are spoken of Sabbath-keeping Christians. Such of them as were of Jewish descent no doubt generally retained circumcision. But there were many Gentile Christians who observed the Sabbath, as we shall see, and it is not true that they observed circumcision. Justin speaks of this class as acting from "weak-mindedness," yet he inadvertently511alludes to the keeping of the commandments as the performance of "the ETERNAL and NATURAL ACTS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS," a most appropriate designation indeed. Justin would fellowship those who act thus, provided they would fellowship him in the contrary course. But though Justin, on this condition, could fellowship these "weak-minded" brethren, he says that there are those who "do not venture to have any intercourse with, or to extend hospitality to, such persons; but I do not agree with them." This shows the bitter spirit which prevailed in some quarters toward the Sabbath, as early as Justin's time. Justin has no word of condemnation for these intolerant professors; he is only solicitous lest those persons who perform "the eternal and natural acts of righteousness and piety" should condemn those who do not perform them.
Clement of Alexandria, though a mystical writer, bears an important testimony to the perpetuity of the ancient Sabbath, and to man's present need thereof. He comments thus on the fourth commandment:—
"And the fourth word is that which intimates that the world was created by God, and that he gave us the seventh day as a rest, on account of the trouble that there is in life. For God is incapable of weariness, and suffering, and want. But we who bear flesh need rest. The seventh day, therefore, is proclaimed a rest—abstraction from ills—preparing for the primal day, our true rest."
Tertullian, at different periods of his life, held different views respecting the Sabbath, and committed them all to writing. We last quoted from him a decisive testimony to the perpetuity of the Sabbath, coupled with an equally decisive testimony against the sanctification of the first day of the week. In another work, from which we have already quoted his statement that Christians should not kneel on Sunday, we find another statement that "some few" abstained from kneeling on the Sabbath. This has probable reference to Carthage, where Tertullian lived. He speaks thus:—
"In the matter of kneeling also, prayer is subject to diversity of observance, through the act of some few who abstain from kneeling on the Sabbath; and since this dissension is particularly on its trial before the churches, the Lord will give his grace that the dissentients may either yield, or else indulge their opinion without offense to others."
The act of standing in prayer was one of the chief honors conferred upon Sunday. Those who refrained from kneeling on the seventh day, without doubt did it because they desired to honor that day. This particular act is of no consequence; for it was adopted in imitation of those who, from tradition and custom, thus honored Sunday; but we have in this an undoubted reference to Sabbath-keeping Christians. Tertullian speaks of them, however, in a manner quite unlike that of Justin in his reference to the commandment-keepers of his time.
Origen, like many other of the fathers, was far from being consistent with himself. Though he has spoken against Sabbatic observance, and has honored the so-called Lord's day as something better than the ancient Sabbath, he has nevertheless given a discourse expressly designed to teach Christians the proper method of observing the Sabbath. Here is a portion of this sermon:—
"But what is the feast of the Sabbath except that of which the apostle speaks, 'There remaineth therefore a Sabbatism,' that is, the observance of the Sabbath by the people of God? Leaving the Jewish observances of the Sabbath, let us see how the Sabbath ought to be observed by a Christian. On the Sabbath day all worldly labors ought to be abstained from. If, therefore, you cease from all secular works, and execute nothing worldly, but give yourselves up to spiritual exercises, repairing to church, attending to sacred reading and instruction, thinking of celestial things, solicitous for the future, placing the Judgment to come before our eyes, not looking to things present and visible, but to those which are future and invisible, this is the observance of the Christian Sabbath."
This is by no means a bad representation of the proper observance of the Sabbath. Such a discourse addressed to Christians is a strong evidence that many did then hallow that day. Some, indeed, have claimed that these words were spoken concerning Sunday. They would have it that he contrasts the observance of the first day with that of the seventh. But the contrast is not between the different methods of keeping two days, but between two methods of observing one day. The Jews in Origen's time spent the day mainly in mere abstinence from labor, and often added sensuality to idleness. But the Christians were to observe it in divine worship, as well as sacred rest. What day he intends cannot be doubtful. It is DIES SABBATI, a term which can signify only the seventh day. Here is the first instance of the term Christian Sabbath, Sabbati Christiani, and it is expressly applied to the seventh day observed by Christians. J. N. A.