The Lord's Day; Christian Sabbath. Science of Moral Philosophy. By Asa Mahan

PRESIDENT OF THE OBERLIN COLLEGIATE INSTITUTE.
AUTHOR OF "A SYSTEM OF INTELLECTUAL PHILOSOPHY;" "DOCTRINE OF THE WILL," &C.

CHAPTER III.

THE LORD'S DAY, OR THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH.

General considerations--Objections--Argument summarily stated--Manner in which the Sabbath should be kept.

THE question in respect to the keeping of a Sabbath is one of special revelation. It is only, as such, that its observance can be regarded as morally binding. It is in this light therefore, that I shall regard and treat the subject in the present chapter.

"The Sabbath," says our Savior, "was made for man;" that is, it was instituted to meet the demands of our nature. As it was originally given, not to any one particular people or age, but to the race, we are bound to conclude that the keeping of the day in accordance with the divine requisitions respecting it, is demanded by the fundamental laws of our being. The same principle applies to all particular precepts respecting the day. If any particular duties are enjoined, or any particular employments forbidden, we are bound to conclude that such precepts are, based upon the fundamental demands of our physical or moral constitution, or both united.

In the further consideration of this subject, I will first direct attention to certain general considerations bearing upon the institution, and designed especially to establish the fact of its being perpetually binding upon us, as the recipients of divine revelation. On this point I remark,

1. That the Sabbath was originally given, not to one people, but to the race. In the scriptures, the account of its establishment is connected with that of the creation, and of the first origin of the race. "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day, God ended his work which He had made: and He rested on the seventh day from all the work which He had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it He had rested from all his work which God created and made.—Gen. 2:1—3. The term blessed, as here used, can mean nothing less than this, that God ordained the institution of the Sabbath as a day of special blessings to all who would duly observe it. To sanctify the day, means to set it apart from secular to religious uses. This is the fixed and exclusive meaning of the term sanctify, when connected with any common object. The fact that the account of the origin of the institution is connected with that of the creation itself, is sufficient evidence, that its origin is coeval with that of the race, and of the fact, that it was designed not for any one people alone, but for the entire race of man. How strange this account appears, when placed in the light of the idea entertained by some, that the Sabbath was designed only for one people, and merely as an institution of temporary obligation relatively to them. To connect the account of the origin of such an Institution with that of the creation itself, without any intimation whatever of its real subsequent date, would be absurd even in an author uninspired. Then the reason assigned for the institution marks it as designed for the race. What if the Most High had said, I finished the work of creation in six days, and rested on the seventh. For this reason, I now, thousands of years after the creation, sanctify this day, as an institution of temporary obligation for one, the least almost of all the branches of the human race! No man, having any proper respect for the scriptures, can put such a construction upon such a passage. Yet the idea under consideration compels us to do it.

The day also was introduced by Moses to the children of Israel, not as a new, but as an institution already existing. "And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them This is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord."—Exodus 16: 22, 28. This was a considerable period before the arrival of the Israelites at Sinai, where the Sabbath was formally prescribed to the people. Yet it was presented to them, as a day, the observance of which had previously been commanded by the Most High. It certainly had not been commanded to the Jews, as a people. It must have been given to the race, and to them only as a part of it. We might then, with the some propriety argue, that any of the other of the ten commandments was given to the Jews alone, and given as precepts of temporary obligation even unto them, as to affirm that the Sabbath was thus given.

The almost universal division of time into weeks of seven days among the ancients, and the equally extensive observance of the seventh as a sacred day, clearly evinces also, that the Sabbath, with the division of time which it implies, was not originally given to one people, but to the race. "Sacred" says Hesiod, "in the first place, is the day of the New Moon. Sacred also are the fourth and the seventh days." "Again came the seventh day, the illustrious light of the sun." "The seventh day then arrived," says Homer, "a sacred day." Again he says," The seventh [day] is among good things. The seventh is the birth [day.] The seventh is among the chief things. The seventh is perfect." Hesiod and Homer, as the reader is well aware, are among the most ancient of the Greek writers. Philo, the Jew who was cotemporary with our Savior, says of the Sabbath, "For it is a holy day, not of one city, or place only, but of all the world, a holy day which alone can be described as universal, the birth-day of the world." "Neither is there any city of the Greeks or among foreigners," says Josephus, "not even one nation in the which the custom of observing the seventh day, on which we rest, has not found its way." I might adduce many other testimonies equally to the purpose. But this is sufficient. Such coincidences must have had a common origin, the giving of the Sabbath originally, not to any one people, but to the race.

