,transcribed from the #ahec ,wertheim and ,macintosh edition by ,david ,price4 ,,the ,,divine ,,and ,,perpetual ,,obligation ,,of ,,the ,,observance ,,of ,,the ,,sabbath1 ,,with ,,reference ,,more ,,especially ,,to ,a ,,pamphlet ,,lately ,,published ,,by ,,the ,,rev4 ,c4 ,j4 ,,vaughan1 ,d4,d41 ,head ,master of ,harrow ,school1 ,,entitled 8,a ,,few ,,words ,,on ,,the ,,crystal ,,palace ,,question40 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 ,,by ,,the ,,rev4 ,,john ,,perowne1 ,m4,a41 ,rector of ,st4 ,john's ,maddermarket1 ,norwich4 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 ,,london3 ,,wertheim ,,and ,,macintosh1 ,,paternoster ,,row2 ,,norwich3 ,,thomas ,,priest1 ,,rampant ,,horse ,,street1 #ahec4 ,price ,one ,shilling4 ,,preface4 ,the following pages are published with considerable reluctance4 ,the ,author read ,dr4 ,vaughan's pamphlet several weeks since1 and was much pained that some of the sentiments contained in it should proceed from such a quarter4 ,he hoped and expected that some one with more leisure than he can command1 and more capable of doing justice to the important points under discussion1 would undertake to refute what he felt to be the very erroneous notions of the learned ,doctor4 ,since1 however1 no one else has taken up the subject1 he ventures to submit his sentiments to the ,christian public4 ,he has no love for polemics1 and very unwillingly appears in print2 but he has reason to know1 that the notions to which he alludes have already1 in several instances1 encouraged a violation of the ,sabbath1 and that they are likely to produce more extensive mischief1 from the circumstance of no attempt having been made to refute them4 ,to prevent this evil1 is one object of the present undertaking4 ,another is1 to counteract the erroneous sentiments of ,dr4 ,vaughan's pamphlet2 while the writer's chief aim is1 to set forth what he believes to be the will of ,god on the important subject of the ,sabbath4 ,he is convinced that the principles enunciated in the following pages are in conformity with the teaching of the ,bible2 and being fully assured that obedience to the will of our ,heavenly ,father1 is in all things the only way of peace and safety1 he will rejoice if this pamphlet shall become the means of removing error1 or of confirming those who already believe that the ,sabbath is of divine and perpetual obligation4 ,,the ,,divine ,,and ,,perpetual ,,obligation ,,of ,,the ,,sabbath4 ,,before entering on the question that we intend more particularly to discuss1 there are some remarks that we deem it necessary to make on the tone and general character of ,dr4 ,vaughan's pamphlet4 ,and in the first place1 we were struck with the entire absence of scripture proof in support of the views propounded4 ,assertions are made of the most sweeping character1 and inferences are thence drawn1 involving matters of the highest moment2 and yet no passage of scripture is adduced in support of these assertions4 ,thus we are told 8that not only the fourth commandment1 but the whole decalogue has ceased to be1 as such1 the rule of our life40 ,but the authority for this declaration is no-where given4 ,if this doctrine be plainly taught in the ,new ,testament1 surely we should be informed where it is to be found4 ,another thing that we could not help remarking1 was the manner in which the authority of the ,old ,testament is repudiated4 8,with reference to the observance of the ,sabbath1 and to every point of moral duty1 the appeal now lies primarily to the scriptures of the ,new ,testament1 and secondarily to any other records which we may possess of the practice of the apostolical age40 ,how different is the mind of ,dr4 ,vaughan from that of the ,apostle ,paul on this important point4 ,the ,apostle tells us 7alluding more especially to the writings of the ,old ,testament71 that all scripture is 8profitable for doctrine1 for reproof1 for correction1 for instruction in righteousness1 that the man of ,god may be perfect1 thoroughly furnished unto all good works40 ,dr4 ,vaughan tells us in effect1 that our rule of practice is the ,new ,testament and tradition6 ,again ,dr4 ,v4 condemns what he designates 8a low and slavish spirit10 in those who wish 8to have an express law to shew for our ,christian ,sunday40 ,but we would ask1 whether an express law makes the obedience of love less sincere1 less warm1 less free and spontaneous8 ,st4 ,john tells us1 8this is the love of ,god1 that we keep his commandments1 and his commandments are not grievous40 ,in a matter of such moment we feel bound to follow the opinion of the inspired ,apostle4 ,dr4 ,vaughan is of opinion1 that 8if we found even a human institution1 which testified throughout ,christendom1 by a speaking sign1 by an act at once self-denying and beneficent1 our faith in realities unseen and future2 even this would bind us to its observance40 ,and yet when we find in the word of ,god1 a plain command to keep holy the ,sabbath-day1 we are told that we are not legally bound to observe it1 and that a wish to have a law to that effect1 bespeaks 8a low and slavish spirit40 ,if1 however1 the express will of ,god does not lead men to keep the ,sabbath1 we cannot conceive of any other motive1 by which 7on ,christian principles7 they will be induced to observe it4 ,in man's present condition1 liberty without law soon degenerates into licentiousness2 and no law but that of ,god1 can so restrain and regulate men1 as to preserve real religious freedom4 ,repeal the laws by which life and property are protected1 and try to persuade men to be good and virtuous1 from a love of virtue1 or from a sense of gratitude for the kindness and beneficence of their rulers2 and we should soon see the necessity and benefit of our laws4 ,and so it will be found1 that the religious observance of the ,sabbath1 will soon give place to a general neglect of ,god's house1 and to practical atheism1 if once the people are persuaded1 that there is no divine command to keep holy the ,sabbath-day4 ,but while the authority of the ,old ,testament is thus repudiated1 the ,rev4 ,doctor 8thinks0 he 8sees0 7what other people may be blind to1 and about which he himself is not quite certain--so poor a guide is man's intellect in the absence of a plain command from ,god17 8indications from the very earliest days1 of which the ,scriptures contain the record1 of man's need of a periodical rest1 and of ,god's purpose to secure it to him40 ,he believes 8that it is essential to the well-being of his bodily and mental structure40 ,he believes that it 8is yet more essential to the well-being of his immortal spirit1 to his education for that state in which earthly life issues40 ,he believes that this was 8foreseen by man's ,creator1 and provided for by the disposer of man's heart40 ,and yet he does not believe that ,god has adopted the only means of securing this all-important blessing permanently to his creatures4 ,once1 indeed1 for a few hundred years he made it