The Washington herald., 1921-07-04
Open C6urt Letters to The HeraIfk
M%gSXHaS6EHk5 5Rga@Ass>&tF fSas

forced them to become Christians
As regards the quotation from Nc
Ciintock and Strong. from whom
also Previously quoted. 4 would ask
where there is anything startling
or inconsistent The Council OF
Laodicca. in enjoining Christians
to rest on the Lords Day. were not
tas L. writer would seeIa TO
thlnk) decreeing a day for rest
other than the day which Christians
were accustomed to observe: for as
sonar says: The celebration If the
LORDS Day in memory of the Resur-
rection of Christ dates undoubted-
~ from the Apostolic age. Moth
ing short Of Apostolic precedent
can account for the universal re-
iiglous observance in the churches
OF the second century," II seems
quite natural that this church coun-
ell should have urged Cas Christians
and Christian churches have done
throushoUt tin" centuries Ius.p,,Itg
the Resurrection) the proper OBJ
serVance Of the Christian Sabbath-
Sunday day which Jews who
have not accepted Christ naturally
DO not reeognize-a day which so
attingly sets apart Christians from
the Jews who rejected their Lord.
In considerAti n OF the real sig
nificance of the quotations offered
by this writer, what. ! ask. do such
so-called proofs Chowever abundant
ly furnished) amount to?
From the writer's statement that
, whether or not the Disciples
worked on the first day of the week
it was their privilege to do so from
the standpoint OF the Fourth Com
mandment." it would almost seem
that he is willing to admit at least
the possibility Cas sugGestedl that
the Disciples rested on the day Of
the Resurrection as well as on the
day before. Now. advocates OF the
Saturday Sabbath claim that it is
just as important to work the FIRST
six days of the week as il is to rest
on the seventh day (of the week..
In fact, the same writer. in q
former letter, in quoting a recent
decision of the Supreme Court Of
Oklahoma, brought forward this
very idea Granting. then, the
possibility Gndeed. the probability
of the resting of the Disciples on
the day of the Resurrection. does
*
they were breaking the Fourth
Commandment: At the same time,
If they continued on this day the
rest of the day before-in order to
fulfill the requirements OF the ''first
provision of the commandment" It
was necessary to work six days be-
fore another day OF rest. Allow
ing six days OF labor, and when
would the next sabbath come? The
next" Sunday. of course, and so
on ad inflnitum.-
In concluding, i cannot overlook
the fact that l have been con-
fronted with the challenging Ques-
ton: viii the writer quote any
text from his Bible which changes
the command?" (referring to the
Fourth COMMANDMENT. And to
this very direct and pointed oues-
ton, i find myself, without hesita-
tion or apology. answering, MOI In
fact, i am quite sure that none can
be found. And why! Chiefly, per
maps, because the command has
never been changed-the question
being one. not of alteration, but of
Interpretation. IL the command had
ever been to keep holy" or rest"
on Saturday. probably there would
be reason to search for and expect
to hnd such q text Since, however
the Command specifies that a day
of rest (Ssbbath) shall follow every
six consecutive days of labor, we
who believe in Christ and His
Resurrection certainly do not need a
chsnge Of command to justify us in
keeping holy, and resting on. the
day upon which Christ ceased
from His own works, as God did
from His"
]. Z. MEYER.