2. The reason originally assigned for the Institution requires to be specially notice "And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; because that in it He rested from all his works which God had created and made." The reason here assigned, as well as that assigned by our Savior, designates the institution, as of changeless obligation. As long as creation should stand before the creatures of God, as his grand work, the reason for observing the institution on the seventh, instead of any other day, would remain unchanged. If, on the other hand, the time should come when, God should perform a work infinitely more important than the creation, such an occurrence would demand, not a destruction of the institution but a change from the seventh to the day on which this last and crowning work of God was completed. Such an occurrence as the above however, instead of being a reason for the abrogation of the Sabbath itself, would be an additional reason of infinite weight for its continued observance, on a different day.

3. Another fact presented in the scriptures designates the institution as of perpetual obligation. It is presented as an emblem of that rest which remains for the people of God in a future state. See Heb. chapters 3 and 4. If this is a reason why one nation in one age should observe the institution, it is a reason equally strong why every nation in every age, should observe it.

4. Another consideration of considerable weight to my mind is this, the fact that the precept requiring the observance of the institution, is placed among nine other precepts of changeless obligation, and which are separate from all other laws, precepts, and institutions, given at the time, as of fundamental importance. The particular phraseology in which the command is given, is adapted with perfect propriety to the institution as then existing, just as the first commandment is conformed in its phraseology to the existing tendencies of the nation and world. Those facts however do not at all diminish the weight of the consideration above stated, in respect to the relation not of the particular day, but of the institution to the changeless laws of our being.

5. The institution of a Sabbath is a manifest demand of our spiritual, religious and social nature. As a spiritual, religious, and social being, worship, individual and social, is a universal instinctive necessity of that nature with which man is endowed. Social worship requires stated days for its performance. As Christianity is designed to be the religion of universal humanity, and as social worship is one of its fundamental elements, a Sabbath is required to perfect its adaptation, as a universal religion, to meet the ends for which it wits given to man. The idea of a Sabbath, that is, of stated days for social worship, is not only a revealed truth, but a necessary demand of the human intelligence. To say, that there should be no Sabbath, is equivalent to the affirmation, that there should be no universal religion an essential element of which is social worship. This is equivalent to the affirmation, that the great want of man growing out of his spiritual, religious and social nature, shall never be met.

Such are some of the reasons, intrinsic in the institution itself, in favor of its perpetuity. Some other considerations of a more general nature now require a passing notice.

l. All the commands of the Old and New Testaments requiring public worship demand such a day. Public worship cannot be maintained without some stated day on which it is observed. Had God required his people not to "forget the assembling of themselves together," and not appointed seasons for this purpose, a blank would have been left in the divine institutions, which the necessities of the church must and would have supplied even without the divine sanction. Can we suppose that God appointed and threw such awful sanctions around an institution in one dispensation, and then dropped it in the other, when the same commands of his, and necessities of our nature which demanded it in the former, demand it in the latter?

2. No reasons can be assigned for the institution before Christ, which do not demand it with increasing weight after his ascension.

3. God has invariably set the seal of his approbation to the strict observance of the day. No community can be named, the purity, virtue, intelligence, and general prosperity of which do not bear an almost exact correspondence to the strictness with which the Sabbath is kept. The opposite is true of all Sabbath-breaking communities. Has God thus set his seal to the observance of a day which He has Himself abrogated? If God's providences and Spirit give us any indication of his voice, both distinctly point to the command, "Remember the Sabbath-day to keep it holy," as of universal and of perpetual obligation.

4. The most extensive observation and experience demonstrate, as far as induction can do it, that such a day is demanded by the physical as well as the moral constitution of man.

5. The main objections brought against the Sabbath are based upon a supposed cessation of the relations noticed above, which so obviously demand a Sabbath. Example: the supposition that saints have entered into their rest in such a manner that they have nothing more to do for God, but simply to enjoy peace, that public and private worship are not demanded, and the necessity of receiving mutual instruction and admonition, has been superseded by the light and teachings of the Spirit. As these are all total misapprehensions of the condition and relation of the Christian, the conclusions based upon them fall of course.