imperative upon a small portion of the human race1 to keep an appointment so essential to man's present and eternal welfare4 ,but when by the mission of his ,son1 and the publication of the gospel1 he manifested his marvellous love to the whole human race1 then1 by an unaccountable and inexplicable mode of procedure1 he set aside this appointment1 and left him to the dictates of his own will1 or to the selfishness or caprice of those under whose authority he might happen to be6 ,all was thenceforth to be left to man's mental perception and moral sense6 #g ,is this view consistent with ,god's goodness8 ,is it consistent with his general dealing with men under the present dispensation8 ,god has provided a ,saviour for all men4 ,he has commanded the gospel to be preached to the whole human race4 ,he has commanded all men every where to receive the gospel4 ,and yet he has abolished the only command by which an opportunity can be permanently secured to all men1 to become acquainted with the truths of the gospel1 and be made wise unto salvation6 ,is this worthy of ,god8 ,a human parent would not withhold from his children1 explicit instruction on any point that he deemed essential to their welfare4 ,he would not leave them to conjecture1 but would tell them plainly what was for their good4 ,is ,god less wise or less good than man8 ,the ,rev4 ,doctor evidently feels some difficulty in reconciling his views with the teaching of the ,church of ,england4 ,for after speaking of the privilege and blessing of ,sabbath observance1 as if conscious of the dilemma in which his principles placed him1 he proceeds to ask1 8,and shall those who look back through long years upon their frequent failures to improve the blessing1 see no reason for the confession which bewails their past neglect of it1 and the prayer which asks help to honour it 7i4e4 the blessing7 hereafter80 ,now we confess that we cannot help feeling1 as we think most must feel1 that this attempt to escape from the appearance of inconsistency in using the prayer alluded to1 is most unsatisfactory4 ,the prayer to which allusion is here made1 is offered by the whole congregation immediately on the reading of the fourth commandment by the ,minister4 ,its language is1 8,lord have mercy upon us1 and incline our hearts to keep this law40 ,and the meaning and intent of the prayer are thus expressed in the rubric at the head of the commandments in the ,communion ,service3 8,the ,priest shall rehearse the ten commandments2 and the people shall1 after every commandment1 ask ,god mercy for their transgression thereof for the time past1 and grace to keep the same for the time to come40 ,this1 then1 is the meaning of the prayer2 and in this there is necessarily implied a recognition of the moral obligation of the commandment1 with regret for its violation1 as well as a prayer for pardon1 and for help to keep it in future4 ,but is this the meaning which ,dr4 ,vaughan attaches to the language of this prayer8 ,no1 with his views1 it must be something of this sort3 8,have mercy upon us for not improving this blessing in time past1 and incline our hearts to honour this blessing in future40 ,surely if the fourth commandment be no longer in force1 to use this prayer is to confess guilt where no law has been transgressed1 to ask pardon where no offence has been committed1 and to seek aid to amend what is not legally wrong4 ,nor is this the only practical difficulty connected with the views in question4 ,we presume it is the duty of the ,masters of our public schools1 as well as of the ,clergy generally1 to teach their charge the ,church ,catechism4 ,but in the ,church ,catechism are the following questions and answers3-- ,question4 ,you said that your godfathers and godmothers did promise for you1 that you should keep ,god's commandments4 ,tell me how many there be4 ,answer4 ,ten4 ,question4 ,which be they8 ,answer4 ,the same which ,god spake in the twentieth chapter of ,exodus1 c4 ,here is a plain acknowledgment that the ten commandments are still in force1 and that we are bound by our baptismal vows to keep them4 ,dr4 ,vaughan affirms that they have 8ceased to be our rule of life40 ,how can these conflicting opinions be reconciled8 or how can those persons consistently use the formularies of our church1 who so directly contradict her teaching8 ,having thus noticed more generally what we consider the unscriptural opinions set forth in the pamphlet under review1 we shall now proceed to consider more particularly the ,sabbath question4 ,this is confessedly one of the great questions of the day4 ,so momentous1 indeed1 are its bearings on the temporal and spiritual well-being of men1 and so intimately is it connected with the worship and honour of ,god1 that its importance can scarcely be overrated4 ,if ,god is to be publicly acknowledged and worshiped in his own world--if men are to be instructed in the principles of revealed religion1 and trained to habits of virtue and christian love--if personal1 domestic1 social1 and national happiness is to be promoted--if time is to be so improved1 as to make it the passage to a blessed immortality--the obligation to keep the ,sabbath must be recognised1 and its observance must be enforced and regulated according to the injunctions of ,god's holy word4 ,it is indeed asserted by some that1 under the ,christian dispensation1 the observance of a day of rest is a mere matter of expediency--that we are under no divine obligation to abstain from labour or other worldly pursuits--that the ,sabbath was purely a ,jewish institution1 and has passed away with the other 8weak and beggarly elements0 of ,judaism4 ,but on what grounds are such assertions made8 because1 as it is alleged1 there is no positive command in the ,new ,testament to keep the ,sabbath1 8no direction for its observance1 nor any reproof for the neglect of it10 and because certain expressions are employed by ,st4 ,paul1 which seem to bespeak 8indifference to its retention1 or even rebuke for its revival40 ,with regard to the first objection1 viz4 the want of a direct command1 this could scarcely be necessary1 inasmuch as our ,lord not only himself kept the ,sabbath1 but in all his remarks in reference to it1 spoke in a manner that necessarily implied his recognition of its divine origin and perpetual obligation4 ,besides1 as he expressly declared that he came not to destroy the law or the prophets1 7both of which are full of exhortations to keep the ,sabbath71 what right have we to deny the obligation of the fourth commandment1 because it is not expressly repeated in the ,new ,testament8 ,the safer and more just way of reasoning would surely be this3 ,under the former dispensation ,god in the most solemn manner promulgated a law1 connecting with its observance great temporal and especially great spiritual blessings1 and visiting its violation with the most severe judgments4 ,this law has not been formally and explicitly abrogated1 nor its sanctions withdrawn4 ,the