,1 tut %m,gnt ^ O PiUNCETON. N. J. e now know that God decided the controversy that had long been carried on between Him and his enemies the Jewish rulers, by raising him from the dead, thus reversing the sentence passed upon him, and attesting the vali- dity of his claim to the Messiahship, we are not to suppose that this interpretation of these events was at that time generally recognized, or, indeed, that it was by any one clearly understood. We know that his own disciples forsook him at the mournful hour of exposure to public ignominy, and instead of rejoicing that the work of redemption was about to be completed, gave utterance to their disappointed 61 expectations, and desponding thoughts, in expres- sions like the following : — " We trusted that it had been he, which should have redeemed Israel"" — lan- guage plainly indicative of their entire ignorance of the leading design of Christ's advent, as also of the nature of that kingdom which he was about to esta- blish in the world. The great facts of the gospel, indeed, the death and resurrection of Christ, impor- tant though they now appear to us, who have been taught by the apostles to apprehend their true mean- ing, attracted at that time, it is probable, a compara- tively small degree of the public notice : and even after these facts had been proclaimed and testified by the apostles, and after the kingdom of Christ had been fully set up in the world, it is probable, that to a considerable portion of the inhabitants of Judea, the very existence of this kingdom was not known ; at all events, it is certain that it was only by a mere frac- tion of the population/ that it was actually recog- " Luke xxiv. 21. ° There were, no doubt a great many thousands of the Jewish people converted to Christ in the days of the apostles ; but there are good grounds for believing that what is stated above, is materially correct. The population of Judea at Christ's Advent, appears, by all accounts, to have been very considerable. In the last Jewish war, and in the subsequent rebellions, millions were slain, and thousands fell by the hands of the executioner. Even after all this depopulation had taken place, the number of the Jewish people subsequent to the taking of Jerusalem, has by some writers been computed as amounting to "sixty six millions, two hundred and forty thousand." This estimate is surely greatly too high : it cannot be doubted however, that Judea contained at that period, a population of a great many millions. See Jahn's Hebrew Commonwealth, Vol. II. p. 211, 62 nized as the promised kingdom of God. Even those who did recognize this kingdom, namely, the apostles and Jewish converts, continued to frequent the tem- ple, and to conform to all the ceremonials of the Mosaic law as usual. This they did, not as christians, but as Jewish citizens, who were under a civil obliga- tion to comply with all the civil and religious laws established in the country. In this way it is evident the kingdom of heaven would literally come upon men without observation. As christians the Jewish converts assembled for religious purposes daily, in each other's private houses, (kat oikon^) without exciting probably any particular notice. In public profession, in fact, these individuals continued to be Jews, even after their conversion to the faith of the gospel: that is, they continued to conform to all the religious rites and ceremonies prescribed in the law of Moses. Thus, as regarded outward appearances, the king- dom of Christ was set up in the world without excit- ing much general observation, and without interfering in any degree with the political institutions of the kingdoms of this world. The affairs of the Jewish nation continued after its establishment to be carried on with the same order and regularity with which they had been conducted previous to its introduc- tion : there was no change of dynasty,"^ or political '' Acts ii. 46. evidently opposed to en to iero. ' Judea, it is well known, was at this time tributary to the Romans, and had been so ever since its conquest by Pompey. Pontius Pilate was procurator from A. D. 26 to 38. 63 movement of any kind calculated to agitate the pub- lic mind : the law of Moses continued to be recog- nized as the sole rule of public religious worship and civil government : the daily sacrifices, and all the various services of the Temple, continued to be cele- brated with the wonted scrupulous care and solemnity; and the observance of the seventh day as a holy sabbath, continued to be enforced on the whole popu- lation of Judea, by the same solemn sanctions which had been annexed to the violation of the prescrip- tions of the law, at its original promulgation. It has apparently been in the entire forgetfulness of these obvious facts, that the notion has been adopted, that at the introduction of Christianity, the christian sabbath and sacraments, (as they are called) were substituted for certain ordinances, supposed to have been synonymous with them in use and signi- fication, under the former dispensation. Opposed as this opinion is to the whole tenor of sacred history, it has, in various quarters, been entertained with an undoubting confidence, as if it were a first principle which admitted of no dispute. It has been supposed that the ordinance of the Lord's supper was appointed in the room of the Jewish Passover, and the ordi- nance of christian baptism in that of the rite of circum- cision. Upon the same grounds it has been assumed, that the duties of the fourth commandment were transferred from Jews to Christians, and from the seventh day of the week to the first, and with this 64 / alteration were, immediately after the resm'rection of Christ, observed by Christians, much in the same way as the precept had previously been kept by the Jewish nation. On this vague notion of a substitution of certain new religious ordinances at the introduction of the gospel, for rites of supposed correspondent signification under the Jewish economy, a considerable number of the un- scriptural observances that have been appended to Christianity since the time of the apostles, appear at present to have their main support. It requires, how- ever, little more than a slight consideration of the history of that period, and especially of the then existing state of public religion in Judea, to detect the fallacy on which this whole theory of " substitu- tion" has its foundation. The opinion, for instance, that the ordinance of baptism was appointed at the beginning of the gospel, to occupy the room of the Jewish rite of circumcision, must be regarded as nothing more than a modern conjecture, which admits of no scriptural proof; for no instituted connexion between these two ordinan- ces, is ever mentioned either in the Old Testament or the New. It seems very unlikely that this notion of the one rite having assumed the place of the other, should have prevailed among the early christians ; for it is certain that all the Jewish believers continued to circumcise their male children, when eight days old, for forty years subsequent to the establishment 65 of the kingdom of Christ, precisely in the same man- ner as they had formerly done, prior to their being themselves baptized into the faith of the gospel. It is difficult to perceive in what points these two ordi- nances are at all analagous ;"■ at all events, it seems very clear, that while these first christians were ob- serving both rites at the same time, they at least could not well have entertained the notion that the one had been substituted for the other. The doctrine of the Westminster Assembly, that " ever since the resurrection of Christ, God has appointed the first day of the week to be the christian sabbath," appears to have its foundation on a similar fallacious assumption. That at the resurrection of Christ, there was any alteration made in the pre- ' The various ordinances of the Mosaic economy had all, no doubt, a peculiar spiritual signification, as well as the few and simple ordinances of Christianity; and in this respect, there certainly exists between them some degree of resemblance. Having all, however, accomplished the end for which they were appointed, they are now abolished ; and the emblematical meaning they possessed has been fulfilled, not by their being converted into ordinances of correspondent use and signification, but by a natural termination in the spiritual realities of the gospel. The Messiah, himself, came in the room of the Passover : " Christ our passover is sacrificed for us," That change of heart which all true believers experience, has come in the place of circumcision : for christians are now " circumcised with a circumcision made without hands ;" the Jewish circumci- sion, which was a figure of the moral renovation produced by the belief of the gospel, was external, and cut off a part of the flesh : the christian circumcision, namely, " the putting off the fleshly body of sin," is internal, and takes place without any manual operation. Thus, the passover and circumcision, as well as the various Jewish " meats and drinks, their holidays, their new moons, and sabbaths were all a shadow of good things to come ; but the body is of Christ." See Col. 2, passim. K 66 scriptions of the fourth commandment, or that the converts to the gospel were taught to sanctify the first day of the week mstead of the seventh, are sup- positions destitute of all appearance of probability, and directly opposed to the whole current of sacred history. It is undeniable, that the seventh day sabbath continued, as has already been mentioned, to be observed by the Jewish nation, and by all the Jewish believers of the gospel subsequent to the resurrection of Christ, precisely in the same way as it had been observed previous to the Messiah's advent. Now, when it is kept in mind that Judaism conti- nued for forty years after the setting up of Christ's kingdom to be the publicly professed religion through- out Judea, it must appear very improbable that any new sabbath should at that time have been viewed as the substitute of another, which at that very time, continued to be as universally and strictly observed as it had ever been at any former period. It is to be borne in mind also that there was no general expec- tation entertained at that time, of the impending fate of Jerusalem, of the catastrophe which shortly after- wards overturned the Jewish government. There is every reason to believe, indeed, that even among the christian converts, the opinion was very prevalent that the seventh day sabbath and several other ordi- nances of the Mosaic economy, were designed to retain their obligation under the new dispensation. It is well known that a considerable body of Jewish 67 believers continued to observe the Jewish ritual long after the destruction of Jerusalem : so tenacious, indeed, were a number of them, of the notion of the perpetuity of the sabbatical law in particular, that they continued for several centuries to adhere to the observance of the seventh day, and succeeded in various places in prevailing on the general body of believers, to join them in the same Judaizing practice. On whatever other grounds then, the doctrine of a christian sabbath, as taught by the Westminster Assembly and others, can be maintained, it seems very clear, that the argument usually adduced in its support, from its being the supposed substitute of the weekly sabbath of the Jewish nation, is very unsound and fallacious. The only sabbath observed in obedience to the fourth commandment, during the time that the apostles were the authoritative directors of christian obedience, was the seventh claij of the week. This day was observed by the apostles them- selves, by the Jewish converts to the gospel, as also by the whole Jewish people. Than this sabbath, there is no evidence that the apostles and early christians ever observed any other : the conjecture that they did so, that for forty years they continued to observe two successive sabbath days weekly, in obedience to the same commandment, seems to be alike improbable and unfounded. VI 68 Having thus shortly considered the relation in |;| which the Jewish believers of the gospel are recorded u to have stood to the fourth commandment, during the apostolic age of Christianity ; proceed we now to inquire, whether there be any evidence of the sabba- tical observance which this commandment prescribes, having been transferred to the Gentile converts. As our situation corresponds more nearly with the cir- cumstances of this class of converts, than with those of the Jewish believers, the directions they received from the apostles, on this and on other questions of christian obligation, are deserving of especial consi- deration. It is, in fact, by placing ourselves in imagination, in the situation which they occupied ; and in this way considering the authoritative instruc- tions they received from Christ's apostles, that we can most satisfactorily ascertain the existing obliga- tion of the law of the sabbath, or of any other of the laws of Moses, as well as the nature and extent of " those things which Christ commanded," which are now the sole rule and standard of christian obedience. That the Jewish believers sanctified the seventh day of the week during the time of the apostles, in obedience to the fourth commandment, is matter of authentic history. The point we have to ascertain h then, is simply this — Was the observance which I this commandment prescribes, made obligatory on Y j those christian converts who had never been the 69 subjects of the law of Moses ? On this question the whole controversy regarding the perpetuity of the law of the sabbath under the christian dispensation, seems in a great measure to hinge. Of these Gentile converts, there were two descrip- tions : the first, those who by the Jews were termed proselytes of the Gate, and who, in the New Testa- ment, are designated " devout men," " fearing God." They were persons apparently, who, benefiting by the knowledge diffused by those Jews that had settled in the various cities of the world, had renounced idol- atry, and become worshippers of the true God. Of j such was Cornelius, of whom, though a Gentile, it is i recorded, that " he feared God, and all his house." Though these devout Gentiles are supposed to have conformed to several of the observances of the Mosaic law, they did not wholly become proselytes to the / Jewish religion. They abstained, however, from things offered unto idols, and never used blood in food, or the flesh of any animal strangled, as retain- ing the blood. The other description of converts were Gentile idolaters, who had been sunk in the gross darkness and debasing practices of pagan wor- ship. To them, the mission of the apostle Paul seems specially to have been directed : "he was sent to them to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness i to light, and from the power of Satan unto God." It ' is very necessary to bear in mind, the difference which at that period actually existed between these 70 two kinds of Gentile converts ; for unless this distinc- tion be attended to, we must ever fail to apprehend, with accuracy, the design of the apostles, in several of the directions they gave respecting the rule of christian duty. It is easy to trace three distinct periods in the apostolic history, in the first of which, the church was kept in ignorance of the second, and had advanced far upon the second before the third was declared to them, and each by a special revelation. Their mi- nistry commenced with the Jews alone. It appears certain, that the apostles themselves did not then understand that it was ever to be extended beyond their countrymen. Their ancient national error was not yet removed, that through Judaism the world must be admitted to the benefits of the Messiah's advent, must be saved, not as the sons of fallen Adam, but as the children of righteous Abraham. Under this impression, they taught through Judea, Samaria, and at last at Antioch. Then it was, that by a special vision sent to Peter, his scruples were first removed, and he was made to understand by the conversion of Cornelius and his household, that a door was opened to the Gentiles. But to what Gentiles ? Not to all indiscriminately, but to such, as like Cornelius, were " devout Gen- tiles," " fearing God ;" otherwise known as prose- lytes of the gate, Gentiles, who, without becoming altogether Jews, had adopted their belief in the 71 one true God, and sought acceptance with him by fasting and by prayer. Yet of the baptism even of these, St. Peter's report to the church of Jerusalem, is but an apology ; " Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I, that I could with- stand God ?"^ Lastly, a further light broke forth on the church, when by another express revelation Paul and Barna- bas were separated for the conversion of the idolatrous Gentiles.* Of all the wonderful counsel of the Lord, this was considered the most wonderful. This it is which is especially styled " the mystery of godliness," the revealing of which produced a sensation, both within and without the church, to which no one who would understand the writings and the history of the great apostle of the Gentiles, should be inattentive."" The time which elapsed during the first of the three periods above referred to, is supposed to have been from A. D. 33 to A. D. 41 : from this to the extension of the gospel to the devout Gentiles, forms another period from A. D. 41 to A. D. 45. The latter period comprehends a term of twenty-five years, extending from A. D. 45 to A. D. 70, when Jerusalem was taken, the Jewish polity dissolved, and the grounds on which these distinctions were founded, were for ever removed. " Acts xi. 17. ' Acts xiii. 2. " Hind's History of the Rise and Progress of Christianity. Vol I. 144, 72 It is to be borne in mind then, that though the great facts of the gospel were testified to all these converts alike : though all these different classes were alike instructed in the true meaning of the death and resurrection of Jesus, the promised Messiah, "the son of the living God," there was a considerable diffe- rence in the directions they received as regarded their respective personal obligations. While all who had been called, being circumcised, were directed to continue " in circumcision ;" those on the other hand, who had been called " in uncircumcision," were en- joined not to comply with any religious precept or custom, in obedience to the law. All conduct of this kind was strictly forbidden them, as being contrary to their allegiance to Christ their sole master, as well as inconsistent with the nature of that gospel liberty, wherewith Christ had made them free. This distinction in the respective obligations of the early believers, became a frequent source of misunderstanding and difference, in several of the churches. The Jewish believers, being " all zealous of the law," attempted to extend its obligation to their Gentile brethren, and some of them went so far as to maintain, that " except these persons were cir- cumcised after the manner of Moses they could not be saved."'' At Antioch, especially, this question was canvassed with great warmth and contention ; Acts XV. 1. 73 so much so, as to render it necessary that the matter should be referred to the apostles and others resident in Jerusalem. Whether the decree that was issued on this occa- sion, related to all the Gentile converts, or merely to that portion of them who, previous to their conversion, had been proselytes of the gate, though a question of considerable interest and importance in other respects, is immaterial to the point at present under considera- tion, namely, the relation in which christians now stand to the law of Moses. As there were no converted idolaters in the church of Antioch at that time, it is more than probable, that the decree had a peculiar reference to the " devout Gentiles" there and else- where, who had embraced the gospel, and was de- signed for their government exclusively : but whe- ther or not this were the case, it is certain that its contents determine beyond all controversy, the entire repeal of every Mosaic precept, as such, under the christian dispensation. In answer to the Judaizing teachers, who clamo- rously contended, " That it was needful to circumcise them [t\\e Gentile converts^ and to command them to keep the law of Moses,"''' it was authoritatively decided by the apostles, "We have concluded that they keep no such thing."'' The things excepted in the apostolic decree, " meats offered to idols, fornication, things strangled. Acts XV, 5. " Acts xxi, 25, 74 and blood/' from all of which these converts were enjohied to abstain, were probably that part of the Jewish ceremonial, which these " devout Gentile" converts had been accustomed to observe prior to their embracing the gospel. This supposition seems to be countenanced by the speech of the apostle James, who, in delivering his opinion, speaks as if he thought, that in enjoining a compliance with these customs, he "was not troubling them, who, from among the Gentiles had turned to God,'' or placing any yoke on their necks, which they had not borne previous to their conversion. It seems, in fact, to have been the prevailing opinion of all the leading men of the council, that it was not desirable to impose any restraint upon the new converts, which existing cir- cumstances did not call for ; and the reason that ap- pears to have weighed with them, to enjoin the keep- ing up of the few religious customs which the Gentile proselytes had observed prior to the introduction of the gospel, was, that the shock might, by the retention of these forms, be obviated, which naturally would have been given to Jewish prejudices by their neglect, and especially by the disregard of the ancient and scrupulously observed precept regarding abstinence from blood. That this was their reason for specify- ing these practices, seems to be implied in the apostle's concluding words : " For Moses of old time hath, in every city, them that preach him, being read in the synagogue every sabbath day.^ y Acts XV, 21. 75 With the exception of these few customs/ the observance of which, it is evident, was enjoined on the grounds of existing expediency, it was decided by the apostles, that from " the law of Moses," the Gentile converts should be wholly exempted. Among the things excepted, it is to be observed, neither the observance of the sabbath, nor the decalogue itself, is included : it seems natural, therefore, to infer, that this code of national law, and the sabbatical institution comprised in it, were not considered by the apostles of Christ, as connected with the kingdom of heaven, or as retaining any obligation on Christ's disciples. This conclusion seems so obviously to follow, from the authoritative decision of the apostles, and is also so accordant with the evident scope of numerous passages in the apostolic epistles, that it appears to be impossible, without a constant straining of some of the plainest and most explicit statements contained in the sacred volume, to avoid arriving at it. Owing however, to indistinct views having been entertained of the grounds of moral obligation, and, to the adop- I That an abstinence from fornication, which certainly it is not usual now to call a religious custom, should have been coupled with the ceremonial practices specified in the decree, will not appear strange to any one who bears in mind how greatly the moral sense, in respect to this vice, was injured by the opinions and practices that, at that time, prevailed in the Gentile world. The practice was not regarded as a sin ; its excess only, was held to be blameworthy. It formed indeed a part of the Pagan worship, and among the Hindoos and others is ac- tually a religious custom at the present time. See on this subject, Hind's History. 76 tion by a certain school of theologians, of the Judai- cal decalogue as the foundation and rule of christian obedience, the inference, that the Gentile converts were exempted from the law as a whole, natural and obvious as it is, has, in various quarters, been studiously evaded. That this conclusion, though entirely accordant with the whole tenor of the New Testament, greatly interferes with the long establish- ed arrangements of the popular systems of divinity to which we refer, is sufficiently obvious. It has been assumed, '•' that the moral law is comprehended in the ten commandments ;" and from this assumption, it has hastily been inferred, that, as every moral precept is of perpetual and indispensable obligation, no portion of this code of laws can possibly have been included in the things from which the Gentile converts were exempted. By identifying in this manner, the Judaical code of national law, with the eternal and universal rule of moral obligation, the apostolic doctrine of the entire abrogation of the Mosaic law, has been strenuously opposed, as under- mining the whole foundation of christian morality. We readily admit, that were it correct that the moral law is comprehended in the ten command- ments, and that this code of national law is the foundation of moral obligation, the refusal to recog- nize the inference which naturally follows from the apostolic decision, would, however difficult to recon- cile with some of the most explicit declarations of 77 scripture, be supported by reasons of no ordinary weight and importance. It is an unquestionable truth, that every precept of a moral nature, is of perpetual and indispensable obligation : neither can we conceive it possible that any law of this kind can be abrogated so long as a relation between man as a rational and accountable being, and God, as his Creator and judge, continues to exist. The question, it is obvious, is not at all whether the Gentile converts were exempted by the apostolic decree, from any moral precept : that they were not, is on all hands admitted. But though this is quite true, we conceive it is not correct to affirm, that pre- cepts of this kind retained their obligation on account of their being specified by Moses. That there were numerous moral precepts sanctioned by temporal re- wards and punishments, incorporated with the Mosaic economy, is clear beyond all dispute ; it would indeed, have been very remarkable, if a system of civil and religious polity of divine origin and con- struction, like that erected among the Jewish nation, had not comprised numerous precepts of immutable obligation ; for even governments purely political, that are founded on considerations of expediency, find it necessary to adopt various laws which have a foundation in the principles of moral rectitude. There is no evidence, however, that the apostles con- sidered it necessary to separate the moral portion of the national law of Judea, from that part which was 78 ceremonial in order to secure the interests of chris- tian morahty. The decalogue was, at that time, it is to be borne in mind, the established law of the Hebrew common- wealth, and was enforced, by temporal penalties, on every member of the community. The apostles accordingly, uniformly speak of the law as a whole, without making any distinction between its duties ; / and declare concerning it, that the Gentile converts I were exempted from its obligation : every duty of a moral nature remained, of course, in force ; but every precept which it specified, whether moral or ceremonial, was disannulled in as far as the authority of Moses was concerned. It is to be remembered also, that though these converts were thus declared to be free from this code of national law as such, as well as from all the other commandments of Moses, they were taught to recog- nize the natural law of conscience, which " had been written in their hearts"'' before the gospel had been made known to them. This law of conscience em- braced every moral duty which the decalogue specified, as well as every other precept included in the principles of the love of God and our neighbour. It is obvious indeed, that the grounds of moral obligation, were then, and at every former period, wholly independent of the Judaical decalogue ; for every moral duty must have been binding long prior " Romans ii, 15. 79 to the promulgation of the law at Mount Sinai. If it had been otherwise — if the sinfulness of murder, for instance, had depended on its being a violation of the sixth commandment, those who lived previous to the time of Moses would have been innocent of that crime, though chargeable with imbruing their hands in the blood of their fellow men. It is manifest that, as every moral precept must have been in force previous to the giving of the Mosaic law, it naturally continued to be binding on all men, not only during the existence of that law, but subsequent to its abro- gation. As all duties of this kind, therefore, were supposed to be obligatory on the Gentile converts as human beings, prior to their conversion, they were supposed to be binding on them afterw^ards ; not indeed, because they were specified in the decalogue, but because, from their own nature, they w'ere consi- dered to be obligatory, independent of every written code of laws whatever. The question then, we repeat, is not whether the Gentile converts were exempted from any moral precept, but whether the decalogue and the sabbati- cal observance it prescribes were not considered, in the apostolic age, to be an integral part of the Mosaic institution. That they were viewed in this light at that time, seems to be indubitable : for at that very time, this code of laws continued to constitute an essential part of the Jewish civil and religious govern- ment, and was enforced, not only on the unconverted 80 Jews, but on the apostles themselves, and on all the Jewish believers of the gospel. The point, in fact, actually debated at the council of Jerusalem, was, " whether it was needful to command the Gentile converts to keep the law of Moses ;" words which plainly import that the question under consideration was, whether the law, viewing it as a whole religious dispensation, should be imposed on them. It was accordingly the express object of the decree issued by the apostles, conclusively to settle this question, by authoritatively exempting these converts from every prescription of the law of Moses as such, en- joining upon them at the same time, the observance of the few religious practices the decree specified. **They were delivered from the law, that being dead" under which the Jewish people were held, and were *' married to another even to Him who is raised from the dead.""" It has already been suggested that the question of the existing obligation of the law of the sabbath, resolves itself into a simple question of fact, which, like all other matters of fact, can be determined solely by proper evidence. This evidence lies within a very narrow compass, and seems to be both clear and decisive in determining the points with which we are concerned. Of any other sabbath than the Mosaic one, which continued to be observed even by the Jewish believers "* Romans vii, 4-6. 81 of the gospel, for forty years subsequent to the death of Christ, there is no mention made in the New Testament writings. That the seventh day of the week continued to be kept as a holy sabbath during the whole of the apostolic age of Christianity, is mat- ter of unquestionable history. Now, whether we con- sider the recorded practice of the Jewish believers, in reference to this sabbatical institution, or that of the Gentile converts, the conclusion seems to be, on all sides, corroborated and confirmed, that the obser- vance was, at that period, viewed as being entirely a prescription of the law of Moses, and as having no connexion with the institutions of "the kingdom of heaven." The fact of the seventh day of the week con- tinuing for forty years, subsequent to the first setting up of Christ's kingdom in the world, to be sanctified in obedience to the fourth commandment by all the Jewish believers of the gospel, is surely very irrecon- cilable with the assumption, " that the duties of the fourth commandment were transferred at the resur- rection of Christ to the first day of the week, and with this alteration, retained their obligation on Christ's disciples." The question however, which it is of greatest importance to ascertain, as bearing most decisively upon the point at issue, is, whether the obser- vance of the fourth commandment was enjoined on those converts, who had not previously been subjects of the law of Moses? On this point, the testimony of M 82 the New Testament is alike explicit and conclusive. When the question was agitated and formally discussed, whether "it was needful to command the Gentile converts to keep the law of Moses," the matter was set at rest by the authoritative judgment of the apostles : " We have concluded that they observe no such thing." As these converts were thus expressly exempted from the law as a whole, they must have been exempted from the observance of the sabbath as entirely, as from any of its prescriptions. As there is no other sabbatical ordinance ever mentioned in the New Testament, save that prescribed in the Judaical decalogue, it seems naturally to follow, that the law of the sabbath, was viewed by the apostles of Christ, as an integral part of the Mosaic dispensation, and as destined to terminate with that system of civil and religious polity, with which it had, in divine wisdom, been originally incorporated. We conceive then, that by these and other unquestionable facts, all un- equivocally expressive of the mind and will of God upon the matter, the entire abrogation of the law of the sabbath under the christian dispensation, is be- yond all reasonable doubt determined. SECTION III. THE SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE RELATIVE TO THE EXISTING OBLIGATION OF THE LAW OF THE SABBATH FURTHER CONSIDERED. The conclusions at which we have arrived, namely, that the weekly sabbath was viewed by the apostles as an integral part of the Jewish economy, and that all the early christians, who, prior to their conversion, had not been subjects of the law of Moses, were ex- empted from its obligation, appear to receive consi- derable corroboration from various passages which occur in the apostolic epistles. That no certain portion of time has been appointed under the gospel, to be observed as more holy than another, seems clearly to be implied in the following words of the apostle Paul : — " One man esteemeth one day above another : another esteemeth every day alike [^holy.]] Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind."" Among " the saints in Rome," to whom this epistle ' Rom. xiv. 5. 84 is addressed, we learn from its contents there were both Jewish and Gentile believers : though Paul was not personally acquainted at this time with the christians resident in that city, he seems to have been quite aware, that there existed among them a considerable diversity of opinion regarding their respective obliga- tions as to the observance of certain meats and days : for the amicable arrangements of these differences, and with a view, apparently, to allay the heats of " the doubtful disputations" that were likely to occur on various points of this nature, he recommended to all, the exercise of charity on the one hand, and a full persuasion of personal duty on the other. That they would all think and act alike upon these matters, he seems to have thought was not in the nature of things, to be looked for : every one, how- ever, was bound to act on his personal convictions of duty ; for whatever was the nature of the action itself, if performed with any doubt or scruple regarding its lawfulness, it necessarily became, to that person, a sinful one : " for whatever is not of faith, (that is, whatever is done without a conviction of it being lawful) is sin." If the distinctions which existed between the various classes of converts, of which the christian church was then composed, be kept in recollection, this exhortation to exercise mutual forbearance, and to allow every one " to follow the full persuasion of his own mind," will appear very natural and 85 extremely judicious. After making due allowance, however, for the circumstance of these various classes recognizing in some particulars, different rules of re- ligious obedience; if we adopt the modern supposition, that there was a christian law then in force, which re- quired the sanctification of a weekly portion of time to God's exclusive service, the propriety of the apos- tle's counsel must necessarily appear very question- able. If the observance of the first, or any other day of the week, had at that time been enjoined as a christian duty, the law must have been regarded by all to be of indispensable obligation : were we to suppose therefore, that the observance of a weekly sabbath had actually been commanded, we should be greatly at a loss to conceive how Paul could, in that case, have been warranted in affirming, " that he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it." It is utterly inconceivable that any christian, whether of Jewish or G-entile extraction, could possibly have manifested his allegiance to Christ, by not regarding the observance of any one day, and " esteeming every day alike holy," if the observance of a certain day as more holy than others, had formed a part of " the things which Christ had commanded." Another passage corroborative of the same conclu- sion, occurs in the epistle to the Colossians : — " Let no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or 86 of the sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ.'"^ " From this text," says Bishop Horsiey, " no less a man than the venerable Calvin drew the conclusion, that the sanctification of the seventh day is no indis- pensable duty in the christian church — that it is one of those carnal ordinances of the Jewish religion which our Lord hath blotted out." " Mr. Baxter observes, with his usual spirit," says the candid Doddridge, " that we may well wonder at those good men that can find the prohibition of a form of prayer, or a written sermon in the second commandment, and yet cannot find the abrogation of the Jewish law relating to the sabbath, in these plain words of the apostle. For it is certainly most arbitrary to pretend that these words do not include a weekly sabbath, when there was no other solemnity so generally signified by that name."^ It is Paul's design in the paragraph of which these verses form a part, to exhort the Colossian believers to adhere in their religious obedience, closely and stedfastly to the authority of Christ, "as the supreme head of all government and power." He acquaints them that their fulness was in Him, who had blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that stood against them, having nailed it to his cross : and that having been buried with Christ in baptism, they were also raised to life with him, by the procurement ■^ Col. ii. 16, 17. " Dodd. Expos, in loco. 87 of an entire confidence in God, who raised Christ from the dead. He farther instructs them, that, having thus died with Christ, and become wholly dead to the law by a gracious pardon of all their transgressions, they were made complete in the knowledge of their duty by the revealed will of Christ, and ought not to suffer any one to rule them in meats or in drinks, or in respect of an holy day, or the new moon, or sabbath days. The scope of his exhortation seems to be this : — " Let no man be al- lowed to call you to account for the exercise of that liberty to which you have been called : these carnal ordinances of the Jews, their meats, and drinks, and sabbaths, and other holy seasons, were merely a shadow of blessings to come ; — the substance of which is Christ's body, the church." It ought to be borne in mind, that when Paul wrote this Epistle, the seventh day sabbath continued to be observed in obedience to the fourth command- ment, by the Jewish nation, and all the Jewish be- lievers of the Gospel throughout the world. The apostle did not find fault with this, for he himself continued to observe the sabbath : it seems very im- probable however, that he would have used language like that in the passage before us, exhorting Chris- tians to resist those who presumed to judge them for refusing to keep the sabbaths, and reprehending their observance of all days of this kind as imposing- ordinances on themselves, according to the doctrines 88 and commandments of men, if he had held the modern doctrine, that the fourth commandment retained its obligation under the gospel, or if, indeed, he had thought there was any law at all then in force, requiring the observance of a weekly sabbath as an institution of " the kingdom of heaven." Another passage to the same purpose, occurs in the epistle to the Galatians : — " How turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage ? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain."*^ " By days, in this passage," says Macknight, " the Apostle means the Jewish weekly sabbaths, by seasons, the annual festivals, by years, the sabbatical years and Jubilees."^ In the apostolic writings it is deserving of notice, the weekly sabbath is usually classed with the abrogated ordinances of the Mosaic law, and is familiarly spoken of, as if, at that time, it was universally understood to be an integral part of the Jewish economy. The general tenor of Paul's writings in particular, in reference to this ordinance, seems altogether irreconcilable with the supposition that he was in the practice of inculcating its observ- ance on the subjects of the new covenant. This ex- postulation with the Christians in Galatia for instance, appears alike natural and forcible, if we Gal. iv. 9-11. « Mackniglit in loco. 89 keep in mind the facts of the case ; that the Gentile converts, though exempted from this, as well as from the other prescriptions of the Mosaic law, had, by listening to the insidious doctrines of some Judaizing teachers, been reverting to the weak and beggarly elements of Judaism, instead of standing fast in that liberty wherewith Christ had made them free. The apostle uniformly taught, that Christ was the end of the law, for justification to every one, whether Jew or Gentile, who believed on him ; and that the subjects of the new covenant were, as such, no longer under Moses : " they were become dead to that law," under which the subjects of the old cove- nant had been held. As the Mosaic constitution remained undissolved until the destruction of Jerusalem, all the Jewish believers resident in Judea, continued, as has already been mentioned, under a civil obligation to conform to all the Mosaic precepts, whether moral, civil, or ceremonial ; it appears that those of them who were domiciled in Greece and Italy, and who were in the practice of periodically revisiting Jerusalem at the different Jewish festivals, were also indulged in their natural attachment to the religious observances of their ancestors. There were several of the Hel- lenistic Jews, we learn, who, not content with this indulgence, attempted, in their ignorant zeal for the law, to prevail on the Gentile converts to join them in its observance. The obtrusion of these Judaical N 90 notions, seems to have furnished a constant bone of contention to the churches, during the whole of the apostohc age : and, as several of the Gentile believers manifested a strong disposition to adopt the obser- vance of the weekly sabbath, and some other Jewish observances, they incurred the warm rebuke and earnest expostulation of the apostle : " Why are ye turning back to these weak and beggarly elements, observing days, and months, and years ? I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain." On the supposition that Paul taught the doctrine ( of the entire abolition of the law, his language on / this and other similar occasions, appears extremely / natural, and his rebuke perfectly just: if we suppose, j however, that he taught the doctrine of the per- j petuity of the sabbath, his expostulation is divested of its principal force. For how could these Galatian christians have been so much to blame for reverting to the observance of a weekly sabbath, if they had been taught, that the fourth commandment retained its obligation under the christian dispensation ? If we admit the natural and unstrained meaning of the numerous passages in the New Testament, which state, that the law, viewing it as a whole, has been done away with, Paul's reasoning, in this and in various others of his epistles, cannot fail to appear as being alike clear and conclusive : on any other interpretation of these passages, the apostle's mean- 91 ing must ever, we conceive, be very partially under- stood, if it be not indeed wholly misapprehended. When it is remembered, that, notwithstanding the virtual abrogation of the law by the finished work of the Messiah, the Mosaic economy as a political insti- tution, remained then, in appearance, wholly unaf- fected by the introduction of the gospel ; the lucid and forcible terms in which the apostle taught the great truth of the abolition of the law, and the bold and uncompromising manner in which he practically maintained the doctrine of christian liberty,^ must appear to furnish no unimportant evidence of that divine inspiration, which, as an apostle of Christ, he possessed. While outwardly he was complying with the Jewish observances, he inwardly had outgrown the law, and was rejoicing in Christ Jesus, having confi- dence in nothing else. To forward the progress of others in the knowledge of this liberty, and to encou- rage them to stand fast in it, were leading objects in all his epistles to the christian churches. To this cir- cumstance, all who would now thoroughly understand the nature of that christian liberty for which Paul contended, and the general scope and true meaning of his writings, will do well to attend. It is to be remembered, that an obligation to sanctify a determinate portion of time to God's worship and service, can arise solely from an express See Galatians ii. 92 revelation of the divine will, for without such a revelation, it is impossible in the nature of things, that men could discover any reason for consider- ing one portion of time to be more holy than another. Apart from the knowledge derived from an express precept, there can be no intrinsic holiness, as far the human mind can discern, in the seventh day of the week, or in the first, more than in the third, or fourth, or fifth. If the observance of the first, or any other day of the week, as a holy sabbath, has been enjoined on the subjects of the new cove- nant, this duty must necessarily be of indispensable obligation: of any command of this kind however, the New Testament contains no record. In the ab- sence, therefore, of all evidence of such a command, •' / the inference seems to be inevitable, that Christianity I recognizes no distinction of days, and leaves its sub- jects at perfect liberty " to esteem every day alike holy." There are some, however, who seem to think that the mention of the first day of the week, which it appears, occurs three times in the New Testament, ought to be regarded as a proof of the first christians having kept that day as a weekly sabbath. With how little reason this notion has been entertained, a very brief examination of all the cases in which the mention of this day occurs, will suffice to show. It may be proper to premise, that the question is not at all concerning the lawfulness and propriety of the 93 practice, which at present prevails, of christians hold- ing their stated convocations for worship on the first day of the week : the existing expediency of this established custom is by no one controverted. The point we have to determine, is not the expediency of the present practice, but the existence of a sabbatical law, and the consequent obligation resulting from this law on all Christ's disciples, to separate a deter- minate portion of time from a common to a sacred use. If such a law be now in force, the disciples of Christ are doubtless bound to obey it : if no such law exists, they ought to beware of imposing on themselves or others, the traditions and command- ments of men. The mention of the first day of the week occurs John XX. 19, Acts xx. 7, 1 Cor. xvi. 2. In each of these cases the expression is naturally interwoven with the context, in which, it is to be observed, there is not the slightest allusion to any. sabbatical obser- vance : in the absence of all evidence of the promul- gation of a divine command, it seems very preposte- rous to suppose, that the apparently incidental mention of the first day of the week in a general narrative, was designed to be understood as implying that the observance of that day as a weekly sabbath, was to be a duty of indispensable obligation on Christ's followers until the end of time. To construe the casual mention of a particular day of the week in an artless narrative, into an authoritative prece- 94 dent for the observance of a holy sabbath, is surely to violate every correct rule of biblical interpretation, and to apply the sacred history to a purpose for which the sacred historian never designed it. In the first of these passages it is recorded, " that the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, came Jesus, and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, peace be unto you." This was the same day on which Jesus rose from the dead; and it is probable the disciples had not previously met together since their dispersion at Christ's apprehension. Whatever may have been the object of their meeting on this occasion, the circumstance of it being mentioned that they were assembled with shut doors for fear of the Jews, when Christ first appeared to them, which was on the evening of the first day of the week, cannot, surely, be correctly interpreted as furnishing any evidence of their keeping Sunday at that time as a holy sabbath. It is certain that the meeting was not convened in obedience to Christ's authority, neither was it held for christian worship : for, at that time, the disciples had not all learned that Jesus had risen from the dead : and we are told that when he did first stand in the midst of them, ** they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed they had seen a spirit."' ■ Luke xxiv. 37. 