Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 41, No. 26.

HOW THE SABBATH WAS CHANGED;

Review and Herald

Jun 10, 1873

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jun 10, 1873

HOW THE SABBATH WAS CHANGED;

By Daniel T. Bourdeau

Also Historical Facts Showing that the Seventh Day has been Kept by Christians Since the Times of the Apostles.
BY ELD. D. T. BOURDEAU.
TEXT.— “And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws.” Dan. 7:25. “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? . . . In vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” Matt. 15:3, 9.
When it is shown that there is no divine authority for the change of the Sabbath, and that the Holy Scriptures still recognize and enforce the ancient Sabbath of the Lord, it is natural for the following question to recur with unwonted solicitude in the mind of the anxious searcher after truth: How was the Sabbath changed? In the following pages, I purpose to briefly answer this question by pointing out the principal events and influences which have raised the first day to its present prominence in the Christian world. I shall also present historical facts showing that the seventh day has been observed by various bodies of Christians since the times of the apostles.
But, before appealing to history, it is necessary to make a proper distinction between the Bible and history. The Bible, as a sufficient rule of faith and practice, shows us how the primitive church believed and practiced, and what we should believe and do; while genuine history shows us how the church has lived, and whether they have departed from the Bible, or not. When history, treating on the times of our Lord and his apostles, states facts respecting the faith and practice of the primitive church which are contrary to the teachings of God's word, then, may it be safely pronounced spurious. To go to profane history to establish a doctrine that is not found in the Bible, is to deny that the Bible is a sufficient rule of faith. With a true Protestant, the question as to duty is not whether a doctrine was received by Christians in the second or first century, but whether it is found in the Bible. Does genuine history substantiate the fact that a large portion of the church have kept the first day instead of the seventh? In the light of the Scriptures, this fact simply shows that a part of the church have neglected an important duty. Does history show that a portion of the church have kept the seventh-day Sabbath? We rejoice that they have done right in this respect.
My historical quotations shall either be from first-day writers, or from no-Sabbath men. As these authors did not write to build up the seventh-day Sabbath, their testimony favoring the seventh day should be regarded as good evidence.

EVENTS AND INFLUENCES THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO RAISE THE FIRST DAY TO ITS PRESENT PROMINENCE.

