The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1909-05-05


Prof. New brings into question, only
one. The points fer which he would
ldGuce the weight Of the Epistle to
the Hebrews. would readily admit.
and use them in the very application he
has made of them to destroy his Easter
idol.
asserted that the practice was nom
christian. In my former arClcleI qUpt-
ed authority that is not only acNnow-
lodged BY the church OF England and
the Roman church. but BY Catholic
and the worlds scholars.
Else long ago 4 revision would have
been forced, or authority substituted.
From the Encyclopedias Britannica,
Vol. =. PAGE GA, quoted Chrysostom:
There is no trace of the celebration Of
Easter Us q christian festival in the New
Testament or in the writings OF the
Apostolic fathers. The sanctity of
special times or places was an idea quite
alien from the early christian mind, too
absorbed in events themsel-
yes to think OF their external accidents.
The whole OF time is q festival unto
christians because of the eXcellencv Oh
the good things which have been Civ
en- This, the Encyclopedias says,
wrote commenting on the
passage I Cor. Y. !. which has been
enormously supposed to refer to the
Apostolic observance OF Easter. 'See
Enc. Brit, VOL l.. Pare 614.
Will the erudite Prof. try TO galnsay
the authority OF SO great Il scholar and
as the one above quoted,
who was on the scene in the insipiency
OF this fostering question of the church
in the 4th century:
Another authority Quo:ed was orig
en-, (see Contr. Celsum VIII. p. who in
his opposition to the Introduction Of it
as christian rite. urges that the
christian who dwells on the truths Of
Christ Us our Passover and the gift Of
the Holy Ghost. is every day keeping
an Easter aud Pentecostal feast" Or
igeu figured in the latter part OF the
second and first of third centuries. On
no question of his day do we look for
more universally recognized authority
than Origen, who put himself on record
against the practice is unchristian and
authority I viii quote and then add TO
them the wayward testimony Of Prof.
New
Socrates, the acknowledged ecclesias-
tical historian OF the first half OF the
5th century, (see Hist. Ecc!., V. -. J
states with perfect truth that neither
Christ nor his Apostles eujoined the
keeping OF this or any other festival.
The Apostles be writes, had no
thought of appointing festival days, but
of promoting a life OF blamelessness and
pietv: and be attribu' the introduc-
tioa Of the festival into the
church to the per: IF an old
'just as many III | ms have
been established 'hi- dbtless a
true statement Of the See Enc.
Brit Vol. l., Page 6
Now for the new witness, that may
here after be quoted with Chrysostom,
Orige1 and Socrates. Prof. New in his
deiensei?) of the Easter custom says:
rue: VIC are not expressly ordered in the
New Testament to observe Easter Nor are we
toG TO observe Sunday. The change OF the day
Of Worship from Saturday. the oriGina! Sab
BATH. TO Sunday is strictly speaking. d viola
tio,. OF the letter Of the fourth commandment:
bu: We draw our reasonable and logical infer
encrS from the custom and usage OF the ApoS-
ties: precisely as we 90 in admitting women to
the Lords Supper (onlr men being present at
the original inSti.utlon) and bapuZ!nS infants.
for which no direct command is given though
It became q genera! custom throughout Chris
tendon With 2J0 years. The sanction OF caS-
ter from scripture is as assured as that OF any
OF the three other usual christian uSaseS to
which ] haze allodcd. Not one OF the four Is the
'iDSe dixi," OF the bible itself. AL four. Easter
included. are our warrantab!e and reasonable
deductions from scripture. and supported by
early church historc.'
This frank, open confession would Go
credit 70 the learned Professor if be did
not at once start out to justify his sen
by calling on the Bible and
the Apostles whom he says are silent on
this matter, TO uphold him. It is the
ordinary trick of one seized of the pow
er of sentime9. he would defend and
cannot fpd Gho exact help he needs.
One. in the Prof's. defence Of the Eas-
ter question, is much reminded OF the
darkay'S snake.
He wired n and be wired out.
And left the people al in doubt
As to whether the snake chat made that track
Was coming in or going back.
He confesses by the authority OF
scholarship that it IS Of heathen origin,
though he tries 10 leave the impression
chat il is only the pane found there. He
admits that it is not "eXpressly ordered
in the New Testament" as is neither
the keeping of Sunday for Sabbath, nor
infant baptism And yet he takes the
same book which in one place he truly
confesses is silent on she matter. and 10
the next strain is trying TO beat ont OF
it the answer he wants 10 his question.
The word Easter was not known to
the Apostles. Il is not TO be found IN
auv trucSlation Of the New Testament
except the Authorized Version, watch
was made in the lit! century by Q set Of
'Chu.ch-of- England clergymen. l! tue
new word had come into use AT that
time with reference 10 Il feast OF that
church with an emphesis that pur-bllnd-
ed their classic vision, it should cot and
does not bias the real scholar OF this
day.
Uron classic authority there cannot
be established; u reference to this feast
in the New Testament. That certain
church fathers who stand well 10 theIr
respective Sees, hold such views, is by
no means L warrant that scholars who
want to be right rather thar disciples
OF prejudiced men. will heartily auQ un-
accept the statement.
I will only ask that the reader Of
Another Side OF the Easter Discus
sinn," by Pref. New: will read the arig-
inal article from my pen, and then look
up classic references from every pos
sibie source. and I shall not fear the
popular verd:cs.
That Prof New would undertake TO
Justify the Easter festival on the same
ground that he would Infant baptism, >
is not a strange position for :; scholar.
but to confound the authority Of either.
with that Of admitting women TO the
Lords Supper" or our observance Of
or the First Day of the week
as the Christian Sabbath" is TOO
naughty trick for scholar like him
seif.
The first two nave their origin and
authority ;.s 4 practice OF christianity,
10 the Roman church. Neither can pre-
7. l.