95 The nature of this and of the other meetings between the risen Saviour and his disciples, during the time he remained on earth, is so far removed from the ordinary objects of christian intercourse, that it seems altogether improper to interpret any particular circumstance attending such inter- views as designed to constitute an authoritative precedent for christians in future ages to follow. It is certain that he appeared on different other days of the week besides the first ; See John xxi. 3, 4.'' — it is expressly stated, indeed, " that he shewed himself alive by many infallible proofs, being seen of the disciples forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God.'' It seems then to be very arbitrary and unreason- able to attach any importance to the mention of any one day, seeing that he was seen of the disciples for forty days. Whether the expression John xx. 26, " after eight days," that is, eight days after the day of Christ's resurrection, refers to the following Sunday, or as the words seem more naturally to indicate, to the day after, is a question wholly imma- terial to the point under consideration. The parti- cular day of the week on which the incredulity of '' In this passage it is mentioned tliat on the next morning after that day, on which Peter and others went a-fishing, Jesus appeared to them standing on the shore. On whatever other day of the week this took place, it certainly could not have been on the first ; for it was not lawful, at that time, to go a-fishing on Saturday, the sabbath day. ' Acts i. 3. 96 Thomas was removed is a matter of small moment compared with the removal itself^ — the leading sub- ject evidently of the narrative. To infer the existence of a positive duty like that of a sabbatical observance, from the time being mentioned at which a supernatural meeting of this kind took place, seems to be alike preposterous and unwarrantable. A lead- ing object of these extraordinary interviews was, doubtless, to communicate instruction to the disciples regarding the nature of that kingdom which they were to become instrumental in setting up in the world : and to qualify the apostles for the duties of that embassy on which they were shortly afterwards to be sent. It was not until the day of pentecost, when, by the descent of the holy spirit, they were endued with power from on high, that the christian dispensation, correctly speaking, commenced. Then it was that the kingdom of Christ was set up, and that the good news of a free and full forgiveness of sin through Jesus the true Messiah, and of a com- plete justification from all things from which men could not possibly have been justified by the law of Moses, were first openly proclaimed. It is not from the extraordinary events that occurred in the interval between Christ's resurrection and ascension, but from the inspired history of the rise and progress of Christ's kingdom in the world, and from the recorded practice of those disciples who acted in obedience to the apostles, that we can most satisfactorily ascertain 97 that will of Christ, which constitutes the sole rule of obedience under the gospel. The second occurrence of the first day of the week, is in Acts xx. 7 : " And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until mid- night." This appears to be the only case on record, in which it is certain that the disciples met for christian purposes on the first day of the week, during New Testament times. In this instance, as well as the others, their meeting on this day, is evidently not the leading subject of the narrative of which it forms a part: it serves simply as an introduction to the account that follows, of the accident that befel the young man named Eutychus, and of his miracu- lous cure by Paul. It is difficult to say whether this meeting was a stated or an occasional one ; but however this may have been, it is plain, there is no part of the narrative that affords any support to the conjecture, that the christians at Troas observed the first day of the week as a holy sabbath ; neither is it implied that they attached any importance to that day more than to any other. It is cer- tain, that at other places, the disciples assembled for christian purposes on various other days of the week. At Jerusalem, they continued daily to break bread from house to house."" We read, that at Acts ii, 46. 98 Pliilippi, Paul and his companions met at a river side, where prayer was wont to be made, on the sabbath." It seems to have been Paul's stated practice to preach the gospel on that day. See Acts xiii. 14-42 ; — xviii. 4. The Hebrews were enjoined not to forsake the assembling of themselves together, but to exhort one another every day." It is thus manifest that the early christians met on dif- ferent other days of the week besides the first. That it was their regular practice to meet every day for christian purposes, does not clearly appear ; it seems to be extremely probable, however, that they were in the practice of holding their meetings very fre- quently. It is to be remembered, that at that time, christians did not possess the important advantage, which their successors do now, of perusing in private the different books which compose the New Testa- ment. Their progress in christian knowledge de- pended almost entirely on mutual instruction, con- veyed orally in their social intercourse. As a consi- derable portion of the first converts (of the Gentile converts especially) needed to be carried forward from the first elements of religious knowledge, it doubtless would be found necessary to meet with them, for purposes of instruction, very often. How often they did regularly meet, for this and other christian objects, cannot now certainly be determined: but from the numerous indications that occur in the Acts xvi. 13. ° Hebrews iii. 13. 99 apostolic epistles, of the close intimacy that existed among the primitive believers, it is highly probable, that their stated convocations were held much oftener than once a week. Waving this however, as various meetings are expressly mentioned to have taken place on different days of the week, it seems to be extremely arbitrary to attach any importance to the mention of a single meeting at Troas on a Sunday. It is impossible to say whether, at that time, it was the established custom to meet at Troas on the first day, or whether the meeting that is mentioned, was specially convened on account of Paul's ap- proaching departure and farewell address. This much is certain, that there is nothing whatever in any part of this narrative of the miraculous cure of Eutychus, which gives any countenance to the con- jecture, that the christians at Troas kept, at that time, the first day of the week as a holy sabbath. The only other passage in which the mention of the first day of the week occurs, is in the first epistle to the Corinthians, xvi. 2. " Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." This injunction relates to a pecuniary collection for the relief of certain disciples in Judea, who at that time, it appears, were situated in very destitute circumstances. The apostle wished, that " the bounty" which the Corinthians, sometime before, had 100 signified they were preparing, might be ready on his arrival ; in order that he might carry it along with him, when he proceeded from Corinth to Jerusalem. To every one who is at the pains of examining the scope of this part of Paul's letter, it must be quite apparent, that the apostle is not speaking at all, in any part of the context, of the observance of the first day of the week, or of any other day, as a holy sabbath. The words simply convey an injunction, that each one of them should lay hy him (probably at home) a certain portion of money, in order that the whole of the intended donation might be prepa- red, and ready to bestow as a bounty, on Paul's arrival. This direction regarding the proper ar- rangement of a special act of pecuniary benevolence, does not furnish, so far as we can discern, any deci- sive evidence that the Corinthians held, at that time, their stated convocations for worship, once a week. It is, no doubt, quite possible that this may have been the case ; but there is certainly nothing mentioned from which it can positively be inferred. According to the natural meaning of the injunction, the arrange- ment advised was to be private, " let every one of you lay by him in store^'' the amount he proposed to contribute. This was recommended to be begun immediately, and continued weekly, in order that there might be no gatherings when Paul arrived. This appears to be the obvious unstrained meaning of the words viewed in connexion with the context : 101 to interpret them as furnishing a proof of the cor- rectness of the conjecture, that the Corinthians were then in the practice of keeping Sunday as a weeekly sabbath, is an unnatural straining of the passage, to serve a purpose wholly foreign from its original ap- plication and design. It is usual with many of the advocates of the per- petuity of the sabbath, to attach a great importance to an expression which occurs in the first chapter of the Apocalypse, " I was in the spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice as of a trum- pet, saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, and what thou seest write in a book, and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia.''^ It has been assumed, that the term the Lords day was used by the apostle John, to designate the first day of the week as a day dedicated to the honour of Jesus Christ ; and, on the ground of this conjecture, it has been maintained, that this use of the expres- sion is a plain proof of Sunday having been kept as a sabbath, or holy day, when the Apocalypse was written. We are disposed to think, that this infe- rence has usually been drawn with a haste and confi- dence, for which the nature of the premises furnishes little warrant. As the phrase in question is, at pre- sent, almost universally understood as synonymous with Sunday, considered as a holy day, it is, no >• Rev. i. 10-11, 102 doubt very natural to affix this meaning to the ex- pression when we meet with it in Scripture : that it was used in this sense however, by John, in the pre- sent instance ; or that this was its current understood signification, at the time when he wrote ; or that the sentiments which are now prevalent, respecting the first day of the week, were entertained in the apostolic age, appear to be all gratuitous assump- tions, insusceptible of any satisfactory proof. On a subject so conjectural in its nature, we feel no disposition to speak with any degree of confi- dence. The same literal expression occurs no where else in the scriptures, and its precise signification in this sole instance of its occurrence, as well as that of various other words that occur in this mysterious prophecy, it seems difficult, satisfactorily to ascer- tain. It is certain, that there is no account of the divine appointment of any sacred day of this name, recorded in the scriptures ; neither is there any evidence of any festival or sacred season of any des- cription whatever, having been observed by Christ's followers during the apostolic age. It has been sup- posed by many, indeed, that the early believers were in the practice of celebrating Christ's resurrection, on the first day of the week : this, however, is also a pure conjecture, which admits of no scriptural proof. That it must be highly profitable for christians in every age of the world to commemorate the resur- rection, and the other facts of the gospel, at all their 103 social meetings, can admit of no doubt : there lias no command been given, however, to do this more particularly at one time than at another. In the absence of all evidence of the first day of the week having been celebrated in commemoration of the re- surrection, during New Testament times, it seems very arbitrary to assume, that the term the Lord's day was then understood as synonymous with a reli- gious festival held on Sunday, Or that it had any peculiar reference to the resurrection. Even if it were certain that the expression was used by the apostle, to denote a solar or natural day, held sacred in commemoration of some particular event in Christ's history, it is difficult to see any sufficient reason for supposing that it must refer to the day of Christ's resurrection, more than to the day of his birth, or the day of his death, or the day on which he ascended into heaven, or the day on which the Holy Spirit descended on the church. The words "I was in the spirit on the Lord's day," have frequently been interpreted as signifying that John was in a spiritual, or peculiarly devotional frame of mind, on that day. The apostle, however, it is deserving of notice, does not in the original, say that he was in the spirit, but simply i?i spirit. The inser- tion of the definite article in the EngHsh version, alters, materially, the natural sense of the expression as it appears in the Greek. John, it is to be remem- bered, had received a supernatural vision relative to 104 the events that were shortly to befal Christ's king- dom. Now, viewed in connexion with this context, it seems natural to suppose, that the words may have been used to denote, not the particular day on which John saw the vision, but the subject of the vision itself. " I was in spirit/' and received a revelation re- lating to the day of the Lord. The term da//, it is well known, is used in the scriptures, not only to signify the particular day on which a person is speaking or writing, but likewise any indefinite time, and fre- quently a whole religious age or dispensation. Thus the christian dispensation is frequently called the "lat- ter days." In the Old Testament, " the day of the Lord" is often used to signify some illustrious ap- pearance of God, in a way of judgment or mercy. In the first epistle to the Thessalonians, the day of judgment is called the Lord's day.'^ Considering then the particular scope of the context, it seems not improbable, that the expression in the Apocalypse may have been used in a similar extended sense. This conjecture, (and we offer it as nothing more than a conjecture,) appears to receive some support from the recurrence of the words in the fourth chapter, when the contents of the vision are about to be dis- closed. " After this I looked, and behold ! a door was opened in heaven : — and the voice which I heard at first, like a trumpet speaking to me, said, ' Come H Tj/j-epa Kvpiov. 105 up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be hereafter.' And immediately / was in spirit , and behold a throne was set in heaven.'"" Whether or not, however, there be any sufficient grounds for entertaining this view of the passage, there certainly seems to exist no sufficient reason for construing the single occurrence of an expression like this, of confessedly dubious import, into the promulgation of a divine precept. Admitting that it could be satisfactorily ascertained that it was upon a Sunday that John received this revelation of Jesus Christ, concerning the things which were shortly to come to pass, surely a circumstance of this extraor- dinary nature, cannot with propriety be regarded as constituting an authoritative precedent, binding on Christ's followers. If the observance of any religious festival had formed a part of the things which Christ commanded, it is reasonable to expect, that the ordi- nation of the institution, its duration, and the proper manner of keeping it, would have been distinctly recorded for the government of his disciples in every age of the world. Supposing, for a moment, that John did refer to some religious festival, we are no where informed on what day of the week the insti- tution is to be observed, whether it recurs weekly, or monthly, or annually, or what duties its proper observance implies. The Apocalypse, on account of the obscure nature ' Rev. iv. 1-2. 100 of its contents, was kept during the three first centu- ries, separate from the other books of the New Testament, and was seldom or^ ever read in the pubhc assembhes of the church. The book is not mentioned in the catalogue of canonical books formed by Cyril, Bishop of Jerusalem, (A. D. 340.) nor in that formed by the council of Laodicea, (A. D. 364.) it is omitted also, in one or two other catalogues of the scriptural canon. This omission was not owing, it is generally supposed, to any suspicion being entertained of its authenticity or genuineness, but because its mysterious nature rendered it, in the view of the early christians, unsuitable for general perusal.^ When these and other circumstances are kept in view, we conceive, that whatever may have been the precise meaning of the phrase " the Lord's day," as originally used by the apostle, it must, to every dispassionate inquirer, appear altogether in- credible, that the single occurrence of it in this obscure, and seldom consulted symbolical prophecy, was designed to constitute the ground of a positive duty of universal and perpetual obligation. At all events, it is not to be controverted, that there is not the shadow of scriptural proof of any connexion having been instituted between the law of the sab- bath and any sacred day, or festival, of any name whatever, under the Gospel. The adoption of a ■ Bishop Tomline's Christian Theology, cited by Home. Vol. iv.484. 107 weekly religious festival, in the second and third centi^^es, furnishes no legitimate authority for trans- ferring the prescriptions of the Judaical decalogue, to the first day of the week, or for sabbatizing on that day — a practice which, as will afterwards be shown, was uniformly condemned by those who introduced the festival in question. That the custom of holding the stated meetings of the church on the first day of the week, obtained at an early period, is matter of history ; and it is also certain, that this day was, at a very early date, celebrated as a religious festival, and came, ulti- mately, to be generally known by the designation " Lord's day." How soon the custom obtained of observing Sunday in commemoration of Christ's resurrection, it is difficult precisely to determine ; but this much is certain, that there exists no evi- dence of any one during either the first or second cen- tury having kept that day as a holy sabbath. It is de- serving of notice also, that in adopting the custom of celebrating the day as a season of religious rejoicing, it was by no one at that time contended, that the prac- tice was obligatory, on the ground of an apostolic pre- cept enjoining it, neither was the origin of the name Lord's day ascribed to the occurrence of this expression in the Apocalypse.* In the writings of the fathers who By some writers, it has been supposed that the first day of the week was known by the designation " the Lord's day," previous to the introduction of \ 108 flourished in the second century, the first day is sel- dom or ever called the Lord's day." Justin calls it ** the day of the sun/' without intimating that it ought to receive any other name : Tertullian, who wrote about fifty years later, gives it the same name, (dies soils.) " It is very likely" says a writer who has professedly examined this question, " that the more solemn and public use of the word Lord's day, was not observed till about the time of Sylvester IL when by Constantine's command it became an injunc- tion. It was afterwards more generally noted in conversation and writing, religious and civil. Till the gospel, and that the name had its origin in the circumstance of Sunday having been dedicated by the heathens, to the honour of the sun. As the sun was called Dominus Sol, it has been inferred, that the day dedicated to his honour, was, in the same way called Dies Dominica. In support of this opinion, it has been advanced, that the Persians called their god Mithra, (who, it is well known was nothing but the sun,) the Lord Mithra : that the Syrians called the sun by the epithet ^!is, or Lord: that Porphyry to the same purpose, in his prayer addressed to the sun, calls him Dominus Sol : that in the consecration of the seven days of the week to the different planets, the day of the sun is called the day of the Lord Sol, or Dies Dominica, while the others are called by their simple names, as Dies Martis &c: and, in fine, that every one of the ancient nations, gave the sun the epithet Lord or Master, or some title equivalent to it, as Kurios in Greek, and Dominictis in Latin. See, on this subject, Higgin's Horae Sabbaticae. Dupuis sur tous les cultes. — Vol. iii. p. 41. " In the epistle, ascribed to Barnabas, Sunday is called " the eighth day." There is an expression used by Ignatius, that has usually been supposed to refer to the Lord's day, kuriake, that is, " the Lord's," without the addition of the word day. There is little importance to be attached to the occurrence of any single word, in epistles so grossly interpolated as those of this Father. Of all the ancient writings, it is now, on all hands, admitted, none have been more the subject of fraud and corruption than these. 109 the time of that emperor, and that prelate, it had never commenced in ecclesiastical constitution. This agrees with the notion of the present church, (of England,) looking on it as a very decent and lauda- ble custom, yet still a custom, continued from universal tradition, and not a divine ordinance^ During the third and fourth centuries, the day appears to have been simply regarded as one of the numerous fast and festival days, which the christians of those times adopted from considerations of sup- posed expediency ; and its observance was, with them, recommended on no other ground than the authority then claimed by the ecclesiastical rulers, to appoint observances of this nature. That this was the case, has been admitted by some of the most learned advocates of the Lord's day, who, while they maintain, that it is still a duty to observe the institu- tion, have possessed too correct a knowledge of its origin to allow them to attempt .to claim for it an obligation on the ground of scriptural precept or ex- ample. " The Lord's day," says Dr. Peter Heylin, "was not instituted by our Saviour Christ, com- manded by the apostles, or ordained first by any other authority than the voluntary consecration of it to religious uses : and being consecrated to these uses, was not advanced to that esteem which it now enjoys, but leisurely and by degrees, partly by canons Morer's Dialogues on the Lord's day. p. 57. 110 of particular councils, and partly by the decretals of several popes, and orders of several inferior prelates, and being so advanced, is subject still to the autho- rity of the church, to be retained or changed as the church thinks fit."y Those who continue to observe this weekly festival, and, who with Heylin, recognize that authority, assumed and exercised during the first centuries, by the rulers of the church, in which it apparently had its origin, must be allowed to possess a claim to consistency, whatever may be thought of their adherence to the principles of protestantism. It appears to be very inconsistent, however, to recognize the authority of " the church" in this instance, while we refuse to receive various other ancient usages, which it is certain were obser- ved by the first christians at the same period, with no less solemnity. As early as Tertullian's time, the feast of Easter appears to have been an established practice. " We celebrate Easter," says he, " in the first month of every year."^ It is certain also, that the custom of observing Whitsunday, Christmas, and various other feasts and festivals, obtained at a period not much later. Along with these, there were obser- ved numerous fasts, both fixed and occasional, some weekly, and others annual ; all of which were ordain- ed by the ecclesiastical rulers, who, it is well known, made laws of this kind, at their own discretion. The * Pasclia celebramus anno circulo in mense primo. — De jejun. ' Preface to the History of the Sabbath, Ill recognition of the authority exercised by tlie church at that time, is evidently the only tena- ble ground on which the retention of such usages can ever consistently be maintained ; and surely if we admit one usage on this ground, we are bound to admit all ; for all necessarily stand or fall together. " It will not be found in scripture^' said Charles I. to " the new reformers" in his reign, who were then zealously propagating their Judaical doctrine of the modern Sabbath, " where Saturday is discharged to be kept, or turned into Sunday ; wherefore it must be the church's authority that changed the one and instituted the other. Wherefore, my opinion is, that those who will not keep the feast of Easter, may as well return to the observation of Saturday, and refuse the weekly Sunday. When any one can shew me that herein I am in an error, I shall not be ashamed to confess and amend it."* On the princi- ples professed by those whose notions he was contro- verting, this argument made use of by the unfortu- nate monarch, appears to admit of no satisfactory answer. If the scriptures be recognized as the only rule of faith and obedience, to be consistent, we are obviously bound to reject every religious custom un- authorized by the apostles. The Lord's day is only one of a vast number of religious customs introduced by the ecclesiastical authorities, during the first three * See Morer. — p. 58. 112 centuries : if it is to be retained, it will be difficult to assign any valid reason for rejecting the rest. As the Apostles of Christ have been constituted the sole authoritative teachers of christian duty, our concern, it is obvious, is not with the religious customs that were appended to Christianity in the second, third, and fourth centuries, but with the com- mandments that were delivered to those who acted under apostolic direction. Recognizing the New Testament writings as the sole attested rule of christian obedience, the question which we have to ascertain, is simply this : — does there exist any divine law, requiring the sanctification of a determi- nate portion of time under the gospel, or is there any precedent on record, that implies an obligation on christians to meet for christian purposes at any par- ticular stated time ? Of the existence of an express precept, or authoritative precedent, implying either of these obligations, we own, we are unable to dis- cover any adequate evidence in the sacred volume ; and it is certain, that where there is no law, there can be no transgression. There are two different obligations which it is conceivable, may have arisen from scriptural ex- ample that have frequently been confounded, and which it is very desirable should be considered separately, being in their nature very distinct. There might have existed an obligation to separate a weekly or any other portion of time from a com- 113 mon to a sacred use : this would have been the case if there had been any evidence of the first believers having been taught to observe the prescriptions of the fourth commandment, as a part of their christian duty. There might also have existed an obligation to meet hebdomadally, or statedly, at any certain recur- ring hour or day. A law prescribing this latter practice might have been delivered, it is obvious, unaccompa- nied by any sabbatical injunction ; and it is certain, that if there exists any proof of such a law having been promulgated, the same precept which the first christians observed must continue still in force. Of the former of these supposed obligations we have already treated at large. It has been shown, we trust, that the perpetual obligation of one of the positive precepts of the abrogated economy of Moses, is a notion at variance with all the leading facts recorded in sacred history, and with the general scope of the apostolic writings. That the national law of the sabbath should have been separated from the other laws of the Jewish government, and imposed on the christian converts, appears to be a supposition, alike extravagant and improbable : and it seems not less so to imagine, that it was designed that the fourth commandment should retain its obligation under the christian dispensation, while there was no intimation to be recorded of it being excepted from that abro- gated economy, with which it was incorporated, and from which, the christian converts were declared to be Q 114 wholly exempted. It appears utterly incredible, that a religious observance like that of a weekly sabbath, which affects so materially the extent of christian obedience, in every age of the world, should have been nowhere recorded, either in the form of a pre- cept or an example, if it had really formed a part of the things which Christ commanded. The question, whether christians are bound to meet hebdomadally, we now propose shortly to con- sider. As it is on record that the early christians met on one occasion at least, for christian purposes, on the first day of the week, and, as it is certain that the practice of meeting statedly on that day prevailed at a very early date, it has usually been inferred, that these facts imply an obligation on christians to continue the same practice in every age of the world. In one view, we have no hesitation in acquiescing in this conclusion. It is manifest, that this custom has long been found highly expe- dient ; that, so long as this remains the case, the practice must continue to be, in a certain sense obligatory, no one, we apprehend, will seek to deny. It is to be remembered, however, that if there exists no law upon the subject, the custom, though obligatory as a matter of expediency, is obli- gatory on no other ground. The matter then resolves itself into this query. Does the scriptural example on record imply the existence of any law upon the subject ? 115 It is of importance to bear in mind, throughout every inquiry in which the obligations arising from the example of the first christians is involved, that it r is not every thing iliey did that constitutes an autho-v / ritative precedent, but only that part of their prac- X tice, which we can ascertain was the result of obedi- ^ ^ ence to a divine precept. The will of Christ is the sole rule of christian duty; and what that will is, we learn from the precepts and examples recorded in the New Testament. That every express precept is of perpetual obhgation, is certain : it will be, by few, contended however, that every example which the scriptures mention, is necessarily of an authori- tative nature. If any recorded practice of the early christians is so situated, that it furnishes no evidence of the existence of a divine law ; if the practice can be ascertained to have naturally arisen from circum- stances that would have led to this result, indepen- dent of any apostolic precept, the example of the New Testament believers, is evidently, of no autho- rity whatever ; inasmuch as it furnishes no indication of the authoritative will of the sole lawgiver in the kingdom of heaven. His will it is, which constitutes | the rule of perpetual obedience to his people, I and not every thing which the first christians did j and said. j That the early christians should have adopted the practice of meeting periodically at a certain hour and day, was, we think, naturally to have been ex- 116 pected, and though it is by no means certain, it is certainly quite possible, that the custom of meeting statedly on the first day of the week, obtained during New Testament times. There were various considerations, indeed, which all agreed in pointing out this as the most suitable time on which they could all regularly assemble together for christian worship. The public weekly sabbath in Judea, (which, it is to be kept in mind, was then observed by all the Jewish believers,) commenced on our Friday evening, at six o'clock, and ended at the same hour on the fol- lowing day ; so that the beginning of their first day of the week corresponded with our Saturday evening. This interval between the close of the sabbath and the commencement of the next solar day, would thus very naturally offer itself as, in various respects, the most convenient time for the early believers, both Jewish and Gentile, meeting together for christian purposes. It seems to have been during this interval, that the meeting at Troas took place. We are told, that the disciples resident there came together on the first day of the week to break bread, and Paul preached unto them ready to depart on the morrow. The meeting, it appears, was continued during the night, " even to break of day." That the night during which the meeting lasted was that of Satur- day, seems certain ; for had it been on the night following, the meeting would have been held on the 117 second day of the week, and not on the first. Paul appears to have staid at Troas over the sabbath, and to have gone to the christian meeting ready to de- part on the morrow : and having continued with the disciples during the whole of the night, {*' having talked with them a long while, even till the break of day,") he departed on his travels, early on the Sunday morning. It thus seems highly probable, that the meeting mentioned in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, (the only proper example of a christian meeting on the first day on record,) ended before our Sunday dawned. When it is remembered, that the greater part of the Gentile converts were at that time placed in circumstances which precluded their assembling regularly during the day time, on any one day of the week, it must appear extremely natural, that the interval between the close of the sabbath, and the beginning- of the next solar day, should have been fixed upon, as the most suitable time for all parties statedly assembling for the purposes of instruction and divine wor- ship. When a custom of this kind is once es- tablished, it is seldom departed from, without the occurrence of some urgent reason for superseding it by some other. It is matter of history, that the practice of meeting in an evening and in the night time, continued to prevail during the greater part of the second century. Pliny the younger, who was 118 governor of Bithynia, (A. D. 107,) states in his letter to Trajan, that the followers of Christ, whom by torture he had induced to abandon the profession they had made of the gospel, gave this account of their renounced religion. " They were accustomed on a stated day to meet before daylight, and to re- peat among themselves a hymn to Christ as to God." Justin's account, about forty years later, of the prac- tice existing in his time, is not materially different. " On the day called the day of sun, there is a meet- ing in one place, of all the christians who live either in the towns or in the country." There are abundant testimonies of the same custom having been uninter- ruptedly transmitted to succeeding ages, as well as of the day coming ultimately to be known by the de- signation the Lord's day. In all the notices that occur, however, of this practice, and even long sub- sequent to the time when the first day became generally observed as a religious festival, there has no case been hitherto pointed out, in which it is ex- pressed or implied that the practice was founded on an apostolic precept. We conceive then, that though it is on record that the christians at Troas met on one occasion on the first day of the week; and although there is sufficient evidence that the practice of meeting statedly at that time became general, before the close of the second century, we are still unfurnished with any proof of the existence of a divine law upon the subject. Whether 119 the meeting at Troas was held during a Saturday or a Sunday night, is a point very immaterial to the only question with which we are concerned. There are various meetings mentioned as having taken place on other days of the week, but in no case is it implied that the early believers met on a stated day, in obedi- ence to a positive precept enjoining such a practice. Adequate evidence of the existence of a precept of this kind, is plainly the sole authority that christians are now warranted in recognizing as a divine law of perpetual obligation. The early christians, doubtless, found it on various accounts expedient to meet on stated occasions for christian worship : and so must ever their successors do in every age of the church. Christians are ex- pressly enjoined not to forsake the assembling of themselves together, but they are nowhere directed to meet statedly at any one time more particu- larly than another. Apart from -any injunction to meet frequently, it is manifest, that the watchful- ness and fraternal affection they are exhorted mutually to exercise over, and towards each other, imply an obligation to maintain such a constant inter- course, as may be adequate for attaining the impor- tant ends for which christian association has, in divine wisdom, been appointed. As no positive law how- ever, has been delivered, prescribing how often they ought to meet, it behoves them, in the exercise of true allegiance to their only master, in this as in 120 other matters, to stand fast in the hberty wherewith Christ has made them free, and to guard against the credulous and unmanly adoption of doctrines and commandments of human invention. On various accounts, it is obviously highly expedient at present, for christians to hold their stated meetings on the first day of the week ; and it is indubitable, that viewed in this light, so long as the practice remains expedient, it must be their duty to continue it. SECTION IV. On the views entertained of the first day of the week, during the first ages of the christian church : and on the causes which led to the general adoption of the modern sabbatarian doctrine in england, during the seventeenth CENTURY. When we leave the testimony of the inspired writers, and pass forward to the unauthoritative records of the times succeeding the age of the apostles, we still search in vain for any footsteps of the doctrine, that " ever since the resurrection of Christ, God has ap- pointed the first day of the week to be the weekly sabbath." According, however, to the assumptions which it is usual for the advocates of this doctrine to make, the opinions which prevail at present upon the subject, have prevailed in every period since the first introduction of Christianity. This notion, however undoubtingly in some Cjuar- ters entertained, appears to derive little support from the testimony of early antiquity: so far indeed, as we have hitherto been able to discover, it has no better foundation than a misconception of the nature and B. 122 design of certain religious customs that obtained during the second and third centuries. That Sunday was observed as a day of rehgious rejoicing, as early as the time of Tertullian, is abundantly manifest. Owing to the early prevalence of this religious custom, and to the festival having been converted, fifteen centuries afterwards, into a weekly sabbath, two things are now by many confounded, vdiich have no necessary connexion or natural resemblance, namely, a day separated to God's exclusive service, and strictly devoted to religious engagements, in the manner the seventh day was observed by the Jewish people ; and the custom of observing certain days as seasons of relaxation and religious rejoicing, a prac- tice which, it is well known, became conunon in the christian church at a very early period, and which has continued to prevail in the Greek and Latin churches unto the present day. These festivals, it is to be observed, were at no time viewed as having any analogy with the sabbatical law promulgated to the Jewish nation, but, on the contrary, were usually contrasted with it, on account of its rigorous pre- scriptions being regarded as directly opposed to them in nature. Instead, indeed, of being sancti- fied by a holy resting from the usual avocations of life, all fasting, and even an abstinence from ordina- ry amusements during the celebration of such seasons, was commonly reprehended, and sometimes strictly forbidden. Tertullian, for instance, declares it " to 123 be unlawful to fast, or to worship on the knees on a Sunday,"'' and describes the christians of his time as " indulging themselves on that day, in mirth and fes- tivity." ''Thus too, it is stated in the epistle ascribed to Barnabas, " we keep the eighth day with gladness." In adopting this and numerous other festivals, some fixed, and others occasional, it does not appear, as has already been remarked, that the christians of those times considered there was any scriptural injunction, making it imperative on them to do so. At that period, the rulers of the christian body appointed whatever new religious practice they deemed expedient, and the people seem to have been uniformly ready and willing to tall in with the observance of them. The traditional power virtually claimed by the rulers of the church, during the first centuries, it is to be remembered, was by no one, at that time, denied, or even called in question. It is very neces- sary to keep this circumstance in recollection, in order to estimate correctly the importance which is to be attached to the testimony of every writer during the second, third, and fourth centuries. During these centuries, the chief corruptions of popery were either, as an able writer upon this subject has remark- ed, introduced in principle, or the seeds of them so ^ Die Dominico jejunaie nefas ducimus, vel de geniculis adorare. De Cor. Mil. ' jEque si diem solis Isetitiae iiidulgeiinus. Apologet -wi. p. 16, B. 124 effectually sown, as naturally to produce those baneful fruits which appeared so plentifully at a later period. In Justin Martyr's time, within fifty years of the apostolic age, the cup was mixed with water, and a portion of the elements sent to the absent. The bread, which at first was sent only to the sick, was, in the time of Tertullian and Cyprian, carried home by the people, and locked up as a divine treasure for their private use. At this time too, the ordinance of the Supper was given in all the public communions to infants of the tenderest age, and was styled, the sacrifice of the body of Christ. The cus- tom of praying for the dead, Tertullian states, was common in the second century, and became the universal practice of the following ages ; so that it came in the fourth century, to be reckoned a kind of heresy to deny the efficacy of it. By this time, the invocation of saints, the superstitious use of images, of the sign of the cross, and of consecrated oil, were become established practices, and pretended miracles confidently adduced in proof of their supposed efficacy.