I. The starting point in exalting the first day of the week is seen in the fact that that day was kept quite extensively as the first festival among heathen nations in honor of their chief god, the sun, long before the establishment of the Christian religion. Hence Webster's first definition of Sunday is, “So called because anciently dedicated to the sun or to his worship.” And the North British Review, in a defense of Sunday, calls it, “The wild solar holiday of all pagan times.” Vol. xxiv, p. 409.
But the heathen, keeping the first day, did not change the Sabbath, but simply opened the way for a change of the Sabbath.
II. A portion of the church apostatized early, by lowering the standard of truth, and receiving from their heathen neighbors traditions and doctrines contrary to the word of God, to please the heathen and not appear odd in their eyes. It was thus that the fallen branch of the church received the Sunday Sabbath. Apostasy commenced among Christians in the apostolic age. The mystery of iniquity, which was to culminate in the man of sin, or papacy, began to work in Paul's time. 2 Thess. 2:7; and errors were taught and received while the apostles were on the stage of action. Hence Jude gave all diligence in exhorting the beloved to earnestly “contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Jude 3. In his farewell charge to the elders of Ephesus, Paul said: “Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” Acts 20:30; and, in view of the fact that the time was nearing when many would not endure sound doctrine, but should be turned to fables, in his dying charge to Timothy, he most solemnly enjoined upon him the duty of preaching the word. 2 Tim. 4:1–4. But it was not till the close of the second century that even the fallen branch of the church attached sacredness to the first day. To use the language of Neander, “Perhaps at the end of the second century a false application of this kind had begun to take place; for men appear by that time to have considered labor on Sunday a sin.”—Rose's Translation of Neander, p. 186.
Morer thus speaks of the easy way in which Sunday was established in the church:— “Sunday being the day on which the Gentiles solemnly adored that planet, and called it Sunday, partly from its influence on that day especially, and partly in respect to its divine body (as they conceived it) the Christians thought fit to keep the same day and the same name of it, that they might not appear causelessly peevish, and by that means hinder the conversion of the Gentiles, and bring a greater prejudice than might be otherwise taken against the gospel.”—Morer's Lord's Day, pp. 22, 23.
The North British Review conveys the same idea thus:— “That very day was the Sunday of their heathen neighbors and respective countrymen; and patriotism gladly united with expediency in making it at once their Lord's day and their Sabbath.” Vol. xviii, p. 409.
Christians thought they would gain more influence, and get more believers, in yielding portions of God's sacred truth, and receiving fables and traditions in their stead, but by that very act they lost their peculiar, holy character, and the special favor of God, and opened the way to plunge deeper into the labyrinth of error and moral darkness.
Mr. Dowling, in his “History of Romanism,” thus remarks:— “There is scarcely anything which strikes the mind of the careful student of ancient ecclesiastical history with greater surprise than the comparatively early period at which many of the corruptions of Christianity, which are embodied in the Romish system, took their rise; yet it is not to be supposed that when the first originators of many of these anti-scriptural notions and practices planted those germs of corruption, they anticipated or even imagined they would ever grow into such a vast and hideous system of superstition and error, as is that of popery.” Book ii, chap. 2, sect. 1.
Robinson, author of the “History of Baptism,” bears the following testimony:— “Toward the latter end of the second century, most of the churches assumed a new form, the first simplicity disappeared, and, insensibly, as the old disciples retired to their graves, their children, along with other converts, both Jews and Gentiles, came forward and new-modeled the cause.”—Eccl. Researches, chap. vi.