law1 therefore1 still remains in force4 ,shew us that the fourth commandment has been abrogated in as plain terms as those that were employed in its promulgation2 and then1 and not till then1 we may with a safe conscience regard the observance of the ,sabbath merely as a matter of ,christian expediency4 ,where1 again1 was the necessity of 8direction0 for the observance of the ,sabbath1 when the first ,christians1 7many of whom1 as well as the ,apostles1 were ,jews7 had the services of the ,jewish synagogue as a model1 and the plain instructions of the law and prophets to guide them1 both as to the proper manner of keeping the ,sabbath1 and the spirit in which it should be kept8 ,we might as well deny the ,christian obligation to maintain the public worship of ,god1 because in the ,new ,testament no directions are given for conducting it4 ,nor would the absence of 8reproof for the neglect0 of the ,sabbath be any valid argument against the continued obligation of its observance4 ,if 8in the primitive age0 there were 8churches in which both 7the ,jewish and the ,christian ,sabbaths7 were observed10 it is scarcely probable that any number of ,christians would be found who neglected the ,sabbath altogether2 and if there was little or no neglect of the observance of the ,sabbath1 there would be little or no room for reproof on account of its neglect4 ,but is there no reproof to be found in the ,new ,testament8 ,what does ,st4 ,paul mean by exhorting the ,hebrews not to neglect the assembling of themselves together1 as the manner of some was8 #ab;a ,few will deny that this passage refers to the public worship of the ,christian church1 which we know was held on the ,lord's day4 ,here1 then1 we have at least indirect reproof2 and its connection with what follows will perhaps suggest an additional reason for the absence of more frequent and more direct reproof4 ,so essential a part of practical ,christianity was the observance of the ,sabbath deemed1 that scarcely any ventured to neglect it1 and they who did so1 were considered in danger of apostasy4 #ab;b ,if the reasons stated be valid arguments against the divine obligation to keep the ,sabbath1 what can be urged to prove the duty of females to partake of the ,sacrament of the ,lord's ,supper8 ,here1 although the institution was entirely new1 and peculiar to the new dispensation1 yet we find neither direct command1 nor reproof for neglect1 nor even mention made of any females having partaken of that ,sacrament4 ,and yet who would venture to pronounce these sufficient reasons for denying the obligation of women to receive the memorials of their dying ,saviour's love8 ,with regard to those passages in which 8the language employed is0 said to be 8that either of indifference to its retention1 or even of rebuke for its revival10 we apprehend that the intention of the apostle was neither to condemn the observance of the ,jewish ,sabbath1 nor to intimate that ,christians were under no moral obligation to keep any ,sabbath whatever4 ,if he was speaking exclusively of the ,jewish weekly ,sabbath 7of which there is no sufficient proof71 his object was1 either to vindicate ,gentile ,christians from the obligation of its observance1 or to condemn the self-righteous spirit in which it was kept4 8,let no man judge you in meat1 or in drink1 or in respect of a holy day1 or of the new moon1 or of the ,sabbaths0 7or sabbatical appointments47 #ac ,all these were ,jewish ordinances1 from which the council at ,jerusalem1 guided by the ,holy ,ghost1 had declared ,gentile believers to be free4 ,they were local and national1 and the various sacrifices and offerings connected with them could be presented only at ,jerusalem1 and by ,jews or proselytes4 ,they were therefore declared to be of no obligation to the ,gentile believer4 ,on the contrary1 these observances became injurious both to ,jewish and ,gentile ,christians1 if they were kept in a self-righteous spirit4 8,i am afraid of you 7says ,st4 ,paul to the ,galatians71 lest ,i have bestowed upon you labour in vain40 8,ye observe days1 and months1 and times1 and years40 ,was the apostle rebuking his brethren for the revival of what had 8died out80 ,was he not rather blaming them for observing in an antichristian spirit1 what they were not bound to observe at all8 ,in his epistle to the ,romans1 he declares that the observance of these days is in itself a matter of indifference4 8,one man esteemeth one day above another1 another esteemeth every day4 ,he that regardeth the day1 regardeth it to the ,lord2 and he that regardeth not the day1 to the ,lord he doth not regard it40 #ad ,how then could he be rebuking the ,galatians for simply doing what he himself declares might be done with a good conscience1 and acceptably to ,christ8 ,besides if the language of the ,apostle must necessarily be understood as conveying rebuke for observing the ,sabbath1 and consequently be a valid proof1 that the obligation to observe it is done away1 much more might the same argument be deduced from the still stronger language employed by ,god in the book of the ,prophet ,isaiah3 8,bring no more vain oblations2 incense is an abomination unto me2 the new moons and sabbaths1 the calling of assemblies1 ,i cannot away with2 it is iniquity1 even the solemn meeting4 ,your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth2 they are a trouble unto me2 ,i am weary to bear them40 #ae ,what would have been thought of a ,jewish teacher who should have affirmed from this passage1 that the rites here enumerated were for ever abolished8 ,and yet such a view would have had more to support it1 than the doctrine attempted to be established by the statement of the ,apostle4 ,in both cases1 we apprehend1 it was not the observance that was condemned1 nor the obligation that was denied2 but the reproof was levelled at the motives and the state of mind by which the observance was attended4 ,an antinomian spirit was condemned by the ,prophet--a self-righteous spirit by the ,apostle4 ,the absence of a formal abrogation of the ,jewish ,sabbath1 and the formal substitution of the ,christian ,sabbath in its place1 is in perfect accordance with the whole plan of divine providence1 for the introduction and establishment of ,christianity in the world4 ,the religion of ,moses was never formally abolished4 ,our ,lord lived and died in it2 and his ,apostles and the early ,jewish disciples occasionally at least observed its rites1 and still worshiped at the temple and in the synagogue4 ,both religions were from ,god4 ,both had the same end4 ,the same truths and the same spirit were essential to both4 ,the shadows of the one gave place to the substance of the other4 ,but in all that was vital1 moral1 saving1 the two religions were identical4 8,he was not a ,jew who was one outwardly1 and circumcision was that of the heart1 in the spirit1 and not in the letter40 ,in like manner we conceive1 what was purely and necessarily ,jewish in the observance of the ,sabbath1 passed away with the mere externals of ,judaism2 but all that was essential to the spirit of the command remained in full force4 ,but it is asked1 if the observance of the ,sabbath be of divine and perpetual obligation1 why have ,christians changed the day1 and why do they not keep the ,sabbath in the manner enjoined in the ,old ,testament8 ,we reply1 that the lawgiver1 the 8,lord of the ,sabbath10 has by his own acts1 declarations1 and example1 and by the example of his inspired ,apostles1 sanctioned both the change of the day1 and the alteration in the manner of its observance4 ,christianity was not to be confined to one country1 nor was it necessarily to be a national religion4 ,it was to overspread the world1 and was to be suited to all countries and climes4 ,it was therefore necessary that whatever was merely local and national in the observance of the ,sabbath1 should be relaxed or removed2 and this might be done1 and was done1 without either touching the moral obligation of the law1 or taking from its observance a particle of what is vital and essential4 #af ,our ,lord did not abrogate the seventh commandment when he declared1 that the unchaste look was a breach of it4 ,neither did he set aside the fourth commandment1 when he worked miracles of mercy on the ,sabbath day2 when he defended his disciples who were blamed for plucking ears of corn on the ,sabbath day2 when he declared it was 8lawful to do good on the ,sabbath day40 ,and if the seventh day had hitherto been kept as a sign between ,god the ,creator and his creature man1 and as a memorial of creating goodness2 surely there was great propriety in changing the day1 so as to make the ,sabbath observance a sign between ,god the ,redeemer and his redeemed creature man1 and a memorial of redeeming love1 as well as an emblem of the eternal ,sabbath1 #ag which is the hope of the christian4 ,nor can we imagine that the most explicit command for the change of the day1 could have come with greater force to the followers of ,christ1 than the recorded facts1 that the ,saviour rose on the first day of the week1 that after his resurrection1 he selected that day to meet his disciples1 that his people ever after regularly kept the first day1 and that this day bears in ,scripture the honoured appellation of 8the ,lord's day40 ,in this change1 however1 nothing is given up that is essential in the command to keep holy the ,sabbath day4 ,one day in seven is to be set apart to the service of ,god2 in it no unnecessary work is to be done2 but works of necessity and of charity on that day are sanctioned by our ,lord himself4 ,and this is so far from being opposed to what was required under the former dispensation1 that it agrees entirely with the teaching of the prophet ,isaiah1 who instructed the ,jews1 that the proper and acceptable way of keeping the ,sabbath1 was1 8not to do their own ways10 nor to 8speak their own words10 nor to 8find their own pleasure20 but to 8call the ,sabbath a delight1 holy of the ,lord1 honourable40 #ah ,here it will be objected1 that this reasoning proceeds on the assumption1 that the ,sabbath is of divine and perpetual obligation1 and that the justness of this assumption is altogether denied4 ,well then1 let us proceed to the proof4 ,it will not be denied1 that in the law of the ten commandments1 commonly called the moral law1 twice written by the finger of ,god1 and delivered to the ,jews in the most solemn manner by the voice of ,jehovah himself1 there is a plain command to 8keep holy the ,sabbath day40 ,it will not be denied1 that this appointment was made as 8a sign0 or memorial of the relation that subsisted between ,god and his ,church1 and that this sign was to be continued in succeeding generations4 ,it will not be denied1 that this appointment was guarded by sanctions of the most important kind--great blessings being promised to its observance1 and severe judgments being threatened against those who should disregard it4 ,in all this we see1 that to the ,jews the observance of the ,sabbath was of divine obligation1 and that that obligation continued so long as the law itself was unrepealed4 ,in other words1 until the same authority by which the law was promulgated1 shall plainly declare it abolished1 every ,jew is bound to keep the ,sabbath1 on pain of incurring the displeasure of ,almighty ,god4 ,but was the ,jew the only person that was brought under the sanctions of this law8 ,were not all proselytes from the ,gentiles bound by the same obligations1 as they were also partakers of the same blessings with the ,jews8 ,and does the obligation stop even here8 ,what is the meaning of this passage from the prophet ,isaiah8 8,also the sons of the stranger1 that join themselves to the ,lord1 to serve him1 and to love the name of the ,lord1 to be his servants1 every one that keepeth the ,sabbath from polluting it1 and taketh hold of my covenant2 even them will ,i bring to my holy mountain1 and make them joyful in my house of prayer 4 4 4 for mine house shall be called a house of prayer for all people40 #bj;a ,surely this language must have reference to the times of the gospel1 when the gentile nations would be admitted into the church of ,god1 and become partakers of the blessings of the new covenant4 ,in support of this view it may be mentioned1 that ,st4 ,paul states expressly that gentile believers have no separate and independent standing in the economy of redemption1 but are as scions cut out of a wild olive tree and grafted into the ,jewish stock1 and so with the natural branches1 partake of its root and fatness4 ,or1 using another figure1 he reminds the ,ephesians1 that before their conversion they had been 8aliens from the commonwealth of ,israel10 but that now they were 8fellow citizens with the saints1 and of the household of ,god40 ,if this view be correct1 and we see not how its correctness can be disproved1 the ,sabbath with its responsibilities and its blessings1 is not confined to ,jews1 or to proselytes to the ,jewish religion4 ,its observance is binding upon all who profess to believe the scriptures and to worship the ,god of the ,bible4 ,we cannot help regarding as very untenable the opinion of those1 who dissever the fourth commandment from the rest of the decalogue1 under the plea that it is not properly speaking moral1 #bj;b and therefore has not the same force as the commandments of the second table--as if the express command of our ,maker were not infinitely above every consideration arising from the nature of the injunction given1 or as if man's reason or man's moral sense were competent to make a distinction where ,god has made none4 ,what right have we1 under any pretence whatever1 to deny the obligation of a law1 so plainly1 so solemnly1 so awfully promulgated by the ,god of heaven himself8 ,the very position of the fourth commandment in the decalogue1 might teach men to regard it with peculiar veneration4 ,it is the link that binds together heaven and earth--our duty to ,god and our duty to our neighbour4 ,it is the pillar that supports the whole moral and religious fabric4 ,to attempt to set aside the obligation to observe the fourth commandment1 is therefore1 in our view1 a daring attack on the authority of the ,lawgiver4 ,it is a temerity equalled only by that of the church of ,rome in expunging from the decalogue the second commandment4 ,we acknowledge the greater consistency of those who affirm1 that the whole moral law is swept away by the gospel2 though we much regret that any true ,christians1 and those too1 persons who are friendly to a proper observance of the ,lord's day1 should hold notions which appear to us opposed to ,scripture1 and calculated to produce among the unthinking multitude1 the most serious consequences4 ,if indeed it were true1 that the whole decalogue is abrogated by ,christianity1 no supposed immoral results would deter us from boldly proclaiming the fact4 ,in that case1 we should not shrink from telling men that our church is under a serious mistake1 when she teaches her members to confess their guilt in breaking each of the ten commandments1 to ask for pardon1 and to implore grace to keep them in time to come4 ,but it is because we believe in our heart that the decalogue is still in force1 and that ,god's honour and man's happiness alike demand its observance1 that we are not 8bold enough0 to proclaim as 8liberty0 what we are sure would lead to the greatest licentiousness4 ,a theory of the kind may not seriously injure men of real piety and great spirituality of mind2 but to others it would be productive of the most lamentable consequences4 ,but if ,christianity has freed us from the moral law1 an announcement to that effect must be recorded in the ,new ,testament1 and recorded in no obscure or doubtful terms1 such as can by any possibility be misunderstood1 but in language as plain1 as perspicuous1 and as authoritative1 as that employed in the original promulgation of the law4 ,for here we are not called upon to give up merely some external observance1 or to change the mode or the time of performing some appointed duty 7for that a less explicit intimation of the divine will would suffice72 but we are told to renounce what in its very nature is essential to all acceptable obedience1 and what above every other part of revelation bears marks of the divine impress4 ,if the moral law is to be renounced as part of 8the weak and beggarly elements0 of the ,mosaic religion1 we must have the voice of ,god as distinctly abrogating the ten commandments as it was heard in their original promulgation4 ,nothing less will satisfy us1 and nothing else1 we venture to say1 ought to satisfy any man who believes1 that at the bar of ,god he must answer for the use he has made of the divine revelation contained in the ,bible4 #bb ,now1 can any man shew1 or does any man pretend to shew1 a single passage of scripture in which it is plainly stated1 that the decalogue is abrogated under the ,christian dispensation8 ,we are well aware that obedience to the law forms no part of man's justification--for 8,christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth40 ,we know too that love is the essence of all obedience--for 8love is the fulfilling of the law40 ,but we know likewise that 8this is the love of ,god1 that we keep his commandments40 ,nor can we conceive how the purest and most fervent love can be properly manifested1 towards ,god or man1 without some infallible guidance for its expression in the different relations of life4 #bc;a ,this we have briefly and essentially in the decalogue2 while the principles there enunciated1 are in the prophets and in the ,new ,testament more fully developed and expanded4 ,and in the absence of some plain revelation to justify such a course1 we would fain know on what principle the comment 7so to speak7 is retained1 when the text itself is rejected4 ,if the law written by the finger of ,god and published by his own mouth may thus be ignored1 what reason can be urged for listening to the moral teaching of ,prophets and ,apostles8 ,but if the law of the ten commandments has not been annulled1 the command to keep the ,sabbath is still in force4 ,for he that said 8thou shalt not kill10 said also1 8remember the ,sabbath day to keep it holy40 ,on this ground then we rest our defence of the divine and perpetual obligation of the ,sabbath4 ,god has not revoked his own solemn decree published with his own lips on ,mount ,sinai4 ,till this is done1 the decree with all its sanctions continues in full force4 ,here we are content to stop2 though we feel that the argument might be carried much further4 ,for we believe that had there been no command in the law of ,moses1 enjoining the observance of the ,sabbath2 still both ,jews and ,gentiles would have been bound by the original institution1 #bc;b coeval with man's being1 and forming the only positive appointment of ,god1 imposed on our first parents in a state of innocency4 ,he 8blessed the seventh day1 and sanctified it40 ,this thought will probably have little weight with those who are not convinced by our previous arguments2 but it will doubtless lead some to reflect1 that if the ,sabbath was needed for man's welfare even in the garden of ,eden1 much more is it required for the good of both body and soul in his present condition of sin and toil and sorrow2 and that if the ,father of ,goodness gave his sinless creatures a day of rest from worldly employment1 and a weekly ,sabbath for more continued and intimate communion with himself2 the compassion of the same gracious ,being would not only lead him to continue the appointment1 now so much more needed in man's fallen state1 but also to command such an observance of the day1 as man's altered circumstances rendered necessary4 ,now1 this can only be effected by making it imperative on all to 8keep holy0 the sacred day themselves1 and to afford to others facilities to keep it4 ,if it were to be regarded merely as a privilege1 to be enjoyed or neglected at pleasure1 it would not answer the end intended4 ,in man's present condition1 he cannot by nature appreciate the boon1 nor desire the spiritual blessings that the appointment is especially intended to convey4 ,the observance of the ,sabbath must therefore be laid upon his conscience as a duty1 that in seeking to fulfil that duty1 he may be continually brought under the means of grace1 and the influence of ,christian principles1 until by ,god's grace he is led to feel the blessedness of a well spent ,sabbath1 and keeps from a motive of love1 what he at first observed from a sense of duty4 ,,appendix4 ,,some persons require a proof that the decalogue is binding on ,christians4 ,they acknowledge that it is still in force towards the ,jews4 ,but assuming that the whole ,jewish economy is abrogated with regard to ,christians1 they demand evidence from the ,new ,testament that the ten commandments are a rule of duty to us4 ,now this is a demand they have no right