*^ Thus did that " mystery of iniquity"^ which was '' already working" in the time of the apostles, speedily after their departure, spread its corruptions among the professors of Christianity. By inducing '' See Middleton's Introductory Discourse to his Free Enquiry, where the origi- nal passtiges on which tlie above statements are founded, will be found cited. II. Thessalonians ii. 7-12. 125 them to adopt names of religious distinction, and to establish among the subjects of that kingdom, all the members of which its founder had declared, stand upon a perfect equality,^ various degrees of ecclesi- astical rank and dignity, a right to legislate for Christ's people in matters of discipline and worship, was ultimately assumed and exercised without either fear or control. To ambitious men, new and nume- rous enticements were thus created "to lord it over God's heritage ;" and in the exercise of their usurped authority, these exalted ecclesiastics were but too successfully educating themselves for introducing, at a future period, the antichristian power " with all de- ceivableness of unrighteousness," and in all its full and imposing splendour.^ As this spirit of innovation and •^See Luke xxii. 24-26 and Mat. xxiii. 3-12. ^ It was not until a form of Christianity was adopted as the state religion of the Roman empire, that this mystery of iniquity (" that wicked one, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his- mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his coming,") was fully revealed. Prior to that period, there were various causes that kept it in check, and hindered the disclosure of its true character and malignant influence. When these causes were taken out of the way, Antichrist, (the man of sin,) in the form of the love and assumption of spiritual power, speedily made his way through the various gradations of ecclesiastical ambition, converting, in his progress, the kingdom of Christ into a secular kingdom, fitted for the ends of clerical rule and rapacity, until, step by step, he ultimately reached the throne of the papal hierarchy. Under the pretence of christianizing Pagans, Christianity itself was, in a short time, paganized, and the foundations laid of a system of wide-spread spiritual tyranny and delusion, under which, in various modified shapes, the spiritual interests of mankind have ever since been struggling. To that usurpation of a right to legislate for Christ's subjects, which is tlie unfailing and distinguishing mark of the antichristian power, under every 126 unchristian ambition made its appearance in the age immediately succeeding that of the apostles, there is, obviously, little importance to be attached to the testimony of the earliest uninspired writers, as it respects our interpretation of the rule of christian duty. So early as the middle of the second century, the ordinances of the gospel, it appears, had not been allowed to remain unpolluted by human tradition ; and even then, various inventions of men had been added to the doctrines and commandments of Christ, as recorded in the apostolic writings. The usages of early antiquity are, nevertheless, matter of much interest, and as they frequently serve to throw some light on New Testament times, their testimony is not undeserving of conside- ration. It is only, indeed as furnishing some degree of presumptive evidence, in proof or disproof of any particular interpretation of scripture, that we con- ceive, they merit regard in any inquiry into the attested rule of christian obedience. When vievved correctly in this light, there is much less importance form ; to that " love of pre-eminence" (the seminal principle of all unchristian usurpation) which betrayed its existence in the apostolic age, and which now is not unfrequently to be met with, in powerful operation, in the heart of not a few professedly independent christian societies ; and to that blending, in religious fellowship, of the subjects of Christ's kingdom, with the men of this world, which has necessarily followed from the unnatural unions formed between Christianity and civil governments, are to be attributed, we apprehend, either directly or indirectly, the whole countless multitude of errors in doctrine, and corruptions in discipline, with which the christian religion has hitherto been so grievously overspread. 127 we apprehend, to be attached to ascertaining* the ex- istence of any ancient usage, than to ascertaining the contrary ; we *mean, the one is, by no means, so cer- tain a test of the divine origin of any rehgious prac- tice, as the other is of its unscriptural character and authority. Chargeable as the first christians unques- tionably were, with a credulous recognition of human inventions, they cannot justly be accused of readily relinquishing any religious custom, they at any time adopted : on the contrary, whenever any usage once obtained a place in the traditions of the church, it was uniformly, without any regard to its origin, treated with a superstitious veneration, and religious- ly transmitted to posterity as of indispensable obliga- tion. Although then, the existence of a religious custom in the second century is no decisive evidence of its apostolic origin, it is difficult to conceive that any important religious observance should have pre- vailed in the times of the apostles> without some trace of it being found in the next and following genera- tions. If the doctrine, for instance, of the transfe- rence to the first day of the week, of the duties of the fourth commandment, had been taught by the apostles, we should naturally expect to find some re- cognition of these duties in the records of christian antiquity. It is surely very improbable, that a weekly observance like this, which interferes so much with the usual arrangements of domestic life, should have been established by the apostles, and wholly 128 relinquished before the close of the second century. Now whether or not it was taught by the apostles, so it is, that of the existence of this Sabbatarian doc- trine, or of the recognition of its duties, there remains no trace in the pages of early ecclesiastical history. In proof of this statement we now propose to adduce a few unquestionable authorities and historical facts, illustrative of the opinions of early antiquity upon the subject. In the writings of the Fathers, (as they are called,) who flourished in the second century, there is no indication of Sunday being viewed by any one at that time, in the light of a holy sabbath. The ac- count given by Justin (who wrote A. D. 150) of the social meetings and practices of the christians of his time, is thus translated by Dr. Kaye. " Afterwards we remind each other of these things, and they who are wealthy assist those who are in need, and we are always together, and over all our offerings we bless the Creator of all things, through his Son Jesus Christ, and through the Holy Spirit. And on the day called Sunday, there is an assembling together of all who dwell in the cities and country ; and the memoirs of the apostles, and the writings of the prophets, are read as long as circumstances permit. Then, when the reader has ceased, the president delivers a discourse, in which he admonishes and exhorts (all present) to the imitation of those good things. Then we all rise together, and pray : and 129 as we before said, prayer being ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president offers prayers in lik6 manner, and thanksgivings, according to his abiUty, and the people express their assent by saying Amen : and the distribution of that, over which the thanksgiving has been pronounced, takes place to each, and each partakes, and a portion is sent to the absent by the deacons. . . . But we meet together on Sunday because it is the first day, in which, God having wrought the necessary change in darkness and matter, made the world : and on this day Jesus Christ our Saviour rose from the dead. For he was crucified on the day before that of Saturn ; and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the Sun, having appeared to the apostles and disciples, he taught them the things which we now submit to your consideration."** It appears from this passage, that the intercourse of christians among each other, continued, in Justin's time to be very great — they were "always together." Their prin- cipal convocation for christian purposes, seems to have been held on Sunday ; and the reason assigned for selecting this day is, that on it, God began the work of creation, and Christ rose from the dead. There is no mention, it is to be observed, of the transference of the sabbath from the seventh day to the first, or of the sanctification of the latter day, in obedience to the prescriptions of the decalogue. Bishop of Lincoln's Account of the Life and Writings of Justin Martyr. — p. 48. S 130 "If to this account from Justin," says an able writer, referring to this passage, " we add, from Tertullian, that Sunday was dedicated to joy, that it was ob- served as a day of festivity, we shall have collected all the information upon the subject which the Fathers of the second century afford. Their writings supply not the slightest information that the Lord's day was observed by them in obedience to any posi- tive divine precept enjoining it, or that the observance of the seventh day, or of one day in seven, was en- joined to our first parents, and through them to all mankind : or, that the sabbatical institutions of the Mosaic law were of any force at all in the christian /church. But they furnish abundant proofs of the opinion, that the institution of the sabbath was given 1 to the Jews only ; that it was not observed by the \ Patriarchs before the law ; that it was utterly abro- gated, together with the other ceremonial appoint- ments of the law, by the introduction of the new and better covenant : and, that the observance of it indicated a reprehensible desire of returning from Christianity to Judaism."' There are various ecclesiastical decrees recorded in the early historians, recommending the observance of Sunday as a religious festival, but in no case that has hitherto been pointed out, is this injunction en- forced by any reference to scriptural authority : on the contrary, it is manifest from several of these i British Critic.— Vol. vi. p. 185. 131 decrees, that the observance of the day was not view- ed, at the period they were issued, as having any de- pendance on the decalogue, or as bearing, in any way, a resemblance to the rigorous prescriptions of the Jewish sabbath. By a decree of the council of Gangres in Paphlagonia, (A. D. 357,) all those are anathematized, who, from notions of devotion, pass the Sunday in bodily mortification and fasting. The practice of abstaining from secular employments on the first day of the week, was condemned by the council of Laodicea (A. D. 364,) as judaizing.'' In the edict of Constantine,' which established the ob- servance of this festival to be the municipal law of the Roman empire, while all judges, townspeople, and " the occupations of all trades," are enjoined to rest *' on the venerable day of the Sun," all persons on the other hand, employed in agriculture, are de- clared to be at full liberty to continue their labours, whenever their affairs might require them to do so. It is obvious that there is nothing in this edict which implies that the observance it enjoins, was regarded as deriving its obligation from a scriptural precept, which it is natural to expect would have been the case, if this opinion had at that period prevailed : See Suiceri Thess. Ecclesiast. voce Sabhaton. Omnes judices, urbanaeque plebes, et cunctarum artium officia venerabili die solis quiescaiit. lluri tamen positi agrorum culturae libere licenterque inser- viant; quoniam frequenter evenit, ut non aptius alio die frumenta sulcis aut vieneae scrobibus mandentur, ne occasione momenti pereat, commoditas coelesti provisione concessa. Dat, Nonis Mart. Crispo II. et Constantino II. Conss. Corp. Jur. Cir. Codicis lib 3 tit 12. 132 regulation appears to have been adopted, purely from considerations of existing expediency, and to have been enforced on no other grounds. After the promulgation of this decree, the obser- vance of Sunday, as a religious festival, became im- mediately, very general; long subsequent to this period, however, the practice of intermitting public labour during the whole of the day, does not appear to have been by any means universally established. It was very customary for the people, after the pub- lic services of religion were concluded, to resume their usual employments. " Paula, a devout lady in Jerome's time, is represented by him, after coming from church on the Lord's day, as sitting down with the virgins and widows attending her, to their daily tasks, which consisted in making gar- ments ; and as doing this on that day for themselves, as well as for others that needed them. By this time, Christianity had got into the throne as well as into the empire. Yet, for all this, the entire sancti- fication of the Lord's day, proceeded slowly ; and, that it was the work of time to bring it to perfection appears from the several steps the church made in her constitution, and from the decrees of emperors and other princes, wherein the prohibitions from servile and civil business, advanced by degrees, from one species to another, till the day had got a consi- derable figure in the world.""" m Morer on the Lord's Day. — p. 235, 236. 133 It is well known, that during the time of the heathen emperors, the christians held their meetings for divine worship, principally on the evening of the day : they were of course naturally led to adopt this custom, from the evening or night being the only time when the people were all disengaged from their ordinary employments. That the first christians did pursue their secular avocations on the first day of the week, is unquestionable, and indeed their doing so was, in a manner, unavoidable. Now, it is de- serving of notice, that although this was their con- stant practice, the necessity they were under to continue to labour, is never complained of as a hard- ship, neither is the practice ever reprehended by any of the early Fathers as a violation of any divine precept, which it is natural to think they would frequently have done, if the sanctification of Sunday by a holy resting from all the business of life, had been recognized at that time, as a christian obliga- tion. The necessity under which many of the first christians were no doubt placed, to engage in secular employments on this day, does not at all serve to explain this circumstance ; for even after the time when Constantine issued his edict, when this necessity no longer existed, the practice of resuming the ordi- nary avocations of life, after the close of public wor- ship, appears to have been quite common, and to have been sanctioned by the Fathers of that age. This practice is countenanced by Jerome, by Chry- 134 sostom, by Augustine, by Gregory Magnus, and others, and is sometimes even recommended as a proper and laudable custom. It is matter of history, that there was a considera- ble number of the Jewish believers of the gospel, who, at the destruction of Jerusalem, refused to relinquish the Mosaic observances to which they had been accustomed : averse, apparently, to read aright that affecting lesson of Providence, they continued to retain their ancient Jewish usages, in conjunction with the profession of the gospel. Though it was the leading design of the apostle Paul in his epistle addressed to these Hebrews, to wean them from their natural attachment to their old Judaism ; and to lead them on to perfection in the knowledge of the gospel, by convincing them of the natural and appointed termination of the Mosaic economy, in the finished work of the Messiah ; notwithstanding too, they had long been in possession of the most pointed and affecting warnings of the fate that hung over their favourite city and temple, all these lessons of instruc- tion and admonition appear to have been lost upon their prej udiced minds. They continued still " zealous of the law," and jealous of every doctrine that appear- ed to disparage the importance of its institutions, or endanger in any way their perpetuity. While, how- ever, a proportion of these Jewish believers continued to labour under these Judaical prejudices and mis- conceptions, there was a considerable number of 135 them, who, when the principal cause of their blind- ness was removed, by the abolition of the temple ser- vice, shortly afterwards wholly relinquished the Jewish ritual, and incorporated themselves with their Gentile brethren. These were the true followers of the apostle, who by their conduct proved that they understood and had benefited by his instructions, and were ready accordingly, when the trial came, to act conformably to that change of circumstances, for the approach of which, it was the main design of his epistle to prepare their minds. The exact number of Jewish believers who acted in this manner, it is impossible now to ascertain. It is certain that a body of Hebrew Christians adhering to the Mosaic ritual, existed at Pella, until the final dispersion of the Jews from Jerusalem in the reign of Adrian. It is supposed, that at that period, the majority of this body finally relinquished their ancient customs, and were admitted, on doing so, into the immunities of the newly formed colony of Elia, from which all Jews were excluded. The residue who still persisted in their tenacity to the law of Moses, withdrew into that part of Palestine called Perea, and there established a peculiar church of their own, in which the ceremonial law was retain- ed in all its ancient rigour. The rites instituted by Moses, they maintained to be still obligatory on all christians of the Hebrew race ; those who were >; 136 of a different origin, they exempted from their obHgation.'* Of those Hebrews who conformed to the regular order and discipUne of the cathoHc body of behevers, there appears to have been a considerable number who still continued to pay some regard to a few of the venerated practices of their ancestors. Of all their old usages, the weekly sabbath seems to have been that which these persons found the greatest difficulty in relinquishing. Through the influence of their example in continuing to pay a respect to the seventh day, and not improbably owing to their frequent justification of their conduct in doing so, and recommendation of the practice to others, the partial observance of the sabbath, ultimately be- came very general among several of the Eastern churches, in addition to, and in conjunction with, the celebration of the weekly festival of Sunday. In this way arose the ancient Sabbatarians, a body, it is well known, of very considerable importance in respect both to numbers and influence, during the greater part of the third and the early part of the next century. Socrates, the historian, states that with the exception of Rome and Alexandria, all other churches " These Judaical christians, though inconsiderable as regarded numbers, were divided' into two sects, the Nazarenes and the Ebionites. Of these, the former appear to have been incomparably the more respectable. Both gradually dwindled into insignificance about the beginning of the fourth century. — See Mosheim's Commentaries, VidalVs Trans. Vol ii. p. 193. 137 devoted Saturday as well as Sunday to religious pur- ^ poses. It was their practice to sabbatize on Satur- day, and to celebrate Sunday as a day of rejoicing and festivity. While, however, in some places, a respect was thus generally paid to both of these days, the judaizing practice of observing • Saturday was, by the leading churches, expressly condemned, and all the doctrines connected with it, stedfastly resisted. Among the general body of believers, it seems to have been the prevailing doctrine, that the Mosaic institution was, as a whole, entirely abolished. In the writings of the earliest and most esteemed of the Fathers, the sabbath is uniformly spoken of as an integral part of the Jewish constitution. "All its ordinances," says Justin, " its sacrifices, its sahhath, the prohibitions of certain kinds of food, were design- ed to counteract the inveterate tendency of the Jews to fall into idolatry."** The view most generally taken of the sabbatical institution, by the christian writers of the two following centuries, seems to have been, that it was purely an ordinance of the Mosaic economy, which had been wholly superseded, having naturally terminated in the christian dispensation : they contended, that instead of being continued under the gospel, or transferred to any new day, it had been succeeded by the whole life of a christian believer, of the spiritual rest and holiness enjoyed by whom it had, under the law, been an appointed type. Bishop of Lincoln's Justin Martyr. — p. 22. T 138 On the supposition of the prevalence during the third and fourth centuries of the modern Sabbatarian doctrine, it seems altogether unaccountable, that when the protracted controversy which took place on this subject was going forward, no one thought of advancing the obvious and silencing argument, that if it were granted, that Sunday was the appointed substitute of the old sabbath, it necessarily followed, that the observance of the seventh day, was entirely superseded. It is natural to think, that if this doc- trine had been then recognized, it would, by both parties, have been regarded as forming the hinge on which the whole controversy turned. The question at issue at that time, however, was plainly, not at all the religious character of the first day of the week : that its observance, as a festival of the church, was a lauda- ble custom, seems to have been on all hands admitted : the notion that its observance as a holy sabbath was obligatory in obedience to the prescriptions of the de- calogue, no one seems to have ever once broached. It is obvious, that the only day then known by the de- signation the sabbath, was Saturday, and the sole question in debate was, whether a respect ought still to be paid to it under the gospel. It is not to be doubted that had the modern notion of the transference of the \ weekly sabbath from the seventh day to the first, been entertained by the opponents of these ancient Sabbatarians, or had this doctrine been regarded, at that time, as capable of being maintained on scriptural 139 grounds, it would readily have been brought forward as an argument obviously conclusive of the whole contro- versy. The circumstance of this view of the subject having never been taken by any one, or adduced on either side as having any bearing on the question, furnishes an indication, we apprehend, of a very une- quivocal nature, that the christians of that age were total strangers to the modern doctrine. The Sabbatarian controversy appears to have been very little agitated subsequent to the close of the third century; and, very shortly after the period when Constantine issued his edict enjoining the general observance of Sunday throughout the Roman empire, the party that had contended for the observance of the seventh day, dwindled into insignificance. The ob- servance of Sunday as a public festival, during which all business, with the exception of rural employ- ments, was intermitted, came to be more and more generally established, ever after- this time, through- out both the Greek and the Latin churches. There is no evidence, however, that either at this, or at a period much later, the observance was viewed as deriving any obligation from the fourth command- ment : it seems to have been regarded as an insti- tution corresponding in nature with Christmas, Good Friday, and other festivals of ^the church ; and, as resting, with them, on the grounds of ecclesiastical authority and tradition. " Thus do we see," says the learned Heylin, *'upon what grounds the Lord's 140 day stands ; on custom first, and voluntary consecra- tion of it to religious meetings : that custom conti- nued by the authority of the church of God, which tacitly approved the same ; and finally confirmed and ratified by christian princes throughout their empires." " It was left to God's people to pitch on the first day of the week, or any other, as the public use might require ; for there was no divine command that it particularly should be sanctified, as there was concerning the Jewish sabbath. And though this day was taken up and made a day of meeting in the congregation for religious exercises, yet for three hundred years there was neither law to bind them to it, nor any rest from labour, or from worldly business required upon it. And when it seemed good unto christian princes to lay restraints upon their people, yet at first it was not general, but only this, that certain men in certain places, should lay aside their ordinary works to attend to God's service in the church ; those engaged in employments that were most toilsome, and most repugnant to the true nature of a sabbath, being allowed to follow and pursue their labours, because most necessary to the common- wealth. And in following times, when the princes and prelates endeavoured to restrain them from that also, it was not brought about without much strug- gling and opposition of the people ; more than a thousand years being past, after Christ's ascension. 141 before the Lord's day had attained that state in which it now standeth. And being brought to that state, it doth not stand so firmly, but that those powers which raised it up, may take it lower if they please, yea take it quite away as to the time, and settle it on any other day, as to them seems best." In the long interval between the rise of the papal hierarchy and the reformation, there remain no traces of the existence of the modern Sabbatarian doctrine. " In all this time" says the same writer, after an elaborate review of the ecclesiastical history of these, and the preceding centuries, "in twelve hundred , years, we have found no sabbath." It is well known, that although Sunday has all along been cele- j brated in the Roman Catholic [church as a weekly I festival, the doctrine of a weekly sabbath has, at no \ time, been a tenet of Romanism. The strict manner \ of keeping Sunday, which at present prevails in this country, cannot indeed, so far as we know, be traced farther back than the close of the sixteenth, or thej/ commencement of the next century. It is deserving^ of remark, that the rigorous practice introduced by the Puritans about that time, was plainly felt by the bulk of the people to be a very disagreeable innovation on their former privileges : so great indeed, was the grievance and general dissatisfaction created by it in some places, that the northern coun- ties found it necessary to petition the government on the subject. It is manifest that the object of the 142 celebrated book of sports, which James I. and Charles I. directed to be proclaimed, was not, as some have erroneously represented, to introduce a new and more lax manner of spending the Sundays than had formerly been allowed by the laws of the country, but simply to counteract, by sanctioning- and encouraging the people in the maintenance of their accustomed enjoyments, the growing influence of the Puritan party. The early reformers appear to have regarded the observance of Sunday as being simply an institution of human origin, and as obligatory on no other ground than its expediency for purposes of religious instruction and worship. There is no indication in their writings of their holding it to be a divine ordi- nance : on the contrary, it was the practice of Calvin and others, to reprehend the observance of particular days as an unchristian superstition.^ It is matter of history that these views were entertained by both the '' A Christianrs ergo abesse debet superstitiosa dieium observatio : &c. Instit, Christ, chap. viii. sect. 31. Beza, much to the same purpose states, that though the custom of christians assembling on the Lord's day, was a useful tradition of the church, yet the practice of a total abstinence from labour on it, was not to be commended ; " for this practice" says he, " does not so much abolish Judaism, as put it off, and change it to another day." " There being no cessation of work required on the Lord's day, as was observed by the Jews on the sabbath," he thought that there was great danger of " this practice, (which was first brought in by Constan- tine with a good intent, that men, by being free from their worldly business, might give themselves to hear God's word,) degenerating into downright Judaism." 143 Lutheran and Calvinistic bodies on the continent,'' and also by the founders of the reformed church in this country. The opinions of Cranmer upon the subject, have already been referred to. '' And here note, good children," says his Catechism formerly quoted, " that the Jews in the Old Testament were commanded to keep the sabbath day, and they obser- ved it every seventh day, called the sabbet or Satter- day. But we christian men in the New Testament are not bound to such commandments of Moses' law, concerning difference of times, days, and meats, but have liberty and freedom to use other days for our sabbath days, thereon to hear the word of God and keep an holy rest." That these views were not peculiar to Cranmer, but were common to the whole English church, is manifest from the royal injunctions of 1547 and 1559, compared with an act passed 1552. In 1547 Edward VI. thus directed the clergy : — " All parsons, vicars, and curates, shall teach and declare unto their parishion- ers, that they may, with a safe and quiet conscience, in the time of harvest labour upon the holy and festi- val days, and save that which God hath sent. And q The reader who wishes to satisfy himself of tlie views entertained of the sabbath by the leading divines at the period of the Reformation, is referred to Milton's Treatise on Christian Doctrine, translated by Sumner ; where will be found quotations from the respective works of Bucer, Musculus, Ursinus, and Gomarus, expressive of the disbelief on the part of every one of these learned writers of any sabbatical law under the gospel. 144 if for any scrupulosity or grudge of conscience, men should superstitiously abstain from working upon those days, that they should grievously offend and displease God." The festival days mentioned, included, it is well known, all Sundays in the year. These directions were adopted by Elizabeth in 1559, adding merely to the words '' quiet conscience," " after their common prayer." The act of 1552 declar- /ed it " lawful for every husbandman, labourer, fisher- ; man, &c. upon the holy days aforesaid, in harvest time, or any other time in the year, when necessity shall require, to labour, ride, fish, or work any kind of work, at their free wills and pleasure." It was shortly after this, that the doctrine, that the prescriptions of the fourth commandment have been transferred to the first day of the week, was introduced into this country. It has been traced to a Dr. Bound, who published a book upon the subject in the year 1594. In this work he maintained *^that where all other things in the Jewish church were so changed, that they were clean taken away, the day the sabbath was so changed, that it still remaineth : that there is great reason why we christians should f take ourselves as strictly bound to rest upon the Lord's day, as the Jews were upon the sabbath ; for being one of the moral commandments, it bindeth as well as they, being all of equal authority.""" This new ' Sabbath Doctrine, p. 91. — Cited by Heylin. 145 doctrine was for a long time strenuously opposed by 1 the leading divines of the English church : it was I warmly contended for however, by the Puritans, '; and shortly became one of the most distinguishing / tenets of that party/ T Proceeding on the assumption that the fourtl^J commandment is necessarily of perpetual obligation, the Puritan preachers, with an imposing confidence j maintained, that the observance of a weekly sabbatli I formed an important and essential part of christian obedience. By what authority the prescriptions of this commandment have been transferred from the seventh day to the first, was a query to which they do not seem to have thought they were called upon to furnish an answer. Their own assertion, that this transference had actually taken place, appears to have been received then, as it has been received by multitudes since,' as a proper substitute for the only authority by which an alteration of this kind can ever warrantably be made, in a positive precept of heaven. • The controversy between the two parties in the church, respecting the sab- bath, was evidently begun much earlier than 1594. Mr. Strype informs us, that the Puritans denounced their rigorous persecutor, Bishop Aylmer, who became Bishop of London in 157fi,as " a defender of the breach of the sabbath," because he used to play at bowls on that day. " Indeed," adds Mr. Strype, "it was the general custom, both at Geneva, and in all other places where Protes- tants inhabited, after the service of the Lord's day was over, to refresh them- selves with bowling, walking abroad, or other innocent recreations, and the Bishop followed that which, in his travels abroad, he had seen ordinarily practised among them." — Life of Aylmer, (1701) p. 25. Sec Notes to Burton's Diary. Vol. ii. p. 267. U 146 The rapid difFasion, and ultimate general and per- manent adoption of this Judaical notion is, doubtless, one of the most singular facts in the whole compass of modern ecclesiastical history. At first view, indeed, it appears wholly unaccountable, how a fig- ment' like this should ever have obtained a footing in the world. It is unquestionable, that in a very short time from its being first broached, among the religious classes in England it was almost univer- sally recognized as an indispensable christian obliga- tion ; and it has continued, it is well known, to be confidently regarded in the same light, by nearly all the various religious denominations which have sprung up in this country, since that period. As it is usual with many of the advocates of this doctrine, to refuse to admit that it was introduced by the Puritans at the period referred to ; and, as its introduction at that, or any other time, seems to be regarded by some persons as a circumstance so wholly unaccount- able and improbable, as of itself, to be almost tanta- mount to a proof of the practice having been transmitted from the apostolic age; it will be requisite to inquire somewhat particularly into the causes that led to its rise and rapid diffusion. The peculiar nature of some of the leading causes which favoured ' It was customary with some of the Calvuiistic divines of the United Provin- ces, to designate " the doctrine of the sabbath," maintained by their Puritan friends in this country, Figmcntum AngUcanum. 147 the progress of the modern Sabbatarian doctrine, we now accordingly propose briefly to examine. This tenet, it is to be observed, formed an essen- tial branch of a connected scheme of religious doc- trine and discipline, constructed in adaptation to the Puritan plan of " a new reformation ;" and it is im- possible to conceive correctly of the circumstances connected with the general adoption of the obser- vance, without an examination of the principles on which this Puritan scheme was founded. Every in- novation like that of the observance of a weekly sabbath, naturally appears, at first view, very remark- able and unaccountable : we apprehend, however, that if the religious history of that period be carefully examined, our surprise in this case, will be greatly lessened, if not altogether removed. It was the common misfortune of that age, that the relation in which Christianity stands to the king- doms of this world, and the line of demarcation which divides the separate provinces of divine and human legislation, were, by no class, or sect, or party, correctly understood. In the view of all the leading men of that time, the object of civil government was not merely to afford protection to life and property, and to promote the temporal welfare of the commu- nity ; their notion of the duty which devolved on civil rulers, combined, with purposes of this nature, the maintenance of a proper and useful system of puhVic religious xvorship and instruction. This opinion 148 appears to have been common to all the early Puri- tans, whether Episcopalian or Presbyterian : it was by the latter, however, that it was in the most strict and rigid sense contended for, and to the system of ecclesiastical government, known by this designation, most of the leading Puritans, it is well known, secretly inclined. With these Presbyterian divines, the revi- val of the Judaical observance of a weekly sabbath seems to have originated : and it must be allowed, the institution was peculiarly adapted to that plan of national Christianity, which they aimed at ultimately establishing. The plan in question embraced a general scheme of civil and religious polity, the leading design of which, so far as religion was concerned, was to maintain a uni- form system of public worship and religious profession, under which, by the suppression of every appearance of error, whether in doctrine or discipline, every relic of Popish superstition, and shadow of heresy of every kind, might be banished out of the land. On the principles upon which this scheme was constructed, they were naturally led to maintain the lawfulness of employing coercive measures, in propagating and es- tablishing what they called the true religion ; and accordingly, they felt no scruples in proposing to enforce their spiritual sentences by the sword of the civil magistracy. Although many of their own party had suffered severely under the iron rule of a despotic government, and had even fallen martyrs in the 149 rightful cause of resistance to its oppressive and ini- quitous measures, they were quite prepared to inflict a similar system of civil and spiritual tyranny on all who, in matters of religion, ventured to differ from them, so soon as they could attain the object of their pursuit, namely, the possession of worldly influ- ence and dominion. The right of civil rulers to use coercive measures in accomplishing their religious projects, seems indeed throughout the greater part of the seventeenth centu- ry, to have been by none of the leading parties," ever called in question. The religious bodies in England and in Scotland, which suffered so severely under the oppressive measures of the Stuart dynasty, appear never to have thought of appealing against the injus- tice of inflicting civil penalties on men, for the mainte- nance of the sacred rights of conscience. The leading grievance of which they constantly complained was, that the true religmi, (that is, the system of religious profession which they themselves had embraced,) instead of being nourished and protected, as they thought it ought to have been, was wickedly opposed and trodden under foot, while popish and prelatical errors were allowed to be propagated and professed, with open liberty and impunity. These men had been tutored in the belief that the cause of Christian- ity could be advanced and supported only by the civil sword being enlisted on its side : their leading " The Brownists, and other sects, which ultimatelj' came into notice, are of course not here referred to. 150 aim accordingly, was to acquire such a sway over the secular power, as would procure the removal of every part of the existing religious system that, in their view, was unscriptural and corrupt, and ensure the estahlishment of a purified and perfect system of national religious profession in its place. This favourite notion, of a pure and perfect system of national religious polity, seems to have formed an impervious veil over their minds, which effectually blinded them from the perception of the spiritual character of the gospel dispensation. It never ap- pears to have occurred to these zealous '^ new refor- mers" that, as the kingdom of Christ is not of this world, it stands perfectly distinct from all earthly governments, and cannot possibly be supported by those compulsory enactments, which are the founda- tion of the civil power. So enamoured were they of their perfect platform of Presbyterian doctrine, wor- ship, and discipline, that it is probable, had the simple truth been stated to them, that as Christianity was not concerned with political matters, so human governments, on the other hand, were not concerned with men's religious opinions, but simply with their external conduct, it would have immediately been condemned as an impious heresy, and as involving consequences that were little better than downright Atheism. Their notion was, that the civil and ecclesiastical authorities combined, constituted one national chris- tian corporation, on which it devolved to suppress, by 151 the execution of efficient laws, all heresy and false worship. The maintenance of such a uniformity of publicf religious profession as would secure the spiritual welfare of the people, was, in their view, an object infinitely paramount to all considerations relative to the temporal well-being of society. In adaptation to this scheme of government accordingly, and in the expectation of its ultimate realization, their plans of religious reformation were all laid, and in conformity with it, the whole details of their scho- lastic system of divinity, were carefully, and cer- tainly with considerable consistency, constructed. There being, however, not the shadow of a warrant in any part of the New Testament, for uniting in this manner "the kingdom of heaven" with the political constitutions of this world, these men, who, it is to be kept in mind, professed in all their plans rigidly to adhere to scriptural precept and example, were obliged to revert to the state of things which existed under the Mosaic dispensation ; and there they discovered, as they imagined, a divine warrant for the scheme they had devised. That the Jewish commonwealth constitutes the divinely appointed model, on which all christian nations ought to be formed, was laid down as the fundamental principle on which their whole fabric of civil and ecclesiastical polity was to be reared. This adopted model fur- nished, in their view, an authoritative precedent for the use of coercive measures in furthering the 152 interests of that kingdom, of which its founder has emphatically said, " my kingdom is not of this world : if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight ; but my kingdom is not from hence :" and it furnished at the same time a precedent of its kind, for the unnatural and baneful practice of uniting the subjects of Christ's kingdom with the men of this world, in the profession of the gospel of salvation. That every nation ought to be formed into a national church, and that the whole population ought to be made to conform to the established form of public worship, were assumed as first principles which ad- mitted of no dispute. As all the Jewish people were introduced into the national covenant in virtue of their natural birth, irrespective of personal character, and were thus all made members of the Jewish church, whether they were spiritual worshippers of Jehovah or not ; it was confidently inferred, that all persons born in a country professing the true religion, were members of " the visible church" of Christ, and entitled to partake of all its outward seals and privileges, irrespective of any evidence of personal Christianity. The figment of a foederal holiness, derived from their parental connexion with this worldly corporation, which they dignified with the designation, " the visible church," was thus constituted the ground on which individuals were re- cognized as subjects of that kingdom, all whose members, the writers of the New Testament state. 