The conclusion which forces itself upon every mind is this: either the seventh day is the Sabbath for us, or some other day has been substituted in its place. The last is the position which I shall now endeavor to establish. If the day has been changed, such change may have been made known to us in one of two ways, either of which would equally indicate the divine will to us:

To the church to whom they ministered, they would indicate the change by precept and example both. To us however, may be left simply the example of these inspired men, as recorded in the Bible, and of the church under their guidance as recorded in her memorials.

We will now consider the amount of evidence left us in the New Testament, in favor of an existing Sabbath under the new dispensation, and of the fact that the day now observed by Christians is that Sabbath. In remarking upon this day, I remark,

1. That the seventh day, as the day on which the institution is to be observed, has been abolished, by the direct authority of inspiration. In proof of this assertion I adduce a single passage bearing directly upon the subject: "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath-days.—Col. 2: 16. The obvious meaning of this passage may be thus expressed. Never admit that you are under obligation to observe any of the institutions or days referred to, so that men may condemn you as guilty of sin for their non-observance. As these institutions and days were instituted directly by divine authority, they can cease to be binding only by the same authority. That they are all alike thus abolished, is in this passage directly asserted. Now if the term "Sabbath," here employed, refers to the seventh day, or to the Jewish sabbath, the keeping of that day as the Sabbath has been superseded by the direct authority of God. That this is the meaning of the term I argue,

(1.) From the fact, that all the other sacred days instituted under the old dispensation were included under the words, "holy day" and "new moon."

(2.) If the term sabbath does include more days than the seventh, no reason can be assigned, why it should not be understood to include this day also, but the strongest reasons to the contrary. The apostle evidently intended to include every thing understood at the time, as included under this term. That the seventh day was included by universal usage no one can doubt. It is a violation of all the laws of interpretation, therefore, to suppose that this day was not included under the term in the passage before us.

(3.) The term sabbath is never, in a solitary instance, used by any of the writers of the New Testament, to designate any of the Jewish sacred days excepting the seventh day. We have then the highest evidence we possibly can have, that this is the day referred to in the passage, and consequently, that the observance of the institution on that day has been formally discontinued by divine authority.

The objection urged by some, that the Jewish feast days must be referred to in this place, from the fact, that in the original, the plural form of the word is used, is without any weight whatever, from the obvious fact, that this is the form most commonly used in the New Testament, to distinguish the seventh day.

2. We have direct and positive evidence, that the observance of the first day of the week was instituted by divine authority as the Christian Sabbath.

In establishing this proposition I will, in the first place, direct attention to Rev. 1: 10. "I was in the spirit on the Lord's day." From this passage I affirm, that there is under the present dispensation, a sabbath, and that the one now regarded by Christians generally, as such, is that day.

The term "Lord's" has a fixed and definite meaning in the scriptures. When applied to any of the common objects of life, it designates some thing set apart from a secular to a sacred use. Thus, the "Lord's Supper," 1 Cor. 11: 20, designates a meal distinguished from common meals, by being observed, as a memorial of the death of Christ, or in honor of Him. So the expression "the Sabbath of the Lord thy God," designates a day separated from all secular pursuits, and devoted to religious worship. What then does the apostle mean by the phrase, "the Lord's day," but a day thus separated, and thus consecrated? There is then such a day under the present dispensation, a day established and recognized as such by inspiration. Else an apostle would not have been inspired of God thus to speak of it.

This could not have been the seventh day of the week, or the Jewish sabbath. This is evident from the fact that that day is always designated by the term sabbath, and was also previously declared by inspiration itself, as we have seen, Col. 2: 16, to have been abolished.

The phrase "the Lord's day," on the other hand, was understood by the entire church at the time, in the very sense attributed to it, to wit, to designate it a day sacred in the sense explained, and the first day of the week as that day. The manner in which the apostle uses the phrase, shows clearly, that it had a fixed and definite meaning, as universally understood at the time in the churches, and that he intended to be understood as using it according to its universal acceptation. What then was the meaning universally attached to the phrase at the time in the churches?

