Sabbath
Tracts, Vol. I, No. 1. An Apology for introducing the Sabbath of the
Fourth Commandment to the consideration of the Christian Public. New
York, by William Burbeck, 138 Fulton Street.
We
mentioned in our
fourth
number, that we had received a series of tracts, issued by the
Sabbath Tract Society of New York, and promised a more extended notice
thereof. But our space hitherto has been so much occupied that we could
not comply with our original intention. We therefore redeem our promise
this month, to give some little account of the first tract of the
series, which indeed embraces that part of the subject which interests
us most as Israelites. A great deal is always said by Christians about
the observance of their day of rest, and still they are able to give but
very unsatisfactory reasons for its institution. Many Christians,
therefore, who are evidently sincere in their belief, and what is more,
ardent trinitarians, have long since felt that with respect to the
observance of the Sabbath, their system is very vulnerable, inasmuch as
it plainly contradicts the evident meaning of the Ten Commandments.
Hence they separated from the great mass of Christians who observe the
first day of the week as a day of rest, and adopted the old Jewish
Sabbath, or the seventh, day, for their weekly time of devotion. In
order, however, to justify their proceedings in their dissent from the
immense majority who profess to be governed by the same principles, the
seventh day keepers have determined to lay their reasons before the
public, "to sustain the claims of the original Sabbath of God's
appointment, enlighten the public mind, disarm their neighbours and
fellow Christians of their prejudices, and to promote a more thorough
and impartial attention to this item of religious practice." It
would seem from this, that the publishers of these tracts wish to prove
first, the correctness of the day they keep, and secondly, to endeavour
to produce a more uniform and sacred observance of the weekly Sabbath.
They lay down the following points for consideration:
-
It is conceded that the weekly Sabbath is a needful, wise, and valuable
institution; and as its value will be much heightened by its resting on divine
authority, the question is presented whether any other than the seventh
day of the week is sustained by this indisputable sanction? and should
the answer be in the negative, then the substitution of any other day is
a virtual annulment of a divine command.
-
It is not the province of Rulers, Bishops, or Councils, to legislate for
the Church, and to bind the consciences of men in this or any other
matter; the decree therefore of the Emperor Constantine commanding the
observance of the dominical day, and that of the Pope as late as 603
prohibiting the observance of the Jewish Sabbath, cannot be operative on
Protestant Christians of the present day.
-
The fact that there is a lamentable division among professors of
religion in regard to the true notion of the Sabbath, and the proper day
to be observed, evinces the great importance of investigation, and of
arriving at a correct knowledge. The writer correctly observes that the
whole Church cannot well become united in the observance of the first
day of the week, if it is not the Sabbath of the Bible; and he asks,
"will it ever be the case, that God will have no witnesses in
favour of his own unrepealed and unaltered institution" And he
answers (for the Christian Sabbatarians): "No, this will never be!
Admitting that the Sabbath, of the Fourth Commandment is still binding,
there is no doubt that there will ever remain a remnant, at least, who
will conscientiously observe it."
- &
- In these heads the writer maintains correctly, that with
respect to the weekly Sabbath there should be a positive divine
injunction for its observance, in case it were necessary, inasmuch as it
comes in direct contact with the cupidity of man and his general
interest in society. But he asserts that the seventh day was duly
instituted by divine legislation as the weekly rest, and its observance
was deemed of the utmost importance by the good men throughout the times
of the Old Testament.
-
He maintains that every law, whether human or divine, must remain in
force unless repealed or amended by the authority which first enacted
it; and as according to the solemn conviction of the Sabbatarians the
Sabbath has never been repealed or amended; they contend that the
obligation to keep the Sabbath of the Fourth Commandment remains without
abatement.
-
The day mentioned being the seventh in order, not a mere seventh part of
every week, proves that the Jewish Sabbath only could be conveyed in the
Fourth Commandment.
-
The above view being correct, the writer imagines that the substitution
of the first for the seventh day by a majority of Christians, presents
an insurmountable obstacle to the conversion of the Jews, and the
introduction of the millennium. He also remarks, "It is true that
they (the Jews) are tenacious also of other practices enjoined in the
Old Testament, which Christians justly (!) regard as obsolete. But as to
these, we can show authority for their abrogation. We can appeal
to the New Testament records and evince that this Mosaic Ritual—the
law of commandments contained in the ordinances' which constituted the
enmity or separation between Jews and Gentiles, was abolished by the
death of Christ—that 'he took it out of the way, nailing it to his
Cross.' But the same process cannot be successfully pursued with respect
to the seventh day Sabbath. The Decalogue in which it is found was not
included in the abrogated ritual. It is altogether a distinct
subject."
-
Exhibits the practicability of putting an effectual check to the sin of
Sabbath-breaking, only by teaching and practising the subject in such a
manner that the sanction of express divine authority can be brought to
bear upon it.
-
The power of custom, though sustained by ecclesiastical and civil
enactments, &c., ought not to prevent investigation and discourage
reform in this important case. Under this head the author appeals to the
rise of Protestantism, to prove that similar reforms from old usages
have been carried out in various other matters besides the Sabbath;
consequently there can be no reason why it should not be observed again
on the seventh day, though the authority of the majority of Christians
is against it.
-
As a consequence of the foregoing principles of faith; the first
day Christians are considered as having sadly deviated from the path of
obedience, and the Sabbatarians feel themselves bound to admonish and to
endeavour to redeem them.
Our
limits have compelled us to be very condensed on the subject of the
important pamphlet under review; but our readers can judge for
themselves of the cogency of the reasoning. Yet we cannot avoid one
remark, which is, that it is certainly surprising that Christians should
not see that to the Jew all the precepts of the Bible are alike, and
that he can never believe that one of them was "nailed to the
cross" more than another. The learned Rev. John Oxlee, in his Three
Letters to the Archbishop of Canterbury, falls into a similar error, to
leave the Jews in the possession of the law, whilst they are to embrace
a belief in the Trinity, and accept the Messiah of the Christians as
mediator between God and man. So strange it is, that men of sound mind
will approach the truth and yet not discover it through some peculiar
obliquity of vision.
However,
the reader will discover, that there are powerful reasons on Christian
grounds for the observance of the seventh day as Sabbath, and that there
is scarcely a single feasible reason why the first day should be
substituted in its stead. We regret that we are compelled to close, but
we by no means dismiss the subject finally, as it affords ample scope
for thought and reflection.
|