153 are " born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."" Because the Kings of Israel possessed a lawful authority to suppress all idolatry and false worship throughout the land of Canaan, it was maintained, that the strict suppression of all Popish superstition " This notion of " a federal holiness," though strenuously contended for by the primitive Presbyterians, has, among their modern successors, fallen into general desuetude. Of the various religious bodies known at present by the term Presbyterian, there appears indeed to be scarcely one that has not, less or more, departed from the principles on which their predecessors constructed and founded the original system. The modern Socinians or Priestleyans, whom it is usual sometimes to designate " the English Presbyterians," hold, it is well known, scarcely one opinion in common with their nonconformist ancestors : having no presbyteries, or ecclesiastical courts of review of any kind, (the distin- guishing principles ofPresbyterianism,) they obviously retain no claim whatever to the designation. Even in Scotland, where the Presbyterian system of church go- vernment still prevails, it is now usual for the advocates of the system to abandon the scriptural ground which was so conscientiously taken up by its founders, and to rest its defence on considerations of expediency. In thus abandoning the doctrine of " a foederal holiness," and some other original principles, on which alone, various of the religious practices which they still retain, can, with any colour of reason, be maintained, they expose themselves to the charge of a very glaring inconsistency. The only consistent and pure Presbyterians since the Revolution, appear to be the Covenanters, known we believe in Scotland by the appellation "the reformed Presbytery." Professing still to adhere to the solemn league and covenant, agreed to by the nation previous to the restoration in which popery and prelacy were abjured ; they also, with consistency, adhere to the whole systerij of worship, doctrine and discipline approved of by the Long Parliament, and Westminster Assembly. It has always appeared to us, that this small but respectable body, are the only consistent advocates of systems of national Christianity on professed scriptu- ral grounds. Though dissenters from the religious establishment at present ex- isting in Scotland, their dissent, it is well known, is founded not on any objec- tions to an alliance between the church and state, but to an alliance between the church and an uncovenanted king and government. X 154 and modern heresies that appeared within their terri- torial jurisdiction, was the bounden duty of every christian government. Thus, under the guise of scriptural support, derived from the abrogated eco- nomy of Moses, did these intolerant ecclesiastics proceed, with great show of scriptural arguments, and with abundance of express precepts and pointed pre- cedents, to attain the object they had in view, namely, the establishment of the notable scheme of a national uniformity of religious profession, and the extirpation of all heretics — the extirpation, in other words, of all who dared to differ from them in religious opinion, or who attempted to exercise man's unalienable right of worshipping his Maker acccording to the dictates of his own conscience/ ' It is scarcely requisite, we presume, to state, (and assuredly to every one who, unfettered by human systems has studied for himself the writings of the apostle Paul, it must be altogether superfluous,) that there exists no such analogy between the Old and New Testament state of things, as to warrant the assump- tion on which, the Puritans and the numerous other advocates of systems of national Christianity, (who propose to model the Christian on the plan of the Jewish church,) throughout their whole reasonings proceed. In Paul's epistles, and, indeed, in various other parts of the New Testament writings, the Mosaic economy and the gospel dispensation, instead of being represented as correspond- ing in nature, are designedly and strikingly contrasted. " The law was given by i\Ioses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." "Moses was faithful in all the house of God as a servant, but Christ as a Soil over his own house." It is no doubt true, there was a church or congregation of God's people under the Old Testament state of things, as certainly as there is one under the New: it is to be remembered however, that though the Jews in a certain sense, may correctly enough be said to have constituted God's church under the old covenant, the kingdom of Israel differed from the kingdom of Christ as widely as the figure does from the reality, as the flesh does from the spirit, as earth from heaven. 155 It is obvious, that the institution of a weekly sab- bath, being essentially a national ordinance, harmo- The mere circumstance of the Jews, as well as the disciples of Christ, being sometimes designated the church of God, (that is, a people called out from others, and formed into a congregation,) does not, surely, of itself render it warrantable to deduce inferences from the one state of things and apply them to the other. Before these inferences can be admitted to be valid, it will be neces- sary to show, not only that there is a sameness of sound between the expressions the Jewish church and the Christian church, the kingdom of David and the kingdom of Christ ; but also, that there is a sufficient correspondence in their respective scriptural significations so as to constitute an analogy, not only in the names they bear, but in the things these names are designed to express. On the gross fallacy, however, of confounding the sound of these and similar ex- pressions, with their appropriate and distinct significations, the scriptural argu- ment in support of ecclesiastical establishments, has its whole foundation. Instead of these expressions being used by the inspired writers to describe sys- tems of correspondent nature and intention, they are employed to designate two states of things which are not only materially diiferent, but which actually form a perfect contrast. Under the former, Jehovah, the God of Israel took the whole people into a national covenant, and gave them a peculiar system of reli- gious ordinances and civil polity, adapted to their theocratic government, which served at once to keep them separate from all other nations, and to preserve alive their remembrance and expectation of that Messiah, of whom they were ultimately to become the progenitors. When Christ-came, this national covenant which had formed a partition wall, keeping Jew and Gentile asunder, was broken down, and the whole Mosaic ritual brought to its appointed end. The old covenant thus served, during the period of its existence, important purposes, peculiar to the then existing stage of the progress of the scheme of redemption ; and terminated in introducing a new and better covenant, founded on better promises, and ratified by the death of that Messiah, whose coming it had prefi- gured and foretold. The kingdom of Israel which thus ushered in the kingdom of heaven, was earthly in its nature, and, like all other kingdoms of this world, was necessarily founded on force : as it had an earthly throne and earthly sub- jects, so had it earthly laws, which were enforced by physical coercion. Christ's kingdom on the other hand, is essentially spiritual in its nature j its dependence is in no degree enforce, but solely on the influence of " the truth" on men's understandings and consciences. It is established, not by human laws, but by the death and resurrection of Jesus the true Messiah, and its subjects are 156 nized completely with this proposed plan of national religious uniformity. It is obvious too, that in adopting the Judaical decalogue as the rule of chris- tian duty, and in proposing to enforce the strict observance of the prescriptions of the fourth com- mandment on the whole population, they were not only acting consistently with their own principles, but were, at the same time, introducing a practice peculiarly adapted to promote and perpetuate that ecclesiastical domination, which they seem confidently to have expected they would, in the end, succeed in establishing. y^ For the reception of this sabbatical doctrine, the people, it is to be kept in mind, were in a considera- ble measure prepared, by having previously been accustomed to pay a religious respect to Sunday as a festival of the church. The change that took place notborn such, but are all persuaded to become citizens by their minds being en- lightened to discern that divine evidence by which the gospel of salvation is attested. Its throne is no longer in any earthly Jerusalem, but in the Jerusalem that is above; for there it is, that the risen Saviour sits, swaying the sceptre of love over the hearts of a willing people. The laws of this kingdom are not de- signed for national communities like the Jews, but for those individuals only in every nation, who, by believing the gospel, have been "born again," and have been thus taught to render to these laws a willing obedience, the only obedience the government recognizes. Thus, from its entire spirituality of nature ; — from the spiritual character of its subjects, from the spiritual obedience its laws require, as well as from the spiritual influence which alone it employs in procuring that obedience, this kingdom is essentially distinct, and wholly separate from the kingdom of Israel, and also from all the kingdoms of this world. All reasoning, it is manifest, which confounds things thus fundamentally different, must ne- cessarily be fallacious and futile. 157 was, indeed, not so much in the practice of the people, as in the grounds on which their practice as a religious obligation, was made to rest. The obser- vance of the day, as a religious holiday, as well as the observance of all the other festivals of the church, had previously been regarded as resting on ecclesiastical tradition and authority : from this ground the Presbyterian divines removed the custom, and attempted to place it on the basis of scriptural au- thority, insisting that the sanctification of the whole day to religious purposes, was the express command of heaven. The respect that previously had been paid to the day as a festival of the church was thus converted into the sanctification of a weekly sabbath, in obedi- ence to the prescriptions of the decalogue. The change which was in this way made in the character of the observance, was introduced, it is probable, very gradually, and at first perhaps, was not even noticed as being any material innovation on the existing practice. The more strict professors of religion, who, it is to be remembered, were all attached to the Puritan preachers, had already been accustomed to observe Sunday and the other holidays and festivals, with pecuhar strictness and solemnity; \ much in the same way as we see Christmas, Good Friday, and similar seasons, kept by the more scru- pulous members of the church of England at the present time. As this strict and devout manner of keeping this weekly festival, would be generally 158 viewed as an evidence of personal piety, and as fa- vourable to the interests of public religion, it is very probable, that in changing the ground of the obliga- tion from ecclesiastical authority to a divine precept, the Puritan divines imagined they were doing the cause of Christianity an important service. Whether, indeed, they were influenced purely by this motive, or, as has sometimes been alleged, by considerations of a more worldly and selfish nature, it is difficult now, perhaps, satisfactorily to decide : certain it is, that the alteration which took place proved highly advantageous to the interests of their own party. The strict manner of observing the sabbath, which they inculcated on the people, harmonized entirely with the austere notions of religious discipline, which at that time were so popular among the religious classes, and came soon to be regarded as a test of men's attachment to what was then called " the cause of vital godliness." Coming forward under this imposing guise, the doctrine readily insinuated itself into the confidence of the religious part of the com- munity, and in a very short time, the conscientious observance of the sahhath day, was generally recog- nized among all the adherents of the Puritan preachers as an important branch of practical piety. " Jewish and Rabbinical though this doctrine were," says one of their contemporaries, " it carried a fair face and shew of piety, at least in the face of the common people : and such who stood not to examine 159 the true grounds thereof, but took it up on the appearance : such who did judge thereof, not by the workmanship of the stuff, but the gloss and colour. In which it is most strange to see, how suddenly men were induced not only to give way unto it, but with- out more ado to abet the same ; till, in the end, and that in a very little time, it grew the most bewitching error, the most popular deceit, that had been ever set on foot in the church of England." "And verily I per- suade myself," continues this writer, " that many an honest and well meaning man, both of the clergy and of the laity, either because of the appearance of the thing itself, or out of some opinion of those men, who endeavoured to promote it, became exceedingly affected towards the same, as taking it to be a doc- trine sent down from heaven for the increase of piety, so easily did they believe it, and grew, at last, so strongly possessed therewith, that in the end, they would not willing be persuaded toconceive otherwise thereof, than at first they did ; or think they swal- lowed down the hook when they took the bait. An hook, indeed which had so fastened them to those men who love to fish in troubled waters, that by this artifice, there was no small hope conceived amongst them, to fortifie their side, and make good that cause which, till this trim deceit was thought of, was almost grown desperate. "^ This representation of Heylin's, is, perhaps, in ^ Heylin's History of the Sabbath.— Part II. Chap. 8. 160 some degree, exaggerated ; it is little to be doubted, however, but that it is substantially correct. It is cer- tain that the Sabbatarian doctrine became very service- able in strengthening the hands of the " new reform- ers ;" for as the rigorous observance of the Sunday, which was then becoming prevalent, was discounte- nanced by the other party in the church, the people, on account of this opposition, became more and more decidedly attached to the Puritan preachers, as being, in their view, the only supporters of the cause of seri- ous piety. A conscientious observance of the duties of the sabbath came shortly indeed to be recognized as a distinguishing evidence of personal religion, and formed one of those peculiarities of behaviour, from which the Puritans derived their religious designa- tion. In this way the doctrine took deep root in the rehgious feelings of the people. The notion of the perpetuity of the sabbath, harmonized not more with those Judaical views of Christianity which were at that time prevalent, than a compliance with its rigorous prescriptions did, with the austere temper of the age. The doctrine thus rapidly became on all sides popular, and was in a short time universally recog- nized, both by preachers and people, as an essential part of practical religion. As, with all those persons who conscientiously re- cognized this obligation, the sanctification of the sabbath became necessarily an indication of the regard they felt for divine authority, it naturally 161 followed, that the most pious of every religious com- \ munity, were distinguished as strict observers of its \ prescriptions ; and in this manner the duty came ul- timately to be associated with sanctity of character, with the cause of vital piety. To this supposed necessary connexion between the observance of the sabbath, and practical personal religion, the trans- mission of the Puritan doctrine to nearly all the various religious denominations, at present in this country, and the unsuspecting confidence with which it has, by all parties, been received, seems to be, in a great measure, owing. By being constantly viewed in this important light, people's attention has been directed almost exclusively to the proper obser- vance of its duties ; the grounds on which their obligation are supposed to rest, being regarded as immovably established, have, in comparatively few cases, been examined or understood. It has confidently been assumed, that the interests of christian piety, and the observance of the sabbath are so identified, that the one cannot survive without the other. Viewed constantly in this light, the doc- trine has usually been acquiesced in without much thought or inquiry, and has thus been transmitted from one generation to another, as an established and indisputable christian obligation. The preceding reference to the testimony of eccle- siastical history, has not been made, it may be proper to state, with any view of representing the opinions Y 1G2 and practices of former ages, as affording the smallest degree of evidence upon this subject, of an autliori- tative nature. The historical facts that have been brought forward, form however, it is obvious, a very strong connecting chain of corroborative testimony, in support of the conclusion which was formerly drawn from an examination of the authoritative evi- dence of the inspired writers. On the single ques- tion, whether or not the sabbatical institution was viewed by the apostles as terminating with the Mosaic economy, the controversy concerning the existing obligation of the sabbath, it is to be borne in mind, wholly hinges. That the apostles regarded the institution as retaining no obligation on the sub- jects of the new covenant, has been made manifest, we trust, by scriptural proofs, alike incontrovertible and decisive : now with this conclusion, it is to be observed, the testimony of early antiquity is in entire accordance. With the supposition, on the other hand, on which the modern Sabbatarian doc- trine is founded, the facts wliich stand upon his- torical record, appear to be wholly irreconcilable. If the sabbath had been transferred to christians at the resurrection, its duties must doubtless have been recognized and observed during the first cen- turies : of any recognition of these duties, however, there remains no trace in the records of early antiquity. It certainly appears extremely impro- bable that this supposed transference of the insti- 163 tution, from the seventh day to the first, should have been made by the apostles, and yet that the duties implied in this authoritative alteration, should have remained unrecognized, until their conjectural discovery by a few Judaizing'^ divines in the close of the sixteenth century. In applying this epithet to the Presbyterian divines of that time, and in freely expressing our dissent from tlie system of ecclesiastical polity which they aimed at establishing, we may be allowed to disclaim all intention of wishing to depreciate the character of those religious men, who, during the former part of the seventeenth century, so manfully maintained their rights as Englishmen, in resisting the tyrannnical measures of the court party. The English Puritans, viewing them as a whole body, (comprehending Episcopalians, Presby- terians, and ultimately Independents,) must stand for ever high in the esteem of all who have at heart the cause of civil and religious freedom : by their patri- otic conduct, they fairly brought to light the cause of truth and liberty as the common cause of mankind, and bequeathed it to the safe care and keeping of future generations. " Many, no doubt who obtained, an undue ascendancy among them, in the turbulent days of Charles I.," says Scott, the commentator,* " and even before that time, were factious, ambitious hypocrites ; but I must think that the tree of liberty, sober and legitimate liberty, civil and religious, under the shadow of which, we in the Establishment, as well as others, repose in peace, and the fruit of which we gather, was planted by the Puritans, and watered, if not by their blood, at least by their tears and sorrows. Yet it is the modern fashion to feed delightfully on the fruit, and then revile, if not curse, those who planted and watered it." The senseless fashion of ridiculing and traducing these men, is, even among churchmen, it is to be hoped, coming to a close. i^Iuch that is valuable in the institutions of this country, and in the character of its people, is doubtless to be traced to that spirit of independence, and to those habits of indus- trious application, by which the religious classes in England were, at that time, so favourably distinguished. It is quite possible, however, to be duly sensible of the benefits which these men have conferred on the cause of civil and religious freedom, without shutting our eyes to the evils of that intolerant system of national religion, which the * Rev. Thos. Scott's Letters to the Rev. P. Wroe, on tlie Evils of separation.— p. 2. 164 Presbyterian party wished to introduce. " I disliked the course of some of the more rigid of them," says Baxter, who was himself partial to the system," that drew near to the way of prelacy, by grasping at a kind of secular power, not using it themselves, but binding the magistrates to confiscate or imprison men, merely because they were excommunicated, and so corrupting the true discipline of the church, and turning the communion of saints into the communion of the multitude, that must keep in the church against their wills, for fear of being un- done in the world. Whereas, a man whose conscience cannot feel a just excom- munication, unless it be backed with confiscation or imprisonment, is no fitter to be a member of a christian church, than a corpse is to be a member of a corporation. They corrupt the discipline of Christ by mixing it with secular force ; and they reproach the keys, or ministerial power, as if it were not worth a straw, unless the magistrate's sword enforce it ; and worst of all, they corrupt the church by forcing in the rabble of the unfit and unwilling, and thereby tempt many godly christians to schisms, and dangerous separations."* It is well known, that it was usual with some of the most celebrated of these Presbyterian divines, openly to contend that the suppression of ' schismatics' was the bounden duty of the magistrate, and to represent toleration as the flood-gate which was to let in all manner of innovation and danger; as the hydra of schism and heresy, and of all imaginable evils. It was with a view to confute the ' monstrous imagination' of religious liberty, that Edwards wrote his ' Gangrena,' and his ' Casting down of the last and strongest hold of Satan, or a Treatise against Toleration.' As a specimen of the contents of these works, the following may suffice. — " A toleration is the grand design of the devil, his masterpiece, and chief engine he works by at this time, to uphold his tottering kingdom. It is the most compendious, ready, sure way to destroy all religion, lay all waste, and bring in all evil. It is a most transcendant Catholic and fundamental evil for this kingdom, of any that can be imagined. As original sin is the most fundamental sin, having the seeds and spawns of all in it, so a toleration hath all errors in it, and all evils. It is against the whole stream and current of scripture, both in the Old and New Testament ; both in matters of faith and manners ; both general and particular commands. It overthrows all relations, political, ecclesiastical, and economical. And, whereas, other evils, whether of judgment or practice, be but against some one or two places of scripture or relation, this is against all — this is the Abaddon, Apollyon, the destroyer of all religion, the abomination of desolation and astonishment, the liberty of perdition ; and therefore the devil follows it night and day : working mightily in many by writing books for it, and other ways: * Baxter's own Life. — Part ii. p. 140. 165 all the devils in hell, and their instruments, being at work to promote a tolera- tion." These bitter railings, it is to be observed, were not confined to a few violent individuals ; the whole body of the London Presbyterian ministers, addressed a letter to the Westminster Assembly, in which they solemnly declare how much "they detest and abhor the much endeavoured toleration." The jus divinum of church government, published by the same body, argues for " a com- pulsory, coactive, punitive, corrective power to the political magistrate in matters of religion."* It was truly with much reason that Milton said of such men, ' New Presbyter is but old priest, writ large.' * See works of Dr. John Owen. — Vol i. p. 33. SECTION V. ON THE PRACTICE OF USING THE JUDAICAL DECALOGUE AS THE RULE OF CHRISTIAN DUTY. Although the Puritan divines appear to have been the first who openly maintained that the duties of the fourth commandment have been transferred to the first day of the week, and retain, with this altera- tion^ their obligation under the gospel ; the seeds of this doctrine seem to have been sown at a much earlier period of history. The edict of Constantino, which established the observance of the weekly festi- val of Sunday, as the municipal law of the Roman empire, while it suppressed that party which had previously contended for the observance of the seventh day sabbath, paved the way for the revival of the Sabbatarian doctrine under a new aspect, and with much greater success, in a subsequent age. It has been the peculiar misfortune of Christianity, that through a false form of it having at an early period been converted into a state religion^ and through its institutions and precepts having, ever Il 168 since that time, been interwoven with the affairs of civil governments, its doctrines and duties have been usually interpreted, in adaptation to systems of civil and religious polity with which it has no natural con- nexion. By being habitually viewed through the distorting medium of worldly appearances, its true character and design have, to a very considerable extent, been frequently lost sight of and forgotten. The primary design of the gospel, it is to be observ- ed, was not to promote the purposes of civil rulers, , or directly to subserve, in any shape, the temporal I well-being of society, but to make known the divine ! purpose of love and mercy in the redemption of a I lost world through Jesus Christ. As that important truth^ which constitutes the gospel of salvation, is really understood and believed only in those cases where the human mind is enlightened to discern the divine evidence by which it is attested, so the obli- gations which the belief of this truth implies, can be felt in their true force only by those " who obey it from the heart." It was for these persons, it is ever to be remembered, that the institutions and precepts of Christianity were designed, and not for the promiscuous characters of which every political society is necessarily composed.'' The practice of ' See John xviii. 37, compared with xx. 31. II John i. I Peter i. 21-25. '' Among the numerous evils that have arisen from the incorporation of Christianity with political institutions, the least has not been the ambiguity of meaning which now attaches to the term christian, and the constant and gross 169 applying this revelation of mercy to purposes of state policy, and of interpreting its precepts in accommo- abuse of this designation in its common application to promiscuous multitudes of men, the bulk of whom are wholly ignorant of what Christianity is, or of what a christian ought to be. The practice of giving this name to all persons born in a particular country, seems to be not less irrational than it is manifestly injurious to the interests of christian truth. On other subjects we never think of saying a person is a believer in any particular doctrine, who is destitute of all know- ledge of its nature ; and with much reason ; for no one can correctly be said to believe any set of opinions, who is unacquainted with the grounds on which they rest, and the evidence by which they are supported ; without this knowledge, the profession of their belief, it is obvious, must necessarily be mere credulity, or presumption, or hypocrisy. In the same way, no one has any proper claim to the designation christian, who is not in possession of evidence producing a personal conviction of the truth, and adaptation to his own particular circum- stances, of that peculiar revelation of mercy which Christianity makes known. The gospel, in proclaiming to a perishing world the highest boon of heaven, namely, a message of mercy sufficient for the purpose of the guiltiest of man- kind, and free to the use of every one, is accompanied with a divine evidence of its verity, which implies an obligation on all whom it reaches, to receive it in its true character, as an authoritative communication from their Maker. This message, it is to be observed, is addressed to men on their individual responsi- bility, and those accordingly, who treat it with neglect, or who refuse to believe it, do so at their own peril. To their own Maker, however, they are answerable for their belief, and not to any fellow-man. On th« subject of Christianity, as well as on every other, men are as free to think, (i. e. naturally free, not morally so,) as they are free to breathe ; and assuredly, they are not called upon to pro- fess the belief of that which they are ignorant of, or do not believe ; and which, so long as its divine evidence remains undiscerned, it is certain they cannot possibly believe. All who recognize the divine authority of revelation, may, no doubt, in a cer- tain sense, be said to be believers in Christianity. It is quite possible, however, to entertain a belief that the bible is true, without being enlightened to appre- hend that particular " truth" which constitutes the good news of salvation. During the apostolic age, they alone were called christians, who credited the testimony which the apostles delivered concerning Jesus of Nazareth, and who, in consequence of their belief, worshipped and served Him as their risen Lord, their anointed and divinely attested Saviour ; thus " obeying from the heart" the facts which they had learned. Z 170 dation to systems of national religion, has naturally led to a serious misconception both of the doctrines It was the remark of a writer in the early ages of the church, that men were not born christians as they were born Jews, or Greeks, or Romans : that they became so afterwards by their personal knowledge and belief of the gospel. Through the misapplication of scriptural terms, and other sources of delusion, many people now seem to think they are born christians, much In the same manner as, by the accident of birth, they are born Britons. It is a false and misnamed charity, which would perpetuate this delusion, rather than liurt people's feelings by exposing the mistake under which they labour. In re- ligion, as in other matters, men and systems ought surely to receive their correct and appropriate designations, and be made to stand on their own merits : it would be better indeed, we apprehend, for all parties, (and certainly it would be much more consistent,) if people desisted from making any profession of the gospel, until they actually understood and believed it. At all events, it serves no end but to create confusion and self-deception, to call those persons christians, who do not give the gospel credit on the authority of Him who has revealed it, or who remain ignorant altogether of its import. It is certain, that all who do believe that the christian revelation of mercy is, of itself, a suffi- cient ground of confidence for eternity, must, at all times be prepared, with the christians in apostolic times, to give a reason for the hope that is in them to all who may ask for it. A christian, in the scriptural sense of the term, it is to be observed, does not mean a person who has wrought himself into a good opinion of his religious state and character, by imagining he has arrived at certain at- tainments in piety, sufficient, as he thinks, to distinguish himself from others, and to form a proper recommendation to the divine favour; but one who is firmly persuaded on proper grounds that the apostolic testimony concerning Jesus of Nazareth is true, and who acts accordingly. They alone who really understand and give credit to this testimony, can with propriety be said to be subjects of that kingdom which Christ came to establish ; and on them alone devolves the management of its affairs. Were the propagation and defence of the principles of this kingdom left to those to whom the duty appertains, it would conduce greatly, we are inclined to think, to the spread of scriptural truth and true religion, In giving expression to this sentiment, we are gratified to find we have been forestalled by one of the living ornaments of the Church of England. " Many persons who call themselves christians," says Dr. Arnold, "are so total- ly ignorant of their religion, that tliey attack and revile its precepts, pretending that they are merely the precepts of the clergy. Hence it is, that so many books not written by avowed believers, are full of principles quite opposite to 171 it makes known, and of the duties it enjoins. When schemes of divinity, constructed in adaptation to worldly systems of this kind, are once established, their influence is frequently felt long after the opin- ions upon which they were originally grounded, have become exploded ; and are thus allowed permanently to affect men's general views of the christian revela- tion. Several of the customs which obtained during the dark ages of popery, when the worst of all forms of national Christianity was spread over Europe, have in this way long survived the leading purposes to which they were originally applied. For several centuries preceding the Reformation, the practice seems generally to have prevailed, of committing to memory the apostle's creed, the Lord's prayer, and the ten commandments : as these summaries were regarded as expressing all things necessary to be believed and practised, the formal repetition of them was viewed as a necessary, and, at the same time, a sufficient profession of Christianity. those of the gospel ; because there are so many persons who, not disclaiming the name of christian altogether, have yet no clear knowledge of what a christian ought to be. But how foolish, on every calculation, is such indecisive behaviour as this ! Would that they would take one side or the other : that they would either be servants of Christ in earnest, or renounce him openly, and say, that they have notliing to do with Jesus of Nazareth and his salvation. Happy, indeed, it would be for the church of Christ, if all its false friends were to de- clare themselves its enemies : the gospel would then be no more reproached with the scandal of their evil lives, and the true believers would be drawn more closely to one another, and would feel the name of christian to be a real tie of brotherhood." 172 That the Judaical decalogue comprehended the whole sum of moral obligation, was, at that time, assumed as an established point : the duties it en- joins, and the sins it prohibits, were accordingly enforced on the whole population, as the obedience which God requires of man. When the then exist- ing state of popular ignorance is remembered, this use of the decalogue will not excite much surprise. That the national code of laws adapted, in divine wisdom, to an ignorant and uncivilized people like the Israelites in the wilderness, should have been transferred, during the middle ages, to the form of national religion, which was then thrown over the kingdoms of this world, seems, indeed, rather natural than otherwise. By blending in this manner the insti- tutions of Judaism with the christian revelation, the public religion became much better adapted to the purposes of elementary instruction, as well as of procuring that servile subjection, which the civil and ecclesiastical rulers then demanded of those, over whom they held the reins of government. It could scarcely have been expected, however, that this practice, the relic of an ignorant and superstitious age, should have been continued subsequent to the Reformation ; and it seems still more extraordinary, that the same antiquated practice should have been allowed to prevail even to the present day. Extra- ordinary as this circumstance is, it has so happened, that the Mosaic code of national law has, ever since 173 the age of the Puritans, been retained, as constituting an integral and most important part of every system of theology, making any pretension to what is called orthodoxy. ^ That the moral law is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments, has been laid down by the Westminster Assembly of Divines and others, as a proposition so indubitable and important, as to be at the foundation of all correct views of moral obli- gation. The fourth commandment being thus for- mally recognized as a moral precept, the perpetual obligation of the sabbatical observance which it prescribes, seems, certainly, very naturally and ne- cessarily to follow ; as this commandment, however, not merely requires the Israelites to remember the sabbath day to keep it holy, but expressly states, that " the seventh day is the sabbath" of Jehovah, it assuredly does not necessarily follow that there is im- plied in its prescriptions an obligation to sanctify Sunday, a day to which the commandment never, in any way refers. Aware of this palpable disregard of the plainest laws of logic, the Puritan divines boldly announced that the duties of the command- ment, have been transferred from the seventh day to the first ; and solely, apparently, on the ground of this unsupported assertion, the obligation to keep Sunday as a holy sabbath has continued to be recog- nized ever since. As the practice of using the decalogue as the rule 174 of christian duty, thus appears to have been the source, in which the doctrine of a christian sabbath originated ; and, as the continued prevalence of this practice seems to be a principal cause of the Sabba- tarian doctrine being still retained in the world, it may be requisite now to inquire, whether the incor- poration of the Jewish code of national law with the gospel dispensation, be warranted by any legitimate scriptural authority It is deserving of peculiar notice, that some of the chief errors and corruptions that have disfigured and oppressed the christian religion, have been introduced and maintained under the guise of scriptural support, supposed to be derived from the Old Testament state of things. The erroneous principle, that the Hebrew commonwealth constitutes the model on which all nations professing Christianity ought to form their civil and religious polity, was at the I foundation, as has already been remarked, of all the I Puritan systems of scholastic theology : this principle \ influenced the entire construction of these systems, I and thus biassed their authors in the interpretation \ of every part of the Jewish and Christian scriptures. All the scholastic systems of divinity that have been in popular use since the time of the Puritans, seem to have been cast in the same mould as theirs was: and it has unfortunately happened, that these systems have, in numerous cases, been more regarded in the formation of men's religious opinions, than the 175 authoritative writings of the apostles of Christ. The practice indeed of teaching people Christianity through the medium of schemes of systematic theology, appears to be greatly, if not wholly at variance with the artless and unartificial manner in which divine truth has been communicated in the sacred volume, and has ever been a fertile source of misconception and error. In no part of the Old or New Testament, it is deserving of remark, is there contained any set of principles, or creed, or formu- lary, embracing all things necessary to be believed and practised ; neither is there ever any formal ar- rangement made of divine knowledge, in a scientific and systematic order. The truths which the inspired writers make known, are not stated as matters of speculation, or as abstract propositions, but as authoritative principles implying necessary and cor- responding duties : and these duties, on the other hand, are not stated as bare precepts, but are en- joined on the supposition that the principles are understood, and the motives felt, by which they are enforced. In this way is divine truth interspersed throughout the whole of the scriptures ; communi- cated, not systematically, but as it were inciden- tally, in historical narratives, in prophecies, in para- bles, in conversations, and in epistles, as different occasions called for. The Bible makes known a clear revelation of the mind and will of God ; and this revelation is easily understood by all people of 176 / plain and unsophisticated minds ; in order, however, to derive that benefit which the attainment of this knowledge never fails to impart, it is quite ne- cessary that men should take their religious opinions directly from the Bible itself, and give credit to every scriptural statement, solely on the u ground of its divine and authoritative character. It is one thing to acquire an accurate knowledge of \ systems of divinity, and it is another to be taught of [ God, the truths revealed in his word. It is quite possible for men to acquire a knowledge of doctrines that are scriptural in themselves, and to continue to hold them on the ground of creeds and confessions of faith, without their consciences ever being brought into contact with divine authority. Speculative knowledge of this kind, it is manifest cannot, in the nature of things, produce those beneficial effects, which never fail to accompany the truths of the gospel, when believed on the direct testimony of God himself. Independent, indeed, of this obvious danger, arising from the use of these scholastic systems, the fatal mistake of regarding the doctrines of Christi- anity as matters of speculation, and holding them merely as such, is very readily fallen into, and can- not be too sedulously guarded against : it seems to be the natural tendency of the practice in question, however, to generate and increase the evil. Through men's minds too, being pre-occupied with systems of 177 this kind, they are naturally led to interpret every part of the scriptures in accordance with the conclu- sions they have learnt from human teachers, instead of sitting down, with the docility of children, at the feet of Jesus, and learning for themselves, on his authority, the truths his apostles have made known. They learn a system of divinity first, and afterwards / proceed to make every part of the Bible quadrate / with their preconceived notions, instead of simply / attending to that voice which has addressed men f from heaven, and interpreting according to its j authoritative direction, the prophetic word as ex- plained by the apostolic testimony. In all these, and I in various other ways, the practice of teaching men | the doctrines of Christianity, through the medium of \ human creeds and scholastic systems, seems naturally 1 fraught with evils and dangers, alike numerous and 1 baneful. It is ever to be remembered, that the gospel was not primarily designed for the professional use and purposes of scholastic theologians, but for the use and benefit of a perishing world, that, by under- standing and believing that divine testimony con- cerning Jesus, which it reveals, men may be made / wise unto salvation. This invaluable wisdom is alike / necessary for all, and it is freely offered to every one : / it is to be obtained, however, not by learning systems I of divinity, but by hearkening, with entire subjection A A / 178 of conscience, to the voice which came from the most excellent glory, testifying concerning Jesus of Nazareth — *' This is my beloved Son ; in whom I am well pleased." It seems to have been a good deal owing to men's attaching an improper importance to the antiquated systems of theology in question, that the natural method of interpreting the various portions of divine revelation, so distinctly pointed out by the apostles, has been so greatly disregarded and overlooked. That the New Testament is the only authentic com- mentarij on all the divine dispensations which pre- ceded the gospel, is one of the most important principles laid down in the apostolic writings : for, except we be guided by it in our interpretation of the sacred volume, we must ever fail to apprehend, with accuracy, the respective natures and designs of the various dispensations of revealed religion, under which men have been placed. In order to arrive at a satisfactory knowledge of the extensive and varied contents of the Bible, it is necessary to begin, as in the study of other subjects, at first principles, and thoroughly to understand them, before we attempt to comprehend other truths in which this knowledge is implied. Now in the case of the scriptures, these first principles are not to be found, as many seem to suppose, in the book of Genesis, but in " the gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God." This gospel, as taught by the apostles. 179 is the only key which opens to us the rich contents of the sacred vohime : it alone brings life and im- mortality to light, and gives a clear revelation of the divine character, as just and merciful in perfec- tion, in advancing and completing the scheme of redemption. All the preceding " words of the pro- phets,"'' (which, viewed apart from this scheme, naturally appeared obscure and incomplete,) have received their confirmation and fulfilment, in the coming of the Messiah, and, to a considerable degree, are now superseded by the noon-tide light of a clear and completed revelation. The apostle Peter represents the Old Testament revelation, as " a lamp burning in a dark place," giving a faint and imperfect view of the glory that was to follow : while he approves of the attention that christians were then paying to this light, on account of its giving a shadowy representation of the great truth made known to them, by the divine testimony, concerning Jesus, he, at the same time, gives them this important caution : — " Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation : for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. But there were false prophets among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily " II. Peter i. 19. 180 shall bring in damnable heresies."'* The rule here laid down as a first principle to guide us in the interpre- tation of the Old Testament writings, is simply this : that, as prophecy was not uttered of old by the will of man, it is not to be understood now according to the pleasure and speculation of men, but according to the interpretation which has been given of it by God himself; namely, in the testimony delivered concerning Jesus, " This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." In the anticipation of false teachers, who might interpret the prophetic word according to their own will, and bring in craftily, destructive opinions, this testimony was committed by the apostles to writing, that in every age, chris- tians might, by attending to it, be preserved from those private interpretations of men, which were at variance with the authoritative interpretation of heaven. We are thus impressively taught by Peter, to reject every commentary on the Old Testament Scriptures, that does not accord with that only authentic commentary upon them which is contained in the New. The apostles of Christ are the only infallible guides in explaining the Old Testament revelation, and every exposition of it devised by scholastic theologians or assemblies of divines, is to be rejected, which is inconsistent with the testimony * II. Peter i. 20. 