the reply is, certainly not. The Jewish Sabbath was abolished by Jesus; and if it were in the power of the author, it should not be restored by him. But the question is not about the seventh day of the week, but about the Sunday, the first; and concerning the latter, the question is, not whether it is to be abolished, but whether it is to be kept, subject to the regulation of the government, as a fast or a feast-whether it is to be made for man, or man is to be made for it-whether, with the modern Pharisees, it is to be kept like Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, or, with Bishop Cranmer, Edward the Sixth, Elizabeth, and all our early reformers, it is to be kept like Easter Sunday and Christmas-day; and it may be added also, with all the Catholic and Greek Christians, and many of the followers of Luther and Calvin, at Geneva, and several parts of Germany, beyond all comparison much the greater part of the Christian world.

76. If it were observed to our little, though increasing junto of Puritans, that it is incumbent on them to pay some attention to the great majority of the Christian world, who entertain an opinion on this subject different from them, and that they ought not to be too confident in their own judgment, but to recollect that it does not become them in fact, though perhaps not in name, to assume to themselves that infallibility which they deny to the united church of Christ with the Pope at its head; they would probably reply, that they have a right to judge for themselves, that they will not be controlled by Antichrist, or the scarlet whore of Babylon. With persons who can make this answer, the author declines all discussion; he writes not for them, but for persons who, having understandings, make use of them: and to these persons he observes, that he does not wish their opinions to be controlled by any authority; but he begs them to recollect the beautiful story of the cameleon-that others can see as well as themselves; and that when a great majority of the Christian world is against them, it is possible that they may be in error; and that therefore it is incumbent on them to free their minds from passion or prejudice as much as possible, in the consideration of this very important subject. That on the decision respecting it depends the question, whether the Christian religion is to be a system of cheerfulness, of happiness, and of joy, or of weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth.

77. It is unnecessary to add any thing more on this subject. It has been shown, that the intention of the writer of the first chapter of Genesis, and of the remainder of the Pentateuch was, to teach that the institution of the Sabbath was expressly limited to the children of Israel; that it was a sign of the covenant betwixt them and God; and that the sign and the covenant went together. It

has been shown, that it was abolished by Jesus, when he did not enumerate the Sabbath amongst the commandments which he ordered to be retained, and by his conduct in breaking it on various occasions. It has been shown, that it was abolished at the first council of the Church held by the Apostles at Jerusalem; and that St. Paul has in the clearest terms, and repeatedly, expressed his disapprobation, not only of Sabbaths, but of the compulsory keeping of set-days as an ordinance of religion. Not a single passage can be produced from the Gospels or Epistles in approbation of the continuation of the Sabbath, or of the substitution of any day in its place. Nor can it be shown, that the early Christians considered the observance of Sunday as the renewal of the Jewish Sabbath, or in any sense as an institution of divine appointment; and therefore, from a careful consideration of the whole argument, and of all the circumstances relating to it-its antiquity

its utility when not abused-and the many comforts which it is calculated to produce to the poor and working-classes of mankind, it may be concluded, that the observance of Sunday is a wise and benevolent human, but not divine ordinance; a festival, which it is on every account proper and expedient to support, in such due bounds as will make it most conducive to the welfare of society. That with Christians it ought not to be a day of penance and numiliation, but of happiness, joy, and thanksgiving, as it was established by Edward the Sixth at the Reformation; a festival, to celebrate the glorious resurrection of their Saviour to life and immortality.

WHEN THOU PRAYEST, ENTER INTO THY CLOSET: AND WHEN THOU HAST SHUT THY DOOR, PRAY TO THY FATHER WHICH IS IN SECRET; AND THY FATHER, WHICH SEEST IN SECRET, SHALL REWARD THEE OPENLY.

A

LETTER

ΤΟ

GODFREY HIGGINS, Esq.

OF SKELLOW GRANGE,

ON THE SUBJECT OF His

HORE SABBATICE;

OR,

AN ATTEMPT TO CORRECT CERTAIN

SUPERSTITIONS AND VULGAR ERROR

RESPECTING

THE SABBATH."