III. The first instance upon record in which the bishop of Rome attempted to rule the Christian church was by an edict in behalf of Sunday. It had been the custom of all the churches to celebrate the passover, but with this difference, that while the eastern churches kept it upon the fourteenth day of the first month, the western churches kept it upon the Sunday following that day. Victor, bishop of Rome, in the year 196, took upon him to impose the Roman custom upon all the churches; that is, to compel them to observe the passover upon Sunday. “This bold attempt,” says Bower, “we may call the first essay of papal usurpation.” And Dowling terms it “the earliest instance of Romish assumption.” (See Bowers' Hist. of the Popes, vol. i., pp. 18, 19; Rose's Neander, pp. 188–190; Dowling's Hist. of Romanism, etc.) The churches of Asia minor informed Victor that they could not comply with his lordly mandate. The victory was not obtained for Sunday in this struggle, as Heylyn testifies in his history of the Sabbath, “till the council of Nice (A. D. 325), backed by the authority of as great an emperor (Constantine), settled it better than before.”
IV. Another aggressive act of the Roman church, in warring against the Sabbath, was to turn that day into a fast, and thus make it despicable in the eyes of the people. Dr. Hase says: “The Roman church regarded Saturday as a fast day, in direct opposition to those who regarded it as a Sabbath.”—Ancient Church History, part i., div. ii., sect. 69. This was at the beginning of the third century. It was only after a long struggle that the church of Rome prevailed, in turning the Sabbath into a fast. And thus Heylyn states the result: “In the end, the Roman church obtained the cause, and Saturday became a fast almost through all parts of the western world.”—History of the Sabbath, part ii., chap. ii., sect. 3.
V. The edict of Constantine, enacted in A. D. 321, contributed greatly in giving Sunday influence. This was the first law enforcing the observance of Sunday, and it is thus expressed:— “Let all the judges and town people, and the occupation of all trades, rest on the venerable day of the sun; but let those who are situated in the country, freely and at full liberty, attend to the business of agriculture; because it often happens that no other day is so fit for sowing corn and planting vines; lest, the critical moment being let slip, men should lose the commodities granted by Heaven.” The original of this edict may be seen in the library of Harvard College.
Observe, 1. That this law says nothing of the first day as a Christian institution. In the language of Milman on this edict, “It is the day of the sun which is to be observed. . . . But the believer in the new paganism, of which the solar worship was the characteristic, might acquiesce without scruple in the sanctity of the first day of the week. . . . In fact, as we have before observed, the day of the sun would be willingly hallowed by almost all the pagan world.”—Hist. of Christianity, book iii., chapters i. and iv.
2. This law made it obligatory only on judges, town people, and the occupation of trades, to rest on Sunday. Farmers in the country were at liberty to attend to the business of agriculture on that day. And Mosheim says that, in consequence of this peculiar law enacted by Constantine, the first day of the week “was observed with greater solemnity than it had formerly been.” (Mosheim, cent. iv., part ii., chap. iv., sect. 5.) How poorly their Sunday must have been kept, before Constantine's time! But,
3. Constantine was a heathen at heart when he passed this law; for the day after its enactment, he made an edict which required to consult soothsayers, who foretold events by examining the entrails of beasts slaughtered in sacrifice to the gods; and the so-called conversion of Constantine is placed in A. D. 323, two years after his law on Sunday was enacted. But Constantine was never converted, as wicked deeds of his after life attest. (See Bliss' Chronological Table, p. 830; Jorton's Eccl. Hist., vol. i.; Milman's Hist. of Christianity, book iii.; Webster, etc.)
The period we have reached is denominated by d'Aubigne as “the deplorable epoch of Constantine,” because of the policy of that emperor to unite the church with the world. His efforts in this direction were too successful, and led many professed Christians to advance rapidly in the lamentable work of adulterating the truth, and exchanging pure doctrines for heathen traditions.
VI. Paganism having elevated Sunday to supreme power, it now remained for popery to transform it into a Christian institution by giving it the imposing title of Lord's day. (Historia Ecclesiastica per M. Ludovicum Lucium, cent. iv., chap. x., pp. 739, 740.) This was done by Sylvester, bishop of Rome, while Constantine was emperor. Individual instances of designating Sunday as Lord's day are found as early as the time of Tertullian, at the opening of the third century; but it was the work of Constantine and Sylvester, in the early part of the fourth century, to establish the festival of the sun, by the authority of the empire, and to render it a Christian institution, by the authority of St. Peter.
