There were only three positive institutions established at the creation. One was, the prohibition to eat of the tree of knowledge; which expired, of course, with the expulsion of our first parents from paradise. The other two were, the Sabbath and marriage. With respect to the latter of these ordinances, no law has since passed to render the tie of wedlock inalienable or indissoluble, by prohibiting polygamy and divorce: and yet, when abuses had crept into that primitive appointment, our Lord did not interpose anew his own authority, plainly considering the original decree as still binding, and a sufficient rule, notwithstanding past abuses, to all future ages. He said, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder." Surely, then, the same reasoning, by which our Lord has enforced the sacredness of marriage, applies equally to the law of the Sabbath; both decrees having been passed by the same authority, at the same time, with reference to the same persons, and in terms of equally general import. God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it, because that in it he had rested from all his work, which God created and made. Still, however, it cannot be denied, with respect to this statute, that a circumstantial alteration has taken place in the time of observing it; an alteration so important, that in the opinion of some it may seem to vitiate the sanctity of the whole observance, and, if justified as a deviation from the original command, may equally justify an omission of it altogether; for, whereas the Sabbath was ordained, as a weekly celebration of the seventh day, when God ended his work CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 294. which he had made, we now do not observe it on the seventh day, but on the first. In opposition however to this reasoning, it has already appeared, that the law of the Sabbath, though a Divine law, and, as such, incapable of yielding to any views of mere expediency, or to any authority merely human, may yet be fitly accommodated and made to yield to any other appointment, also Divine. Thus, Moses gave the Jews circumcision, and they on the Sabbath-day circumcised a man; nor was any blame imputed to them by our Saviour on that account. The indefeasible obligation of the law remained notwithstanding this occasional relaxation in compliance with another decree; and though it might be neglected, that the Law of Moses should not be broken, it could not be violated with a safe conscience for objects of human policy or expediency. There are many other instances of Divine laws being interpreted so as to accommodate them to other indications of the Divine will. Thus, though the original law of the Sabbath prescribed rest, and the Law of Moses, engrafted upon it, prohibited every kind of labour, yet, as sacrifices were to be offered on that sacred day, and many servile works were necessary in order to prepare the victims, we are told by our Saviour himself, that on the Sabbathday the priests in the temple profaned the Sabbath, and were blameless. And such was the paramount authority of the great law, of selfpreservation, that David, without any offence being imputed to him, when he was in extreme want, and they that were with him, "entered into the house of God, and did eat the shew-bread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them that were with him, but only for the priests." The same observation also may be made concerning the prohibition' to offer sacrifice, except at Jerusalem, which continued in force till 3 A the very time of our Saviour, and yet was as nothing, when compared with the greater command to worship only the true God: for, when Elijah repaired another altar to reclaim the Israelites from idolatry, he was answered by fire from heaven; though, but for the apostacy to Baal, which had rendered any more regular worship of God impracticable, it would have been imputed to him as a sin. Further instances may be found in Scripture of circumstantial deviations from the letter of a law, the principle of which was still held sacred. Thus, though Moses had determined the age at which the Levites should enter upon their duty and the whole order of the service of the tabernacle, David, when the temple was determined on, altered them both, as designing to attain the end which Moses had in view, by means better adapted to his new circumstances. He therefore regarded the precept as inviolable, while he varied the circumstances of it at discretion under the influence of the Spirit of God. These observations may be sufficient to shew, that, even while a Divine law remains in force, circumstantial deviations may from the letter of it occasionally be necessary or justifiable. And where shall we find, or how can we imagine, any cause to justify a circumstantial deviation from an acknowledged rule, greater than that which occasioned the alteration of the day of the Sabbath? To devote one day in seven to hallowed rest is the principle of the command, to which the literal direction of it added, that the day selected should be the seventh. The principle of the law therefore is still held sacred by Christians, who yet consecrate the first day of the week to that service, instead of the seventh. The same time is withdrawn from labour, the same interval given to God. Surely then a change in our condition, such as that which the resurrection of Christ has made in it; a change which is equivalent to a second creation; a change from a state in which it had been good for us if we had not been born, to one in which we are made heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, is