181 they have delivered. Instead then of interpreting the ^ew Testament through the medium of the Old, we are called upon to interpret the writings of Moses, and every other part of the prophetic word, in the light of the divine testimony concerning Jesus, and agreeably to the directions the apostles have given us. The veil that was upon Moses' face, has now been removed by the apostles of Christ : and in making known the things formerly concealed under the symbols and carnal ordinances of the law, they use great plainness of speech ; for they, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glorious bright- ness of the Lord, have been transformed after the same image.^ It is to the apostles, then, that we are now to look for authentic information respecting the design and meaning of the Mosaic economy, and concerning the relation in which christians stand to every part of its handwriting of ordinances. To the testimony which they have delivered, we are called upon to bring every religious doctrine or practice founded on infe- rential reasonings, drawn from the Old Testament state of things, and, by this standard, " to prove all things, holding fast that which is good." It is by this test, accordingly, that we now propose to examine the practice of using the Judaical decalogue as the rule of christian obedience. It is the express declaration of the apostle Paul, * II. Corinthians iii. 12-18. 182 / that the believers of the gospel are " delivered from the law," and are no longer under Moses, but under a dispensation of free favour and rich mercy ; they have '^ become dead to the law by the body of Christ" and have been " married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead." They are no longer "under \ the law but under grace." Of what law is it that the apostle speaks thus ? That it is of the law of Moses, seems to be indisputable, for, in the context (evidently referring to the Jewish believers) he says, " I speak to them that know the law." The point then, we require to ascertain, is simply this : did Paul, by the term lazu, mean the Mosaic law as a whole, or only a portion of it ? in other words, did he mean that christians are delivered from the Mosaic institution, viewing it as a whole dispensation, or only from the civil and cere- monial part of it in contradistinction from that part which is moral ? This important question calls for a somewhat detailed examination. That the civil and ceremonial part of the Mosaic law has been abrogated by the introduction of the gospel, is, on all hands, admitted : that every moral precept retains its obligation under the christian dispensation, is, also, by no sober thinking man, ever denied. These two leading points may be laid down as indubitably established. The law has been " disannulled" and set aside, it being " weak and un- profitable, and making nothing perfect." As every moral precept, however, which Moses specifies, was 183 obligatory on men prior to its promulgation in the law, it continues, from its own nature, to remain in force after the Jewish economy has been brought to its appointed termination. What then is the pre- cise meaning of the apostolic statements, respecting the relation in which Christ's disciples now stand to the law of Moses ? In answering this question, it is of importance to keep in mind, that these state- ments have a special reference to the believers of the gospel, and were not meant to apply to mankind in general. The letters in which the declarations respect- ing the disannulling of the law are contained, are addressed, not to men indiscriminately, but to persons who had embraced the divine revelation of mercy, and who thus stood in the new relation to their Maker, of redeemed and adopted children, "justified by faith, and having peace with God through the Lord Jesus Christ."^ The subject of which the inspired writers / treat, is not the grounds of moral obligation, but the temporary character of the Mosaic economy, and the entire deliverance of Christ's people from all its hand- writing of ordinances, its rigorous penalties, and bur- densome ceremonies. The relation in which man stands to his Maker, and the grounds of his responsi- bility in the possession of natural faculties, and of opportunities for their exercise, are questions entirely apart from the relation in which christians now stand ^ Romans v. 1. P 184 to the decalogue, and to the other national laws contained "in the book of ordinances." Owing, however, to the adoption, by certain scholastic theo- logians, of this code of laws as the rule and standard of christian obedience, these two questions have fre- quently been confounded at the expense of darkening and perplexing, both the one and the other. According to these divines, the rule which God has revealed to man for his obedience, is the moral law, and this law they affirm " is summarily compre- hended in the ten commandments." Proceeding on this assumption, they identify the decalogue with the grounds of moral obligation, and represent it as constituting the permanent rule of christian duty. / They conceive, that while Christ by his death abrogated the ceremonial law, he also fulfilled the moral in its precepts and penalties, and retained it as the rule of obedience for his people. By the moral law, they understand the decalogue, and their notion is, that though believers are not now under the law, to obtain justification by obeying it, the ten commandments continue to be equally binding under the christian, as they were under the preced- ing economy. In this way they imagine they are placing the interests of christian morality on a sure foundation, and protecting them effectually, from every approach and inroad of Antinomian doctrine. There are two leading points, assumed on this system of doctrine, which call for examination. 185 First. — That the moral law is summarily compre- hended in the ten commandments. Second. — that? the decalogue has been constituted the permanent) ; rule of christian obedience. With regard to the first of these points, it is certain, that it is nowhere on record, that Christ or his apostles ever taught, that the law, promulgated to the Jewish nation at Mount Sinai, included the whole of human duty ; neither does it appear that they, at any time, stated that this code of laws constitutes the foundation of moral obligation. The foundation of human duty, it is obvious, is to be found not in the Sinaitic covenant, but in the na- ture of God, and in the nature of man, and in the relation which necessarily exists between the Creator and the being whom he has created. As the duties which thus naturally arise from the relation in which man stands to God, and from the relation in which men stand to each other, are imprinted on the human conscience, they are inde- pendent of every written code of laws, and continue, from their own nature, under every dispensation of religion, to be immutable, and universal in their obligation. These principles are uniformly recog- nized in the christian scriptures ; for the inspired writers proceed on the assumption, that the duties they involve, must necessarily be recognized by the human conscience, being interwoven with the whole constitution of man as a moral and accountable jx4-->- /'V A<^ 6>>%d B B 186 being. It is this natural law of conscience, and that distinction between right and wrong which conscience points out, that the apostles, it is to be observed, uniformly state to be the foundation of human responsibility, and not the political law of Judea. The apostle Paul for instance, affirms, that the Gentiles, who did not possess any written law, were a law unto themselves ; for, while without a law, they, doing by nature the things contained in the law, gave evidence of its efficacy written upon their hearts : their conscience also bearing testimony, and their reasonings between one another when they advance or repel accusations.^ To the same purpose, he speaks of those who commit sin, " knowing that they who do such things are worthy of death.'"' This law, written upon man's heart, includes every moral precept specified in the decalogue ; it embraces, moreover, every precept implied in the great princi- ples of the love of God and our neighbour, and extends, consequently, to the use of every faculty with which man has been endowed, to the exercise of his inmost thoughts, and to the performance of all his actions. It is deserving of notice, that the two great com- mandments, the love of God, and our neighbour, are not directly propounded in the decalogue, though -; Rom. ii. 14, 15. '' Rom. i. Saj^ -r 187 they were elsewhere expressly enjoined by Moses himself. The first is enjoined Deut. vi. 5, the other, Levit. xix. 18 ; and it does not appear, that they formed any part of the national code of the Jewish civil and religious polity. In the New Tes- tament, these two commandments are represented as comprehending, not only the decalogue, but the whole sum of moral obligation. Paul says, " He that loveth his neighbour has fulfilled the law," and " that love is the fulfilling of the law." '' All the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this, that thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." The same truth is stated by Jesus himself — " Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." In these two commandments, the moral law may doubtless, with propriety, be said to be / summarily comprehended : the assumption, that it is 1 comprehended in the ten commandments, seems, however, to be alike incorrect and unfounded. The | decalogue was a code of national law, in which moral and positive precepts stood side by side, all | of which were enforced by arguments and motives i that had a peculiar reference to that people to whom they were delivered. Instead of it being correct, ■ then, that the moral law is summarily comprehended 188 in the ten commandments, we conceive it is much more correct to say, that every one of these com- mandments that is moral in its nature, is cotnpre- hended iii the moral lazv. The other point assumed in the Westminster system of doctrine, namely, that the decalogue was designed to constitute the permanent rule of christian obedience, appears also to be destitute of any legiti- mate scriptural proof. Although it is quite true, that every moral precept contained in the decalogue, continues in force, it is to be considered, that this code of laws was delivered to the Jewish nation to serve as the instrument of their civil and religious polity. Even such of the statutes of that theocratic go- vernment, as were moral in themselves, had a peculiar reference to the state and condition of the people, as a nation delivered from Egyptian captivity, taken into covenant with God, and carefully kept in a state of separation from every other people in the world. Admitting therefore, that a considerable portion of the decalogue is of a moral nature, it seems, nevertheless, to be an extremely unwarrantable use of this code of national law, to extract it, without any direction to do so, from the other parts of the Mosaic economy, and to incorporate it with the gospel. It is to be remembered, that the Mosaic economy was, essentially, a national dispensation of reli- gion — a dispensation adapted in divine wisdom to the character and circumstances of a people that had 189 long been in bodily bondage, and in a state of great mental imcultivation ; and who, accordingly, not- withstanding their miraculous deliverance from Egypt, and the numerous solemn warnings they afterwards received, were constantly shewing a dis- position to relapse into the idolatrous practices of the heathen world around them. When that line of Abraham's posterity, that inherited the promise of giving birth to the Messiah, was rescued from Egyptian slavery, they were organized into " a king- dom of priests, a holy nation," that is, a nation separated from all others. Of this nation, Jehovah, in condescension to the people's weakness, and to the infancy of their religious knowledge, became the tutelary Deity, their God, the God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. To this people, thus taken into covenant, there was de- livered a national code of laws, embracing a system of religious worship and civil polity, adapted to their theocratic government, and their peculiar situation as the inheritors of the promise of redemption. That the decalogue was given to the Israelites, to serve as their immutable code of national law in the land of promise ; and, that a leading design of it was to distinguish them from other nations, is expli- citly stated by Moses, when exhorting the people to yield the divine statutes and judgments a proper obedience. "Behold I have taught you statutes and judgments even as the Lord thy God commanded 190 me, that ye should do so in the land, whither ye go to possess it. Keep, therefore and do them, for this is your wisdom and understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people."' Let the decalogue be viewed in its original ap- plication to the circumstances of this people ; and its peculiar and exclusive adaptation to the character of the government with which it was incorporated, can- not fail to appear. It kept them in mind of the mira- culous interference of Jehovah in their behalf ; and it was enforced by promises and threatenings which implied the constant care and superintendance of Him who was the supreme head of their government, political as well as religious. The preface affixed to it, " I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bond- age ;" the responsible connexion stated to exist between fathers and their posterity, to the third and fourth generation ; the promise of long life in the land of Canaan ; the prohibition against coveting male and female slaves ; all these, and various other injunctions and provisions, seem unequivocally to indicate, that it was designed exclusively for the Israelitish nation. Its legitimate application to any other people, and especially to the spiritual subjects ' Deuteronomy iv. 6. X91 of the kingdom of heaven is, indeed, wholly incon- ceivable, inasmuch as its injunctions are enforced by arguments, the force of which arise entirely from the relation in which the nation stood to Jehovah as their deliverer from Egyptian slavery, as their tutelary deity, and the supreme head of their civil and reli- gious polity. The notion of the Westminster Assem- bly, that the decalogue was designed to constitute the permanent rule of christian obedience, seems therefore, to be palpably erroneous ; being manifestly founded on an entire misapprehension of its contents, and of their original application and design. On whose authority has it been then, we must be allowed to ask, that this national code of laws has been separated at all from the other parts of the old covenant, and enforced on the subjects of the new ? Certainly not upon that of Christ, or his apostles : for this practice is never once enjoined or recognized in any part of the New Testament writings. On the contrary, it is the express declaration of the apostle Paul, that christians " are not under the law but under grace :" that they are delivered from it entirely, having become '' dead to it by the body of Christ." It is wholly arbitrary to assume, that, in these statements, Paul speaks merely of the ritual and ceremonial observances of the Jewish religion. All the prescript I tions of the law, it is to be remembered, whetherl) moral or ceremonial, were enforced by the same temporal sanctions, on every subject of the old 192 covenant, and constituted the rule of the Jewish civil as well as religious polity, at the very time the apostle wrote. When treating, accordingly, of the relation in which the believers of the gospel now stand to the Mosaic institution, Paul never makes any distinction between precepts as moral or ceremonial, but simply states, that christians, as such, are no longer under the law, but under a dispensa- tion of free favour and mercy. The question, as was formerly remarked, is not whether Paul means that the moral precepts speci- fied in the law, are abrogated by the introduction of the gospel : the relation that exists between man and his Maker, remains doubtless undissolved, and the moral obligations which this relation implies, are in- dependent of every handwriting of ordinances con- tained in the Mosaic institution : as the moral precepts incorporated in that national economy were binding prior to its introduction, it is indubitable that they continue to be binding subsequent to its abrogation. Paul, however, is not speaking of the grounds of moral obligation, but of the deliverance of Christ's people from the rigorous prescriptions and condem- natory sentence of the law. This sentence was "Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them." It is quite true, that the things written in the book of the law, embraced precepts of a moral as well as others of a ceremonial nature, but the apostle never 193 intimates that he refers to one part of the law more than to another. As, therefore, he uniformly speaks of the law without any particular limitation, or any distinction of its duties, the conclusion seems to be inevitable, that he speaks of it as a whole — as a national covenant, all the precepts of which, whether moral or ceremonial, were alike obliga- tory, and enforced alike, by sanctions of the same solemn description. That this is the natural sense of the term law, used in this connexion, is too obvi- ous to admit of any dispute : and, except we admit that this was the sense in which Paul designed it to be understood, we must do a constant violence to the natural import of some of the plainest decla- rations contained in the sacred volume. The conclusion at which we have arrived, namely, that the apostle means by the term the law, the Mosaic institution as a whole, and not merely a part of it, receives a strong corroboration from various passages which occur in his leading epistles. It is his great doctrine, which he takes every opportunity of inculcating, that Christ is ^' the end of the law for justification to every one who believed on him :" and that all who thus acquiesced in the divine testi- mony concerning Jesus, were " not under the law but under grace." " Ye are become dead to the law by the body of Christ." " We are delivered from the law, that being dead under which we were held." These statements seem very plainly to import that christians c c 194 / have nothing to do with the law of Moses as respects / the rule of their obedience : that there exists between it and them no connexion, inasmuch as every pre- cept has been disannulled, in so far as it was binding because Moses commanded it. In the beginning of the chapter from which the two last passages are cited, Paul illustrates his meaning by the example of a woman loosed from the law of marriage by the death of her husband; he states, that though the woman would be deemed an adulteress, who took another husband while her first was living, yet, as at the death of this husband she was made free from the law of marriage, so she would be no adulteress though she married again. In like manner, says he, are chris- tians discharged from the lata through the body of Christ, and married to him who was raised from the dead. In the prosecution of his subject the Apostle emphatically asks, " What shall we say then ? Is the law sin ? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin but by the law : for I had not known lust, except the law had said, thou shalt not covet." Now this is the same law of which he was previously speaking, when he states that believers are " delivered from the law," and loosed from its obligation, precisely as a woman is discharged from the obligation of the law of mar- riage, by the death of her husband. As then, this precept adduced by Paul to show how he was con- vinced of sin, is one of the moral precepts prescribed by Moses; the proposition, that when speaking of 195 the law, he speaks of it as a whole, without any distinction of its duties, seems, by this passage alone, to be, beyond all question determined. The same important truth of the entire abolition of the law, is stated with great clearness and force in different parts of the epistle to the Galatians,^ in the epistle to the Ephesians,^ and in that to the Colos-i sians."' In these and other similar passages it is \ declared, that Christ hath blotted out the handwriting \ of ordinances, having nailed it to his cross, and has thus broken down the partition wall which kept Jew and Gentile asunder. The law of commandments, with its ordinances, is thus shewn to be wholly abo- lished through the body of Christ. That the deca- logue, as well as the ceremonial institutions of Moses, was a law of commandments, contained in ordinan- ces, is indisputable ; that it was the law as a whole, which formed that wall of partition, which was broken down by Christ, is not less certain ; it seems necessarily to follow, that when Paul states, that Christ "hath blotted out the handwriting of ordi- nances," and " hath taken it away, having nailed it to his cross," he means the entire abolition of the law on the introduction of the gospel. In the epistle to the Hebrews, it is stated, that the believers of the gospel are not brought to receive the law from Mount Sinai, but are come to Mount Sion ; '' See Gal. iii. 19-25. iv. 1—7. -v. 1 ' Eph. ii. 14, 15. '" Col. ii. 13, 14. 196 they are not come to a mountain spread all over and burning with fire, and to blackness, and dark- ness, and tempest, and a noise of words, which the hearers intreated might not be addressed to them : they are come to Mount Sion, to the city of the living God, to the heavenly Jerusalem, to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, which speaketh better things than the blood of Abel."* In a similar way, through- out the whole of this important epistle, are **^ the two covenants"" strikingly contrasted ; the one from Mount Sinai, engendering fear and bondage ; the other, the Jerusalem which is above, the begetter of a spirit of love and of christian liberty. " There is, verily," says the apostle, " a disannulling of the com- mandment going before, for the weakness and unpro- fitableness thereof; for the law made nothing per- fect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by which we draw nigh to God.''^ Those who have learnt in this new way to draw nigh unto God, receive the law of their obedience no more from Moses, but from Him who addresses them from heaven, as well pleased for the sake of his Son ; and who has taught them to serve him, not with the slavish fear that characterized the subjects of the old covenant, but with the filial confidence of children, and in the generous spirit of that liberty, with which Christ has made his people free. " Heb. xii. 18-24. " Gal. iv, 24. ■' Heb. vii. 18. 197 These, and various other passages, according to their simple and unstrained import, obviously imply the entire setting aside of the Mosaic law on the introduc- tion of the gospel. The notion, that Paul meant that { the distinction between the ceremonial observances I of the law, and that part of it which is moral, should be made by those to whom he wrote, seems to be destitute, not only of all direct scriptural proof, but of all colour of rational probability. The apos- tle, it is to be borne in mind, never speaks of the law as moral, in distinction from its national cha- racter and design ; for the decalogue itself was not merely a religious rule, it was promulgated for l^ the express purpose of constituting the permanent national law of Judea. It was as a whole institu- tion, in which precepts of a moral nature were inter- spersed with others purely positive and ceremonial, that the law was delivered to the Israelitish nation, and, it was as a whole also, that it received, in Christ's death, its appointed fulfilment and abrogation. At the very time when the apostle was writing these letters to the christian churches, the decalogue con- tinued to be enforced as the national law of Judea on the Jewish believers themselves ; for though they had, as christians, become dead to the law by the body of Christ, they continued under a civil obliga- tion to comply with all its injunctions, whether moral or ceremonial, until the political dissolution of the Jewish government. The Gentile converts were 198 exempted, however, from this obhgation — from the prescriptions of the decalogue, as well as from every other precept, in as far as they were binding because found in the law of Moses ; and were directed " to keep no such thing." That by the term the lazv, then, the apostles meant the law as a whole, and not merely a portion of it, seems to be established be- yond all reasonable dispute. The grounds of moral obligation being wholly independent of the Mosaic law, it is manifest, we may safely admit the unstrained and obvious meaning I of the apostolic statements, respecting its entire i abolition, without endangering, in any degree, the interests of christian morality. Every moral precept specified in the decalogue, as well as in every other part of the sacred volume, is, from its own nature, as has already been remarked, of indispensable and uni- versal obligation. This was true anterior to the pro- mulgation of the ten commandments; and it continues to be true after the Mosaic economy, has been brought to an end. Though no precept is now binding, because Moses commanded it, it is indubitable, that, as the law of conscience was not introduced by Moses, so neither have the moral obligations which the existence of this law implies, ceased to be in force now that the law of Moses is done away with. While, however, in as far as the grounds of moral obligation are con- cerned, the solution of the question it was proposed to consider, is thus of trivial consequence, its deter- 199 mination is of great moment as respects the influence which it naturally exerts over our views of various important collateral questions. If Paul's language respecting the law be interpreted in its natural and unstrained sense, the reasoning contained in the apostolical epistles, appears luminous and conclusive; if, on the other hand, the important doctrine of the entire abolition of the law be explained away or lost sight of, there is reason to believe that a consider- able portion of the christian scriptures can never be thoroughly understood. In the New Testament, the different dispensations of Judaism and Christianity, instead of being blended together as if they were the same system of religion under different names, are represented as being wholly distinct, and their different natures are de- signedly contrasted in order to illustrate their respec- tive characters and designs. " The laxv was given / by Moses, \ivX grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." / Though the former made nothing perfect, and was not designed to acquaint men how a sinner could obtain forgiveness and acceptance with the righteous Jehovah, it subserved important purposes peculiar to ; that stage of the progress of the scheme of redemp- ''\ tion : it fulfilled the duties of a pedagogue, gradu- ! ally conducting the posterity of Abraham from a 1 state of infantile religious knowledge, to that Messiah \ in whose advent and finished work, it received its verification and completion. When, however, the 200 glad tidings of pardon and peace with God, through this Messiah, were, subsequent to his resur- rection, pubHcly proclaimed, those who gave credit to the divine testimony concerning the person and work of Christ, were declared to be " no longer under a pedagogue ; they had become the children of God, by faith in Jesus Christ." The allegorical parallel drawn by Paul between the son of the bondmaid and the son of the freewoman, in the epistle to the Galatians, is designed to illustrate the different natures of the two dispensations ; or, in other words of " the two covenants," the old covenant of Moses, and the new one ratified by Christ's death. The former from Mount Sinai, being a dispensation of servitude and fear, gendered bondage : the latter, the Jerusalem which is above, being free, begets children of promise, freed from the bondage of the law, and capacitated to enjoy the privilege of gospel liberty. The one was a shadow of good things to come, the other the substance of those things : the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did, by which christians now draw nigh to God. To all who have been taught to appreciate the value of the liberty of the gospel, it must be appa- rent, that the modern practice of dragging the deca- logue from its appropriate situation in the old cove- nant of Moses, and introducing it as the rule of christian obedience, is not only destitute of all 201 scriptural authority, but wholly inconsistent with the nature of those principles which^ in the New Testa- ment, are represented as influencing and regulating the thoughts and actions of the believers of the gospel. The children of the promise are enjoined not to undervalue that freedom from the servile bondage of the law, to which they are begotten, but to hold it fast, stedfastly resisting every one who at- tempted to entangle them in its dispiriting servitude. They are not taught to view a literal adherence to the minute prescriptions of any written code of laws like the Judaical decalogue, as the due fulfilment of their christian obligations. Having been all " taught to know the Lord," they have all had the divine law written upon their hearts, not indeed, " with ink," or as the decalogue was written, " in tables of stone," but "in fleshly tables," and in the language of ardent love and profound gratitude. This knowledge of the Lord, and that love and gratitude which it naturally engenders, all contribute to animate the subjects of the new covenant to devote them- selves unreservedly to his service who redeemed them, and thus, effectually furnish them with the motives and principles of christian obedience. It is deserving of notice, that the objection which the introduction of the unauthorized practice in question, has, apparently, been designed to obviate, namely, that the doctrine of the entire abolition of the law, affords no security against the freedom of D D 202 the gospel being abused to licentious purposes, has been anticipated by Paul himself, who, it is to be noticed, in replying to it, does not attempt to remove this apprehension of danger, by retracting any part of the declaration, that christians "■ are no longer under the law but under grace." " What shall we say then ?" he asks, " shall we continue in sin be- cause grace abounds ?" What is the answer ? *^By no means." And on what grounds is it, that the apostle gives this emphatically negative reply ? Is it by stating that the decalogue, or some other part of the Mosaic dispensation is still in force, and has been constituted the permanent rule of christian duty ? No. Paul was addressing persons who had given credit to the apostolic testimony concerning the grace of God, that had been manifested in Christ Jesus, and which had abounded to sinners of every de- gree and name. As these persons were capable of feel- ing the force of christian motives, he appeals at once to their sense of gratitude : and, by calling to their recollection, their union to Christ in his death and resurrection, afFectingly impresses on their minds, the deep obligations arising from their belief of the great facts of the gospel. They were become dead to the law by the body of Christ, and dead conse- quently to sin, not only as respected its sentence, but as respected its service also. Their connexion with it being dissolved, instead of serving it as they formerly had done, prior to their union to Christ, 203 they ought now, (he goes on to show,) to be wholly "the servants of righteousness." "How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein ? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ? There- fore 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. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. Knowing this also, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin."i " Ye are not under the law but under grace. What then ? shall we sin because we are not under the law but under grace ? God forbid. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves ser- vants to obey, his servants ye are whom ye obey ; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness. But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the ser- vants of righteousness : and now, being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.'"^ ■i Rom. vi. 3-7. ' Rom. vi. 15-22. / 204 Thus by calling to their recollection their union to Christ in his death and resurrection, represented to them in their baptism, and by reminding them at the same time, that the profession they had made "of ! putting on the Lord Jesus," clearly implied, that their connexion with sin, both as respected its sen- tence and service, was done away with, does the ', apostle impress on their minds the affecting conside- ration, that christians are no longer their own, but are bound by the strongest ties to serve Him unre- servedly, who, by his own blood, has redeemed them. It is in this manner that our great apostle effectually precludes the captious objection, that ignorant and foolish men have, in every age, been ready to adduce against the doctrine of the free grace, and complete justification of the gospel. Instead of trying to remove the apprehension of these doctrines being frequently perverted and abused, by calling to their aid the weak and beggarly elements of Judaism, he simply exhorts christians " to walk in the spirit" of revealed truth, and " to obey from the heart that mould of doctrine, into which they had been cast." By reminding them of the revealed mercy of God in Christ Jesus, and of all the affecting considerations connected with the scheme of redemption, he be- seeches them to present their bodies as a living sa- crifice, holy, well-pleasing to God ; and shows them, that this is their reasonable service. Thus does Paul teach us that it is the devout remembrance of the 205 great facts of the gospel, which most effectually pre- serves in its full force, that law of love and gratitude which, as it is written upon the lieart of every be- liever of the gospel, so is it at the foundation of all acceptable christian obedience. It seems to be thus very manifest, that the modern practice of dragging the decalogue from its natural situation in the old covenant of Moses, and intro- ducing it into the gospel dispensation, as the rule of christian duty, is not only at variance with the decla- rations of the apostles respecting the entire abolition of the law, but also wholly inconsistent with the nature of those principles, which in the Nev/ Testament are represented as influencing and regulating the conduct of Christ's disciples. In this unauthorized practice, the relic of an ignorant age, the doctrine of a chris- tian sabbath appears to have had its origin ; and to its credulous retention, the continued preva- lence of this Sabbatarian doctrine seems to be in a considerable measure attributable. The doctrine of a christian sabbath, it is obvious, is not an insu- lated point having no relation to other scriptural questions; it formed an integral part of all those systems of divinity, which the Puritan divines con- structed in adaptation to that worldly system of ecclesiastical polity, which they wished to intro- duce ; and it has been a good deal owing to the mutual support which several of the unscriptural notions broached by these Judaizing divines, have 206 yielded to each other, that they have been al- lowed so long to prevail in the world. As the Puritan doctrine of the existing obligation of the fourth commandment, seemed naturally to follow from the retention of the decalogue as the rule of christian duty, in like manner, the practice of using this national code of laws as the standard of obe- dience under the gospel, has prevented the full re- ception of the apostolic doctrine of the entire aboli- tion of the law. It is incredible, that the distinct and repeated declarations of Paul on this point, should have been so long and so studiously evaded, had the Puritan doctrine of a christian sabbath not stood in the way. Because, however, it was plainly perceived, that, if the full meaning of the apostolic statements on this head were admitted, the Sabbata- rian doctrine would be entirely subverted, it was found necessary to have recourse to unnatural and unauthorized distinctions between one part of the law and another, by the help of which, the natural and unstrained meaning of the apostle's language has continued to be explained away, and seriously misrepresented. Thus have these two practices, the use of the de- calogue as the rule of christian duty, and the obser- vance of a weekly sabbath, served to support each other, and to perpetuate in concert, scriptural mis- conception and error. It is not to be doubted, that in numerous and various ways, these unscriptural 207 practices have greatly impeded the progress of divine truth. They have contributed to retain the professors of Christianity under the dominion of human creeds and scholastic schemes of theology, which have too long been allowed to usurp that place which exclusively belongs to the apostles of Jesus Christ. They have led men to confound things which mate- rially differ ; — the old covenant of Moses, and the new covenant ratified by Christ's death ; and to inter- mix Judaism with Christianity, in a manner entirely ] at variance with the peculiar relation in which they stand to each other. According to the apostles, Judaism was introductory to Christianity; and having received in Christ's advent and finished work its appointed fulfilment, is now entirely done away with J . According to the system of doctrine laid down by / the school of divines referred to, they are merely m different dispensations of the same "covenant of ! grace or redemption," a covenant supposed to have ' been made in eternity, but which, as it is not once mentioned, either in the Old Testament or the New, we may safely pronounce to be purely a figment of human invention. Viewed through this fictitious medium, the old and new covenants so strikingly contrasted by the apostles, are represented as being substantially the same ; and the language of the inspired writers respecting the abolition of the law, is rendered perplexingly ambiguous, re- quiring to be constantly understood in a sense at 208 variance with its unstrained and most obvious import, while some of the most important reasoning contained in Paul's writings, is seriously enervated and obscured. When, however, we simply follow the natural plan of interpretation, that the natural sense of the lan- guage zaas the meaning designed to be expressed by the writers, the reasoning contained in the apostolic epistles appears uniformly consistent and luminous ; and all the various dispensations of religion spoken of in the Old Testament, are seen to harmonize in advancing that great scheme of redemption, the na- ture, as well as the completion of which, is first fully and clearly revealed in the New. The Old Testament revelation necessarily appear- ed very obscure and incomplete of itself ; for accom- panied, as it undoubtedly was, with manifold incon- trovertible evidences of divine authority, it did not receive its true interpretation or chief confirmation, until it terminated in the finished work of Jesus, the true Messiah. As in Christ's advent and death it received its designed verification, so now, having re- ceived this conclusive evidence, it furnishes in its turn, a most powerful and decisive testimony to the person and work of Him, the purpose of whose com- ing, it had previously, by types and carnal ordinances, adumbrated and foretold. As Judaism and Christi- anity, in this manner powerfully confirm each other, so do they furnish mutual illustrations of their respective characters and designs. The law received 209 its verification and fulfilment in the work of the Messiah, who, by finishing the work given him to do, became the end of it for justification to every one who believed on his name. By means of the explications given by the apostles, of the carnal or- dinances of the law, we now distinctly perceive the meaning of those earthly figures and shadows, which were as a veil upon the face of Moses, under which the realities of the gospel were formerly concealed. Thus do we learn, that what the laxo^ could not ac- complish in that it was weak through the flesh, God hath by the gospel of his Son effected ; for He send- ing his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, a sin offering, condemned sin in the flesh ; that the right- eousness of the law might be fulfilled by those who have been taught to serve God no longer with a slavish fear, according to the letter of the law, but with the filial confidence becoming the subjects of " It is usual, we are aware, to interpret the word Jaw in this passage as de- noting merely the moral law: — that law written on man's heart, which consti- tutes the universal rule of duty to intelligent creatures. As the apostle, however, has been reasoning in the preceding context about the law of Moses, (that law which, he assumes, the individuals he was addressing were familiar with, " I speak to them that know the law,") it seems much more natural to interpret the expression as simply referring to the whole Mosaic dispensation, without any distinction of its duties ; and among these duties, it is to be remem- bered, the immutable principles of moral obligation were included. The term law is, no doubt, used in scripture with considerable latitude of signification ; but the scope of the context seldom or ever fails to point readily and distinctly to its precise intended application. Its primary meaning, namely, the authori- tative revelation of the will of a superior for the obedience of those under him, enters into all the senses in which it is employed. Thus we read, that wliere E E 210 gospel freedom, — in the newness of the spirit of the law, even that grace and truth which came by Jesus Christ. " tliere is no law there is no transgression." In this primary sense, it is with evident propriety used to denote the whole revealed will of God as coramuni- cated to us in his word. See Psalm i. 2. xix. 7. cxix. passim ; and in the same original sense, the gentiles are stated to be without the law. Rom. ii. 14 ; that is, they were without any written revelation, and under no law save the natural law of conscience. In the New Testament, the usual application of the term is to the Mosaic institution as distinguished from the gospel, John i. 17. Acts xxv. 8. Gal. iii. 19 : and from this sense it naturally derived another, namely, a designa- tion for the Books of IMoscs, in which the institutions of the Jewish economy were described in distinction from the other books of scripture. Thus Jesus said, " All things must be fulfilled that are written in the law of Moses, and in the Psalms, and in the Prophets concerning me ;" and to the same effect Paul states, that the method of a sinner's acceptance with God, revealed in the gospel, " is witnessed by the law and the prophets." SECTION VI. THE GROUNDS ON WHICH THE MODERN SABBATH IS SUPPOSED TO REST, EXAMINED IN DETAIL. Here we might terminate the inquiry we proposed to institute, respecting the original design and ex- isting obligation of the sabbatical institution. From all the prescriptions of the law of Moses, from the law of the sabbath as well as from every other hand- writing contained in the book of ordinances, chris-/ tians are declared to be wholly delivered. Th( gospel has disannulled the commandment goin^ before : and though every moral precept the Mosai^ law specifies, and all moral precepts whatever con- tinue from their own nature in force, there is no precept now binding merely on account of Moses having commanded it. As there has been no sabba- tical observance prescribed by Christ or his apostles, we may warrantably conclude, that the believers of the gospel are under no obligation to observe any one day as more holy than another. These are plainly the real points on which the Sabbatarian question hinges : there are various other points, however, which it is usual to adduce, as having a bearing on the subject, that by some may be re- garded as requiring further consideration. 