proposition. The first is his memorable assertion, when defending his disciples from the charge of Sabbath-breaking, (Luke vi, 5,) "The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." Why make this assertion, unless he meant to make some change in the law of the Sabbath? It was a triumphant defence of the disciples to refer to the great principle of necessity and mercy involved in the case of David; why, then, advance a claim to the power of changing the law of the Sabbath, unless he had determined to use this power? Unless we regard this as an implied prediction of an exercise of his sovereignty over the Sabbath, it appears irrelevant, weakening to the argument, and at variance with the uniform habit of the Saviour.

The second declaration is that contained in Matt. ix, 15, that when the bridegroom was taken away, then would the children of the bridechamber mourn. He was taken away, however, during the Jewish Sabbath. The Sabbath being, in its very nature, a festival, and a time of rejoicing, this act of the Head of the Church made it impossible for the Church to keep it according to its nature. It was to "the little flock" a day of gloom, defeat, and mourning; and not until the light of the first day of the week revealed to their sight the Lord of the Sabbath, were they able to enjoy its quiet rest. In, therefore, so ordering his death, that it should prevent the possibility of keeping the Sabbath; in causing the whole of the mighty machinery of the plan of redemption to stand still, and the ancient order of things to cease on this day, as to its typical efficacy, he did virtually abolish the Jewish, and establish the Christian Sabbath.

3. The Redeemer rose from the dead on the first day of the week, and by his resurrection completed the work of redemption; and thus consecrated this day to rest by the mightiest work the world

ever saw.

It is marvellous that even prejudice should have induced men, in this discussion, to deny either of these premised facts. In regard to the first, it will be sufficient to refer to the account of the resurrection, and especially to Mark xvi, 9-"Now when Jesus had risen early, the first day of the week, he appeared to Mary Magdalene"for the most positive assertion of the fact. The second fact, that the resurrection was the completion of the work of redemption in its purchase, appears from the reasonings of Paul in 1 Cor. xv, 17, 18: "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep are perished." This averment can be true only on the ground that the resurrection was the crowning act of the work of redemption: the fact which, if

it be established, Christianity is safe; if it be overthrown, Christianity is destroyed.

This, then, being the completion of the new creation, which, by the afore-cited prophecy of Isaiah, was to supplant the old in the commemorations of the Church; and this being the mightiest benefit ever bestowed upon the world, it ipso facto consecrated the first day, as before the old creation had consecrated the seventh, as a day of rest. Had Christ designed that the commemorating festival of the Christian Church should remain the same with the Jewish, he would surely have risen on the seventh day, and not left his great work undone, and the day of joyous rest a day of anxious mourning. But having not completed his work until after the seventh day, we infer that he designed us, after his example, to rest and rejoice, not on the seventh day, but on the first, the glorious day when "the morning stars sang together, and the sons of God shouted for joy." 4. Our Lord Jesus Christ consecrated this day to worship, by meeting with his disciples for that purpose.

Four times during this day did he meet with his disciples in some way, and the last interview is minutely recorded. The disciples were met in the evening of the first day, when Christ came into their midst, and, breathing upon them, said, "Receive the Holy Ghost." This interview and bestowal of the Holy Ghost sanctified their assembly, and consecrated the day of that memorable assembling to worship. Had our Saviour designed them to observe the Jewish Sabbath, we should naturally expect to find him meeting with them on that day for this purpose. But when was their next meeting? On that day week, or, in Jewish phrase, after eight days. It is manifest that this meeting was by appointment, for Thomas was there with them, to have his doubts removed. At this meeting, also, Christ gave them his blessing, and thus hallowed the day. Why did he not meet with them on the seventh day, and observe the Jewish Sabbath with his disciples? The only answer that can be given is, that he did not design them to observe it, but intended, by these significant marks of favour, to consecrate the day of his resurrection to worship, as the Lord's day, and the Christian Sabbath.

5. It was farther consecrated to the peculiar promise of the Sabbath by the first proclamation of the gospel, the setting up of the Church, and the wonderful outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost.

That the day of Pentecost fell on the first day of the week appears from Lev. xxiii, 15, 16: “And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath, even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath, shall ye number fifty days." This, however, was

the day selected for the downfall of the Old Dispensation and the establishment of the New; for the first preaching of the gospel, which was one of the most important duties of the Sabbath; for the outpouring of the Spirit and the conversion of souls, which are the highest blessings the Sabbath can confer; and for the joy that went up from every part of the holy city at these "wonderful works of God." Can we conceive of a nobler consecration of the day than this? Has ever a day since the morning of the creation been so wonderfully honoured, and so evidently set apart for hallowed purposes? If, then, we imitate the apostles in the observance of this day in this manner, can we possibly be wrong?

6. Its consecration is farther evident from the example of the apostles.

The record we possess of the acts of the apostles is so brief, that much is omitted which would otherwise satisfy our queries on this subject. But there is one negative fact of great value in this investigation. We never find the apostles meeting Christians for worship on the seventh day. We find them meeting the Jews, because this was the only day they could have full access to them; and meeting the Gentiles, who frequented the synagogues on this day, for the same reason. But this is only what a missionary to the Jews would do in our own day on the Jewish Sabbath, or a missionary to the Mohammedans on the Mussulman Sabbath, without sanctioning, for a moment, the claim set up by either for the sixth or seventh day as the day of rest.

