RREMARKS ON A PAMPHLET BY DR. DONALD FRASER.
ON the first day of the week the Lord Jesus Christ rose from the dead, and was found in the midst of the disciples, when assembled together in a room at Jerusalem, with closed doors, for fear of the Jews. On the next first day of the week He appeared again to them, when Thomas, who was absent on the first occasion, had ocular proof of the verity of the Lord's resurrection, and confessed Him there as his Lord and his God. Six weeks after the Lord's resurrection the Holy Ghost was poured out on the first day of the week on the one hundred and twenty disciples gathered together in the upper room in Jerusalem. Thenceforth that day of the week, hitherto unconnected with any special historical association, had a place in the minds of Christians not inferior to that which the Sabbath, or seventh day, had on the minds of the Jews. We say historical association, because the only reference to the first day of the week in the Old Testament is that given in Lev. 23, in the ordinances of the wave sheaf and the wave loaves, the former being waved on the morrow after the paschal Sabbath, the latter waved on the feast of weeks, which must always have been on the first day of the week. On the Sabbath the Jews met in their synagogues (Mark 1:21; Acts 13:14). On the first day of the week Christians met to break bread
(Acts 20;7). Christians from amongst the Jews evidently for a time observed the Sabbath (Rom. 14:6), as well as the Lord's day; but for the converts from the Gentiles, the first day of the week, subsequently called the Lord's day (Rev. 1:10), was the only one with which, as part of God's people, they had any historical association. As the first day of the week, we learn which day of the week it was that they observed. From the term the Lord's day, we gather in what light it was viewed by Apostles and Christians in general.
The Sabbath was given by God to Israel, to observe in remembrance of His rest on the seventh day from all His work which He had created and made. The seventh day then, not a seventh day, could alone be the Sabbath for them, because " in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it"
(Ex. 20:11). He blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it; and that day was the seventh, or last day of the week, from which what we call the Lord's day is carefully distinguished in the New Testament, being called the first day of the week, μία σαββάτων Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1,19; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; or πρώτῃ σαββάτου, Mark 16: 9. Blessed by God ere the fall of man took place, its observance was not, that we read of, enjoined on any of mankind till God called Israel out of Egypt, and gave them His Sabbaths, to be a sign between Him and them throughout their generations (Ex. 31:13; Ezek. 20:12), that they might know that He was the Lord who sanctified them. The measurement of time by weeks was known before the flood, it would seem (Gen. 8:10-12); and Israel, for aught we know, may have heard of the Sabbath (Ex. 16:23), but certainly they did not observe it till after the manna came down. In the wilderness they were commanded to keep it (Ex. 16:28; 9: 8-11; 31:13; 35: 3, etc.) By the prophets they were reproved for polluting it (Jer. 17:22,27; Amos 8: 5; Ezek. 20:13; 22: 8). By Nehemiah the returned remnant were exhorted to observe it (Neh. 10:31;13:15). By and by they will again offer sacrifices upon it (Ezek. 46:3-5), and duly hallow it. Israel, then, and Israel alone, were commanded to hallow it; and their non-observance of it, as the Lord commanded them, formed part of the criminal charge brought by Jehovah against them. For fifteen hundred years, therefore, they were called upon to sanctify the seventh day, ere those who had been Gentiles were taught as Christians to regard one day as different from the rest. Then the first day of the week came into prominence, which we call the Lord's day.
As to the necessity of observing the Sabbath the Old Testament is clear and precise. As to any command for hallowing the Lord's day the New Testament is silent. We understand from Acts 20:7;
1 Cor. 16:3, how Christians made use of it; and from the Gospels we gather how it came to have a place in the estimation of Christians in early days, and from the earliest time of Christianity above any other day..
The observance of the Sabbath was legally binding on Israel. We could not say the same of the Lord's day with respect to Christians. No law, no injunction about it, that we read of, was ever promulgated, yet it was observed; and for converts from the Gentiles it was the only day of the week which had any special significance. On it the Lord had risen, the token to all that God had accepted Him, " in that he raised him from the dead;" and the witness, by His tomb being empty, that the surety was free, Death could not hold Him; so those, on whose behalf He had died and had borne their sins, were free from all charge of
guilt before the throne of God. He, was raised again for our justification (Rom. 4:25), and we are risen with Him, and are in Him who is risen, and is on high.