one which, more than all others, may best warrant a merely circumstantial variation in the particulars of a law, the prin ciple of which is still held in reverence; for, if God rested from the work of creation on the seventh day, he rested from that of redemption on the first. Accordingly, the first day of the week appears to have been substituted for the seventh by the lively gratitude of Christians, even in the days of the Apostles ; and as God himself sanctified the seventh day by resting upon it after the work of creation, so he did honour to the first day likewise, after the work of redemption, by selecting it as the day for shedding forth upon the Apostles the gifts of the Holy Ghost, as well as for revealing to his servant, Jolm, the things which should be hereafter. This alteration of a circumstance, however, left the principle of the command as it was; for though a difference was made in the order of time, which cannot be the same all over the world, (for that which is day here, is night in the opposite hemisphere,) the same portion of time is still consecrated to God, who from the beginning has required, and has never since revoked the requisition, to have one day in seven separated from worldly engagements, that it might be devoted to spiritual communion and intercourse with himself. This view of the case, however, brings us to the only serious question still remaining between the advocates and the opponents of the perpetuity of the Sabbath; for we do not think it necessary to notice in the present sketch the argument, grounded on Gal. iv. 9, 10, and Col. ii. 16, 17, in which Saint Paul is thought to have condemned the observance of a sabbatical day, as a Jewish, and consequently an un christian ceremonial. If there be any truth in the foregoing remarks, the conclusion to which they lead us must govern our interpretation of these and similar passages. But it is contended by many, who cannot but admit the observance of the Lord's day by the Apostles and primitive Christians, that an entire separation was then made between the Lord's day and the Sabbath; that the Lord's day therefore, as a day of rejoicing, is still binding upon us as a debt of gratitude, but that the Sabbath is for ever abolished, having expired with the Levitical system, which, according to them, it birth and this representagave tion of the fact they are in the habit of strengthening by an appeal to the early ecclesiastical writers; among whom they are apt to say, that the absence of all distinct allusion to a cessation from work on the Lord's day is almost as remarkable as the omission of all notice of a patriarchal Sabbath in the books of Genesis and Exodus, till Constantine enacted a law which is now conceived to proceed from higher authority. The fathers unfortunately are so little studied by Protestants in our day, that an appeal to their authority is generally a safe argument on any side to those who resort to it. We are therefore much indebted to Mr. Holden for the care and industry with which he has collected passages calculated to throw light on the only part of the argument which still appears to require elucidation. We shall select several of those passages, from which our readers may judge for themselves, how far the fathers of the primitive church have left us at liberty to doubt of the obligation of the Sabbath, or of the practice of the Christians of the first ages to abstain, as far as was practicable, from secular occupations on the Lord's day. The fathers of the first century have left us but few writings of any sort; and nothing which they have left is decisive of the point at issue. The following hint, however, is not without its value. "Clement Romanus, whom St. Paul calls his fellow-labourer, whose name is in the book of life,' says, that we are to do all things in order, whatsoever our We are Lord has commanded us to do. to perform our offerings and services at the stated times, for he hath ordered them to be done, not rashly or disorderly, but at certain determinate times and hours.' But what stated and determinate times can be so probably meant as the returns of the weekly festival? Clement is clearly speaking of religious services, for which he says there were, even at that early period, appointed seasons; and it cannot rationally be doubted that the Lord's day was the principal." pp. 293, 294. "In the Catholic Epistle of Barnabas, it is said, in explanation of Isaiah i. 13, Behold how he declares, The Sabbaths which are now kept are not acceptable to me; but those alone which I have made; when, resting from all things, I shall begin the eighth day, which is the beginning of the other world. Wherefore we observe the eighth day with gladness, on which Jesus rose from the dead, and, having been manifested openly, he ascended into heaven. The eighth day, it is well known, was a very common appellation, with the ancient Christian writers, for the first day of the week, or Sunday." p. 295. We all which pass over passages, speak only of the religious observ. ance of the Lord's day, to notice those which either identify it with the divinely instituted Sabbath, or bear testimony to its being kept as a day of rest. "Irenæus, Bishop of Lyons, in Gaul, A. D. 178, if we may give credit to the author of the Questions and Answers to the Orthodox, inserted among the works of Justin Martyr, speaks of the Lord's day as observed with peculiar ceremonies by Christians. And in his Epistle to Pope Victor, relating to the paschal festival, he says, that the mysteries of our Lord's resurrection should