The testimony of Christian writers cotemporary with the apostle, and immediately succeeding him, is perfectly conclusive on that point. Says Barnabas, the companion of Paul, "we keep the eighth as a joyful day, on which day also, Jesus rose from the dead." Ignatius, a cotemporary with the apostle, contrasts the practice of sabbatizing, "with living according to the Lord's day, the day on which our life arose, the day consecrated to the resurrection, and the queen and prince of all days." Again he says "Let every friend of Christ celebrate the Lord's day." Pliny the younger, says of Christians in his letter as governor, to the Emperor Trajan: "That they are accustomed, on a stated day, to meet before day-light, and to repeat among themselves, a hymn to Christ, as to God." This was A. D. 107. That this was the Christian Sabbath, is evident from what has been said above, as well as from the fact that one of the standing questions put to martyrs by Roman persecutors, was, "Have you kept the Lord's day?" The answer usually returned in substance was, "I am a Christian, I can not omit it." To be a Christian, and to observe as the sabbath of the Lord our God, the "Lord's day," that is, the first day of the week, was by them considered as synonymous.

From the time of the apostles onward, the phrase was employed in this same sense, by the church universal. They not only observed the day as a Sabbath, but designated it by the same words. They sometimes used other forms of expression to distinguish the same thing. This, however, was the common designation of the day, and the meaning universally attached to it. To show this I will here present the following extract from the excellent work of "Gurney on the Sabbath."

"An unquestionable evidence on this point is afforded us by Justin Martyr, who in his Apology addressed to the Emperor Antonius (A. D. 147,) gives a lively account of the Christian day of worship. 'On the day called Sunday,' he says, 'there is a meeting in one place of all the Christians who live either in the towns or in the country, and the Memoirs of the Apostles (supposed to mean the four Gospels) or the writings of the prophets, are read to them as long as is suitable. When the reader stops, the president announces the admonition, and exhorts to the imitation of these noble examples; after which we all arise and begin to pray.' Justin then describes the eucharistical meal, and the collection made for the poor, and concludes by explaining why this day of the week was chosen for their public worship. 'We all meet together on the Sunday because it is the first day—on which God turned the darkness [into light,] gave shape to the chaos, and made the world; and on the same day Jesus Christ our Savior rose from the dead.'

Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth (A. D. 170,) when writing to the Romans, informs them that the epistle of Clement their late bishop, had been read in the church at Corinth, while they were keeping the Lord's holy day; an incidental allusion, which proves that the practice of observing that day was familiar both to the writer, and to those persons whom he was addressing.

After the destruction of Jerusalem, and with it of the whole Jewish polity, and during the first two or three centuries of the Christian era, it is probable that the Lord's day was universally recognized as the only Christian sabbath. Ignatius, as we have already remarked, contrasts this day with the old sabbath of the Jews; and while abundant evidence is afforded by the other authors whom we have now cited, that the first day of the week was kept as a solemn day of worship, no mention is made by any of them of the seventh day, as claiming any peculiar honors from Christians. Accordingly Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, (A. D. 167,) expressly asserts that the Lord's day was their sabbath. "On the Lord's day every one of us Christians keeps the sabbath, meditating on the law, and rejoicing in the works of God." So also Turtullian (A. D. 192,) while he makes frequent mention of the keeping of the Lord's day, speaks of the Jewish sabbath as foreign to believers in Jesus. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, (A. D. 250,) takes no notice of the old sabbath, but repeatedly alludes to the Lord's day, as that which was kept holy among Christians."

I have adduced the above extracts, as full demonstration of the sense in which inspiration itself employs the phrase, "the Lord's day," in the passage under consideration. Inspiration then directly recognizes the day as thus sacred, and as nothing but inspiration could have rendered it such, the keeping of the day as the sabbath of God, was by divine authority introduced into the Christian church, and is consequently binding upon us as such. As a believer in the inspiration of the scriptures, I know not how to get rid of the above argument.

Special attention is now invited to the following passages of scripture: "And we sailed away from Phillippi, after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days; where we abode seven days. And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, (ready to depart on the morrow) and continued his speech until midnight."—Acts 20: 6, 7. "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.—1 Cor. 16: 1, 2. It is quite evident from the manner in which these facts are here recorded, that the custom referred to, the custom of assembling for worship on the "Lord's day," or the first day of the week, was established and universal, at least in the churches at Corinth and Troas. Equally evident is the fact, that this custom was introduced by the apostles themselves, in other words, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. This is rendered certain from two considerations.

