, 1875-12-26

ninth canon Of that Council testify, which ruu
thus: Because Christians ought not to Judaize
and to rest on the Sabbath, but to work on that
day (which many At that time did re-
or the Lords Day Ghere beipg then
great controversy among Christians which OF
these two days should have precedepce); il they
desired to rest they should do this as Christians,
because. it they be found to Judaiza, lot them be
accursed By Christ. Tho seventh dav Was SOL
tive Christians till tbs Laodcea.s Council did in
manner quite abolish the observation Of it.
The Council Of Laodieea, i. D. 364, first settled
the observation Of the Lords Day, aud prohibit
ed the keeping Of the jewish Sabbath under Al
anathema' BY this net the heathon Sun'e day,
after being made by imperial edicz the worship-
day OF tho Empire under tho sitle OF 'Venera-
bio Day Of the Sun, became the vorship-day Of
the Church, under the title Of Lords Day"
THIS view of the question Is confirmed BY en-
Church history, says: ''The festival Of Sum-
dav. like an other festivals. was always
only human ordinance, and it was
far from tho intention Of the Apostles
to establish divine command. in this respect,
far from them, and from the early apostolic
Church to transfer tho laws OF the Sabbath to
Sunday"
Dr. Cox says: ''There is no evidence that
either at thus [third century, or at per1od much
later, the observance lof Sunday was viewed as
mandmont it seems to have been regarded As
an institution corresponding in nature with
Christmas, Good Friday, aud other festivals Of
tho Church, and as resting With them On the
ground OF scclesrlaatioal authority and tradi-
tion."
Kitto in his Cyclopedia, On the question of
the regard in which sunday was held III the
primitive Church, SAYS Though in Inter times
we find considerable reference to d sort OF con-
secratlon Of the day, it does not seem at any
period Of the ancient Church to have assumed
the form Of such an observance IS some m
Nor do these writera in any instance
pretend to allego anc divine command OF even
apostolic practice In it's support
Or. Higiln says: '-That for three hun dred
years there WAS neither law to bind Them TO it,
(Suudey1 nor any rest from labor, or from World
IL business required upon it: and when the
Prince and the Prelate endeayored to restrain
them from ali kinds OF bodily labor Oh that day.
it vas not brought about without much strug-
Cling and opposition Of the people, moro shan 8
cension before the Lords day had attained that
atate in which it now btandesh.'
I submit these authorities. which might be
much extended in kind, to the consideration OF
"Iayman" aud others concerned in this lnvostI-
CATION, in tho hope that they will minister some
light On this question shall LOOK with interest
for response from .''the able clergy Of this
city" to ''Layman's" call for hep. Whom
wrote my first article on the
philosophy Of the moral la7s, printed i'll rnE
rn1nuSE Of Nov. %, wished to call attention
TO that interpretation OF the law, feeling that no.
lawism and no-aabbathsm as the arguments OF
iniue1ity should be successfully met and te-
futed. I shall rejoice with the men who shall
establish the Sabbath Of the Church, as well and
firmly az the spiritual law Of the moral Ian
establishes it's Sabbath. II this cannot be done.
it viii be better for the Church to change its
prnctica tn another day than to be driven bY TO-
fidelity INTO no-law,sm. 1 may hereafter con-
slider the Sabbath question IN the light Of the
practice aad teaching OF Christ and the Apostles
j. BAILEY,