The Lord never claimed the first day as his own; neither is it once stated in Holy Writ that that day was regarded as the Lord's day, or, in any sense, as a Sabbath, by Christ or the primitive church, or that a divine command was ever given to keep it holy unto the Lord. It is nowhere in the Scriptures called Lord's day, but is uniformly designated by the simple title of “first day of the week.” “But the seventh day,” says the Sabbath law, “is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” Ex. 20:10. Jehovah calls it “my holy day.” Isa. 58:13. It is even the day of the Lord Jesus Christ,who styled himself its Lord, Mark 2:28, and kept it in imitation of the example of his Father, Luke 4:16; Matt. 12:12; Gen. 2:1, 2, leaving an example which was faithfully followed by the primitive church. Luke 23:56; Acts 13:14, 42, 44; 16:13; 17:2; 18:4, 11. At the close of the first century, the apostle who had been the most intimate with Jesus refers to the only day of the week that the Lord ever claimed under the familiar appellation of “Lord's day.” Rev. 1:10.
The habit of calling the first day the Lord's day, and the seventh day the Jewish Sabbath, has made the impression that these names are really what their false names indicate, has clothed the first day with sacredness in the mind of the people, and has had a prejudicial influence against God's holy Sabbath.
VII. The decrees of councils, kings, and popes, also aided the Sunday cause. The council of Laodicea, held in A. D. 365, settled the observance of the first day, and pronounced a curse against keeping the seventh day. Wm. Prynne, in his “Dissertation on the Lord's day,” p. 44, edition 1663, says: “The council of Laodicea, A. D. 365, first settled the observation of the Lord's day, and prohibited the keeping of the Jewish Sabbath under an anathema.”
But even at this time, Sunday labor was considered perfectly lawful. Dr. Heylyn, in his “History of the Sabbath,” part ii., chap. iii., sect. 9, says: “St. Chrysostom gave confessed it to be lawful for a man to look to his worldly business on the Lord's day, after the congregation was dismissed.”
Sir William Domville says:— “Centuries of the Christian era passed away before the Sunday was observed as a Sabbath. History does not furnish us with a single proof or indication that it was at any time so observed, previous to the Sabbatical edict of Constantine in A. D. 321.”—Examination of the Six Texts, p. 291.
Bishop Jeremy Taylor thus states the case:— “The primitive Christians did all manner of work upon the Lord's day, even in the times of persecution, when they are the strictest observers of all divine commandments; but in this they knew there was none; and, therefore, when Constantine the emperor had made an edict against working upon the Lord's day, yet he excepts and still permitted all agriculture or labors of the husbandman whatsoever.”—Ductor Dubitantium, part i., book ii., sect. 59.
But as ages rolled, decrees and laws for the first day assumed a more bold and aggressive tone, until, according to Morer, the violation of Sunday by servile labor was punished by fines, lashing, beating, loss of patrimony, servitude, and perpetual banishment. The twelfth council of Toledo, in Spain, A. D. 681, forbade the Jews to keep their own festivals. (“Dialogues on the Lord's Day,” pp. 265–270.) In A. D. 1095, pope Urban II. consecrated the Sabbath to the weekly service of the Virgin Mary. What an indignity to the Creator of the heavens and the earth! In the following century, an apparition from St. Peter charged the king of England to allow “no buying or selling and no servile work” on Sunday.—Morer's “Lord's Day,” p. 288.
VIII. To attach importance to, and promote the observance of, the first day, stories of pretended miracles were invented and circulated. One of these miracles is thus given in Francis West's “Historical and Practical Discourse on the Lord's day”:— “Gregory of Tours (about 590) reporteth that a husbandman, who, upon the Lord's day, went to plough his field, as he cleaned his plough with an iron, the iron struck so fast in his hand that for two years he could not be delivered from it, but carried it about continually, to his very great pain and shame.”
Heylyn makes the following statement:— “It was delivered of the souls in purgatory by Petrus Damiani, who lived A. D. 1056, that every Lord's day they were manumitted from their pains, and fluttered up and down the lake Avernus, in the shape of birds.”—History of the Sabbath, part ii., chap. v., sect. 2.