to make4 ,it proceeds on an assumption1 the correctness of which we deny4 ,it is therefore1 the part of those who maintain that view1 to prove that the moral law has ceased to be in force2 not of us1 to shew the contrary4 ,while1 however1 we maintain our vantage ground1 and contend that nothing less than a plain declaration in the ,new ,testament to that effect1 can or ought to satisfy us1 that the decalogue is annulled1 we do not despair of being able to satisfy any candid mind1 by an appeal to the ,new ,testament1 that we are as much bound by the ten commandments as are the ,jews1 to whom they were originally given4 ,no one can say1 that there is an express declaration in the ,new ,testament1 to the effect1 that the decalogue is set aside under the present dispensation4 ,those who arrive at the conclusion1 must confess1 that it is merely inferential4 ,in this respect1 then1 both parties stand on equal ground4 ,neither our opponents nor ourselves can adduce an undoubted and positive declaration4 ,but we ask which have the greatest need of such a declaration--they who assert that the moral law1 written and pronounced by ,god himself1 has been abrogated1 or they who affirm that it is still in force8 ,on which side lies the greater probability1 and with whom rests the greater responsibility8 ,no very serious harm can result from the error 7if such it be7 of maintaining the perpetual authority of the moral law1 but the most disastrous consequences may flow from the rejection of its claims4 ,and surely it is more likely that ,god would continue his own law in force without a direct renewal of it1 than that he would abrogate it without a plain announcement to that effect4 ,in the absence then of positive evidence1 the probability lies on the side of its retention4 ,now1 this probability advances a step towards certainty1 when it is remembered1 that ,judaism is not formally abrogated in the ,new ,testament--that in fact ,christianity is not a new religion1 but the extension and expansion of the moral and spiritual part of the ,mosaic dispensation--believing ,jews still remaining on their own stock1 and believing ,gentiles being scions grafted into the ,jewish olive tree4 ,the religion of ,jesus is in reality the perfection of the religion of ,moses4 ,but where would be its superiority in a moral point of view1 if the authority of the very standard of morality were taken from it8 ,at any rate1 if such were the case1 some express intimation to that effect is to be expected4 ,this argument is still further strengthened by the fact1 that the spirit and essential requirements of ,judaism and ,christianity are identical4 ,it has indeed been asserted that the morality of the ,old ,testament was one of legal enactment2 whereas that of the ,new ,testament is one of motives and principles4 ,but our ,lord teaches a very different doctrine4 ,he tells us that love was the essence and sum of all the requirements of the ,old ,testament1 even as love is the fulfilling of the law under the present dispensation4 #bg ,christianity presents a new and powerful motive for obedience--namely gratitude for the incarnation and death of the ,son of ,god2 but this neither changes the nature of man's moral obligation1 nor removes the necessity of a positive enactment to guide him in his obedience1 and enforce conformity to ,god's will4 ,if then in spirit and essence the moral requirements of the law and of the gospel were the same1 what reason should there be for setting aside the decalogue1 and what authority have we to ignore it without an express command from ,god8 ,the probability that the moral law remains in force under the present dispensation1 is still further strengthened by the use which is made of it by the inspired writers of the ,new ,testament4 ,st4 ,paul indeed speaks of the law as the 8ministry of condemnation10 in opposition to the gospel1 which is the 8ministry of righteousness10 or justification--the one dispensation bearing on its front the justice of ,god1 the other1 his mercy4 ,he tells us plainly that the law can only condemn1 while the gospel alone has power to justify4 ,he assures us that in this respect--in its condemning power--it is 8done away0 to the believer1 while the free grace of the gospel alone 8remains40 ,but when he speaks of the moral requirements of ,christianity1 while he tells us that 7as in the religion of ,moses7 love is the essence and sum of all1 he nevertheless sends us to the commandments of the second table1 to learn how love is to be exhibited1 or rather perhaps to shew us1 that the moral requirements of the two dispensations were essentially the same4 #bh;a ,what an extraordinary use to make of the law1 if the decalogue be part of 8the weak and beggarly elements0 abolished by ,christianity4 ,st4 ,john tells us that to love ,god is to keep his commandments4 ,but we know not which of his commandments we are bound to keep1 if we reject those which he wrote with his own finger1 and pronounced with his own voice4 ,st4 ,james refers to the moral law as if recognising its obligation4 8,whosoever shall keep the whole law1 and yet offend in one point1 he is guilty of all4 ,for he that said1 ,do not commit adultery1 said also1 ,do not kill4 ,now1 if thou commit no adultery1 yet if thou kill1 thou art become a transgressor of the law40 #bh;b ,it may be objected1 that this reference to the law is merely for the purpose of illustration4 ,but surely if the violation of one precept involves the guilt of breaking the whole law1 the whole law must still be in force4 ,for if the enactment has been repealed1 there is no law2 and if there is no law1 there can be no transgression2 and if there is no transgression1 there can be no guilt4 ,how strange1 too1 is this appeal to the law by the ,apostle ,paul1 if the law has been annulled3 8,children obey your parents in the ,lord2 for this is right4 ,honour thy father and mother1 which is the first commandment with promise2 that it may be well with thee1 and that thou mayest live long on the earth40 #bh;c ,we thus approach very near the establishment of our position1 that there is evidence in the ,new ,testament1 that the moral law is still binding on men4 ,it may indeed be objected1 that in the scriptures quoted or alluded to1 the reference is chiefly1 if not exclusively1 to the second table of the decalogue4 ,but we think few will venture to deny1 7especially after the assertion of ,st4 ,james1 that the violation of one precept is the violation of the whole law7 that if the part which regulates our duty to man is in force1 the part which teaches our duty to ,god must be equally in force4 ,besides1 if love is the fulfilling of the law1 and the love of ,god is keeping his commandments1 how can we express our love to him1 if we reject that part of the law1 which especially guides us in the proper manner of shewing our love directly to him8 ,but there is one passage of the ,new ,testament1 which1 in the absence of a positive enunciation