able than that of the other festivals, or the season of Lent, which the Puritans stubbornly despised." "A circumstance that occurred in the session of 1621, will serve to prove their fanatical violence," (that of the House of Commons). "A bill having been brought in for the better observance of the Sabbath, usually called Sunday,' one Mr. Shepherd, sneering at the Puritans, remarked that, as Saturday was dies Sabbati, this might be entitled a bill for the observance of Saturday, commonly called Sunday. This witticism brought on his head the wrath of that dangerous assembly. He was reprimanded on his knees, expelled the house, and, when he saw what befell poor Floyd, might deem himself cheaply saved from their fangs with no worse chastisement. Yet when the Upper House sent down their bill, with 'the Lord's day' substituted for 'the Sabbath,' observing, 'that people do now much incline to words of Judaism,' the Commons took no exception. The use of the word Sabbath instead of Sunday, became, in that age, a distinctive mark of the Puritan party."-Constitutional Hist. Eng., I, pp. 388, et seq. Boston, 1865.*

* The Episcopal Church, notwithstanding it has incorporated into its service the use of the Commandments, with a prayer for their observance, holds to a more Scriptural view of the Fourth Commandment than is laid down in the Westminster Confession. We are aware, however, that each "receives its appropriate Christian sense, and the meaning annexed to the Fourth Commandment, and the duty stated to be inculcated in it, is simply this: To serve God truly all the days of my life,'-not one day in seven, but every day." We are also aware, that "the existing authorized formularies were designed to be comprehensive, and are characterized on these points by the omission of topics in dispute. While the Decalogue was inserted to satisfy one party, the Christian exposition of it, in which its Judaical tendency is neutralized,

We must take occasion to remark upon an admission which, though small in compass, covers the entire ground under discussion and yields it in our favor, and we do it with the more pleasure because from the pen of one whose authority the author of Sabbatismos should feel inclined to respect, happening to belong with him to the same branch of the same religious denomination, and professing to hold in all their strictness the same views of this interesting question.

The Rev. Dr. COLEMAN, who is regarded as authority, says:

"But it is not a little singular that the Church, though right in theory and to some extent in practice, continued through successive centuries down to the age of the Reformation, and even beyond it, wrong in principle in that she disowned the sanctity of the law of the Sabbath. In other words, the divine authority of the Sabbath neither was recognized by the ancient fathers nor by Luther or Calvin or the early Reformers. It was reserved for the Puritans," &c. Ancient Christi

must be assented to by all." (Powell, 170.) The Sabbath is not once mentioned in the Prayer-Book. There is, however, an incongruity, to the perception of which, long familiarity has deadened the mind. The hoar of antiquity has toned down that, which in its newness, must have seemed harsh and repulsive; for what is really more inconsistent than to ask, without qualification, that the heart may be inclined to keep the seventh day, or Jewish Sabbath, when by that church it never has been kept, but is, and has always been, utterly repudiated. Nothing is more distressing than the existence of a tarnish, or a blemish, which we know it is entirely possible to remove. A defect so obvious in a service, as to excite the observation of the merest neophyte, and to place any sensible explanation beyond the ability of the most astute, much retards the progress of religion and truth. We regret that the attention of the body which has the authority to make the change, has not long since been directed to the necessity in this regard.

anity Exemplified. By Rev. Lyman Coleman, p. 532. Philadelphia, 1856.

We feel not a little grateful that we are in such good company as that of the ancient fathers, and of Luther; and particularly of Calvin. There is a talismanic influence connected with the name of the latter great Reformer, which we shall be pardoned for regarding, however dangerous the reliance upon any mere human authority in a question of conscience, and which, from the lights before him, every one must decide for himself.

We presume the writer of Christianity Exemplified meant to say that the Church was wrong in theory as well as principle, for we cannot perceive how she could be right in theory had she been wrong in principle. And we are now, for the first time, taught that the ancient fathers, those who lived so near the period of the apostles, and who had, if any, the right to speak with confidence upon the subject, were wrong, as were Luther and Calvin; and all having failed to discover that the observance of Sunday was not by divine authority, but merely by that of the Church, it was due to the Puritans (after mankind had groped in darkness and been immersed in error for fifteen centuries), that the one was discovered and the other dissipated. Surprising discovery; wonderful Puritans!

What a consolation, that the text of Scripture remains through all time the protection of the innocent and of the oppressed, an everlasting wall of defence against heresy, superstition, tyranny, and error; that we have but to display the great Apostle's warning words of earnest exhortation to the Romans, the Colossians, and Galatians, when the eye of the bigot is averted, and his confidence abashed.

CHAPTER X.

The testimony of the Reformers and others of more recent times against the doctrine held by the author of "Sabbatismos" and his adherents.

THAT the Sabbath was exclusively a Jewish institution, and is not binding upon us, is maintained by an array of authorities which, in the exercise of the sacred right of private judgment, we dare not say should silence further controversy, but which we do say is entitled to a candid consideration. We have in support of this view the testimony of Luther, Calvin, Melancthon, Beza, Bucer, Zuinglius, Cranmer, Ridley, Frith, Knox, Chillingworth, Jeremy Taylor, Baxter, Barrow, Milton, Barclay, Limborch, and, in more recent times, of Paley, Arnold of Rugby, Whately, Robertson of Brighton. In America, that of Bishop White, the Rev. Dr. James W. Alexander, &c., &c.

In presenting the convictions of some of those we have named, and whose opinions have already to some extent been adduced, we shall have occasion to comment upon the Doctor's "vindication" of Luther, Calvin, and others. For in his appendix he endeavors to repel the "charge" that these regarded the "Sabbath" of the fourth commandment as a purely Jewish ordinance and not binding upon Christians.

The candid reader will, in the course of our remarks, be able to decide how far the Doctor in his "vindication" is successful.

LUTHER.

LUTHER'S language is very strong: "As for the Sabbath, or Sunday, there is no necessity for its observance; and if we do so, the reason ought to be, not because Moses commanded it, but because nature likewise teaches us to give ourselves, from time to time, a day of rest, in order that man and beast may recruit their strength, and that we may go and hear the word of God preached." Works, 11, 16; quoted in Hazlitť's Translation of Michelet's Life of Luther, p. 271. London, 1846.

The following is a translation of the same passage by another hand: . . . "As regards the Sabbath, or Sunday, there is no necessity for keeping it; but if we do, it ought to be not on account of Moses' commandment, but because nature teaches us, from time to time, to take a day of rest, in order that men and animals may recruit their strength, and that we may attend the preaching of God's word." Michelet's Life of Luther. Translated by G. H. Smith, F.G.S. Whittaker & Co., London.

Again, Luther says: "The Gospel regardeth neither Sabbath nor holidays, because they endured but for a time, and were ordained for the sake of preaching, to the end God's word might be tended and taught." Colloquia Mensalia, or Table Talk. Translated by Captain Henry Bell, chap. xxxi, p. 357. London, 1652. Still further: "Keep the Sabbath holy for its use both to body and soul; but if anywhere the day is made holy for the mere day's sake-if anywhere one sets up its observance upon a Jewish foundation—then, I order you to work on it, to ride on it, to dance on it, to feast on it, to do anything that shall remove this