And even hell itself could be benefited, if those yet living upon earth would keep Sunday well. Morer, in his “Lord's day,” p. 68, speaks thus:— “Yet still the others went their way; and to induce their proselytes to spend the day with greater exactness and care, they brought in the old argument of compassion and charity to the damned in hell, who, during the day, have some respite from their torments, and the ease and liberty they have is more or less, according to the zeal and degrees of keeping it well.”
In the very midst of the dark ages, when the papal power had reached its highest elevation, pope Innocent III., in A. D. 1202, sent into England a roll which fell from Heaven, containing the long-needed divine authority for Sunday. Here is this remarkable document:— “A holy mandate, touching the Lord's day, which came down from Heaven unto Jerusalem, found on St. Simeon's altar in Golgotha, where Christ was crucified for the sins of all the world, which, lying there three days and three nights, struck with such terror all that saw it, that, falling on the ground, they besought God's mercy. At last, the patriarch and Akarias the archbishop (of I know not whence) ventured to take into their hands that dreadful letter, which was written thus. Now wipe your eyes and look awhile on the contents:— “‘I am the Lord who commanded you to keep the Lord's day, and you have not kept it, neither repented of your sins; I caused repentance to be preached unto you, and you believed not; then I sent the pagans among you, who spilt your blood on the earth, and yet you believed not; and because you did not observe the Lord's holy day, I punished you awhile with famine, but in a short time I gave you fullness of bread, and then you behaved yourselves worse than before. I again charge you that, from the ninth hour (i. e., three o'clock P. M.) on Saturday, until sunrise on the Monday, no man presume to do any work, but what is good; or, if he do, let him repent for the same. Verily I say unto you, and swear by my seat and throne, and by the cherubim which surround it, that if you do not hearken to this my mandate, I will send no other letter unto you, but will open the heavens, and rain upon you stones, wood, and scalding water, by night, so that none shall be able to provide against them. I say ye shall die the death for the Lord's day; and other festivals of my saints which ye have not kept; and I will send among you beasts with the heads of lions, and the hair of women, and the tails of camels, which being very hungry, shall devour your flesh. And you shall desire to flee to the sepulchers of the dead, and hide you for fear of those beasts. And I will take the light of the sun from your eyes, and send such darkness that, not being able to see, you shall destroy each other. And I will turn my face away and not in the least pity you. I will burn your bodies and hearts of all them who do not keep the Lord's day. Hear then my words, and do not perish for neglecting this day. I swear to you, by my right hand, that if you do not observe the Lord's day, and festivals of my saints, I will send pagan nations to destroy you.’ (History of the Sabbath, part ii., chap. vii., sect. 6; Morer, pp. 288–290; Wilkin's “Concilia Magna Britanniæ et Hiberniæ,” vol. i., p. 510; Matthew Paris, p. 141, and many other writers.)
This mandate was taken to England by Eustachius, abbot of Flay, whose mission, it was afterward reported, was attended by miracles and prodigies. Thus we read in Heylyn's “History of the Sabbath,” part ii., chap. vii., sect. 6, as follows:— “A carpenter making a wooden pin, and a woman making up her web, both after three on Saturday in the afternoon (for the pope in this letter had fixed the ‘Lord's day’ from three o'clock on Saturday afternoon, until sunrise on Monday), are suddenly smitten with the palsy. A certain man of Nasserton, baking a cake on Saturday night, and keeping part until the morrow, no sooner brake it for his breakfast but it gushed out blood. A miller, of Wakefield, grinding corn on Saturday after three of the clock, instead of meal, found his bin full of blood; his mill-wheel standing still of its own accord.”
The reader will observe that the pope's letter enjoined the observance of a remarkably long Lord's day, embracing several hours of the true Sabbath. As error takes better when mixed with a little truth, this would present a strong temptation for those who honored the holy Sabbath to keep the first day.

