The Portland daily press., 1878-07-11
THE SUNDAY QUESTION.


priestcraft, ignorance! And with this kind O
argument they dispose Of the obnoxious doc
trine. To this class of street corner theologue
if we may judge from his production "Sub
scriber" belongs. "The clergy speak for eff
feet" "They have got in the habit of telling
fictitious tales for facts" "They are ignorant
''They bear false testimony" "They lie TO
the Lord" &C., sc.
These are specimens Of the splendid logic O
Subscriber" For man who complains O
want of proof upon the part of preachers
Subscribers" production is also slightly dog
matic. 1t is quite ex cathedra. From begin
ming to end it is string of affirmations with
out argument or points, entirely foreign tt
those contained in the abstract of the sermon
We have right to ask Subscriber to excuse
us from reply until he says something and
makes an attempt at least to prove it. But al
we should have said something more on this
subject had not Subscriber replied, we may
as well take this opportunity. The first declar'
alton in Subscribers" pronuncamento is, 81
assert without fear of successful contradiction
that it is not diviue law" Now, probably,
even though no evidence Of that fact is given,
we ignorant ministers should accept this bit Of
information without demurrer. But igno-
rance is stupid and we want to ask some ques-
tions, Was the Sabbath ever divine institu-
ton, and was its Observance eDjoined by divine
day was day Of rest; holy convocation? If
so, when did it pass away, and when was the
law concerning it aunulled? Some of the cid
institutions and laws have persisted, but did the
Sabbath 60 with them or does it remain as the
enactment of law that has never been modi-
fed except to be made more stringent and en-
phatc? Will Subscriber" pardon us if we poor
ignorant preachers venture a suggestion at this
point. If the Sabbath belonged to a code that
has persisted, then it has gone with that code
perhaps. But if it was given before any writ
ten law and was afterwards incorporated into a
law that has never been abrogated but abides
forever, then it is here-it remains. AS Sub
scriber' is the teacher Of the preachers, he
probably kaoacS that as to the divine laws,
there were three general codes,-the ceremon-
ial, the judicial, the moral. The frat contained
the types and symbols and sacrifices of the
Hebrews, and was abolished at the coming of
Christ. Christ nailed that law to the cross
and gave instead the law Of the spirit of life,
(read the epistle to the Hebrews). The second
was the policy and government of the Hebrew
nation and disappeared with the dissolution of
that people. Its enactments, its penalties con-
tanned in the Bible, are only so many archives
Of once great and prosperous nation. But the
third law was made t0last until there should
be no more need of moral instruction and cor
rection. The fourth enactment in this Law is
''Keep the Sabbath day to sanctify it, Now
do men say that the law has been abrogated.
In our ignorance we ask which law, the cere-
monial? But the Sabbath did not depend up
on that law and no more disappeared with that
law than did the first commandment. It no
more ceased to exist when that law was done
away than has Christianity disappeared be-
cause at different epochs one mode of worship
has Been substituted for another mode. Be-
cause it was not contained in that law and that
law was altogether ceremonial. The judicial
law? The national law only affixed the penal.
ties to its violation. 1t simply said what should
happen to the people under Hebrew rule who
violated it. But has the moral law been abro-
gated? That law remains intact, and the Sab.
bath having been incorporated into it will re-
main coeval with lt-eternal if need be. For
this statement we have the plain declaration of
Christ himself: "Think not that l am come to
destroy the law and the prophets. 1 am not
come to destroy but to fulfil Ito confrm).
"Till heaven and earth pass away one jot or
one title shall in no wise pass from the law"
And that no man may say that this was not
the law He meant that no one may say that it
is of less force under the gospel. He plainly
taught that it was the moral law of which He
spoke and gave men to understand that it was
to be made more stringent by the gospel. Muir
der now was to consist of hating and adultery
of a lewd purpose. Does that look as though
Christ let down or amended the old law?
Rut ms W hn 1inds 1ar ON.
actment has been abrogated or modified at
least. But Christ said not one jot or little
should pass from the law till all be fulfilled.
He taught that that law was unit. Moth
ing could be added to that law; moth
ing could be taken from it. Now
the very arguments that would make
void or modify the fourth wonld also render of
no effect two or three more of the command
ments. That argument is Christ abrogated
the Sabbath law by His examples. Christ did
went through the corn fields contrary to
Jewish custom and Sabbatic observance. He
+. buked the Pharisees hence He disregarded
tue law and taught men SO. That proves to
much. Christ knew the seventh command
ment, and when they brought to Him the
according to Jewish law, ''She must be stoned"
But instead He said, Neither do 1 accuse yop."
He by that example annuled the seventh COM
mapdment. On one time He sent and led
away a mans colt without leave and all the
reason the man was to receive was that the
master wanted him. He abrogated by that
example the eighth commandment thou shall
not steal. He made wine. By that example
He committed His gospel to the modern rum
traffic. The man who reasons away the fourth
commandment from the example of Christ by
that argument annuls these commandments
and is driven to Ridiculous ard blesphemous
straits. We advise Subscriber to insert into
his sparse Latin vocabulary instead of petitio
principii that becomes his position more
fittingy reductio ad absurdum. But we in
fer that one objection to the Christian Sabbath
may be found in the fact that the day has been
changed from the last to the first of the week.
If Christ had ignored the last day entirely. and
if His disciples had not continued to observe
devoutly one whole day in seven there would
be more force in this objection. But the mere
doesn't touch the institution and objections on
that ground are only bubbles about term.
Did Christ change the day? Then there we're
the best of reasons for it. One of them
doubtless was that the institution might be
redeemed from the traditional trappings of the
the fact that the Sabbath was made for man;
not only for the Hebrew but for man. So long
as it had remained the peculiar heritage Of the
Hebrews, and its observance was restricted
to narrow latitude, all the people who
held the Sabbath could unite on the same
uUuIS III ibo OUSCIFouCCS Uub WHOu buO SOnp0i
came and bore the. gift to all men;
to the entire world then the adoption
of precisely the same hours over
all the world for Sabbath observance
became physical impossibity. People of the
antipodes would have dark Sabbath. Ant
that physical impossibility would have been ar
argument hundred fold stronger against the
Sabbath than the whimsical objections on thu
score of change from the seventh to the first
day. The change removed the emphasis from
the exact limit of hours, but left it forever
upon the proportion of one-seventh. That thi
latter fact is true appears from the practice of
seventh day worship by the disciples. Though
it fell upon the first day of the week, one
seventh of the days was kept in wershipfu
mood. "Subscriber' thinks there is small
proof of this fact. But we notice that "Sub
scriber" says that there are two instances o
first day Observance, and he cites them. Blu
in Tuesdays PRESS there was another com
munication on this subject, and that authorit.
says there are only two aud cites them. Blu
these authorities give different instances, s.
according to the two men there are at leas
four such cases. Neither authority alone i
correct, but together they approach nearer tn
truth. Really, Subscriber, were you ignorant
or did you intend to lie for the-Lord2 PROT
ably you made mistake. The fact is, Their
are at least six such instances given. Fo
proof of this statement, read more CAREFUL
the New Testament This custom of worship
one day in seven, the primitive Christians fol
lowed The early fathers kept that day holy
PliDy to Trajan said that the Christians met O
| stated day. Neander, authority that will nc
| be disputed, said that STATED day. was tn