212 It is doubtless, not a little surprising, that an observance so destitute of all legitimate scriptural proof, as the modern sabbath manifestly is, should have ever obtained a general prevalence in the world : and it seems not less so, that it should continue still to prevail among persons who profess to recog- nize no authority in matters of faith and practice, save the authority of the sacred volume. That the obligation of this observance continues to be un- hesitatingly recognized by the great bulk of the professedly christian community, is a fact too obvious to admit of being questioned : the precise grounds on which the duty is, by different persons, supposed to rest are, however, by no means so clear ; and are somewhat difficult to ascertain. With many, we apprehend, the general prevalence of the practice furnishes the chief and actual evidence on which they found their belief of its divine authority. They conceive it to be altogether incredible, that a doc- trine so generally believed by religious persons, should have obtained the prevalence it has done, if it had not been taught in the sacred writings. To vague notions of this kind, and especially to a con- fident but erroneous persuasion entertained, of the universal prevalence of the observance in all past ages, its credulous recognition at the present time is apparently principally to be attributed. There are many, again, who seem to think, that the ma- nifest and universally acknowledged expediency of 213 observing a weekly day of public rest, is an unequi- vocal proof of the divine origin of the modern doc- trine. That the observance of the sabbath is indis- pensable to the interests of religion, is regarded by these persons as a point not to be called in question: every argument, accordingly, which impugns the divine institution of this observance, is jealously watched, and strenuously opposed, being viewed as an attack upon the cause of christian piety. There are few errors, we apprehend, into which men are more apt to fall, in the formation of their religious opinions, than that of allowing their predilections and prejudices in favour of a certain conclusion to bias their minds, in the interpretation of scriptural evidence. When a person is once firmly convinced that a particular conclusion is essential to his own^ religious well-being, or to that of mankind in generalj there is no degree of evidence in favour of oppositq sentiments, short of absolute demonstration, which his mind, under the powerful impulse that is felt to adhere to its own prepossessions, will not resist. It is obvious too, that persons powerfully impressed with a conviction, that any religious object they are pursuing, is an undoubtedly good and important one, are not very apt to scrutinize with much care, the precise lawfulness of all the means which go to support it. This temptation to pursue the ac- complishment of a supposed good end by means, which, were it not for the laudable purpose to which 214 they are applied, would in themselves seem barely warrantable, is doubtless one of the most insidious, and at the same time one of the most powerful in- ducements to deal unfairly with evidence, to which the human mind is exposed.* That there is a con- siderable number of persons who are sincerely per- /suaded, that the doctrine of a christian sabbath is supported by adequate scriptural evidence, we by no means wish to dispute : of the greater number of those however, who have professedly advocated this notion, it is to be observed, that they have assumed, with so great confidence, the indispensable necessity of the observance to the interests of religion, that they seem to have imagined, it was their bounden duty to discover every semblance of evidence that would contribute to support their own view of the subject. Their object, in discussing the question, ap- pears to have been, not so much to ascertain on which side the truth lay, as to collect and adduce arguments of all sorts and qualities, which might serve to con- firm their own previously formed opinions. As among the arguments which these ingenious advocates of the Puritan sabbath have discovered, there occur several, of which there has hitherto been no suitable opportunity of directly noticing, it may now be proper to consider, more particularly than we have ' For an able illustration of this point see Whately's Errors of Romanism — Chap. " On Pious Frauds." 215 yet done, the validity of the grounds on which this doctrine is, in modern times, usually made to rest. / I. — The most prevailing reason apparently for ! recognizing the authority of this observance, is the \ assumption, that the fourth commandment is of uni- \ versal and perpetual obligation. This command- ment required those to whom it was delivered, to remember the sabbath day to keep it holy ; and as the same obligation is considered to be still binding, it is supposed that this duty is complied with, by keeping the first day of the week as a holy sabbath. It is deserving of notice, that in the numerous publications which have appeared, treating of the " sanctification of the sabbath," the usual design of the writers has been simply to explain the duties required by the fourth commandment, and to en- force their careful observance, by the various pro- mises and threatenings by which the law was sanctioned under the Mosaic dispensation : the ob- ligation of the precept, and the transference of its duties from the seventh day to the first, have been almost invariably assumed to be settled points which admit of no dispute. It has already been shown that the assumption on which this Sabbatarian doctrine is founded, is un- i supported by any legitimate scriptural proof: it has' also been shown, that the notion of the decalogue having been constituted the permanent rule of chris-l 216 of the apostles respecting the entire abolition of the law, but wholly inconsistent with the nature of chris- tian liberty, and with those principles of christian love and gratitude, which, in the New Testament, are represented as influencing the believers of the gospel. Were we to admit, however, that the perpetual obligation of the fourth commandment is a doctrine capable of scriptural proof, we should still be unable to discern in what way it can be warrantably in- ferred, that there arises from this commandment an obligation to sanctify the first day of the week, — a day to which its prescriptions never once refer. The fourth commandment expressly states that " the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God." To deduce, then, from a precept which specifies that the seventh day is the sabbath of Jehovah, an obligation to keep the first, or any other day holy, is surely not less presumptuous, than it is palpably illogical and absurd. It will be difficult to assign any reason for drawing from the contents of this commandment the inference, that the first day of the week ought to be sanctified, which would not be equally valid for de- ducing from the same premises the conclusion, that the second or third day of the week ought to be sanctified. If it be warrantable to alter the pre- scriptions of a positive divine precept like this, by substituting another day altogether for the day specified in the precept, we may, on the same grounds, proceed to alter, at our own discretion. 217 every positive precept in the sacred volume, in accommodation to our own taste and convenience. Before, then, we can recognize an obligation to sanctify the first day of the week, in obedience to the fourth commandment, we require to be distinctly informed by what authority its duties have been transferred from the seventh day to the first : — we require to be informed, moreover, by what authority the duties prescribed in the commandment, the reasons assigned for its ordination, and the pe- nalty originally annexed to its violation, have been all either partially disregarded, or wholly set aside. The law of the sabbath, it is to be remem- bered, was originally delivered to the Israelites as " a kingdom of priests, a holy nation" — a people separated for peculiar purposes to God's] service, and placed under his special care an(^' protection : it was given to be " a- sign," distinguish- ing this people from every other nation, and con- stituted part of that " middle wall of partition," which was ultimately "broken down" by Christ. As the distinction kept up between Jew and Gentile, by this " sign," and other ordinances, has been abolished by the introduction of the gospel, one of the special causes of its institution is, conse- quently, entirely removed. In addition to this, it is to be considered, that the observance of the sabbath was designed, among other reasons, F F I 218 to commemorate the completion of the work of creation on the seventh day : it is impossible, therefore, that this purpose can be answered, if its duties be observed on any other day ; neither can any new reason for keeping this or any other sab- bath, be introduced, without divine authority. It is certain that there is no divine precept on record, enjoining the commemoration of the work of Cre- ation on the first day of the week, or authorizing the introduction of the commemoration of Christ's resurrection, or that of any similar event, as a reason for observing Sunday as a holy sabbath. The rigorous prescriptions of the sabbatical in- stitution, it is to be considered, moreover, were in entire accordance with the nature and design of the old covenant ; being adapted, in conjunction with the other Mosaic hand-writing of ordinances, to produce that servile frame of mind, which was imposed as a yoke of bondage upon all under that dispensation, for purposes peculiar to the pedago- gical condition of the people under it. The ob- servance of the weekly sabbath, as a day of holy rest, was literally and strictly enforced on the whole population ; so rigidly so, that the people were prohibited from " kindling a fire throughout their habitations upon the sabbath day ;"" and every violation of the law constituted a capital crime, subjecting the guilty person to the penalty of death.'' " Exod. XXXV. 3. " Exod. xxxi. 15. — xxxv. 2. 219 All these things — the day specified in the command- ment, the rigorous prescriptions it enacts, the pe- nalty annexed to its violation, were every one of them strictly complied with, by that people to whom the ordinance was originally delivered ; and if the law continues to be still obligatory, it will not be easy to assign any valid reason for altering and ac- commodating its prescriptions to meet men's modern notions of convenience. Whatever other reasons then may be adduced in support of the modern sabbath, it seems to be utterly unwarrantable to infer its obligation from the fourth commandment. To maintain, indeed, that the sab- batical ordinance delivered to the Jewish nation is not abrogated, is to introduce the obligation of the whole Mosaic ritual ; for all the positive precepts of Moses are declared by Paul, to stand or fall on the same foundation. II. — In proof of the perpetuity- of the sabbath, it has been alleged, that as this precept was spoken, to- gether with the other nine precepts of the decalogue, with an awful voice, from the midst of the thunders at Mount Sinai, and was written by the finger of God on one of the two tables of stone, fashioned by the hand of Jehovah himself, it is to be regarded as one of the commands of the moral law, and as binding accordingly on men of every age and country.^ ' Dwight's Theology, Serm. CV. 220 It has already been shown, that the notion of the moral law being comprehended in the ten command- ments, is alike incorrect and unfounded. The deca- logue may, with propriety, be viewed as a summary of the political law of Judea, but all the circumstances connected with it — " the kingdom of priests," to whom it was delivered, the peculiar motives by which it was prefaced, the particular promises and threatenings by which it was sanctioned, its con- trived adaptation to that theocratic polity with which it was incorporated, all forbid the supposition that it was designed to constitute the perpetual code of universal moral obligation, and much less the standard of gospel obedience. It seems to be entirely futile to adduce the extra- ordinary circumstances which attended the promul- gation of this code of laws, as a reason for regard- ing its prescriptions as being of universal and per- petual obligation. That it was " by divine contri- vance and design," that the decalogue was writ- ten by the finger of Jehovah on tables of stone, is doubtless not to be questioned : this parti- cular design, however, we are to ascertain from legitimate scriptural evidence, and not from the conjectures of speculative divines. The reasons for the decalogue having been spoken with an awful and audible voice, from the midst of the thunderings and lightnings at Mount Sinai, we are distinctly 221 told, in the Epistle to the Hebrews f we are there taught too, that the believing Hebrews were not again brought to receive a law from Mount Sinai, but that they were now brought to Mount Sion, to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling which speaketh better things than the blood of Abel. And elsewhere, we are instructed, that the subjects of this new covenant have their laws written no longer upon tables of stone, but upon the fleshly tablets of the heart.^ Independent of these conclusive considerations, it is to be re- membered, that the words, " I am the Lord thy God who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage," were written on the same tables of stone upon which the ten com- mandments were written. Now, though these words were very significant and impressive in their original application to the Israelites, it is not easy to see their meaning in reference to any other people. That every moral precept specified in the deca- logue is, from its own nature, of perpetual obligation, is on all hands admitted : it does not follow from this, however, that the fourth commandment is a portion of the moral law. If it be a part of the moral law, it must necessarily be moral in its own nature ; and the question, whether or not this is the case, is to be ascertained, not by indulging in con- Heb. xii. ' 2 Cor. iii. 222 jectures about the design of the thunderings that accompanied its delivery, but only in the same way as we ascertain the nature of all other precepts whatever, namely, by the moral judgment of mankind. Clearly to conceive of the distinction that exists between moral and positive precepts, is of the last importance in all discussions of this nature. This distinction is neither subtle nor unsound, as some writers would represent it, with a view, apparently, of evading what they are unable, satisfactorily, to answer : it is plain and pertinent to the point in question ; and, existing as it does in the nature of things, except it be kept accurately in view, the mind must be greatly misled, by confounding things which materially differ in their nature ; and the grounds and extent of human obligation must ever be very superficially and inaccurately understood. All duties are termed moral, it is to be remembered, which are right in themselves, and which^ on account bf the human conscience recognizing them as being thus right, are of universal obligation, independent )f any enactment. To love God, to do justly, to speak the truth, and similar obligations are, on this account, called moral duties. Those duties, on the other hand, are called positive, which derive their obligation solely from their being commanded. The ordinance of the Lord's supper, for instance, is called a positive duty, because the particular use of 223 bread and wine prescribed in that ordinance, would not have been obligatory on Christ's disciples at all, except it had been specified and enjoined on them : thus, while moral duties are commanded, because they are right, — positive duties are right, solely because they are commanded. Whether then is the sanctification of the sabbath day, a precept of a moral or of a positive nature ? That the worship and service of the Divine Being is a moral obligation, is a truth consonant with the clearest dictates of the human conscience : that the sanctification, or setting apart of a determinate portion of time from a com- mon to a sacred use, must be a duty purely positive in its nature, seems to be a proposition not less clear and certain. The fourth commandment required the Jewish nation to remember the sabbath day to keep it holy, and expressly stated that the seventh day was the sabbath of Jehovah. Now that this was purely a positive enactment,- seems to be indis- putable, inasmuch as the observance it prescribed became a duty, solely on account of the law having been promulgated. To sanctify a determinate por- tion of time is plainly not an obligation recognizable as right in itself apart from any revealed law, as all moral duties are. Antecedent to the promulgation of the law, enjoining the observance of the seventh day, so far as men's knowledge of the matter went, it must necessarily have appeared a matter of in- difference, whether the sixth, or the seventh, or the 224 eighth clay was to be ordained a holy sabbath. As, therefore, an obligation of this kind could not pos- sibly have been known without an express precept prescribing it, upon such a precept alone its whole ^obligation is manifestly founded. We conceive then, pthat as the law of Moses, and that law alone made fit obligatory on the Jewish people, to keep the I seventh day holy ; the observance of the sabbath f: day, prescribed in the fourth commandment, is a : ' duty distinctly of a positive nature, and obligatory accordingly, on those alone on whom it has been " enjoined. By some writers it has been maintained, that " the fourth commandment is of a moral nature no less than the others, and indispensable to all the children of Adam," on the ground that the ends for which the?/ conceive the sabbath was ordained, namely, " to give the labouring classes of mankind an opportu- nity of resting from toil, to furnish an opportunity to fallen man of acquiring holiness, and of obtaining salvation, are equally necessary to every child of Adam."^ By others it has been supposed, that " the commandment is moral as to the duty, seeing there must be a time appointed for the service of God, and ceremonial only as to the specified day ; so that it is of a mixed or middle nature;" the part which continues to be obligatory, these persons imagine, ^ Dwicht's Theologv. 225 is the moral law ; the Mosaic part alone, as they conceive, having been abrogated on the introduction of the gospel. The first of these opinions appears to rest upon very fallacious grounds. That the sabbath was in- stituted, with a view of permanently promoting all the important purposes, which, by this class of wri- ters, are confidently ascribed to its original design, is a pure gratuitous assumption, incapable of any legitimate scriptural proof. Admitting however, that it could be shown, that the institution was de- signed to promote, in every age of the world, these and similar important purposes, it would not neces- sarily follow that the commandment is, on this ac- count, of a moral nature. However important and general may be the ends, which the observance of a sabbatical institution may be adapted to promote, the nature of the precept, as moral or positive, is not determined by circumstances of this kind. If the prescription to keep the seventh day more holy than any other day, had been founded on the nature of things, and been recognizable by the human con- science, without the promulgation of an express law, it would, unquestionably, have been a moral duty, and obligatory upon all men to the end of the world. Whatever general purposes however, were designed to be accomplished by the ordination of a weekly sabbath, if its observance became a duty, solely on account of it being commanded, so that otherwise G G 226 it would not have been known to be a part of the mind and will of God, the observance is plainly to be classed with those positive divine laws, which are obligatory on those persons alone to whom they are delivered. The other notion, that the law of the sabbath is of a mixed, or middle nature, seems also to be clearly chargeable with inaccuracy. That the wor- ship and service of the Divine Being is a moral duty of universal obligation, is not for a moment to be questioned : this duty being recognizable by the human conscience, as right in itself, is obligatory, independent of the enactments of Moses, and of every written code of laws whatever. It does not alter the nature of this, or of any other moral obligation however, that it requires time to per- form it : it requires time to visit the widow and the fatherless, and to relieve the destitute; but no one thinks of saying that these duties are of a mixed or middle nature, because they cannot be performed without the consumption of a certain portion of time. It seems equally incorrect, to say that the law of the sabbath is of a mixed or middle nature. The worship of the Creator is, unquestion- ably, a moral duty : it was a duty obligatory on men prior to the promulgation of the fourth command- ment, and it must continue to be obligatory so long as the relation between man and his Maker exists. This obligation, it is obvious, stands wholly apart 227 from that particular duty specified in the Mosaic precept, the nature of which alone, is the real point with which we are at present concerned. That duty is the assignment of a determinate time, to the exclu- sive service of God — the separation of the seventh day from a common to a sacred use ; now these things, the determination of the seventh day to be a day of rest, and the sanctification of this rest to the pecu- liar service and worship of Jehovah, are undeniably appointments purely of a positive kind. That the law of the sabbath is an ordinance, correctly speaking, of a positive nature, seems to be thus clear, beyond all cavil, or reasonable dispute. The question whether this commandment is moral or positive in its nature, is not at all affected, it is to be observed, by the obligation of the pre- cept, but is wholly determined by the particular duty it prescribes. Every positive ordinance which the Creator promulgates, requires an instant and unqualified obedience, just as certainly as if it were moral in its nature. It is obvious, that to obey God in all things he commands, whether the command be moral or positive, is a duty indispensably obligatory on men as rational creatures. But, though obedience to all the revealed will of God, is thus a duty of in- dispensable obligation, it does not follow, that every law which God has prescribed must necessarily be of a moral nature. The morality of this obedience, it is plain, arises not from the nature of the commandment. 228 but from the obligation under which man, as a rational being, is placed, to comply with the will of his Cre- ator. Every positive law, like that of the sabbath, requires an unhesitating obedience from all to whom it is delivered : to sanctify the seventh day was thus a duty, indispensably obligatory on all the Jewish people : it is wholly inconceivable, however, that a law of this nature can be binding on others, unless such an extension of its obligation be actually made known. Another argument that has been adduced in sup- I / port of the notion, that the fourth commandment is of a moral nature, may be considered as deserving of some notice, from the celebrity of the writer who has brought it forward. " The main objection against the perpetuity of this command," says Pre- sident Edwards, " is, that the duty required is not moral." That this objection is an insufficient one, this writer attempts to prove on the following grounds. "That there should be certain fixed parts of time set apart to be devoted to religious exer- cises, is founded in the fitness of the thing, arising from the nature of things, and the nature and uni- versal state of mankind. Therefore there is as much reason, that there should be a command of perpetual and universal obligation about this, as about any other duty whatsoever." " The particular determi- nation of the proportion of time in the fourth com- mandment, is founded in the nature of things, only 229 our understandings are not sufficient absolutely to \ determine it of themselves. Without doubt, one / proportion of time is in itself fitter than another ; and a certain continuance of time better than any other ; considering the universal state and nature of mankind, which God may see, though our under- standings are not perfect enough absolutely to de- termine it. So that the difference between this command and others, doth not lie in this, that other commands are founded in the fitness of the things themselves, arising from the universal state and na- ture of mankind, and this not : but, only that the fitness of other commands is more obvious to the understandings of men, and they might have seen it of themselves ; but this could not be precisely dis- covered and positively determined without the as- sistance of revelation. So that the command of God, that every seventh day should be devoted to religious exercises, is founded in the universal state and nature of mankind, as well as other commands, only man's reason is not sufficient without divine direction so exactly to determine it."" This reasoning is more specious, we apprehend, than relevant to the point at issue. It is, no doubt, true, that many of the divine laws of a positive nature, may have their foundation on important reasons, which the human mind can neither discern, nor comprehend. It is quite conceivable too, that things ' Sermons on tlie Perpetuity of the Sabbath. Works, Vol. VII. p. 507. 230 which appear to men indifferent in themselves, may, in their nature, differ materially as understood by infinite wisdom. The responsibility of man, how- ever, does not extend beyond the measure of the powers and faculties with which he has been en- dowed : ordinances, therefore, which God may see to be founded in the nature of things, but which, from the natural and necessary limits of the human capacity, it is impossible the mind of man can dis- cern to have this foundation, can never constitute matter of obligation, except they be expressly ^^commanded and made known. The precise differ- ence between this command and others, pointed out by this acute writer, is, therefore, a true and suf- ficient reason for its being termed a positive, in contradistinction to a moral precept. Moral duties may be seen of themselves ; but this law could not be discovered without revelation. '' Moral pre- cepts," says Bishop Butler, to the same purpose, " are those, the reasons of which we see : positive precepts are those, the reasons of which we do not see. Moral duties arise out of the nature of the case itself; positive duties from external commands." Now, because the mind of man is insufficient to discern any reason for the seventh day being sanc- tified more than the sixth, or the eighth, or the ninth, the law which prescribed the sanctification of a particular day, is correctly called a positive pre- cept ; and is with manifest propriety regarded as 231 obligatory on those alone to whom it has been de- livered. The law of conscience cannot possibly extend beyond precepts, which, to the moral judgment, appear right in themselves, and which on this ac- count are recognized as of indispensable obligation independent of any enactment; and precepts which derive their obligation from an express announce- ment of the divine will. *^ If any one asks what is ( a moral precept," says a valuable contemporary writer, " the answer must be, that the conscience, if honestly consulted, will determine that point. So far from the moral precepts of the Mosaic law being, to the Christian, necessary to determine what is right and wrong, this moral judgment is necessary to determine which are the moral precepts of Moses."*^ On this account, another argument, which has sometimes been confidently assigned as a sufficient reason for regarding the fourth commandment as a moral precept, namely, that the other nine are all undeniably of a moral nature, seems to be altogether futile and irrelevant. To say nothing of the fact, that in other scriptural passages, moral and positive precepts are enumerated and blended together with- out any distinction, Ezek. xviii. 5-9, Acts xv. 20; it is indubitable, that a proper and ready recognition of every duty of a moral nature, is an obligation implied in the very constitution of man, as a rational ^ Wliately on Paul's Writings. 232 and accountable agent, and constitutes a chief part of his responsibility to his Maker. III. — There have been some writers who, from being accustomed to entertain, with an undoubting confidence, the opinion that the sabbath was insti- tuted at the creation of the world, seem to have imagined they were warranted in drawing from the supposition that this was the case, the conclusion, " that the ordinance was designed for the human race without distinction, and continues to be obli- gatory on all men unto the end of the world. "^ There has, hitherto, been much too great an importance attached in religious inquiries, to con- jectural notions of this nature. It is in vain we search the scriptures, with the professed view of ascertaining the mind and will of God, if we allow unsatisfactory conjectures, which admit neither of proof nor disproof, to influence and determine the conclusions we deduce from scriptural evidence. We can never reasonably expect to see the progress of religious error and delusion eflectually arrested, and the cause of scriptural truth generally to pre- vail, until people are taught to abandon the absurd habit of interpreting the scriptures through the medium of preconceived theories. Men have yet, in a great measure, practically to learn the im- portant truth, that an impartial induciio?i from legitimate scriptural evidence, is at the foundation of • Dwight. 233 all correct thinking upon religious subjects. It cannot for a moment be questioned, that if it be ascertained that the scriptures contain a revelation of the divine will, it must be the dictate, alike of reason and of duty, to receive implicitly whatever they reveal. If the scriptures be recognized as an authoritative com- munication from God to man, the question is no longer, what do we think is probable ? but, what is it that we find actually revealed as true ? Instead, then, of forming positive opinions on points con- cerning which there has no distinct information been communicated, and allowing conjectural notions to influence our minds in the examination of legitimate evidence, it seems more consonant with reason, and at the same time more respectful to that authorita- tive character which the scriptures claim, carefully to distinguish between what is certain and what is merely possible, or presumptive ; and from that portion of scriptural testimony, which we thus ascertain to be certain, to draw our conclusions, without giving heed to the vague notions and baseless theories of speculative divines. The particular time at which the law of the sab- bath was first promulgated, is obviously a question of fact, which, with every other point of a similar nature, can be determined only by competent testi- ( mony. It is, no doubt, quite conceivable, that some 1 sabbatical ordinance may have been instituted at the 1 Creation ; but that this actually was the case, is a I H H 231 mere conjecture, which afhiiits neither of satisfactory proof, nor of decisive confutation. It is certain, that of any institution or observance of the ordi- nance, prior to the time of Moses, there exists no record in the sacred volume. In the second chapter of Genesis, the sabbath is indeed mentioned, and the reasofi assigned for God sanctifying the serenfh day, namely, " because that in it, he had rested from all his work he created and made :" it is not there stated, however, that the observance of it commenced at that t'tme. Moses, it is to be remembered, was not narrating the history of the work of Creation, for the information and obedience of Adam and the patriarchs, but for the instruction and use of the Israelites, who lived two thousand five hundred years afterwards. As they had received a command to keep a weekly day of rest, and, as one of the rea- sons for the ordination of this command, was to commemorate the completion of the work of Creation on the seventh day, it was natural for the sacred historian, when recording the work of Creation in six days, to mention that the seventh day was the day of God's resting from his works, the event which they had been taught to celebrate by the observance of a weekly day of rest. This interpretation of the passage seems most naturally to accord with the facts of the case : at all events, it is undeniable, that there is nothing recorded from which it can be in- ferred, that the law was actually promulgated to 235 Adam in his state of innocence ; and it is not less certain, that of any observance of the institution, prior to its promulgation by Moses, there exists no trace in the subsequent history of the antediluvian iind patriarchal ages. It is deserving of notice, that while the conjecture that the sabbath was instituted at the Creation, is supported by no direct evidence contained in sacred history, all the subsequent evidence relative to the period of its first promulgation, points to a different conclusion. It is certain that the Jews and early Christians, who unquestionably possessed more fa- vourable opportunities of judging of the traditional impressions that existed respecting its origin than we do now, were generally opposed to the notion of its primeval institution. As its observance was not included in the reputed " seven precepts given to Noah," which the Jews held to be obligatory on all men, they adduced this fact as a conclusive proof that it was designed for their nation exclusively. It was their custom, accordingly, to designate it the bride of the synagogue ; in this way distinguishing it as an observance peculiar to themselves. The opinion that the sabbath was not known previous to the time of Moses, seems also to have generally ob- tained in the first ages of the christian church. The learned Heylin has argued, with much force, that as the early christian fathers, Justin, Irena^us, Tertul- lian, all adduce the non-existence of a sabbath before 236 the days of Moses, as a proof that it was not de- signed to retain its obligation under the gospel, the fact that an argument of this kind was confidently addressed to Jews and Jewish believers, shows very clearly, that this view of the subject was generally admitted at that time. " If we contend that the law is of perpetual and universal obligation," says Justin, " we run the hazard of charging God with inconsis- tency, as if he had appointed different modes of I justification at different times : since they who lived || before Abraham were not circumcised, and theij zoho ,1 lived before Moses, neither observed the sabbath, nor i| offered sacrifices, although God bore testimony to 1 them that they were righteous.'*^ This opinion is certainly in perfect accordance with the concurrent testimony of sacred history : for, of any observance of a sabbath during the patriarchal ages, no foot- steps are now to be traced. Neither in the history of the antediluvian world, nor in the history of Noah, nor in that of Abraham, nor of Isaac, nor of Jacob, is the institution once referred to. On the supposition that the sabbath was observed by the patriarchs, this circumstance is certainly not a little remarkable : for amona; the numerous minute and familiar narratives we possess, of the religious cus- toms and domestic habits of these times, it is very improbable that a single allusion to this weekly practice should never have once occurred, if it had ' Dr. Kaye's Justin Martyr, p. 23. 237 then been an established observance. As the sacred history advances, this improbability becomes stronger and stronger. If the Israelites had been in the practice of observing a weekly sabbath, previous to their migration to Egypt, the observance must ne- cessarily have been, in a great measure, discontinued, at the period of their captivity : there is no mention made, however, of any difficulty they experienced under the rule of their oppressive bond-masters, in fulfilling this religious obligation ; nor of the ob- i servance being suspended, or sinfully neglected :,' and it is certain, that those to whom the law was actually delivered, received no permission to dis- pense, at any time whatever, with the literal per- formance of its rigorous prescriptions. The sixteenth chapter of the Book of Exodus, contains the first account of the institution and ob- servance of a sabbatical ordinance, recorded in sacred history. It has sometimes been alleged, by] those who suppose that the ordinance was given to Adam at the Creation, that the words of the fourth commandment, ''Remember the sabbath (lay to keep \ it holy," plainly imply that the sabbath was known and observed previously. That the sabbath was known and observed, previous to the delivery of this command at Mount Sinai, is indubitable : it was first delivered at Sin, in the wilderness; and in a short time afterwards it was repeated to the people, " as a kingdom of i)riesls, a holy nation," 238 in that code of laws which was given them to be the permanent standard of their civil and religious po- lity. If, then, the word remember, refers to any previous knowledge of the institution at all, it is natural to think that it refers to its promulgation and observance in the wilderness : at all events, there is not the shadow of a proof, that it has any reference to a supposed coitimand given to Adam, and observed during the patriarchal ages. It is to be observed further, that while there is no intimation in this passage in Exodus, of the sabbath being the revival of a former ordinance, or the continuance of one already established, several of the circumstances that are related, furnish strong indications of the people being previously wholly unacquainted with any weekly sabbatical observance. The circum- stances which were preliminary to the ordination of the law, are thus narrated : " Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold I will rain bread from heaven for you, and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law or no. And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day, they shall prepare that which they bring in, and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily." This was spoken to Moses, on account of the murmuring of the people for the want of bread. It is further re- lated, that when the manna was given, the people '* gathered it every morning, every man according to 239 liis eating : and when the snn waxed hot it melted." It is stated also, that notwithstanding they had been strictly enjoined not to leave any portion of what they gathered until the following morning, " some of them did leave of what they had gathered, and it bred worms and stank, and Moses was wroth Avith them." It had already been intimated to Moses;^ that a double portion was to be gathered on the sixth \ day, but it does not appear that the reason of this double gathering was, at that time, assigned to the people. Now it is natural to think, that if they had been accustomed to keep the seventh day as a sabbath, this circumstance of a double supply being furnished on the sixth day, would have excited little or no surprise : we find it recorded, however, that when, " on the sixth day the people gathered twice as much bread," " all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses ;" evidently apprehensive of some mistake, and fearing, probably, that serious consequences might ensue if this were a second violation of the established regulation. To this ap- plication of the rulers, Moses made the following reply, now assigning as the reason for this double portion being gathered on the sixth day, the oi'dina- tion of a day of holy rest on the next. " This is that which the Lord hath said. To-morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the Lord: bake that which ye will bake to-day, and seethe that ye will seethe : and that which remaineth over, lay up for 240 you to be kept until the morning." " And they laid it up until the morning, as Moses bade, and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein. And Moses said. Eat that to-day : for to-day is a sabbath unto the Lord, to-day ye shall not find it in the field : Six days ye shall gather it, but the se- venth day which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none." f The whole tenor of this narrative seems, naturally, ? to accord with the supposition, that this was the : first actual institution of a weekly day of rest. The \ words of Moses would intimate more distinctly than they even do at present, that it was the institution of a new observance, if the English version had been more literally rendered : for, in the original, it is the indefinite article which occurs in the 23rd and 26th verses. The reply of Moses to the application of the rulers, ought accordingly to have been rendered, " To-morrow is a rest of a holy sabbath unto the Lord." " Six days shall ye gather it, but on the seventh day which is a sabbath, in it there shall be none." That the observance of a weekly day of rest was a new institution at that time, seems also to be plainly indicated by the conduct of the people, on receiving these instructions respecting the seventh day : at first, it appears, several of them refused to comply with the prescribed regulation. "And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the 241 seventh day for to gather, and they found none." This conduct called forth the following divine ex- postulation, in which there seems to be clearly implied the fact, that the sabbath was one of the commandments " giveii'' to the people " to prove them whether they would walk in God's law or no :" " And the Lord said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws ? See, for that the Lord hath given yon the sabbath, there- fore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days : abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day. So the people rested on the seventh day"^ That the sabbath was given to the Israelites at this time, seems also to be plainly indicated in pas- sages which occur in books of a later date. " Where- fore I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness, and I gave them my statutes, and shevved them my judg- ments, which if a man do he shall even live in them. Moreover also / gave them my sabbaths to be a sign between me and them, that they might know I am the Lord that sanctify them."'' " And madest known unto them thy holy sabbath, and commandedst them precepts, statutes, and laws, by the hand of Moses thy servant."' These passages seem to be strongly at variance with the supposition that the sabbath was known and observed as a divine ordinance ■ Exod. XV. 30. '■ Ezek. xx. 10-12. ' Neh. ix. 14. I I 242 during the patriarchal ages : for if this had been the case, it is difficult to see in what sense it could have been given and made knozvn in the wilderness at the time of Moses. That the sabbath was limited to the Jewish peo- / pie, and was not designed for the observance of mankind at large, is clearly shown also by the na- ture of several of the reasons assigned for its insti- \ tution. It is declared to have been an essential part \ of their national covenant, and a sign distinguishing \ them from every other nation. " Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a per- petual covenant ; it is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever."'' That the institution was desiijned for the Israelites alone, is shown also by the reasons by which its observance was enforced. In the fifth chapter of Deuteronomy, the Sinaitic covenant is repeated, and the miraculous deliverance of the people from Egyptian captivity, assigned as /the sole cause of the sabbath being instituted. "And / remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretch- ed out arm : therefore the Lord thy God com- manded thee to keep the sabbath day.'" There are other passages, indeed, in which the sabbath is stated to have been instituted in commemoration of » Exod. xxxi. 16, 17. See also Ezek. xx. 12. ' Deut. v. 15. 243 God's rest from the work of creation ; but it is to be observed, that even in these cases, the ordinance is spoken of as " a sign" of the covenant into which the nation had entered. The sabbath " is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever : for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and refreshed.""" It is thus very manifest, that the notion of the sabbath having been instituted at the Creation, from which the conclusion has so hastily been drawn, that " it is binding on all men in every age of the world," has prevailed without any sufficient proof. It is certain that there exists no express precept or undoubted example, from the existence of which alone, we could warrantably infer, that it was observed anterior to the time of Moses : on the other hand, it is the express testimony of the in- spired writers, that it " was given to the Israelites" by Moses, — that it " was made known" to that people in the wilderness, — and that it was afterwards promulgated to them as " a kingdom of priests, a holy nation," at Mount Sinai. That the ordinance was designed for this kingdom of priests alone, seems also to be clearly indicated by several of the purposes it was instituted to serve : it was to be " a perpetual covenant between them and Jehovah," and ** a sign between him and them for ever," thus distinguishing them from every other people. As ■" Exod. xxxi. 17. 