THE SEVENTH DAY HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY CHRISTIANS SINCE THE TIMES OF THE APOSTLES.

With a divine obligation existing to keep the seventh day, it is a matter of no small interest for us to know that, notwithstanding the corrupting influence of heathenism, and the decrees, anathemas, and pretended miracles, of the Catholic church in favor of the first day, and against seventh-day Sabbath-keeping, God has had his faithful witnesses to the ancient Sabbath, from the days of the apostles till the present time. It is interesting to know that Morer, a first-day writer, in his dialogues on the Lord's day, says of the Nazarenes, who, as Gibbon states, “laid the foundation of the church and retired from the ruins of Jerusalem at the time of its destruction,” that they retained the Sabbath; that he further states that “the primitive Christians had a great veneration for the Sabbath, and spent the day in devotion and sermons; and it is not to be doubted but they derived this practice from the apostles themselves” (Morer's Lord's day, p. 189); that Gieseler affirms that “the Gentile Christians observed, also, the Sabbath and the passover, with reference to the last scenes of Jesus' life, but without Jewish superstition” (Eccl. Hist., vol. i., chap. ii., sect. 30); that Brewster, in his “Learned Treatise of the Sabbath,” p. 77, edition of 1631, says that the ancient Sabbath “was religiously observed in the east church three hundred years after our Saviour's passion; that church being a great part of Christendom, and, having the apostles' doctrine, would have restrained it if it had been deadly.” He also affirms that “the name of the Sabbath remained appropriated to the old Sabbath, and was never attributed to the Lord's day, not of many hundred years after our Saviour's time.”
It is a source of great satisfaction to know that John Lay, an English writer, in his “Sunday a Sabbath,” says: “From the apostles' time until the council of Laodicea, which was about the year 364, the holy observation of the Jews' Sabbath continued, as may be proved out of many authors; yea, notwithstanding the decree of that council against it;” and that Socrates, a historian of the fifth century, testifies that “almost all the churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week; yet the Christians of Alexandria, and at Rome, on account of the ancient tradition, refuse to do this.”—Eccl. Hist., book 5, chap. 22.
In answer to the insinuation that but few Christians, if any, kept the Sabbath before the Reformation, the Sabbath becomes vocal in the practice and groans of thousands of the noble church of Waldenses, who, according to the French historian, De Shou, in “Hist. of the Vaudois,” by Bresse, p. 126, “kept the commandments of the decalogue,” and who were called Sabbati, or Sabbatati, because they observed the seventh-day Sabbath. Mr. Robinson, in “Ecclesiastical Researches,” chap. x., pp. 303, 304, observes: “One says they were so named from the Hebrew word Sabbath, because they kept Saturday for the Lord's day.” Other writers allude to this term in the same manner. Some have objected to this view that their name originated from their custom to wear wooden shoes. But two reasons are sufficient to completely refute this interpretation. 1. The wooden shoes they wore were called sabbot (French); and did their name arise from their wearing these shoes, they would be called Sabboti and not Sabbatati. Sabbati is simply the French word Sabbat with an i added to it. 2. They were also called Insabbatati, or Insabbatathos. (See Benedict's Gen. Hist. Bapt. Den., vol. ii., pp. 412, 413, ed. 1813, etc.) Now if their names originated from their wearing wooden shoes, then they wore wooden shoes [sabbati], and did not wear wooden shoes [insabbatati]. The easy conclusion is, they kept the Sabbath, and therefore were called Sabbatati; but they did not keep the festivals of the Roman Catholic church, and, therefore, were called Insabbatati or Insabbatathos.
The Waldenses were also called Leonists by Roman Catholics, who charged one Leo with originating the Waldensian heresy in the valleys, in the days of Constantine the Great (Hist. of Bap. Den. p. 33). Rainer Sacho, one of their bitterest persecutors, says of them: “There is no sect so dangerous as the Leonists, for three reasons; first, it is the most ancient—some say it is as old as Sylvester [pope in Constantine's time], others, as the apostles themselves; secondly, it is very generally disseminated, there is no country where it has not gained some footing; thirdly, while other sects are profane and blasphemous, this retains the utmost show of piety; they live justly before men and believe nothing respecting God which is not good.”—Hist. Church, chap. xxii., sect. 1.
The Cathari, or Puritans, were a body of witnesses who, during the dark ages, protested against Rome. The papal writers, to whom we are indebted for our knowledge of this people, say of them, that they kept the Sabbath and held, also, to circumcision. The same statement is made concerning the Passaginians, a branch of the Waldenses. Mr. Benedict speaks of them as follows:— “The account of their practicing circumcision is, undoubtedly, a slanderous story forged by their enemies, and probably arose in this way. Because they observed the seventh day, they were called, by way of derision, Jews, as the Sabbatarians are frequently at this day; and if they were Jews, it followed, of course, that they either did, or ought to, circumcise their followers. This was probably the reasoning of their enemies; but that they actually practiced the bloody rite is altogether improbable.”—Gen. Hist. of the Bap. Denomination, vol. ii., pp. 412–418.
We would refer to the Abyssinian churches. They were located in Central Africa, where the eunuch of Ethiopia had lived, Acts 8, and kept the Sabbath until the early part of the seventeenth century, when they were brought under the rule of the pope; but the masses broke the yoke, saying “that the sheep of Ethiopia were now delivered from the hyenas of the West.” (Church Hist. of Ethiopia, p. 31, etc.; Gibbon, chap. xlvii.) We would also refer to the Armenians of the East Indies, who, according to Messrs. Mosie, Yeates, Buchanan, etc., authors of high authority, trace their origin to a very early age, have never come under the influence of papacy, have fifteen hundred churches, and keep the seventh-day Sabbath.—Continental India, vol. ii. pp. 116, 117; East Indian Ch. Hist., p. 134.
Since the Reformation, the Seventh-day Baptists have stood nobly for the Sabbath, some of whom have even died for their faith; and for nearly a quarter of a century their efforts have been seconded by Seventh-day Adventists, in response to the last message before the coming of the Son of man, which warns against the papacy, etc., and develops a people keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. Rev. 14:9–12. The Scriptures not only show that the little horn, or papacy, was to change the times and the laws (or the law, French translation), tread the truth to the ground and prosper and practice, Dan. 8:24, and that the word of God would be kept in obscurity during its dark reign. Rev. 11:3, etc. They as clearly point out a glorious exaltation of God's word and a restoration of the true Sabbath at the close of papal rule. It is when salvation is near to come that a blessing is pronounced on “the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it: that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil.” Isa. 56:1, 2; 1 Pet. 1:5; Heb. 9:28; Isa. 25:9. It is following the leading signs of the second advent, that the seal, or sign of the living God, as the Creator of the heavens and the earth, is to be exalted in the earth, and that the servants of God are to receive it in honor of the God of Heaven. Rev. 7:1–3; 6:12–17; 8:1; Matt. 24:29; Ex. 31:17; Eze. 20:12, 20. Now is the time to repair the breach that has been made in the law of God and raise up the foundations of many generations, by keeping God's “holy day.” Isa. 58:12, 13. We have entered the brief period in which the work of reform, commenced in the sixteenth century, is to be finished. The last message of reform is due, and is on the wing. Already we have its solemn notes been heard from ocean to ocean on this continent, and more than two hundred churches have been raised under its proclamation, keeping all of God's commandments. And God being no respecter of persons, the message is going to other nations.
Dear reader, on which side of the question do you design to be? Will you be on the side of truth and of the God of the truth? or on the side of error and of that power that has warred against the truth, against God and the saints? Will you receive the commandments of God? or the traditions of men, by which the law of God is made of none effect?