be kept only on the Lord's day." p. 297. Tertullian, about the end of the second century, affords indubitable evidence of the custom, established in his time, of ob. ed with them.' "In his refutation of Marcion, there is an argument, too long to quote; but the scope of which is to shew, that Christ did not design to abrogate the Sabbatical law, but to explain and amend it; and in the course of which he asserts that neither Christ nor the Creator have destroyed the Sabbath that Jesus is called the Lord of the Sabbath, because he maintained it 'ut rem suam,' that as the Lord of the Sabbath he did not altogether abolish it; and that he did not wholly rescind the Sabbath, the law of which he observed, proving by his actions that he did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. Proceeding to the Christian fathers of the third century, we find the most unequivocal attestation to the consecration of the first day of the week, in the works of the learned, ingenious, and indefatigable Origen, who was born A. D. 184 or 185, and died A. D. 253. In his Treatise against Celsus, he says, 'If any one object to our observances of the Lord's day, (Good) Friday, Easter, and Pentecost, it is answered, that a perfect (Christian) who in word, deed, and thought, is ever with his natural Lord, the Word of God, always observes the days sacred to him, and keeps the Lord's days.' Commenting upon the sixteenth chapter of Exodus, he says, 'I ask, on what day was manna first given from heaven? and I desire to compare our Lord's day with the Jewish Sabbath. From the sacred Scriptures it appears that manna was first given on the Lord's day; for if, as the Scripture says, it was gathered on six successive days, but on the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, it ceased, without doubt it commenced on the first day, which is the Lord's day. If, therefore, it is clear from the sacred Scriptures that God rained from heaven more manna on the Lord's day, and rained none on the Sabbath, let the Jews learn from this, that the Lord's day, which we observe, was even then preferred to the Jewish Sabbath; and that it was then indicated, that on their Sabbath no grace of God descended upon them from heaven, no bread of heaven, which is the Word of God, came to them, &c.' pp. 300-302. "Constantine was born about A. D. 273, and died A. D. 337. He was the first emperor who made public profession of Christianity and he promulged several laws for the regular and orderly observance of the Lord's day. By a general enact ment he commanded, as Eusebius expresses it, that those who lived within the Roman empire should rest on the day entitled from our Saviour,' i. e. the Lord's day. He likewise passed a law that those who governed in the provinces should reverence the Lord's day." pp. 307, 308. "He must have believed that he was acting agreeably to the precepts and practice of the Apostles, when he established by his imperial edicts the observance of the Lord's day; and it cannot be conceived that he was entirely mistaken in the matter. His laws respecting it were proniulged but little more than 200 years after the death of the Apostles: the current of tradition was flowing in an uninterrupted and uncorrupted stream: many writings and documents, now lost, were at that period accessible to every inquirer; and possibly the extraordinary operation of the Spirit had not yet altogether ceased; from all which it may safely be inferred that Constantine, and the men of his council, were both acquainted with the practice of the immediate followers of our Lord, and acted conformably to it in giving a legal sanction to a weekly festival in the Christian church. "After this period the appropriation of Sunday was fortified by the decrees of various councils, and by imperial laws, the chief of which may be seen in Suicer, Heylin, Bingham; and the due consecration of it was inculcated by the learned doctors of the church." pp. 311, 312. "Athanasius, who flourished A.D. 326, in his Exposition of Psalm cxvii. 24, 'This is the day which the Lord hath made,' remarks : What day can here be meant, but the day of our Lord's resurrection? What day but that which brought salvation to all nations, in which the stone that was rejected became the head of the corner? The expression signifies our Lord's resurrection-day, that which was entitled from him, that is to say, the Lord's day.' He condemns certain persons, Arians, 'who did not reverence the sacred festival of the Lord's day.' In another place he says: The Sabbath was the end of the first creation, but the Lord's day the beginning of the second, when he renewed the old (creation). Therefore, as he formerly ordered the Sabbath-day to be ob served, in commemoration of the end of his first works, so we venerate the Lord's day as a commemoration of the beginning of his second, which were a renovation; for he did not make a new creation, but renewed the old one, and perfected that which he had commenced.' So also (he observes) we celebrate the Lord's day on account of the resurrection;' and again, The Lord transferred the Sabbath-day to the Lord's day.'" pp. 313, 314. Hilary, bishop of Poictiers, flourished about the year 354, and in making some observations upon the septenary and eighth number, he expressly mentions the Lord's day, adding, though the name and observance of the Sabbath were first appointed on the seventh day; yet we on the eighth day, which is also the first, rejoice with the joy of a true Sabbath, p. 317. "The last authority to which appeal shall be made is Augustine, the celebrated bishop of Hippo