(1.) The direct testimony of inspiration. "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you."—1 Cor. 11: 2. Here the apostle affirms, that the church at Corinth were keeping "the ordinances as he delivered them unto them." In a subsequent chapter he refers, as seen above, to the observance of the "Lord's day" as a day of stated worship, as an ordinance established and observed by that church. What is this but a direct affirmation, that he himself had delivered this ordinance unto them? No other conclusion can be legitimately drawn from this palpable fact. We have then the positive testimony of inspiration, that the keeping of the Lord's day was introduced into the churches by divine authority.

(2.) The universal observance of this day in all the churches, as a day sacred in the sense under consideration, and that under the immediate supervision of the apostles, renders it demonstrably evident, that the ordinance must have been introduced by them, that is, by the inspiration of the Spirit of God, through them. A custom absolutely universal in all parts of the world, must have had a common cause for its existence. A custom that did obtain thus universally among churches established by the apostles, and acting under their immediate supervision and control, could have originated from no other cause, than their direction and authoritative dictation. That this was the case among the churches sustaining such a relation to the inspired apostles of Christ in respect to the keeping of the Lord's day, has already been rendered undeniably evident. Additional evidence to any required extent might be adduced, did my limits permit. We can hardly conceive of a case more clearly made out, than is the fact, that the observance of this day as the Christian sabbath, was introduced by the authority of inspiration itself. With those who deny the fact, that the apostles did teach and write under the inspiration of God, in other words, that the New Testament, as well as the Old, is of divine authority, the above argument has nothing to do. As Christians, among whom it is my joy and highest glory to number myself, I see not how to avoid the force of the evidence adduced in favor of the keeping of this day.

As an argument confirmatory of that already adduced from scripture, I now direct attention to the manner in which the first day of the week is referred to by the apostles. Let us suppose that they were inspired by the Holy Spirit to establish this day as the Christian sabbath. The manner in which it is referred to by them, readily falls in with this supposition, and with no other. Why are they so particular in recording the most signal manifestations of divine grace, as having occurred on that particular day? It is needless to adduce examples on this point. The reader, who is familiar with his Bible, is already sufficiently informed on the subject.

To conclude the argument from the direct testimony of scripture, I adduce the fact that the change of the ordinance from the seventh to the first day of the week, is positively foretold by an inspired prophet. "Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves. And when these days are expired, it shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt-offerings upon the altar, and you peace-offerings: and I will accept you, saith the Lord God."—Eze. 43: 26, 27.

Under the image of a mystical temple, and of a corresponding arrangement of the church, the prophet shadows forth the glories of the new dispensation. In this passage he affirms that from the time when the work of completing the temple and purifying the altar was consummated, an event to occur on the eighth day, that is on the day after the Jewish sabbath, or the first day of the week, the usual services performed on the seventh day should be performed on the eighth. The meaning of the prophecy can be nothing else than this, that from the time in which the work of redemption was consummated, the eighth, that is the first day of the week, instead of the seventh, should be the day on which public worship should be observed. The change of the sabbath, therefore, from the seventh to the first day of the week is a subject of direct prophecy.

3. As a third and last argument in favor of a change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, I notice the intrinsic reasonableness of such a change. The new dispensation is represented as so far surpassing, as a manifestation of the divine glory, all that God had previously done, that such works, in the comparison, should cease to be "remembered, or to come into mind." Surely the Sabbath should now represent the consummation of "the new heavens and of the new earth," and not that of the old. The change of the day is in itself so reasonable, so accordant with the usual dispensations of Providence, that all who fully enter into the spirit of inspiration would naturally expect it.

Some objections often adduced against the arguments above presented in favor of an existing Sabbath, as well as against those adduced to prove a change of the day, demand a passing notice in this place.

1. We have no direct and positive command for keeping the Christian Sabbath. I have two remarks to make in reply to this objection:

(1.) It assumes that the will of God is never indicated to us in any other way than by positive command, an hypothesis manifestly false.

(2.) It also assumes that the declaration of an inspired apostle, that a church keeps the ordinances as he delivered them to that church, and a reference to the keeping of the Christian Sabbath, as one of the established customs or ordinances of that and other churches, does not amount to a command. Such an assumption surely is not only without foundation, but untrue.

2. All the ordinances ceased at the destruction of Jerusalem. To this objection I reply,

(2.) The supposition that the Sabbath was instituted for a period of about thirty or forty years, is intrinsically absurd.

(3.) For such an abrogation, we may at least ask a "thus saith the Lord" or, apostolic example.

(4.) The apostle John probably wrote the Revelation, and certainly lived long after that event. Yet the practice continued in the churches under his immediate inspection, and that without the least interruption.