244 the sabbath thus formed an essential part of the Sinaitic covenant, and as its observance was enforced by sanctions peculiar to the Israelitish theocratic government, it is natural to conclude that it w^as designed for the Jewish people exclusively, and was destined to terminate with that system of civil and religious polity with which it was, in divine wisdom, incorporated. IV. — By some writers, it has been maintained, that though the observance of a sabbath is not ex- pressly mentioned previous to its promulgation to the Israelites in the wilderness, there are indications of a septenary division of time in the Mosaic history of the patriarchal ages, which can receive no satis- factory solution, except on the supposition of the sabbath having been familiarly known at that early period. It is usual with this class of writers also to advance, that there are indications of a general knowledge of the weekly sabbath to be found in the sacredness attached by the Gentiles to the number seven ; and it has been inferred, that this traditional knowledge, of which (it is assumed) several of the heathen nations were in possession, must have been transmitted to them from the earliest ages of the world. On these, and on some other collateral questions, of a nature similarly obscure and conjectural, there has long existed, among learned writers, a consider- able diversity of opinion. When, indeed, the nature 245 of the evidence relative to them is considered, it is unreasonable to expect that the most dispassionate inquirers will ever, on such points, be found en- tirely to agree. On the particular consideration of such conjectural questions, we do not feel called upon at the present to enter ; for whether or not there be any sufficient reason for entertaining the opinion, that some sabbatical institution was ob- served previous to the time of Moses, (and, as has already been remarked, it is certainly quite possible that some law of the kind may have been then in force, although no instance of its observance has , ... . / been recorded,) it is manifest that the question of ' the existing obligation of the weekly sabbath, as well as the grounds and extent of religious obliga- tion in general, are wholly independent of all points of this doubtful nature. It is the certain testimony of the apostles of Christ, it is ever to be remem-\ bered, which constitutes the authoritative rule of christian duty, and not the dubious theories which ; learned writers have applied to the interpretation of j the scanty records of ancient sacred and profane j history. J Nearly all the passages which, at one time, it was customary for the advocates of the perpetuity of the sabbath to adduce, in support of the conjecture, that the Pagan nations were in possession of a traditional knowledge of a weekly day of rest, are nor/ gene- rally allowed to be either wholly irrelevant, or so V 246 very ambiguous in their meaning, as to admit of no satisfactory inference being deduced from them. The few passages which are acknowledged as genu- ine," serve chiefly to prove, that the custom of attaching a peculiar sacredness to the number seven, obtained very generally among several of the Pagan nations, — a custom, the existence of which no one has ever sought to call in question. The peculiar importance that was attached to this number, by so many ancient writers, both sacred and profane, is doubtless a very singular coincidence ; and affords a considerable degree of countenance to the conjec- ture, that the practice may have originated in one and the same source. Even this, however, can never be correctly considered as being more than a plausible conjecture, for it admits of no satisfac- tory proof. In the sacred writings, it is well known, the num- ber seven is very frequently used to denote perfection. It is possible that this use of the word may have been derived from a knowledge, transmitted from ° Several of the lines, wliich it was customary for all the old puritan divines to give as the authorities of Hesiod and Homer upon this point, are now un- derstood to have been the coinage of some ancient writer, (supposed to have been Aristobulus, or Clement of Alexandria,) who had thought proper to invent them to serve this or some similar purpose. Those who have lately been at the pains of examining the works of these poets, purposely in quest of such cita- tions, have been unable to discover any trace of them. The puritan divines had evidently all copied them one from another ; and, in doing this, they have been followed by numerous respectable writers, since their time. — See, on this subject, A Letter fo G. Higgbis, Esq., hy T. S. Hughes, B.A., of Cambridge . 247 one generation to another, that the work of creatioii was completed and made perfect on the seventh day :\ or, perhaps, in some traditional knowledge which the patriarchs possessed, of God resting from his works on that day. It is not impossible also, bnt that a corrnption of this tradition may have been the original source of the ancient superstition pre- valent in pagan countries, respecting the number seven : this supposition, however, possesses, we ap- prehend, a very faint shadow of probability. Some learned writers have maintained, with a much better show of reason, that the origin of this custom is to ! be traced to the practice of keeping the seventh j month sacred in honour of the birth of Apollo : and j others with a greater appearance of probability still, have contended that the true origin of the custom, is to be found in the number of the planets then known to exist, from which source, it is well known, the heathens derived the names they gave to the days of the week. " Dion Cassius, in Pompeius, c. 6, says, that the Romans derived the practice of assigning the names of the planets to different days, from the Egyptians, and that it had become, in a certain degree, national among them. Whether the Egyptians, having received the com- putation of time by weeks from the Jews, ap- plied the names of the seven heavenly bodies then known to be immediately connected with our sys- tem to the days of the week, or whether their 248 observation of the heavenly bodies first led them to compute time by periods of seven days, may be doubtful ; but it appears certain that the computa- tion was made subservient to the purposes of as- trology."" The vi'hole of this curious subject seems to be irretrievably involved in doubt and obscurity. Whether Homer possessed any knowledge of a /septenary division of time at all, is now admitted to be by no means certain : it is abundantly clear, indeed, that as early as his time, a peculiar sacred- ness was attached to the number seven ; whatever may have been the source in which the superstition originated. As it respects our present purpose however, it is of more importance to notice, that though there is sufficient evidence of the prevalence of this custom among the Greeks and other nations, there exists no proof whatever of any of these na- tions having ever kept a weekly sabbath. On the / contrary, it is certain that the Gentiles were, for a long period, entirely ignorant of the existence of such an observance ; and it is matter of history, that when they first heard of it, they derided it as a Jewish superstition. It is to be remembered, moreover, that it is the explicit testimony of the sacred historian, that the sabbath was given to the Israelites as a nation separated to God's peculiar and exclusive service ; — that it was to be " a perpetual covenant and sign ° Dr. Kaye's Justin Martyr, p. 95, 249 between God and the children of Israel for ever."'' " Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep : for it is a sign between me throughout your generations: that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify your^^ When the unequivocal import of this and similar statements, assigned by Jehovah himself as the reason for the ordination of the sabbath, is con- sidered, it appears very strange that, in the face of such an authority, so many of the professed advo- cates of the claims of revealed religion, should have shown so great an anxiety to discover evidences of the existence of a sabbath among Pagan nations. It is incontrovertible that the scriptures state that the sabbath was given to the Jewish people as a sign of their national covenant, serving, with other ordi- nances, to distinguish them from all the nations by which they were surrounded : if then, these writers had discovered the evidence, in support of the notion that the institution was designed for mankind in ge- neral and was observed in every age of the world, of which they were in quest, it is not easy to see in what sense the institution could, in that case, have been correctly said to be " a sign between God and the children of Israel for ever," or how it could have served the "end at all, of perpetuating among the Israelites a knowledge of the important fact, that Jehovah had sanctified or separated them from every other people. '' Exod. xxxi. 16. '' Exod. xxxi. 13. K K 250 There seems to be equally little reason for at- taching the importance that some have done, to the early adoption of the custom of computing time by the number seven. If, indeed, the computation of time by periods of seven days, had been the only or principal use of the number which obtained during the patriarchal ages, there might be some colour of reason for attaching a degree of importance to the practice : this, however, was by no means the case. The word week was used among the Hebrews, not merely as denoting a period of seven days ; it signified also, a period of seven years, computing from one sabbatical year to another, and also a period of seven times seven years, reckoned from one sabbatical jubilee to another. This exten- sive use of the word seems to have obtained, in some degree, among the Israelites, not only subse- quent to the erection of their theocratic government, but even during the patriarchal ages, prior to the ordination of any sabbatical year or jubilee. We read in the Book of Genesis, for instance, that Laban, in reply to Jacob's expostulation, (on the occasion of his not receiving Rachel to wife, having served for her, as was stipulated, seven years,) used the following language. " It must not be so done in our country, to give the younger before the first born. Fulfil her zaeek, and we will give thee this also for the service which thou shalt serve with me, yet seven other yearsy " And Jacob did so, and 251 fulfilled her week, and he gave him Rachel his daughter to wife also." It is by no one pretended that the seventh year sabbath was instituted ante- rior to the time of Moses : if, however, the practice of computing time by periods of seven days, (and it ought to be borne in mind, that the prevalence of this practice at that time at all, is by no means cer- tain,) is to be regarded as an evidence of the early institution of a weekly sabbath, and of its having been originally designed for mankind in general ; the practice of computing time by weeks of years, may with equal cogency be adduced in proof of the ordination of a sabbatical year, previous to the erec- tion of the Jewish theocracy. That at the introduction of the gospel, all the christian converts should have adopted the practice of computing time by periods of seven days, was what was naturally to have been expected. Jesus and his first disciples being all Jews, were already accustomed to use this hebdomadal division of time, and the Gentile converts would naturally be led to adopt the same convenient custom. The language in which some of the leading facts of the gospel are narrated, such as that Christ rose from the dead " on the first day of the week,'' would of itself indeed teach the primitive believers to adopt the practice ; and it is not improbable, that the occurrence of the above and other similar expressions, led also to the general adoption of the custom of holding their 252 stated convocations for worship on the first day of the week, a practice which, it is evident, obtained at a very early period of the christian church. j V. — It has been customary with some writers to / assume, that the duty required in the fourth com- / mandment is, simply, the sanctification of a seventh \ portion of time, or of one day in seven : and that the precept is obeyed by sanctifying the first day of the week, just as well as by sanctifying the seventh day, or any other. By this representation of the requirements of the law, these persons have attempted to escape from that charge of inconsistency, which so palpably attaches to those who deduce from a commandment which states, that " the seventh day is the sabbath," the conclusion that men are now under an obligation to sanctify another day, of which the precept makes no mention. This method of interpreting a positive law of heaven, if less glaringly inconsistent than the il- logical practice it attempts to avoid, seems in itself to be not less unjustifiable. We never read in any part of the Old or New Testament scriptures, /of any law requiring men to keep holy a seventh I portion of time, or one day in seven : the sanc- I tification of the sabbath, and of the seventh day, \ are the only duties mentioned ; and these two are ^ uniformly represented to be the same thing, — the expressions being familiarly used as convertible terms. It will not be questioned, that the weekly sabbath 253 observed by the Jewish people, was that prescribed in the fourth commandment : there were not two or more weekly sabbaths prescribed to them ; there was only one — and that one was expressly stated to be the seventh day. As then, the sanctification of this day was the duty particularized in the command- ment, it is manifestly a gross and most presumptuous misrepresentation of the precept, to say that it requires merely the sanctification of one day in seven, a prescription, mentioned neither in the decalogue nor in any other portion of the Sacred volume. No doubt, if God had enjoined the sanctification of a seventh portion of time, without specifying any particular day, men would have been at liberty to observe any day they pleased. To recognize, how- ever, the obligation of the fourth commandment, and arbitrarily to alter its prescriptions at our own pleasure ; to affirm that it is immaterial what day be observed, provided we do observe a sabbath,\ when a particular day has been distinctly specified ; \ to deal in this manner with the express command- \ ments of Jehovah, must surely be alike presumptuous and unwarrantable. All conduct of this kind stands ' exposed to the threatenings annexed to every inter- ference with the positive laws of heaven. If this sabbatical law extends to christians, it behoves them to give it an unhesitating and exact obedience. It is not for a moment to be questioned that He who delivered the law, possesses alone a right to alter its 254 prescriptions. We may indeed imagine that one day is as good as another, and that the observance of the first day of the week must serve precisely the same ends as the observance of the seventh. Thus thought Naaman the Syrian, that one river must be as good as another. This may be all quite true, so long as God makes no difference between one day, or one river, and another : — when that difference, however, is once made, and intimated for man's obedience, by the promulgation of a positive law, it behoves christians to beware of contemning God, by gainsaying what he has said. In matters of this kind, men have nothing to do, but to hearken with implicit deference to the voice of their Maker, — to listen, and to obey. VI. — Some advocates of the modern sabbath have attempted to introduce a modification of the pre- scribed mode of observing the original law, and have contended that it was only with this proposed mo- dification of its duties, the precept is now binding. They conceive that an allowance ought to be made for the difference between the rigour of the Jewish and the liberality of the Christian dispensation ; and that a correspondent alteration ought to be made in the interpretation of the sabbatical observance. The Jewish people, they think, were unnecessarily scru- pulous in their manner of keeping the day, and \ committed the gross mistake of making the literal \ observance of its prescriptions the end itself of the 255 institution, instead of viewing it in the correct light (correct, that is, according to the Hght in which these modern Sabbatarians view it,) of being merely " an important means of religious improvement." While, therefore, they disapprove entirely of trans- ferring the rigour and austerity of the Jewish observance to the mild dispensation of the gospel, they contend that though a literal adherence to its prescriptions is no longer called for, the object which the observance is adapted to promote, is so highly important, that the recognition and prudent ob- servance of the law is still an important religious duty. This seems to be the chief ground on which Bishop Horsley wished to rest his defence of the modern doctrine. " The spirit of the Jewish law," says this writer, '' was rigour and severity. Rigour and severity were adapted to the rude manners of the first ages of mankind, and were particularly suited to the refractory temper of the Jewish people. The rigour of the law itself was far outdone by the rigour of the popular superstition and the phari- saical hypocrisy — if, indeed, superstition and hy- pocrisy, rather than a particular ill will against our Lord, were the motives with the people and their rulers, to tax him with a breach of the sabbath, when they saw his power exerted on the sabbath day for the relief of the afflicted. The christian law is the law of liberty. We are not, therefore, to take the measure of our obedience from the letter 256 of the Jewish law, — much less from Jewish preju- dices, and the suggestions of Jewish malignity. In the sanctification of the sabbath in particular, we have our Lord's express authority to take a pious discretion for our guide ; keeping constantly in view the end of the institution, and its necessary subor- dination to higher duties.""^ This view of the subject is no doubt very specious ; and wearing as it does to most minds, the appear- ance of steering a middle course — a course dictated by prudent moderation, and removed at an equal distance from the error of those who insist on the sabbath being still kept with Pharisaical austerity, and the apparently not less dangerous notion of es- teeming every day alike holy, it naturally recom- mends itself at once, to all men of timid minds, who are satisfied with a hasty and superficial view of the question/ Plausible, however, as this notion at first sight appears, it is liable to the serious objection of being destitute of all legitimate scriptural evi- dence : — it seems to be founded indeed on a radically defective and erroneous conception of the original ' Sermon on Mark ii. 27. • On this and on every other question of apparent difficulty, upon which there exists a diversity of opinion, men of weak and undecided minds, readily fall in with any notion that appears in their view to modify the subject. This modification of the question is looked upon as the safest course ; and usually saves them the exertion of personally instituting such an accurate inquiry into its real bearing, as would qualify them to come to a decisive and satisfactory conclusion upon it. 257 design of the sabbatical institution, as well as of the peculiar nature of that economy with which it was interwoven : — and it assumes, moreover, a discretion- ary power to adapt the duties of the positive laws of Jehovah to our own notions of propriety, which is alike unauthorized and presumptuous. Whatever " pious discretion" men may now as- sume in their manner of keeping the sabbath, it is certain, that the law itself gives no person, whether Jew or Christian, a discretionary power to dispense with any one of its prescriptions. That the Jewish people did not consider themselves at liberty to mo- dify, in any degree, these prescriptions, is unequivo- cally shown by their uniform careful observance of them :' and it is not less certain, that in strictly ad- hering to the letter of the law, they were simply acting conformably with their revealed rule of duty. The notion that they usually overlaid the observance with unnecessary restrictions, and magnified the im- portance of an outward compliance with its duties, at the expense of that diffusion of religious know- ledge the institution was calculated to promote, is unsupported, we apprehend, by any legitimate proof. ' At the conquest of Jerusalem, by Pompey, (B. C. C3,) the siege would have been protracted to a much greater length, had the Jews been willing to make the least effort in their own defence on the sabbath ; but as they scrupulously abstained from all labour on that day, the Romans, every sabbath, filled up the ditch, and set their engines against the walls without opposition : this enabled them, on other days of the week, to make their attacks with more effect, and contributed greatly to their ultimate success. L L 258 That this or any other of the institutions of the old covenant, indeed, was designed principally to spread religious and general knowledge among the people, appears to be an assumption founded on an entire misconception of the nature and primary design of the Mosaic economy. It is not to be forgotten, that there was a veil placed purposely upon the face of Moses, hindering the people from seeing to the end of that, which was afterwards to be abolished ; — a veil which was never once removed until the advent of the Messiah. The old covenant, moreover, was designed to beget a spirit of fear and bondage, and to retain its subjects in a state of pupilage, until their arrival at that promise of spiritual re- demption they inherited. The rigorous prescrip- tions of the sabbath, in conjunction with the other laws which they xi'ere compelled to obey, were, for wise purposes, imposed on them, until the time of gospel reformation ; when, to those whose hearts were opened to understand the good news of salva- tion, this burden was displaced by the service of Him, whose " yoke is easy and whose burden is light." Feeling, however, as the Jewish people sensibly did, the service of Moses to be " a yoke which neither they nor their fathers were able to bear," they never presumed to introduce any mo- dified interpretation of the positive precepts of Jehovah. As respected the manner in which they kept the sabbath day in particular, it is certain that 259 they, at least, were not left to their own " pious discretion," for the literal observance of the pre- scriptions of the law, which related, it is to be re- membered, not only to an abstinence from all bodily and secular labour, but to the regular domestic economy of every family, was enforced by the most solemn of all earthly sanctions. The law was, " Whosoever doth any work on the sabbath, (and the kindling of a fire was specified as doing work,) shall surely be put to death." Thus were they commanded literally " to rest upon the sabbath day." It is not to be questioned, then, that in scrupu- lously adhering to all the prescriptions of the sab- bath, the Jewish people were merely acting in conformity with the injunctions delivered to them. That they generally overlaid it with needless re- strictions, or superstitiously made the observance itself an end, in this way misconceiving its design as an important means of diffusing knowledge, seem to be pure figments of modern invention, deriving no countenance either from the facts of sacred history, or from the scriptural account of the original design of the sabbatical institution. It has been supposed, indeed, that the conduct of Jesus, on various occasions, with respect to the sab- bath, in taking liberties with it, which at that time were deemed unjustifiable, was meant to be a re- proof of the over-scrupulous sanctity of the Phari- 260 sees, in their manner of observing the day ; and in support of the supposition, this text has confidently been cited, " The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath," — words which have been interpreted as " an emphatic axiom, expressive of the universal design and utility of the institution." The conduct of Jesus referred to, has also been fre- quently represented as being a practical correction of the unnecessary strictness with which the sabbath was then observed, with a view of permanently adapting the observance to the mild spirit of that new dispensation he was about to introduce. This interpretation of Christ's conduct, is usually assumed to be so obviously correct, as to admit of no dispute : specious, however, as it no doubt may be made to appear, it has been adopted, we apprehend, on very insufficient grounds. It is perfectly true, that, in various instances, the scribes and Pharisees added traditions of their own to the prescriptions of Moses, numerous and bur- densome as these prescriptions of themselves were : while Jesus, however, frequently rebuked these men for their selfish, hypocritical pretences, and their sanctimonious, self-righteous notions, it does not ap- pear he ever found fault with the Jewish people for strictly complying with the rigorous terms of the sabbatical law, or with those of any other of the laws of Moses. On the contrary, it is certain, that he uniformly recognized the authority and literal obli- 261 gation of all the Mosaic precepts ;" and, by personally fulfilling all righteousness, paid them the highest conceivable honour and respect. It is deserving of peculiar notice, that in most of the instances in which Jesus has been supposed to reprove the Pharisees for overloading the sabbath with needless restrictions, his principal and real pur- pose appears to have been to assert, by an intentional violation of the law, his divine authority, and Ms own riglit as the Messiah, to dispense with all the positive enactments of Moses. It was evidently with this view, for instance, that he asserted his lordship or power over the sabbath, " The Son of man" (the usual title he applied to himself) "is Lord also of the sabbath." It seems to have been the leading purpose of the conduct and conversation of Jesus, during his ministry, not so much to communicate christian instruction to the Jewish people, or even to his own disciples, (who indeed, as, he himself informed them, were not then competent to receive it,) as to furnish satisfactory evidence of the validity of his claim to the Messiahship, while, at the same time, he was finishing the work given him to do. As the salvation of men had uniformly been represented in the Old Testament scriptures, as depending on the future revelation that was to be made, re- " " Jesus said to the multitude and to liis disciples, The scribes and the Phari- sees sit in Moses' seat : all therefore tuhatsoevcr they bid you observe, that observe and do." — Matt, xxiii. 2. 3. 262 specting the person and work of the Messiah, the chief questions which Jesus seems to have aimed at calling men's attention to, were such as these, " What think ye of Christ ?" " Whose son is he ?" By what works was he to prove his character and mission ? In the fifth chapter of the Gospel of John, for instance, we find it narrated, that Jesus wrought a supernatural cure on a lame man who lay at the pool of Bethesda ; and that on this cure being ef- fected, he commanded the man to take up his bed and walk. This took place on the sabbath day. The Jews finding the man carrying his bed, charged him with breaking the sabbath, and doubtless on good grounds, for this act was a manifest violation of the law of Moses. The man, on being challenged for his conduct, naturally stated what had taken place, and afterwards gave his accusers Jesus as his authority, for what he had done : the charge of breaking the sabbath was accordingly transferred to Jesus himself'' What then was Christ's conduct, on being charged with violating the sabbath ? Did he attempt to disprove the charge, by showing that the Jews had misinterpreted and overstated the law upon the subject ? No ; he appealed at once, it is deserving of notice, to the divine authority he ' The act was evidently regarded as a capital crime ; for it is related, " there- fore they sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day." — John v, 16. 263 possessed, as furnishing his warrant for breaking the sabbath, and superseding every positive precept of Moses. Jesus answered them, " My Father worketh hitherto and I work.''^ It was on the same grounds, namely, his own es- pecial authority, that he rested his defence, when his disciples were charged with rubbing out the grains of corn on the sabbath. He seems to admit the act itself was unlawful ; but, after making an allusion to the case of David and his companions, in eating the shew bread in the temple, (in referring to which, it appears to have been his object to show that the au- thority he possessed was at least equal to that of high priest, who dispensed with the divine law on that oc- " This answer was evidently understood by the Jews as implying the posses- sion of divine power, and as calling God his Father in such a peculiar sense, as to claim an equality with God : for it is related, it exasperated them to that extent, " that they sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." This obviously was the leading question to which Jesus vpished to di- rect their attention ; and it afforded him an opportunity of proving, which he immediately afterwards did, the validity of his claim to the Messiahship. — See John v. 17-47. In this and similar passages, we may be allowed to remark, there seems to be contained the simplest and best key to a satisfactory solution of the controverted question respecting the person of Christ. At that period, it is obvious, there was no difference of opinion about the meaning of the expression, " the Son of God :" that this designation implied a real and proper divinity of nature, was on all sides agreed. The question between Jesus and his opponents was, at no time, whether this appellation signified a divine person ; the real question at issue was, whether his claim to be the Son of God was a valid one. This, then, is the proper ground on which the question ought to be placed. It is a plain matter of fact, which every plain-minded reader of the gospel history can judge of as correctly and as satisfactorily as can the most erudite critic. The question 264 casion,) he declares that " the Son of man is Lord of the sabbath, inasmuch as the sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath." It is in this connexion that the latter expression ought to be in- terpreted : it does not stand alone, but is brought forward as a proposition, from which the conclusion is drawn, that Jesus possessed an entire dominion over this and every other positive appointment of the Mosaic economy. It seems then to be wholly incorrect, to interpret this expression as designed to affirm " the universal design and utility of the sab- batical institution." The meaning of the words, when viewed in their connexion, is plainly this, " The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the is not, what meaning do learned tlieologians now attach to the name given to Jesus, " the Son of God ?" but, what was the universal sense in which this designation was understood, when Jesus was on earth ? That in calling himself the Son of God, Jesus was understood by his enemies to mean he was a divine person, is indubitable ; for it was on this very account they charged him with blasphemy ; " he said God was his Father, making himself equal with God." That, by the expression, he actually wished to convey this meaning, is not less certain ; for when this charge of blasphemy was made against him, he did not, it is to be observed, attempt to refute it, by showing they had misinterpreted what he intended to state : on the contrary, he tacitly admitted this was the true sense of his words, and proceeded to ground his defence on that divine evi- dence by which he substantiated his claims as the Messiah. The solemn con- troversy between Jesus and his opponents, on this point, was never settled during his life ; and terminated in the apparent victory of the latter, in their cruel crucifixion of the Son of God. Then it was, that their mistaken judg- ment and unjust sentence were refuted and reversed ; and that (by the Father interposing and raising Jesus from the dead, thus " declaring him to be the Son of God with power,") the controversy was finally, and beyond all rational doubt, determined, •265 sabbath, therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the sabbath/' All the positive appointments of the Mosaic covenant, that had been instituted in adap- tation to that stage of the progress of the scheme of redemption, could be abrogated by the same au- thority which originally enacted them. The sab- bath vi^as one of these ordinances ; and the Son of man claimed a dominion over it, in virtue of the divine authority he possessed, — a powder to dispense with its obligation, and to supersede it by the insti- tutions of his own kingdom/ While Jesus, however, in this manner publicly and avowedly violated the sabbath, and gave as his reason for doing so, that the sabbath was made not for himself but for mati, he never once, during his public ministry, gave any general permission to dispense with the prescriptions of this or any other law of Moses ; much less did he teach men to use a " pious discretion," in modifying .the positive laws of heaven to suit their own notions of propriety. It is manifest, therefore, that to adduce his conduct in asserting his personal dominion over every positive precept of the Mosaic covenant, as an authoritative precedent for men now assuming a discretionary li- berty with the positive laws of Jehovah, is altogether erroneous and unjustifiable. In matters of this In confirmation of tliis view of the words, see the parallel passages. Matt. xii. 1-8. Luke vi. 1-5, M M 266 kind, it is inconceivable that any compromise, or modification of duty whatever, can be warrantable. To assume, indeed, a liberty to modify any positive divine precept, is to introduce a principle fraught with the most serious evils and dangers : for the same principle which would warrant us in altering, in any degree, the prescribed mode of observing the sabbath, or any similar institution, would necessarily open a door for the admission of the countless tra- ditions and inventions of " the mystery of iniquity." /It is no doubt true, that we offend God as cer- '(tainly, by neglecting to obey the positive laws he fbas promulgated, as by adding our own inventions and will-worship to the revealed will of heaven : ihere is plainly a possibility of erring in either way. \^ %'hen, however, after the obligation of a positive law like that of the sabbath is recognized, we presume to modify its duties in accommodation to our own notions of *' pious discretion," the sin and danger of our conduct is inevitable. It is impossible that conduct of this kind can either be acceptable to God, or safe for man. An unhesitating compliance with the re- vealed will of God, (as one of the best of the Puritan divines'* has somewhere said,) walking humbly and steadfastly according to this rule, a supreme regard to the authority of Christ as the only Lord of the Dr. John Owen. 267 conscience ; it is acting thus, that can alone prove permanently satisfactory to our own minds, justify us in the eyes of all sober-thinking christian men, and produce an obedience acceptable to Him whom alone christians are bound to serve. VII. — By a few writers it has been supposed, that \ the change of the sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, is intimated in the ninth verse/ of the fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrew^ " There remaineth therefore a rest (a sabbatism) to the people of God." In support of this opinion it has been advanced, that as in this passage, the apostle, instead of the word Katapausis, which he had pre- viously been using, to express that rest of which he is treating, uses the Hebrew term Sabbatisjnos, which admits of the signification, " the keeping of a sabbath," it is warrantable to infer, that this change of the term was made in order to include the first day of the week, and to denote it as the new day of sabbatical rest under the gospel. By that sabbatical rest which the apostle says, " re- maineth to the people of God," these writers un- derstand, accordingly, this supposed first day sab- bath, — a rest, which christians enter into, and enjoy in this world. According to this view of the pas- sage, the leading design of the apostle is to exhibit the excellency of the gospel, its freedom from a spi- rit of bondage, and that peace with God and spiritual rest which flow from the belief of the truth, in con- 268 trast with the burdensome yoke, and servile state, of the former dispensation.'' Any one who is at the pains of examining the scope of the context, will readily perceive that this interpretation greatly perplexes the whole passage, by rendering the meaning of the writer, which of itself seems very plain, extremely involved and ob- scure : besides this, it is open to the serious objection of materially injuring the apostle's argument, making it obviously incorrect and inconclusive. The i^est of '■ We are not aware that this view of the passage has been adopted by any modern commentator of any note. — See Doddridge, Maclcnight, Scott, Stuart, Sfc. 8fC. in loc. It was very prevalent however, during the seventeenth century, and was maintained with great zeal and erudition by Dr. John Owen, and se- veral other learned divines of the same school. It was adopted also by Glas, and by some others of the most eminent of the early English and Scotch In- dependents. — See Owen on Hebrews, in loc. — Glas's Works, vol. 111,^. 356. While these learned congregationalists, however, held this opinion, and acted on it themselves, they knew their own principles too well, to allow them to think of inferring from this sabbatism, (which they contended pertained to the believers of the gospel exclusively,) the conclusion that civil governments are bound to enforce the observance of what is called a christian sabbath, on a pro- miscuous population. " It was a great profanation of the sabbatism of the peo- ple of God," says the last mentioned writer, " to oblige the nations to keep the first day of the week as christians, who could not therein show regard and sub- jection to the authority and power of the Lord Jesus, but unto that authority and power that constrained them to keep it, which also appointed and obliged them to keep many other holy days without any warrant from the New Testa- ment. Christ gave commission to make disciples by the gospel, and to teach them to observe all things, whatsoever he commanded the apostles : but he gave no commission to procure an observance of the things which he commanded, by virtue of any other authority or power, but that of his word : and all force or compulsion is inconsistent with the nature of the obedience he requires, and with the profession of subjection to him in doing the things that he says." — On the Three Divine Rests, 269 which the apostle is speaking, is plainly not that of the first, or any other day of the week, but one, a promise of which was left to the believing Hebrews at that time ; it was a rest into which they were exhorted diligently to strive to seek to enter, and cautioned lest any of them should fall short of it. As none of them had then arrived at this rest, though they had already believed the gospel, it seems very manifest that the apostle was treating, not of any rest in this life, but of a perfect and eternal rest in heaven. With this supposition ac- cordingly, the whole tenor of his argument accords ; for after showing that neither the rest of the seventh day, nor that in the land of Canaan, was the ulti- mate rest intended, but only types of it, he con- cludes that there was still a rest in store — a sabbatism remaining for the people of God. " The apostle, in his conclusion, hath substituted the word sabbatismos for the word katapausis, rest, used in his premises. But both are proper, especially the word sabbatism, in this place, because by directing us to what is said in verse 4, it showeth the nature of that rest which remaineth to the people of God. It will resemble the rest of the sabbath, both in its employments and enjoyments : for therein the saints shall rest from their work of trial, and from all the evils they are subject to in the present life ; and shall recollect the labours they have undergone, the dangers they have escaped, and the temptations they have overcome : 270 and by reflecting on these things, and the method of their salvation, they shall be unspeakably happy."" The word sahbatismos, which occurs in the 10th verse, is merely a Hebrew word with a Greek end- ing : that this term and the word katapausis, though both employed, are used as equivalent in significa- tion, seems to be indubitable : for if it were other- wise, — if the former had been used with the intention of expressing more than the latter, the apostle's reasoning would be entirely invalidated, there being in that case more in his conclusion than in the pre- mises from which his inference is deduced. It is no doubt true, that the believers of the gos- pel enjoy, even in this world, a spiritual rest through faith in Christ : but the enjoyment of this rest must ever be accompanied with fighting the good fight of faith, and running with patience the race set before them. It is also certain that this present rest in Christ is intimately connected with the hope and prospect of that future perfect rest of which the apostle treats : for every christian is begotten again to the lively hope of it, by the resurrection of Christ from the dead ; to the hope, namely, of an inheritance, incorruptible, undefiled, which fadeth not away. Of this rest, re- served in heaven for every true follower of Christ, the apostle, as has already been remarked, treats at large in the passage under consideration ; and con- cludes by proving, that it still " remains in store a ' Macknifflit's Note, in loc. 271 sabbatism for the people of God." Acquiescing, with ardent gratitude, in this conclusion, every christian may, in the words of the same apostle upon a diffe- rent occasion^ with much reason exclaim, " Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift :"— for that present, perpetual, spiritual sabbatism, which is now enjoyed by the belief of the gospel of salvation ; and above all, for the promise and prospect of a perfect and interminable sabbatism beyond death and the grave. " Having, therefore, the promise" of this future sabbatism, and being already put in possession of that spiritual rest which is the sure pledge and foretaste of the ultimate realization of an eternal rest i in heaven, surely with christian men, even in this pre- sent life, every day ought to be as a sabbath day. / 273 NOTE. That the whole life of a christian ought to be regarded and passed as a holy sabbath, and not any particular part of it more than another, seems to have been the prevailing doctrine during the first four centuries. Of any other christian sabbath than this, the writers of that time appear to have been wholly ignorant. This, Heylin has shown at large, by numerous citations from Chry- .. sostom, Augustin, and from various others of the Christian Fathers. See Hieronymus in Decalog ; Justin Martyr Dial, cum Tryph ; Chrysost. Hom. 39 in Matt, xii ; Clemens Alexandr, Strom, lib.iv; and Augustin Op. passim. " Of all the ten commandments," says the last mentioned writer, " that of the sabbath alone, is given to be kept as a figure ; which figure we are to embrace with our understanding, not also to set forth by bodily rest. For, whereas, by the sabbath is signified the spiritual rest to which all mankind are called by our Lord himself, saying, Come unto me, and I will give you rest ; yet the other commandments we keep, without any figurative signification, in their primary and proper sense as they were delivered." On this, however, as well as on various other points, it is frequently a matter of considerable difficulty, to reconcile the Fathers, as they are called, with each other : sometimes, indeed, it is not a little difficult to reconcile them with themselves. The principal cause of the inconsistencies that appear in their writings respecting the sabbath, seems to have been the importance then attached to the decalogue ; and the difficulty found in reconciling the notion of its perpetuity with their non-observance of the fourth commandment. Irenseus, who appears to have maintained that the decalogue is of perpetual obligation, speaking of the N N 274 abolition of the sabbaths, says, " They were designed to teach us to persevere in serving God the whole day, all the time of our life, and to foreshow that rest of God, his kingdom, in which, whoever has so persevered resting from his labours, will be made a partaker of God's table." In other places, he speaks of " the times of the kingdom, as the hallowed seventh day, the true sabbath of the righteous," which was to begin, as he thought, when the world lasted six days, that is, six thousand years, Iren. adv. Hares. Sometimes the Lord's day is spoken of, by the writers of that age, as being so superior to the sabbath, as en- tirely to have superseded it, and at other times, as being a type of the millenium and heavenly rest. Origen extravagantly con- tends that, as manna was rained from heaven on the Lord's day, and as there was none rained on the sabbath, from this fact the Jews ought to understand " that from that time, our Lord's day was set above the Jewish sabbath !" By the small body of christians who, in modern times, have maintained the existing obligation of the seventh day sabbath, it has been supposed that their predecessors, the ancient Sab- batarians, feeling themselves aggrieved by the edict of Constan- tine, which strictly enforced the observance of the first day of the week, while it made no provision for the seventh, retired, some into Abyssinia, and others into Piedmont, where they re- mained until the Reformation. Whatever may be in this, it is certain that the practice of observing Saturday as a festival, was very common in the Eastern churches, at the close of the fourth century : according to Augustin, (cited by Bingham,) this custom was then generally prevalent throughout the East, and the greater part of the christian world. At this period, when it appears to have been customary to meet for worship and instruction both on Saturdays and Sundays, Athanasius, in defence of himself, for seeming to countenance the practice of judaizing, speaks of the day of the sabbath as being transferred to the Lord's day : it is manifest, however. 