Regius in Africa, who died A. D. 430, in the seventy-sixth year of his age. He says, 'The resurrection of our Lord is to us the pledge of eternal day, and hath consecrated to us the Lord's day. That which is called the Lord's day properly belongs to the Lord, because he rose on that day.' Again, We so lemnly celebrate the Lord's day, the Paschal, and some other Christian festivals.' Also, The Lord's day was made known, not to Jews, but to Christians, by the resurrection of the Lord, from which it took its origin as a festival.' Again: If a Jew by keeping holy the Sabbath denies the Lord's day, how can a Christian observe the Sabbath? Either let us be Christians and keep holy the Lord's day,'" &c. pp. 320, 321. To these quotations we must add a part of Mr. Holden's reply to those who argue, from other passages in the early fathers, that the Sabbath of which they spoke was spiritually observed, and must be figuratively interpreted of the perpetual rest from sin to which the Christian is called. "The primitive fathers assert that we are to worship God, not by a mere hebdomadal service, but continually; not on one day in the week alone, but at all times, which has been supposed irreconcileable with the notion of a Sabbath. Thus, Justin Martyr says, The new law demands the observance of a perpetual Sabbath.' pp. 326, 327. "Origen says, Tell me, ye who frequent the church on festival days alone, are not all days festivals? Are they not all the Lord's? It belongs to the Jews to observe certain solemn days. Hence God says to them, Bring no more vain oblations incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and Sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with : it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me: I am weary to bear them.' God therefore abhors those who believe one day (only) to be the festival of the Lord. Christians every day eat the flesh of the Lamb, that is, they daily take of the flesh of the Word of God, (i. e. in the holy sacrament).' Jerome also declares, 'that all days are equal; tha t Christ was not only crucified on the Friday, and rose again only on the Lord's day, but that every day is the holy day of his resurrection, and that at all times the Lord's body may be eaten (in the sacrament). But fasts and assemblies on certain days were constituted by men of prudence, on account of those who are more devoted to the world than to God, and who are neither able nor willing to assemble in the church continually.' "These passages, though by far the strongest that I have met with in the ancient fathers, are by no means hostile to the observance of a Christian Sabbath. The context, of which they form a part, plainly shews that they are directed against those who confine their religion to certain times and seasons. In opposition to such, these venerable fathers affirm, that we must cherish an abiding sense of religion, that we must not only worship the Creator on certain days, but preserve a continual reverence of him in the mind; and that, by retaining an unceasing, operative principle of piety in the heart, every day may be made, as it were, a Christian festival. In this all sincere Christians will coincide, while they strenuously support the obligation of a weekly holy day. Our faith is not merely to be exhibited at certain times, and in certain places; it should become an ever active principle, pervading the whole heart, and influencing every thought, word, and deed, from its first implantation in the soul, to the termination of life; yet the the culture and advancement of the religious principle, as for offering the incense of public praise and thanksgiving to the Deity. Not only are they reconcileable, but mutually friendly to each other; the Lord's day does not prevent the daily secret worship, and unceasing veneration of God, nor does this militate against the appropriation of the Lord's-day to his more immediate service." pp. 328-330. Sabbatical institution is needful as well for 66 Origen likewise reasons upon the assumption that the Sabbath was no longer obligatory after the coming of Christ; and similar sentiments are proclaimed by most of the ancient fathers, to some of whom, as it would be tedious to cite them, 1 refer in the margin. "But all the declarations of this kind, it is to be observed, have reference to the Jewish Sabbath and they only amount to this, that, so far as the Sabbath was a Levitical institution, it is no longer binding upon Christians; a position to which the most strenuous advocates of the Christian weekly festival will instantly and cheerfully accede. The truth of this observation is demonstrated, first, by the concurring attestation of the fathers to the obligation of a septenary festival under the Gospel; and, secondly, by their contrasting, in many of the passages referred to, the Jewish festival on the seventh day, with the Christian festival on the first, or, as they frequently call it, the eighth day of the week. These circumstances clearly prove that these learned and venerable men, in speaking of the abolition of the Sabbath, refer solely to it as it constituted a part of the Mosaic dispensation. They would not palpably contradict themselves; and, as they asserted the duty of consecrating a weekly day to religion, they must, when mentioning the abrogation of the Sabbath, have meant that the Levitical ordinance of the Sabbath was no longer in force. This might be further confirmed by certain expressions and circumstances in the passages appealed to; but a more particular examination may be waved, as the general observations just now |