to the contrary1 to our mind1 of itself establishes the permanent authority of the decalogue1 and which1 when added to what has already been said1 more than completes the proof that has been demanded of us4 ,we allude to our ,lord's declaration3 8,think not that ,i am come to destroy the law1 or the prophets3 ,i am not come to destroy but to fulfil4 ,for verily ,i say unto you1 till heaven and earth pass1 one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law1 till all be fulfilled40 #bi;a ,there can scarcely be a doubt to what the ,redeemer refers when he speaks of 8the law and the prophets40 ,he could not intend the ceremonial law1 because the breaking of its least commands would not make a man 8least in the kingdom of heaven40 ,neither was it true that he did not come to put an end to its observance4 ,it is the moral law1 and those instructions of the prophets which flow from it--it is 8the law and the prophets0 as embraced in the precept1 8thou shalt love the ,lord thy ,god with all thy heart1 and thy neighbour as thyself10 which our ,lord evidently meant4 ,the entire discourse to which this declaration forms the introduction1 is of a moral character2 and whatever meanings may have been put upon our ,lord's language1 we think any unbiased mind1 on reading the whole discourse1 will come to the conclusion1 that the moral law was chiefly and prominently in the ,saviour's mind1 when he employed the language above quoted4 #bi;b ,but if one jot or tittle cannot pass away from the law1 how should the entire law be abrogated8 ,we conclude1 therefore1 that there is satisfactory evidence in the ,new ,testament1 that the decalogue is still in force in the ,christian church--not so indeed that obedience to it forms the ground of the believer's justification1 or that want of perfect conformity to its requirements brings him under condemnation 7this was not the case under the ,jewish dispensation71 but as the standard of right and wrong1 as the infallible regulator of conscience1 as that perfect rule of moral obligation1 by seeking conformity to which we honour our ,creator and ,redeemer1 perform the duties of this present life1 and become fitted for the presence of ,god and the inheritance of the saints in light4 ,to the believer the moral law has always been 8the law of liberty10 because1 it being 8written in his heart10 he has 8delighted in it after the inner man10 and kept its precepts from a principle of love4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,the ,,end4 99 99 99 99 99 ,,norwich3 ,,printed ,,by ,,thomas ,,priest1 ,,rampant ,,horse ,,street4 ,,footnotes4 #g ,it is the fashion to extol highly the power of man's mental and moral perception of what is right and wrong4 ,but from whom do we hear most on these subjects8 ,from those who1 having lighted their torch at the lamp of ,god1 affect not only to be independent of divine illumination1 but even to eclipse the light of heaven itself4 ,if they will fairly test their own principles1 let them try them by the condition of that portion of the human family on whom revelation never cast its direct rays4 ,let them seek in the records of the heathen nations of antiquity1 or in the principles and practice of modern heathendom1 for proofs of man's inherent power to think and act aright4 ,they will then find that their wisdom is folly1 their religion the most degrading idolatry1 and that their moral code allows and even commands actions of the most revolting kind4 ,the moral sense of the ,new ,zealander made him a cannibal4 ,in the ,hindu it is seen in the worship of the ,linga1 in the horrid rites of the ,suttee1 and in the filthy and unnatural crimes that form a part of what is considered their most acceptable worship4 ,it is hardly necessary to refer the classical reader to such works as the ,phdrus and ,symposium of the greatest philosopher of the most civilized nation of antiquity4 #ab;a ,heb4 x4 #be4 #ab;b ,vide x4 #bf1 et seq4 #ac ,after examining all the places in which the word and the defective plural occur1 both in the ,new ,testament and in the ,septuagint1 we are satisfied that the following extract from ,bishop ,horsley's ,third ,sermon on the ,sabbath1 gives the proper exposition of the passage4 8,i must not quit this part of my subject without briefly taking notice of a text in ,st4 ,paul's ,epistle to the ,colossians1 which has been supposed to contradict the whole doctrine which ,i have asserted1 and to prove that the observation of a ,sabbath in the ,christian church is no point of duty1 but a matter of mere compliance with ancient custom 4 4 4 ,from this text no less a man than the venerable ,calvin drew the conclusion1 in which he has been rashly followed by other considerable men1 that the sanctification of the seventh day is no indispensable duty in the ,christian church--that it is one of those carnal ordinances of the ,jewish religion which our ,lord hath blotted out4 ,the truth however is1 that in the apostolical age1 the first day of the week1 though it was observed with great reverence1 was not called the ,sabbath day1 but the ,lord's day 4 4 4 and the name of the ,sabbath days was appropriated to the ,saturdays1 and certain days in the ,jewish church1 which were likewise called ,sabbaths in the law4 ,the ,sabbath days1 therefore1 of which ,st4 ,paul speaks1 were not the ,sundays of ,christians1 but the ,saturdays and other ,sabbaths of the ,jewish calendar40 #ad ,rom4 xiv4 #e1 #f4 #ae ,isaiah i4 #ac1 #ad4 #af ,we are reminded of certain expressions in some of the ,fathers1 from which it is inferred1 that they did not deem it necessary to keep the ,lord's day so strictly as we contend it ought to be kept2 and that ,constantine passed a decree permitting persons in the rural districts1 to get in their crops on ,sunday1 should the weather be such as to threaten their destruction or serious injury4 ,without discussing the propriety of the particular edict in question1 we deem it a sufficient answer1 that the ,bible1 and not the ,fathers or ,constantine1 is our rule of faith and practice4 ,many erroneous notions were held by the ,fathers2 and no one will pretend that either ,constantine or the church generally in his days1 was so correct in practice1 as to present a perfect model for us to follow4 ,we are also reminded1 that there were some in the early church--slaves1 for instance--who could not keep the ,lord's day2 and these1 it is argued1 would rather have died than have desecrated it1 had they considered it of the same obligation as the command to abstain from idolatry4 ,to this it may be replied1 that the question is not what certain individuals thought1 or what was the practice of certain communities1 but what the word of ,god teaches4 ,there is1 however1 a marked distinction between the two cases here supposed1 arising from the difference between the two commandments4 ,many instances may occur1 in which it is physically impossible to obey the letter of some of the commandments4 ,thus1 poverty1 