MY CROSS.

It is not heavy, agonizing woe, Bearing me down with hopeless, crushing weight— No ray of comfort in the gathering gloom; A heart bereaved, a household desolate.
It is not sickness, with her withering hand, Keeping me low upon a couch of pain; Longing each morning for the weary night, At night for weary day, to come again.
It is not poverty, with chilling blast, The sunken eye, the hunger-wasted form; The dear ones perishing for lack of bread, With no safe shelter from the winter's storm.
It is not slander, with her evil tongue; 'Tis no “presumptuous sin” against my God; Not reputation lost, or friends betrayed; That such is not my cross, I thank my God.
Mine is a daily cross of petty cares, Of little duties pressing on my heart, Of little troubles hard to reconcile, Of inward struggles, overcome in part.
My feet are weary in their daily rounds, My heart is weary of its daily care, My sinful nature often doth rebel; I pray for grace my daily cross to bear.
It is not heavy, Lord, yet oft I pine; It is not heavy, but 'tis everywhere; By day and night each hour my cross I bear; I dare not lay it down—Thou keep'st it there.
I dare not lay it down. I only ask, That, taking up my daily cross, I may Follow my Master humbly, step by step, Through clouds and darkness, unto perfect day. —Church Monthly.

Christ’s Life and Divine Instructions

Look we into the life of Christ and we shall find it the philosophy of the simple, the nurse of young men, the meat of strong men, the buckler of the weak, and the physic of the sick; the book full of Divine instructions; fit for all mankind.—St. Chrysostom.
Continue reading: The Conflagration of This World