But the facts are different in regard to the first day of the week. In Acts xx, 6, 7, it is stated by Luke, "We came unto 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 to them, ready to depart on the morrow.'

Several points are manifest on the face of the record. It appears that Paul tarried until the first day, for the purpose of preaching to the disciples, and uniting in the Lord's Supper. This proves that they were accustomed to meet for this purpose on that day. The same thing appears from the form of expression used. It is not said, "On the first day of the week the disciples came together," as if this was a special meeting called to hear Paul; but, "On the first day of the week, when they came together;" when they were accustomed to come together for this purpose; just as we should say, "on the fourth of July, when we came together to celebrate our national Independence." Being mentioned thus as a common custom, and a matter of

*For this use of the participle, see Winer's Idioms, part iii, § 46, 1, 9, and Buttman's Larger Greek Grammar, § 144, note 7.

course, it proves that they kept the first day of the week, by assembling for worship, preaching the word, and celebrating the Lord's Supper. This being done under the authority of inspired men, we have the same warrant for keeping the first day of the week that we have for the other parts of the New Testament worship.

The next indication of apostolic example is found in 1 Cor. xvi, 2: "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."

The argument from this passage is misunderstood in the objection, that this is a mere private laying aside of money, which cannot hallow the day on which it was done. But, in the first place, this was an act of worship, for it was an offering to God for the benefit of the poor saints at Jerusalem. We learn from Philo and Josephus, that the Jews were accustomed to make these offerings on the Sabbath, as a part of the worship of the synagogue. And, as Paul informs the Corinthians that he had given the same command to the distant churches of Galatia, we infer that it was a general regulation all over the Church, thus ingrafting a well-known Sabbatic custom on the first day of the week. Now this must have been a collection made when they came together for worship, because this was a Jewish act of worship, and because, if they simply laid aside their bounty at home, this would not save gatherings when the apostle came; and the reason given for his injunction would be irrelevant and absurd. It is therefore implied, that in doing this act they were assembled for worship. But why was the first day specified? Had it been a private laying by of the savings of the week, the most natural time would have been the close of the week, the sixth day, when the week's business was done. If the seventh day had been kept as the day of worship, it would also have been named as the day of this collection. The placing of these collections on the first day of the week proves conclusively that they kept it, by apostolic authority, as the day of worship, or the Christian Sabbath.

The next indication we find in Rev. i, 10: "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day."

The object of the apostle John was to state on what day of the week the vision was seen; and hence he gives it this designation. This proves that the name was well known to Christians at this time, otherwise the use of it to point out a particular day would have been a mockery. Now what day was it? Not surely the seventh, for it sacred or profane. It could

is never so designated by any writer, not be an indefinite time for any day, for it would then convey no information such as was required. It must, therefore, have been a

day belonging to the Lord in a peculiar sense; a day set apart for the service of Him who claimed to be the Lord of the Sabbath; which is but to say, that the Lord's day is the Christian Sabbath.

7. We gather the same thing from the doctrinal teachings of the apostles.

In Heb. iv, 9, 10, it is stated that Christ's resting from his works (which he did not do until the resurrection) was parallel with God's ceasing from his works of creation; and, therefore, he infers that there remaineth a oaßßariouós, a keeping of the Sabbath to the people of God. Whether this refers to the Sabbatic rest of heaven or that of earth, it, in either case, teaches that it follows the rule not of the "rest" of the creation, but that of Christ, which took place at his resurrection.

The only other passage we adduce is Col. ii, 16, 17: "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, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is Christ." The "Sabbath days" here mentioned cannot be all the Jewish festivals, for they are included in the former terms, "holy day and new moon;" and the word Sabbath is not so used in the New Testament. It could not be the general duty of keeping the Sabbath, for this was a moral precept unrepealed. It must, therefore, be the Jewish Sabbath, as far as it was possible to alter it, and adapt it to the New Dispensation; and this was only as to the day of its observance. He then asserts that the Jewish Sabbath, being but a shadow, in its commemoration of the Exodus, of the great deliverance that was made at the resurrection, must give place to a fuller embodying of the substance, in making the Lord's day the Christian Sabbath. The only incident connected with the law of the Sabbath that partook of this shadowy character was the day; and hence this alone could be changed, in throwing aside the Mosaic regulations concerning the day of rest.

8. We infer the same thing from the universal practice of the Christian Church.

There is no fact in ecclesiastical history more undoubted, than the unanimous consent of the Primitive Church in keeping holy the Lord's day. In some of the churches composed of Jewish converts, the observance of the seventh day was tolerated, for the same reason that circumcision, and some other Jewish rites, were permitted during the existence of the temple. But where the seventh day was observed, it was accompanied by the observance of the Lord's day. About this fact ecclesiastical historians are agreed.*

* Murdoch's Mosheim, vol. i, p. 85; Torrey's Neander, vol. i, p. 295.