sickness1 or other providential impediment1 may incapacitate the most obedient child from ministering to the wants of his parents4 ,in like manner1 bodily infirmity1 imprisonment1 or other providential restraint1 may prevent the observance of the fourth commandment in the letter1 while the heart longs to honour ,god's holy day1 and to enjoy its blessings4 ,the ,christian slave1 therefore1 whose body 7in the providence of ,god7 was under the power of his master1 might be compelled to work on the ,lord's day without incurring guilt4 ,but he could not worship an idol1 without an open renunciation of ,christianity4 ,surely there is no need to insist on the difference between the two cases4 #ag ,heb4 iv4 #i4 4 #ah ,we cannot see the distinction contended for by some1 between the ,jewish ,sabbath and the ,christian ,lord's day2 namely1 that the former was 8rest10 while the latter is 8public worship40 ,to us they appear identical4 ,the ,jewish ,sabbath was not merely 8rest10 but holy or sanctified rest4 8,god blessed the seventh day1 and sanctified it40 ,moses calls it 8the rest of the holy ,sabbath unto the ,lord20 and ,god frequently declares that it was appointed as a 8sign0 between himself and his people1 and commands them to keep it holy4 ,now1 how could the ,jewish ,sabbath answer the description thus given of it1 if mere rest1 or cessation from bodily labour1 was all that was required in its observance8 ,we know that the ,sunday1 as kept by those who only lay aside their usual worldly employments1 is neither 8blessed10 nor 8sanctified10 nor 8holy10 nor a 8sign0 between them and ,god4 ,on the contrary1 it is made the occasion of the most awful immoralities1 and is productive of the greatest misery4 ,instead of a blessing1 it is converted into a curse4 ,besides1 did not the instructions of the heads of families1 and the teaching and ministrations of the ,levites1 in the earlier part of the ,jewish history1 and the services at the synagogue in after times1 afford means of instruction very similar to those in the ,christian church8 ,by divine appointment the ,levites were to teach the people 7,lev4 x4 #aa2 ,deut4 xxxiii4 #aj71 and the people were to teach their children 7,deut4 vi4 #g72 and we cannot conceive how this could have been done1 or the ,sabbath have been kept holy1 according to the commandment1 without some stated instruction and worship on the day of rest1 from the first settlement of the ,israelites in ,canaan4 ,a whole nation keeping holy every seventh day1 without the aids and restraints of public worship1 appears to us an impossibility4 ,indeed1 why is the ,sabbath expressly called 8a holy convocation0 7,levit4 xxiii4 #c71 if no assemblies of the people for worship took place on that day8 ,but after all1 what do the advocates of the strictest observance of the ,sabbath require1 more than was required of the ,jews by ,god himself8 7,isa4 lviii4 #ac47 ,we therefore consider the ,jewish ,sabbath and the ,christian ,sunday1 the same in spirit1 in character1 and in their general religious requirements4 #bj;a ,isaiah1 lvi4 #f1 #g4 #bj;b ,the fourth commandment is in its nature partly moral and partly positive4 ,reason teaches the duty of devoting a portion of our time to the worship of ,god4 ,revelation determines the amount by a positive enactment4 ,now1 it is very remarkable1 that while all the other sabbatical institutions 7which are peculiar to the ,jews7 are omitted in the moral law and inserted in the ceremonial law1 that of the seventh day alone stands in the decalogue4 ,is not this a tacit indication of its moral character8 #bb ,see ,appendix4 #bc;a ,how often has the fondest love of parents become destructive to their offspring1 for want of proper regulation in its expression4 ,so1 love to ,god and man1 if mere feeling1 without proper intellectual guidance1 might produce results the reverse of its intention4 ,it would be the propelling power without the regulator4 #bc;b 8,it is a gross mistake to consider the ,sabbath as a mere festival of the ,jewish church1 deriving its whole sanctity from the ,levitical law4 ,the contrary appears1 as well from the evidence of the fact which sacred history affords1 as from the reason of the thing which the same history declares4 ,the religious observation of the seventh day hath a place in the decalogue among the very first duties of natural religion4 ,the reason assigned for the injunction is general1 and hath no relation or regard to the particular circumstances of the ,israelites4 ,the creation of the world was an event equally interesting to the whole human race2 and the acknowledgment of ,god as our ,creator1 is a duty in all ages and in all countries1 equally incumbent upon every individual of mankind40 ,from ,bishop ,horsley's ,second ,sermon on the ,sabbath4 ,professor ,blunt has elaborately demonstrated1 that the ,sabbath was observed in the ,patriarchal age4 ,see ,scriptural ,coincidences1 pp4 #ah-bd4 ,the hebdomadal division of time by the ,pagan nations of the ,west1 and by the ,hindus and other people in the ,east1 seems to indicate a traditional recognition of the ,sabbath1 though the observance of the day1 as a day of rest1 passed away with the worship of ,him1 in whose honour it was originally instituted4 #bg ,matt4 xxii4 #cg-dj4 #bh;a ,rom4 xiii4 #h-aj4 #bh;b ,james ii4 #aj1 #aa4 #bh;c ,ephes4 vi4 #a-c4 #bi;a ,matt4 v4 #ag1 #ah4 #bi;b ,our ,lord refers to some of the moral precepts1 and to some of the civil enactments of the law of ,moses2 because the meaning and application of both had been perverted or obscured by the glosses of the ,scribes and ,pharisees2 and his intention evidently was1 to remove those false glosses1 and to teach the legitimate application1 meaning1 and extent of the divine commandments4 ,thus1 the civil enactment1 8,an eye for an eye10 c4 was perverted by the ,pharisees1 so as to encourage the notion1 that personal revenge was justifiable by the divine law4 ,this perversion was met by our ,lord's command1 8,resist not evil10 c4 ,again1 ,god had commanded the ,jews to love their neighbours as themselves4 ,the ,scribes1 it would seem1 chose to infer that this command necessarily implied the inculcation of an opposite feeling towards enemies4 ,they therefore interpreted the precept to mean 8,thou shalt love thy neighbour1 and hate thine enemy40 ,our ,lord gave the most decided negative to this gloss1 by his injunction1 8love your enemies10 c4 ,moreover1 the ,scribes taught that the mere outward observance of the precept was all that the law required4 ,our ,lord shewed that ,god regards the inward feelings and motives of men--that the unchaste desire was adultery1 and that causeless anger was murder4 ,in this1 his object was not to condemn or contradict the teaching of the law and the prophets1 but to free it from human perversion1 to shew its real character1 and to point out its moral beauty and excellency4 ,hence his solemn assertion1 that not one jot or tittle should pass from the law4