3. In Rom. 14: 5, and Gal. 2: 16, the apostle does away with the keeping of the Sabbath altogether. Answer:

(1) Such language is to be construed consistently with the ordinances established by the apostle himself, of which the keeping of the Christian Sabbath, we have seen, is one.

(2.) The apostle is evidently speaking of Jewish customs, and consequently of the Jewish Sabbath, and not of Christian ordinances, or of the Christian Sabbath.

5. The Jewish Sabbath is a type of the rest under the new dispensation. This does not touch "the Lord's day."

6. All days are equally holy to the Christian. True, but not in the same sense. All kinds of employments may not therefore be equally lawful on every day.

7. The divine command, requiring the observance of the seventh day as the Sabbath, has never been repealed. Till repealed, it is binding upon us. The conclusion is admitted; but the principle on which it rests is positively denied. The ground of this denial has been fully shown in the remarks made above on Col. 2: 16.

The entire argument in favor of the Christian Sabbath, stands before us in this light:

1. That there is, under the present dispensation, a Sabbath, is incontrovertible.

2. That the seventh day, as such a Sabbath, has been repealed by divine authority expressed and implied, is equally certain.

(1.) From express declarations of scripture, as understood by the whole primitive church.

(2.) By the example of the church directly under the control of inspired apostles.

(3.) By the declaration of such an apostle, that the ordinances were kept by at least one of these churches, as he delivered them to that church.

(4.) From the fact that such is the nature of the ordinance of the Sabbath, that the directions of the apostles respecting it could not have been misapprehended.

(5.) The action of the church under the direction of the apostles, together with the facts and declarations recorded in the Bible, can not be accounted for, only on the supposition that the keeping of the first day of the week, as the Christian Sabbath, was an ordinance delivered by them to the churches.

One inquiry remains to be answered, to wit, the manner in which the Sabbath should be kept, in order to realize the benefits designed to be conferred upon the race by the institution. In accomplishing this object, we will

1. Inquire into the obligations imposed upon men by the law, respecting the original Sabbath. To understand this subject, we must

(1.) Distinguish between the institution as given to the race, and the same institution as adapted to a particular people, located in one particular part of the world.

(2.) We must distinguish between the particular precepts, respecting the institution as given to that people, and that one precept which presents it as a part of the moral law.

(3.) We must keep in view the two-fold design of the institution: the spiritual interest of man by appropriate religious observances, and the health of his physical system, by an entire suspension of secular labor.

(4.) As the main object of the institution was the advancement of the spiritual interest of man, the apprehension of any means, whether prescribed or not, adapted to that end, will enable us to determine the meaning of the precept, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy."

(5) To understand the duties appropriate to this day, we must not only determine what is positively required, but what is prohibited. The prohibition is thus expressed: "In it thou shalt not do any work." Every thing properly called work, is positively prohibited. What then, are the kinds of employment which come under this term "work?" I answer,

[I.] Nothing is called work, which is necessary to securing the end of the Sabbath—spiritual good, and physical rest; and securing these objects in the best possible manner.

[2.] Nothing is called work, which is a necessary manifestation of the spirit which we are required to cherish, and which the Sabbath is designed to secure. "It is lawful to do good on the Sabbath day."

[3.] Every thing, not included under either of the above particulars, is comprehended under the head work, and is of course forbidden.

(6.) But as the keeping of the Sabbath has a primary reference to the state of mind, our thoughts, reading and conversation should of course be employed on things sacred and divine. They should also be dissociated from things about which our hands are forbidden to be employed. Such would be the original Sabbath, if its revealed law as given to the race, was binding upon us.

2. The inquiry which now arises is this. Should the Christian Sabbath be kept by us in conformity with the above principles? To this inquiry I answer,

(I.) The Sabbath was made for man. All the above precepts are demanded by his moral and physical constitution.

(2.) Here we have God's judgment respecting the manner in which the Sabbath should be kept. Such a revelation surely is law to us.

(3.) No reason can be assigned why the present should be kept less sacred. On the other hand, all the reasons lie on the opposite side.

(4.) All the indications of providence favor this supposition. The virtue, order, intelligence, and prosperity of every community is, as its observance of the Sabbath.

(5.) No reason can be assigned why a Sabbath, if kept at all, should not be kept in accordance with the principles above elucidated.