The Portland daily press., 1878-07-17


add EARTH the sea and all that them is and rested
the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the
Sabbath day and hallowed it -Erodas Xxx, 8, 9, TO-
IL.
sssubscriber's, Reply TO Rev. MIR. Day.
Mr. EDIToR,-If Sunday is the Sabbath and
is so by divine appointment, one of two things
is necessary in order that We should know it.
1t should be distinctly affirmed in the record,
or it should be revealed TO every mans con-
seriousness. If it is affirmed in the New Tesla
ment let it be shown, not guessed at; for to
show that the seventh or Saturday is declared
in the written laws given to the Jews does not
help the matter. but rather the contrary. If it
is revealed to each mah's consciousness, then
all men should be agreed about it; bnt if the
reason of man, assisted by observation and ex-
perience and his moral nature, is to decide the
question, then it is not only moral but sci
entifc question, and should be settled upon
scientific principles. In the absence Of posi-
tive enactment each man may ba his own
judge and there will be different conclusions
Where shall we find a more moral people
than the sect of Friends or Quakers? And al
though they assemble for worship on Sunday
moral On other days is not immoral on Sunday,
and as day of worship they hold fourthday
"Wednesday as sacred as the first Who is
authorized to say they are wrong?
In tie days when slavery 1uled the nation,
your correspondent and others were acoustic med
to meet on Sunday evenings at the house of a
Quaker family to discuss anti-slavery meas
ures. The estimable lady Of the house knitted
while others talked. She would say, 81 am
knitting for Gods poor children; 1 suppose
there is nothing wrong 10 it, Who has right
to condemn her? She expended her time and
money to feed'the hungry, clothe the naked
and to break the bonds Of the oppressed. "By
their fruits We shall know them" But in those
days it was accounted secular business and
we were all condemned as Sabbath breakers,
and Of course immoral.
Murder, adultery and theft are immoral on
any day and no argument can be drawn there
from unless they are defended. L can see no
reason why man may not "worship the
Father in spirit and in truth" while enjoying
the beauties OF nature or while riding in . rail-
road car, or even while driving steam engine,
and he may attend church ever so regularly
and not worship at all any more than in the
field or in the car; therefore we have no right
to say the man in the car is an immoral man,
tor. 1t may be so or it may not. Worship is a
personal matter, whether solitary or social, and
is not confined to time or place.
The controversy on this subject Is Older than
"the fathers" who are no better authority on
the moral question than the children. Paul,in
writing to the Colossians says: "Let no man
therefore judge you in meat or in drink or in
respect of an holy dsv, or of the new moon, or
of the Sabbath days'-the word days is in
terpolated-"wbich are a shadow of things to
z. 4 ha Cab hot
par with meat and drink. Also to the Ro-
mans: "Who art thou that judgest another
mans servant? To his own master he stand
eth or falleth; one man esteemeth one day
above another; another esteemeth every day
alike; let every man be persuaded in his own
mind. He that re garaeth the day regardeth it
unto the Lord, and he that regardeth not the
day to the Lord he regardeth it not. He that
eateth, eateth to the Lord and giveth God
thanks and he that eateth not to the Lord he
eateth not and gath God thanks, "-R,m.
xiv, 4, 5, 6; placir. meat drink and the day
upon par with eacn other.
In my first communication l DID not say
"there are two instances of first day ObSerU-
ance" said sit is recorded 10 the Gospels
that the disciples met together on the first day
of the week. after the resurrection" should
more properly have written on day of Christ's
resurrection. There is nothing said about OBJ
servance and the word day is lefG out either by
oversight of the type-setter or an oversight 10
the writing, probably the latte1.)
In the first three Gospels it is implied, 10 the
fourth it is distinctly stated John, Xxx :l9. These
all refer to one single fact and equivalent to
one single statement In the 27tn verse of
the same chapter there is room for bubble
and so it was not mentioned, but they all make
one statement of the fact that on that
day and afterwsrd the disciples assembled (for
some purpose) on the first day of the week.
The other instance is recorded Acts XXI
"And upon the first dag of the week, when the
disciples came together to break bread, Paul
preached to Them There is no mistake and
no discrepancy. 1t is implied again in the first
Corinthians, xvi:2, but not asserted, but there
is no doubt about it. With regard to the his
torical fact there is DO controversy,
The theory of the Sunday Sabbath is there
fore merely inferential without proof or written
authority but SIS only matter of opinion
1t is not stated 10 the record that the day of
Pentecost was on the first day of the week, but
if Christ arose on April 9th and the day of
Pentecost was on May Oath succeeding, of
course it fell on the first day, but this is not re-
levant to our argument
Here think might safely leave the ones-
ton of the application of Deus VIZ to the juds-
ment of an Intelligent public, believing that
the conclusion from the text does not follow
the premises, and is what iogicians term 10
'saprse Latin" non sequitur; but will crave
your indulgence a little logger, though l 10
not wish to trespass unreasoua5ly upon the
columns of the PRESS.
We know that for some years the Jewish
Christians continued to observe the Jewish
Sabbath and conform to other customs of the
Jewish law and they had some sharp contro-
versies about it among themselves. When and
by whom and in what manner the change was
finally consummated is irrelevant so long as the
Scriptures tell us nothing about it. We bring
"the fathers to the book, the same as We do
the children.
Of course we understand that with regard to
"the divine law" there were three general fea-
that the former have passed away and that the
last continues forever, and that it is incumbent
upon US to be moral not only on the seventh or
the first day, but every day, not oue-seventh of
the time but all the time, and We believe that
what is immoral on one day is immoral every
day, and what is not immoral on one day is not
immoral on another day. We believe in pure
religion as we understand 1t, and in pure NOR
atty, to do what is right, according 10 our best
or Christians, but because 1t is right, Sundays
and all days, and the liberty which we claim
we freely accord to others. If a man believes it
is immoral for him to do On Sund ~ what it
would be right to do on Monday. let him Obey
his conscience and We have no right 10 juCge
him.
Although am radical temperance man,
yet do think that those Christians who regard
the drinking of an occasional glass of wine as
an immortality, do thereby condemn their
master and they must meet the Inconsistency
as they can.
In this controversy l care nothing for victory
but do care for truth, and am willing to ac-
cept it, come from what source it may, aud ifl
error am willing to be corrected, and if con-
WINGED to acknowledge it. But they that take
the book must talk by the book, they cannot be