BY THE REV. T. S. HUGHES, B. D.

LATE FELLOW OF EMMANUEL COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE,

CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE IN THAT UNIVERSITY,

AND EXAMINING CHAPLAIN TO THE LORD BISHOP OF PETERBOROUGH.

LONDON:-1826.

A LETTER,

&c.

SIR,

HAVING perused your pamphlet, intitled "Hora Sabbaticæ," soon after its publication, I felt strongly inclined to reply to it; but my immediate attention was at that time engaged on a subject which permitted no delay, and a serious illness subsequently prohibited me from every kind of occupation. I seize, however, the first moments of convalescence, to combat several of the opinions you have therein advanced, and to support, as far as I am able, some of those doctrines which you have denounced as vulgar and superstitious errors.

As in the preface to your treatise you deprecate a reply, and state the means you have taken to prevent it, I beg leave to offer a few reasons in justification of my interference. In the first place, then, I have a public duty to perform, which I think demands such interference. (2.) I cannot allow to any man the faculty, which you have claimed, of knowing and determining all the arguments that can be brought against his own view of a question. (3.) If this faculty were granted him, it would by no means follow that he could satisfactorily refute them. (4.) It is possible that even old arguments may be so disposed as to throw new light on a subject, and produce that conviction which they failed to produce under a different arrangement. (5.) I trust I shall be able, as I am sincerely disposed, to conduct this reply without affording you any reasonable cause for offence; especially as I am willing to give you full credit for your motives, and to make a fair distinction between your views, and those of many, who endeavor to attack religion itself through its forms and ordinances.

I may now perhaps be permitted to say a few words respecting the method which I have pursued in my answer. I at first intended to reply to your several arguments in detail; but I soon discarded that plan, for the purpose of maintaining an opposite opinion which might comprehend a refutation of all those objections which I thought entitled to notice: and I was led to this decision by discovering that in at least two-thirds of your arguments we perfectly agree. To your opinions respecting the abolition of the Jewish ceremonial rites, and amongst them that of the Sabbath, I cordially assent. I admit, with yourself, and Paley, and Beausobre, that no mention is made of a Sabbath before the sojourn of the Israelites in the wilderness. I grant that no passage is to be found in the New Testament directing the observance of a Sabbath; nay more, I allow that our Saviour himself, though no Sabbath-breaker,' as you represent him, did, as Lord of the Sabbath, both by word and deed, give intimation to the Jews of its approaching abolition; and that St. Paul did exhort his converts to omit the observance of this and other ordinances, which Christ had, as it were, blotted out, nailing them to his cross.

Where then, you may say, lies the difference between us? To this I answer-chiefly in a definition, or in the signification of a

term.

I will venture to affirm, that wherever the word Sabbath is used in Scripture, it either signifies that day of rest from every kind of labor, which was so strictly enjoined on the Israelites; or it has metaphorically an allusion to that rest. You, on the contrary, apply it also to the Christian ordinance of the Lord's-day, as well as to the primeval institution given to our first parents, I mean in your arguments concerning that institution, although you deny it existence. Again, you argue on the supposition that our Christian rite is derived from the Jewish Sabbath. I, on the contrary, derive it, not from that abolished ordinance, but from the original decree of God, which was given even before the promise of a Messiah, which was delivered on general and moral grounds, which has never yet been abrogated, but extends to all ages and all nations, wherever the word of God is known.

He particularly wished to make the Jews comprehend the proper distinction between the great moral duties, which are of eternal indispensable obligation, and the overstrained observance of ritual institutions. Jesus therefore took many occasions of performing deeds of mercy, and of exhi biting his miraculous powers, on the Sabbath, that he might shame and silence those hypocrites who carried the observance of its ordinances to excess, whilst they neglected the weightier matters of the law: but you can nowhere show that he was not a strict though rational observer of this sacred institution, or that either his practice or precepts ever led his immediate followers into a contempt or neglect of its duties.