275 that though both days were at that time observed as festivals, they were regarded as being perfectly distinct : for there can be nothing more clearly attested than this, that the only day then known by the designation sabbath, was Saturday. Gregory, of Nyssa, remonstrates warmly with those who neglected to observe both the one and the other. " With what face," says he, " canst thou look on the Lord's day, who hast dishonoured the sabbath ? Knowest thou not that these days are sisters, and that whosoever doth despise the one, doth affront the other ?" When the ob- servance of the Lord's day, and the numerous other festivals of the church became universally established, it was contended, that these festivals were holy, not merely on account of the services performed on them ; but that in virtue of the power possessed by the church, they were invested with a greater sanctity than other days. It thus became customary to class all the greater festivals with the Lord's day, and to designate them sabbath days, being all regarded as consecrated days of rest. In what are called the apostolical constitutions, it was provided, that " servants were to rest from their labours on Christmas day, Epiphany, Passion and Easter weeks. Ascension day, Whitsunday, and every Lord's day with the sabbath." The obligation of the decalogue being recognized by the Roman Catholic church, the observance of the whole of these, and nu- merous other holy days was, by some, grounded on the fourth commandment; and it was maintained that to engage in any worldly business on such seasons, was a mortal sin. The number of days that were thus canonized, and spent in idleness, came at last to be felt to be a serious evil, by the Roman Catholics them- selves ; the Popes however persisted in increasing their number, canonizing days in honour of all who became liberal benefactors to the church ; so that Fox, the Martyrologist, was provoked to complain that " they had cumbered the year with so many idle holydays, and the calendar with so many rascal saints, some of them, as good as ever were they that put Christ to death." 276 At the period of the Reformation, the early reformers on the Con- tinent, as might have been expected, strenuously opposed the greater number of these saint days. In the confession, drawn up by Me- lancthon, at the Diet of Augsburg, to the question what we ought to think of the Lord's day, it is answered, that the Lord's day, Easter, Whitsuntide, and other such holy days, ought to be kept because they are appointed by the church, that all things may be done in order ; but that the observance of them is not to be thought necessary to salvation, nor the violation of them, if it be done without offence to others, to be regarded as a sin. " For they who think the observance of the Lord's day has been ap- pointed by the authority of the church instead of the sabbath, as a thing necessary, greatly err. The scripture allows that we are not bound to keep the sabbath ; for it teaches, that the ceremo- nies of the law of Moses are not necessary' after the revelation of the gospel. And yet because it was requisite to appoint a cer- tain day, that the people might know when to assemble together, it appears that the church appointed for this purpose the Lord's day, which for this reason also, seems to have pleased the more, that men might have an example of christian liberty, and might know that the observance neither of the sabbath nor of any other day is necessary." At the same period, similar views of the sab- bath were advanced in this country, by the English reformers, Tyndal and Frith. " As for the sabbath," says the former, in his answer to Sir Thos. More, "we be lords over the sabbath, and may yet change it into Monday, or into any other day as we see need, or may make every tenth day holyday only, if we see cause why. Neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday, but to put a difference between us and the Jews; neither need we any holy day at all, if the people might be taught without it." " Our forefathers, who where in the beginning of the church," says Frith, who wrote about three years later, " did abrogate the sab- bath, to the intent that men might have an ensample of christian liberty. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be 277 reserved, in which the people should come together to hear the word of God, they ordained, instead of the sabbath, which was Saturday, the next day following, which is Sunday. And although they might have kept Saturday with the Jews as a thing indiffe- rent, yet they did much better." Such appear to have been the prevailing opinions respecting the sabbath, on the Continent and in England, at the early period of the Reformation. Owing, however, to the decalogue being still recognized by the reformers as in some sense the rule of human duty, the popish doctrine was by many retained, that the Lord's day, and all the other holy days, ought to be kept as sabbaths, in obedience to the fourth commandment. In the Book of Prayer set forth in the last year of Henry VIII., the fourth command- ment is curtailed as follows : " Remember that thou keep holy the sabbath day," and in the General Confession, enumerating the violation of each of the commandments, that on the fourth states, " I have not sanctified the holy days, with works which be accep- table unto thee," When the commandments were added to the English Liturgy, the practice of enforcing the observance of all the holy days appointed by the church, by a reference to the de- calogue, appears to have become very common : by those who did this, however, it was at the same time maintained, that " one day is no more holy than another ; for that day is always the most holy in the which we most apply and give ourselves to holy works ;" and along with this doctrine they held also, that as "the sabbath is a figure of that rest and quietness which they have that believe in Christ ; it is meet, therefore, that faithful christians on such days as are appointed for holy days, should lay aside un- holy works, and give them earnestly to religion and serving of God." In short, all the leading divines of that age, appear to have adhered to the original doctrine of the primitive church, namely, " that the sabbath was a tjrpe of the present spiritual rest enjoyed by the believer of the gospel, and of the eternal rest that is to come." 278 The reader, who attaches a greater degree of importance to the opinions of reformed churches, and of uninspired writers, than we feel disposed to do ; and who may wish to ascertain the sentiments of several of the leading English divines, who flou- rished in the sixteenth and the early part of the following century, is referred to "Heylin's History of the Sabbath," and to "James's Sermons on the Sacraments and Sabbath ;" from which works the principal contents of this note have been taken. APPENDIX. It is gratifying to have it in our power to remark, that though there has long prevailed a great diversity of opinion respecting the observanee of a weekly day of rest, considered as a religious obligation, all parties seem cordially to unite in approving of the civil enforcement of a periodical intermission of public la- bour. Instead of it being desirable to procure a repeal of the statutes now in force, which enjoin an observance of Sunday, it is deserving of serious consideration, whether a revisal of the ex- isting statutes, with a view to remedy their partial operation, and to increase, in various ways, their efficiency, would not be highly expedient. The provisions of these statutes, having principally a reference to the state of things which existed in the reign of Charles II., at which period the greater number of them were enacted, are wholly insufficient to meet the exigencies of modern times : owing in fact, to the change that has taken place in the value of money since the seventeenth century, and to various other causes, the penalties annexed to their violation, are now little better than a dead letter, being seldom carried into execution ; or when they are, being enforced very partially, and usually on the poorer classes of society, by every case in which the law of the land upon the subject is carried into effect, there is conveyed the irrita- ting and injurious impression, that there is one law for the rich and another for the poor. It is obvious, that every municipal regu- lation like this, which interferes with personal liberty of action, ought to be founded on considerations of manifest public utility ; and as aU its provisions ought to have for their sole object, the 280 general welfare of the community, so ought they to be enforced with the strictest impartiality. While we are far from intending to call in question the cor- rectness of the opinion, that the periodical intermission of public labour is an expedient political regulation, we may be allowed to mention, that this opinion has, with numerous other true conclu- sions, been rested by many, on very fallacious grounds. " There is nothing lost to the community," says Paley, " by the inter- mission of public labour one day in the week. For in countries tolerably advanced in population, and the arts of civil life, there is always enough of human labour, and to spare. The difficulty is not so much to procure, as to employ it. The addition of the seventh day's labour to that of the other six, would have no other effect than to reduce the price. The labourer himself, who de- served and suffered most by the change, would gain nothing. "» This reasoning will hardly, we are disposed to think, bear a close examination. It is to be considered, that the price of la- bour in any country, does not depend solely, as Paley's premises assume, on the actual existing supply, but on the proportion which exists between that supply, and the means of setting it to work. These means consist in accumulated capital, and in the efficiency of labour in producing those commodities which the labourers consume. If these means were to remain fixed, it is certain, that by adding the seventh day's labour to the other six, the price of labour would be immediately lowered: and on the same supposition, it is not less certain, that by every fresh addi- tion made to the existing number of labourers, (and it is well known, that such an increase is by the law of population, in this, and in every similarly situated country, constantly taking place,) the same consequences would inevitably follow. According to Paley's doctrine, therefore, the price of labour must necessarily undergo a gradual fall, correspondent to the gradual increase of population, so that in a very short time, it would be wholly " Moral Philosophy, Book v. chap. 6. 281 inadequate to procure for the labouring classes the necessaries of life. Happily, the prospects of society, gloomy as some think they are, are not quite so gloomy as this. It has already been remarked, that the rate of wages does not depend solely upon the existing amount of the population, but is determined by the ex- tent of the fund that exists for the maintenance of labourers, compared with the number of labourers to be maintained. It is obvious, that if the means of setting labour to work and of maintaining it, can be made to increase as fast as the population or supply of labour increases, the law of demand and supply, which determines the market price of labour, as well as of every other commodity, will keep up the price as infallibly at one rate of supply as at another. Although, therefore, the direct and temporary effect of adding a seventh portion of time to the ex- isting supply of labour, would be to lower the price, it does not necessarily foUow, that this would be the permanent result. Paley's proposition, that there is nothing lost to the community by the suspension of its productive industry one day in the week, is obviously incorrect : for it is incontrovertible, that by an ad- dition of fifty-two days annually to the productive industry of the community, there would be an addition, somewhat correspondent, to its annual revenue and accumulated capital. Now, it is not less certain, that by the industry of the country being made one- seventh part more productive, there would naturally arise a beneficial reaction in favour of the price of labour ; inasmuch as the demand for labour always increases with an increase of the revenue and accumulated capital of the country, and cannot in fact possibly increase without it. It is no doubt very desirable, that labour should be kept up at such a price as will procure, for the labouring classes, a comfort- able supply of the necessaries of life : this, however, can be ac- complished in no other way but by increasing the annual revenue and stock of the community. The desirable matter, is to maintain a healthy pi'oportion between the means of setting labour to O O 282 work, and the constantly advancing extent of the labouring po- pulation. It is manifest, that, while the productive industry of any country is suspended one day in seven, the law of population, which is increasing the supply of labour, (at a rate, for instance, in England and Wales alone, of five hundred souls daily,) con- tinues to operate on that day the same as on any other. Now, as by employing the industry of the country every day, a seventh part would be added to the annual revenue of the country, and consequently to the means of setting labour to work, it is plain, that these means would keep pace more certainly with the natural increase of population than they otherwise would do, and that a favourable price for labour would eventually be more perma- nently obtained. The ground on which Paley and others have usually rested the popular opinion of the expediency of a periodical cessation of public labour, viewed in this light, seems wholly untenable. Placed on other grounds, there is reason to think, that the opinion in question will, on examination, be found substantially correct. It is very questionable, whether an addition to the pro- ductive industry of the country, proportionate to the addition of a seventh portion of time, could, for any considerable length of time, be, with safety to the community, obtained. If man was a mere machine, that could be repaired when overwrought, like any other piece of machinery, it is evident, that by employing the whole population day and night, without any periodical in- termission at all, the annual revenue of the country could be increased to an almost incalculable extent. Such an unremitting application, however, in any toilsome pursuit, would be wholly incompatible with the physical and moral well-being of the po- pulation, and would shortly produce the most disastrous results. At present, in the unhealthy occupations in which a considerable proportion of the labouring population of this country are em- ployed, the duration of the period of labour allowed by law, is considered by many intelligent men, practically conversant with 283 the subject, to be much too long. According to a recent calcu- lation, there are at least 8 or 10,000,000 of the population em- ployed in manufactures, or subsisting indirectly by them. In the close and heated atmospheres, in which a great portion of this vast mass are confined, it is certain that unremitting application to their exhausting occupations, would speedily produce physical and moral evils of a nature for which no more rapid acceleration of national wealth could possibly compensate. That there exists a necessity for some legislative enactment de- termining fixed days and hours of public labour, in order that the physical and moral well-being of society may be duly protected, is too obvious to require any formal proof. The natural and inev- itable operation of commercial competition, of itself renders this imperiously necessary. It is the interest of every manufacturer who has capital invested in machinery, in buildings, and in the raw material which he manufactures, to produce as great a quan- tity of commodities for the amount of capital thus invested, as he possibly can ; for, by increasing the production, he diminishes the interest of the capital he has laid out, and thus can afford his commodities at a lower price. Let us suppose the case of two manufacturers, who have each a capital of twenty thousand pounds invested in machinery of the same construction : the one works his manufactory six days in the week, and the other night and day the whole seven days ; the latter, it is plain, by obtaining a greater return of commodities than the other, diminishes pro- portionately the rate of interest upon his outlaid capital, which is part of their actual cost, and is thus enabled to undersell his competitor in the market. The particular time a manufacturer is allowed to work his machinery, is immaterial to liim as an individual, provided all his competitors are obliged to adhere to the same time : unless, however, a uniform time be fixed, and its observance enforced by a legislative enactment, the in- ducements which exist for one person to work his machinery longer than his competitors, would naturally lead to a gradual 284 encroachment on the periods of repose and relaxation possessed by the labouring classes, until their physical and moral condition became injured, to an extent wholly inconsistent with a prosper- ous or permanently secure state of society. As it is the interest of the community at large, that the health and temporal well-being of the labouring classes be duly protected, it is manifest that the fixing of proper hours for public labour is a duty devolving on the civil legislature, the discharge of which it cannot neglect without entailing a lasting injury on the common- wealth. The apprehension that to restrict, by civil enactments, the time of public labour, is a violation of the principle, that all legislative interference in commercial concerns is impolitic, has been entertained, we think, without any sufficient grounds. The principle in question, however important and universally true, in reference to the means of producing national wealth, does not ne- cessarily apply to the means of securing the greatest hapjnness of the community. In political economy, which relates purely to the production of wealth, the desirableness of every measure is, with much propriety, estimated by this standard alone : for it does not fall within the province of that science, to determine how far the different means of increasing the wealth of the state which it points out, may be found conducive in the long run, to the general well-being of society. To political science, however, it belongs, not only to ascertain by what means the national wealth can, with the greatest facility and rapidity, be increased, but also to provide, that all the means employed be compatible with public and permanent utility. Although, therefore, the accumulation of the wealth of this country could be greatly ac- celerated, by an addition to the hours and days of labour al- lowed by the existing laws, if this increase of wealth could be ob- tained, only by the sacrifice of the health and morals of the people, such an increase, instead of being a public good, would necessarily be a public evil. To the preservation of the health and comfort of the people, and the promotion of the general well- 285 being of the community, every means of expediting the accumu- lation of the capital of the country, ought undoubtedly to give place. If, as seems very generally to be believed by those most con- versant with the matter, a reduction of the period of labour at present allowed by law, would, under proper regulations, conduce greatly to the amelioration of the moral and intellectual condition of the labouring classes, the enforcement of such a reduction, so soon as the claims of the public expenditure admitted of the loss which the revenue would necessarily by the alteration sustain, would doubtless be an act of the truest political wisdom. As members of civil society, men must stand or fall together : all classes consequently are deeply interested in the prosperity of each other. If the great body of the people be allowed to con- tinue poor and wretched, or to retrograde in civilization, the few who have attained a command over the conveniences and luxuries of life, can possess but a slender security for the permanent en- joyment of their privileges. Already, owing to the heavy pressure of taxation on productive industry, and to the superabundance of labourers compared with the means of employing and maintain- ing them, the bulk of the labouring classes in this country are forced, in order to procure a supply of the necessaries of life, to ply at their occupations with such unremitting application, as to preclude, in a great measure, the possibility of their being much raised in the scale of moral and intellectual improvement above their present low position. The demoralization and physical evils which have arisen from this unnatural state of things, have now assumed an aspect which no one, who has at heart the welfare of his country, can contemplate without entertaining serious apprehensions for the consequences. We are informed, that the hours of labour in cotton manufactories, generally ex- tend from half-past five in the morning, till half-past seven or eight at night; with an intermission of only two hours altogether for meals. It is natural to expect that such a prolonged applica- 286 tion to an exhausting employment, in a heated atmosphere, must be attended with very injurious effects on the human frame. The consequences of these exhausting employments are not confined, it appears, to bodily health, but are equally injurious and distressing as it respects the physical and moral condition of the labourer. *' When the operative returns home at night," says a late writer upon this subject, (who states that he is personally extensively en- gaged in manufactures,) " the sensorial power is worn out with in- tense fatigue ; he has no energy left to exert in any useful object, or any domestic duty : he is fit only for sleep or sensual indulgence, the only alternations of employment which his leisure knows ; he has no moral elasticity to enable him to resist the seductions of appetite or sloth ; no heart for regulating his household, super- intending his family concerns, or enforcing economy in his domestic arrangements ; no power or capability of exertion to rise above his circumstances, or better his condition. He has no time to be wise, no leisure to be good ; he is sunken, debilitated, depressed, emasculated, unnerved for effort, incapable of virtue, unfit for every thing but the regular, hopeless, desponding, de- grading variety of laborious vegetation or shameless intempe- rance.""^ If this representation be correct, (and we are not aware that it is in any degree exaggerated,) there is reason to fear that the distressing state of things which it so vividly pictures, cannot long co-exist with the well-being, or even security of the com- munity. If these evils, in fact, be allowed to accumulate, and to form the habits of the majority of the population, the employers must, in a short time, suffer as certainly as the employed : for, against the dangers which arise to the body politic from their existence, no political sagacity can reasonably be expected to provide. When society is once reduced to that ebb, that the mass of the population are generally debased, and wholly reckless about the consequences of their conduct; the security for life '■ Enquiry into the State of the Manufacturing Population, p. 31. Ridgway, 1831. 287 and property being necessarily impaired, the inducements which capitalists have to invest their stock in the employment of labour, are naturally diminished, and all the important ends which ought to attend the institution of civil government, become, in a great degree, unattainable. A superabundant population must, under such circumstances, rapidly and inevitably lead to a dissolution of the frame work of political society. The wealth and well-being of this country, being now in a very considerable degree dependent on the capital and labour employed in manufactures, it comes to be a deeply important and interesting question, whether the evils that have been found to accompany their increase, be their necessaiy result ; or whether, by a more judicious regulation of the hours of labour, and other remedial measures, these evils might not be mitigated or removed. On the consideration of this question, it would be unsuitable in this place to enter at any length ; but we may be allowed to sug- gest in passing, that as the subject has a vast bearing on the prosperity of this country, the attention of the public mind cannot be too soon directed to its serious consideration. It is gratifying to notice, that those who are best qualified by practical know- ledge to judge of the matter, are not without hope, that by the adoption of various palliative measures, a principal share of the evils in question might be avoided. On this one point, the testi- mony of experienced men seems remarkably to accord, namely, that of all the remedial measures that can be suggested, the re- duction of the hours of labour is that on which the greatest stress is to be laid, inasmuch as the adoption of this remedy is abso- lutely essential to the success of every other. Desirable, however, as this measure, both in itself and in its consequences, may be, it is not to be forgotten, that there exist serious impediments in the way of its adoption, — impediments which it is quite necessary to remove, before such a regulation could with safety be enforced. It is very plain, that even the present protracted hours of labour are not more than sufficient to 288 enable the great body of the people to earn the means of a com- fortable subsistence. Unaccountable as, at first sight, it must to every intelligent and reflecting mind appear, so it is, that not- withstanding all the advantages arising from the surprising mechanical inventions of the present age, at no former period, perhaps, did it require greater manual exertion on the part of the body of the people, to procure the necessaries of life. As the inventions referred to have facilitated, in an extraordinary de- gree, the production of commodities, it is natural to think, that the necessaries of life ought to have become before this time, so plentiful, and cheap, as to be within the reach of the majority of the community, without any exhausting and injurious bodily la- bour being requisite. That with the immense productive power possessed by this country, a general difi^usion of plenty ought to have existed, will, by no one who is acquainted with the means by which national wealth is produced, be called in question. To what cause then, must we attribute the absence of this abundance, and the necessity which still exists for the bulk of the population labouring for a livelihood, at the actual sacrifice of their physical and moral well-being ? No doubt, the source of this evil is in some degree to be found in the absence of habits of forethought and prudential management on the part of the people themselves ; but it is alike unfair and impolitic to attempt to conceal, that the principal cause of the necessity in question is, that heavy pres- sure of taxation on the necessaries of life, entailed upon the present generation by the wasteful wars, and extravagant sys- tem of government, carried on by this nation during the greater part of the last half century. Had it not been for the immense drafts made on the productive classes, during the whole of that period, it is little to be questioned, that long before this time, under a judicious and economical management of the country's resources, a competent supply of the means of subsistence would have been within the easy reach of every member of its indus- trious population. 289 The pressure of taxation on the necessaries of life, being the real cause of the present depressed state of public industry, it is manifest, that the sole remedy for the evil which can be expected to be efficient, is the gradual removal of this burden from the productive classes, and particularly, the speedy alleviation of its pressure on those v^^ho are least able to bear it. It ought ever to be borne in mind, that, as the labouring classes compose the great bulk of the community, a country can be said to be really pros- perous or otherwise, only as these classes are well or ill supplied with the necessaries and conveniences of life : to the promotion of this end, therefore, the energies and resources of the country ought steadily to be directed. No civil community can correctly be said to be prosperous, or under proper management, in which the efficiency of labour in producing the commodities which the labourers consume, is not sufficient to supply the wants of every one who is able and willing to labour for a livelihood. As, in order to afford an effectual relief to the existing dis- tressed state of labour, it is requisite that there should be a gradual removal of the present pressure on the springs of public industry, every one who wishes well to his country, and who feels an interest in the amelioration of the condition of the la- bouring classes, must see it to be his duty, to advocate an econo- mical management of the nation's resources. Without a repeal of those taxes which raise the price of provisions, and limit proportionately the market for the produce of labour, the popula- tion will inevitably advance too rapidly for the extent of the fund by which labour is employed ; and that reduction of the hours of public labour, which is allowed to be so necessary to the protec- tion of the health of the people, as well as essential to the success of all extensive and efficient plans for improving their moral and intellectual condition, must be abandoned as impracticable. To secure an increase of the efficiency of labour, is thus the primary and principal object which it is desirable to see accom- plished. If this object be attained, various important means of P P 290 advancing knowledge and civilization can with facility be put in operation ; — without securing this end, no material alteration in the present protracted and demoralizing period of public labour, can with safety be adopted. Difficult as the attainment of the object mentioned no doubt is, we trust the ulterior purpose to Avhieh it is a necessary preliminary, and the collateral advantages that would attend its realization, are too important to be ever lost sight of by the enlightened philanthropists of this country. We may be allov/ed to remark, that we feel disposed to attach a more than ordinary degree of importance to the suggestion of a better regulation of the hours of public labour, on account of the increased facility which such an arrangement would afford for adopting efficient means for securing the education of the labouring classes. Of all existing national wants, we look upon this, namely, a proper system of public instruction maintained by the state, to be that, of which the community stands in the most urgent need. Unless indeed, some more efficient means of educating the people than those at present in operation be adopted, we conceive there can be no rational expectation entertained of the permanent well- being of this country. It is an incontrovertible fact, that not- withstanding the immense sums which have been annually levied on the industry of the nation, for the professed purpose of pro- moting the religious instruction of the public, up to this present hour, the education of the people, in the proper sense of the expression, has been wholly neglected. It is well known to all those who have given the subject any degree of attention, that the public teachers of religion, who have been so richly endowed by the state, for communicating instruction, have not reached more than a fraction of the labouring population : the fact indeed is becoming too palpable to be longer concealed from any one, that the great body of the people, who have needed instruction at the public charge most, have been hitherto allowed to grow up in all the grossness and ignorance of brutish barbarism. Not only in the dense population of large towns, has this popular ig- 291 noranee and vice been springing up, and spreadnig its baleliil influence on society : — recent events have in no unequivocal language told us, that in the agricultural districts, the condition of the labouring classes is still more deplorable. In these dis- tricts, says the Report of the British and Foreign School Society for the present year, " the most debasing ignorance prevails to an extent, which could not be credited, were it not verified by the closest investigation. The facts which have been elicited respecting the moral and intellectual state of those counties which have been disgraced by riots and acts of incendiarism, are truly affecting, and yet they are but a fair representation of the actual state of our peasantry. We call ourselves an enlightened nation, an educated people, and yet, out of nearly seven hundred prisoners put on trial, in four counties, upwards of two hundred and sixty were as ignorant as the savages of the desert — they could not read a single letter. Of the whole seven hundred, only one hun- dred (md fifti/ could write, or even read with ease ; and (in the words of one of the chaplains to the gaols,) " nearly the whole number were totally ignorant with regard to the nature and obligations of true religion." It will be well if the danger with which the country has been threatened from this quarter, become the means of effectually arousing public attention to the consideration of the deeply important subject of the public instruction of the people. It is manifest, that whatever services of a private religious nature, the endowed teachers of religion may have rendered to that compara- tively small section of societv, whose religious opinions have allowed them to make use of these stipendiary spiritual ministra- tions ; the present corporate body employed by the state, viewed as a public means of spreading useful knowledge, has proved an entire failure. "The authority of a church establishment," says one of the most enlightened among the modern advocates of such institutions, " is founded on its utility :" it is " a scheme of instruction," the single end of which is, "the preservation and 292 communication of religious knowledge. "c Weighed in the balance oi general utility, we apprehend the costly church establishment of England, considered simply as a means of communicating instruc- tion, will be found greatly wanting. What great services to the body of the people, it may with propriety be asked, have been secured, by the immense portion of the public industry, that has been expended on this overgrown corporation ? We certainly look in vain for any important civil benefits which it has conferred on the community : and it is to be remembered, that it is in men's civil character, and not at all in their religious opinions, that the commonwealth is interested. In as far as the advancement of society in the arts of civil life, and the promotion of that know- ledge which qualifies men for the proper discharge of their duties as citizens, is concerned, it will be difficult, we think, to show that the expensive " scheme of instruction" at present employed by the state, has not been as valueless in its operation, as it is glaringly unjust in the means, by which it seeks and obtains public support. We assuredly envy not those, who are in duty bound to prove, that the state possesses a right to compel men, as free citizens, to contribute to the propagation of religious opinions, to which, as individuals, they are conscientiously opposed. Neither should we be in any wise anxious to have the somewhat onerous task imposed on us, of proving the equity of appropriating a consi- derable portion of the nation's industry to a religious object, in which, only an inconsiderable section of the community are interested ! It is high time that the state should confine itself to its proper province, in providing for the temporal well-being of the people, and leave men to worship their Maker according to their own sense of religious duty. It is plainly the dic- tate alike of common sense and common equity, that those individuals who chuse to employ religious teachers, ought to pay them themselves, as they pay their own lawyers and phy- ' Palcy's Moral Pliilosopliy, Book vi, Chap. x. •293 sicians : it will be difficult to show, that the state possesses any better right to allocate a portion of the public revenue to such a private purpose as the remuneration of the teachers of a particular religious sect, than it would have to apply a portion of it to the support of certain physicians, who, it might be, were in va- rious places, exclusively employed by the higher classes of society. It has not been one of the least of the disadvantages that have attended the employment of the present religious establishment, as "a scheme of instruction," that confiding too implicitly to its operation, the public have been led to neglect the proper means of diffusing instruction altogether. It is every day, however, becoming more and more apparent, that the well-being of the commonwealth can have no other basis than the general educa- tion of the people ; and we trust the day is not distant, when efficient means for securing this object, will be put into operation throughout the whole of the British Empire. It can scarcely be requisite to remark, that it is alike the interest and the duty of the state, to make a due provision, for ensuring a proper civil character among the whole body of the people. In free govern- ments, where the people possess the liberty of practically express- ing their political opinions, there can be no other security for the stability of the commonwealth, than the consent of the governed : and the procuring of this can be looked for, only from the diffusion of the knowledge, that all the members of the community are alike interested in the adoption of equitable laws, and in the strict and impartial enforcement of them. There is no instrument now to be confided in, for securing the obedience of the people, save that of the diffusion of political knowledge. Men, indeed, cannot possibly be good citizens, in the correct sense of the expression, until they are made acquainted with the foundation and objects of civil government; for without the possession of this knowledge, they can neither be expected to yield to the laws a steady obedience, nor to exercise, with requisite judgment, those political rights with which they may be entrusted. So long as the object pursued by any 294 government, is the correct one of the good of the public ui large, there need be little apprehension entertained of the effects of popu- lar influence, provided only, the population be duly qualified for the prudent exercise of the power they possess. That the people should be qualified for the appreciation and judicious exercise of their privileges, is manifestly an object, in virhich the whole com- munity are interested. As men rise in the scale of civilization, they feel a growing sense of liberty of thought, and independence of character, which not only makes them more resolute and self- denying in resisting the enticements of corrupt influence, but also, more acute in detecting the covered designs of the selfish, and sophistical demagogue ; as well as more temperate and imptirtial in the formation of their own jjolitical opinions. Viewed therefore, purely as a matter of political expediency, the instruction of the rising race is a matter of such paramount importance, as it respects the permanent well-being of the state, that it must plainly be the interest of the community to provide for it at the public charge. The expense which would be incurred by instituting an efficient system of national instruction, when compared with the advantages accruing to society from its opera- tion, is too inconsiderable to merit any particular consideration : so far indeed, from it entailing any serious additional expense on society, there are grounds for believing, that what any country saves by not employing a requisite number of schoolmasters and schools, it ultimately expends fourfold, in additional police, and bridewells, and gaols. A mere tithe of the immense portion of the productive industry of this country, hitherto allocated to the purpose of maintaining in splendour the endowed teachers of religion, would be more than sufficient to provide the elements of education for all the labouring classes of society. " The education of the common people," says Adam Smith, "re- quires, perhaps, in a civilized and commercial society, the attention of the public, more than that of people of some rank and fortune. The parents or guardians of such, are generally sufficiently anxious 295 that they should acquire every accomplishment which can recom- mend them to the public esteem, or render them worthy of it It is otherwise with the common people. They have little time to spare for education. Their parents can scarce afford to maintain them even in infancy. As soon as they are able to work, they must apply to some trade, by which they can earn their subsis- tence. That trade too, is generally so simple and uniform, as to give little exercise to the understanding ; while, at the same time, their labour is both so constant and so severe, that it leaves them little leisure, and less inclination to apply to, or even to think of any thing else. But though the common people cannot, in any civili.zed society, be so well instructed as people of some rank and fortune ; the most essential parts of education, however, to read, write and account, can be acquired at so early a period of life, that the greater part, even of those who are to be bred to the lowest occupations, have time to acquire them, before they can be employed in those occupations. For a very small expense, the public can facilitate, can encourage, and can even impose upon almost the whole body of the people, the necessity of acquiring those most essential parts of education. The public can facilitate this acquisition, by establishing in every parish or district, a little school, where children may be taught for a reward so moderate, that even a common labourer may afford it ; the master being partly, but not wholly paid by the public ; because if he was wholly, or even principally paid by it, he would soon learn to neglect his business. In Scotland, the establishment of such parish schools, has taught almost the whole common people to read, and a very great proportion of them to write and account If, in those little schools, the books by which the children are taught to read, were a little more instruc- tive than they commonly are ; and if instead of a little smattering in Latin, which the children of the common people are sometimes taueht there, and which can scarce ever be of any use to them, 296 they were instructed in the elementary parts of geometry and mechanics ; the Hterary education of this rank of people would perhaps be as complete as can be. There is scarce a common trade, which does not afford some opportunities of applying to it the prin- ciples of geometry and mechanics, and which would not therefore gradually exercise and improve the common people in those prin- ciples, the necessary introduction to the most sublime, as well as to the most useful sciences. The public can encourage the acquisition of these most essen- tial parts of education, by giving small premiums and little badges of distinction, to the children of the common people who excel in them. The public can impose upon almost the whole body of the people, the necessity of acquiring the most essential parts of education, by obliging every man to undergo an examination or probation in them, before he can obtain the freedom in any corporation, or be allowed to set up any trade, either in a village or a town corporate. "'^ Under a general system of tuition, constituted on this or some similar principle, it is obvious, that the elements of education might be placed within the reach of the whole population at a very inconsiderable expense : it is manifest also, that by the use of a few simple expedients, they could, in a certain sense, be forced on the reception of that portion of the rising race, who might be so debased in character, as to be unwilling to avail themselves of the advantages tendered them . By local or district schools being planted over the whole country, and in every quarter of our crowded towns, the most favourable opportunities would thus be afforded for training the people in those habits of industry, of forethought, and mental application, (habits which alone deserve the name of education,) that are so essential to individual success in life, as well as absolutely requisite for the due performance ^ Wealth of Nations. — Book v Chap. i. 29: of those relative duties which devolve on men as members of civil society. Those who had arrived at an advanced stage of tuition, might with propriety be made acquainted with the elements of economical and moral science ; and in this way correctly initi- ated in the knowledge (to them invaluable knowledge) of the causes which determine the rate of wages in any country, as also of the various circumstances on which the well-being of the labouring classes depends. Other branches of knowledge, it is obvious, might be taught them with much advantage : the specification of these, however, — the proper means of securing qualified preceptors, — the difference between teaching well, and teaching ill, and numerous collateral points, are topics of too extensive and important a nature, to admit of more than being alluded to in this place. We shall content ourselves with expressing it to be our well-weighed conviction, that unless some more efficient means than those hitherto employed in the instruction of the people be put in operation, so that the ad- vantages of an education suited to men's respective circumstances in life, shall be extended to, and secured for every member of the community, no political measure, however good and im- portant in itself, will ever raise this highly favoured country to that pitch of prosperity, to which its natural resources, its immense productive power, and the industry and enterprise of its people, are calculated to advance it. Nothing short of the adoption of a general system of public instruction, supported at the public charge, and founded on the broad principles of na- tional utility, will ever remove the existing load of popular ignorance, and overtake the existing and growing wants of our densely-planted population. THE END. HARRISON AND CROSFIELD, PRINTERS, MANCHESTER. J I' / m'-'. rMlfi'Min','.",^''.";;;' Stm„u,-y.5pe„ L,b,.-,r, 1 1012 01003 1914