Now there are consequences in connection with this subject, which flow from the truth, of which the Lord's day reminds us, and from the very term in which, in accordance with Scripture, we speak of it.
It is the day of the week on which He rose, who was raised by God for our justification, with whom too we are risen if Christians in truth (Col 3: 1), and in whom we are (Rom. 6;Eph. 1., 2.) Hence, by the very truth, of which the day reminds us, we are really outside the number of those for whom days, and months, and times, and years, were appointed for commemoration by God. Christians are risen with Christ, and are seated in Him in the heavenlies. Times and seasons have to do with earth and the earthly people, not with heaven and the saints in Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:21). The man who would intelligently urge on Christians rightly to observe the Lord's day would most strenuously impress on them the incongruity, nay, worse than that, of observing what are called the Christian festivals. "Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years," wrote Paul to the Galatians. "I am afraid of you," he added, "lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain" (Gal. 4:10,11). Perhaps some one will reply-But these were Jewish seasons of observance. Granted, but the Apostle does not tell them to keep Christian seasons instead. The observance of days, months, times, and years, indicated that they had lost in their hearts a characteristic feature of Christianity, which acknowledges a heavenly people, risen with Christ, and in Him also.
But how, some will ask, should we observe the day, since Scripture lays down no law about it? The very name by which we speak of it-the Lord's day, sufficiently indicates. Do we call it the Lord's day? Then use it for Him, and the advancement of His work and glory. Now, that simple thought will solve a hundred questions on the subject, which no casuistry could determine. The Christian, if really seeking to do God's will in the matter, will have no difficulty in settling what in his case would be a right use of that day. For the world we could lay down no rule about it. How make those who know not the Lord, and have no beneficial part for eternity in the results of His death and resurrection, observe the day made use of by Christians, because it speaks to them of all that? To a professing Christian one could of course appeal, and point out the inconsistency of his profession if he treats the day just as he would any other, and devote it, or any portion of it, to secular ends and temporal profit. In a country professedly Christian, we are thankful for the relief from toil which, by statutory enactment, has been provided. But were there no such enactments the Christian would surely, if he remembered what day it was, and what he is, and in whom he is, seek to make use of the opportunity, as the saints in early days did, when no relief from secular toil was permitted them by those who knew not that Lord and Master who had redeemed them, and for whom they now lived. They assembled together on that day to break bread. Should one be less diligent in this than they were?
Now, if we own it to be the Lord's day, we see at once what becomes us on it. Who then could rightly encourage the Christian, whether poor or rich, to visit museums or picture galleries on that day? Could any one, really conscious of the privilege of bearing the "worthy name by which we are called"
(James 2:7), encourage such a practice in others, or allow it for himself? Granted we are not able to set the world right, nor are we called to do that; but are we not responsible, if we profess to be Christians, to act as such, and to remind each other that, professedly bearing the name of Christ, such practices are not to be encouraged, but discountenanced to the utmost of our power. We speak of course only with reference to those who profess to be Christians.
These remarks have been suggested by the perusal of a pamphlet on the Lord's Day, by Donald Fraser,- D.D. In it the writer insists most strongly on the difference between the Sabbath and the Lord's day. So far he is right. But he evidently does not apprehend the consequences really involved in the observance of the latter; nor does he see the incongruity, to use no stronger term, of writing of it as the Lord's day, and yet advocating the opening of museums and galleries for the less spiritual part of the Christian community. A few extracts will illustrate what we have said: " However Christians vary in their view of Church festivals generally, and of the degree of strictness with which this day should be observed, they all concur in assigning it to the first rank of Christian institutions. Now it is quite true that the present dispensation does not make so much of institutions as the previous dispensation did; but it does not despise them or overlook their importance. Wisely so, for men need the molding influence of venerable institutions, as well as the ever fresh inculcation of Divine truth, to hold them faithful to their religion" (p. 6), How, we might ask, has the molding influence of venerable institutions held men faithful to their religion? It was just that which Paul had to combat throughout his apostolic career.
Again, " In like wise, only those Christians who are truly risen with Christ can keep the Lord's day aright; but all Christians must be supposed to know that the Lord is risen from the dead, and all ought to be quickened together with Him, and so to keep the First Day Festival. Moral and spiritual defect, want of knowledge, of faith, or feeling, cannot be accepted as a plea of excuse, cannot relieve any one of obligation to keep the ordinances of our religion. And non-observance of the Lord's day for its proper ends, which are sacred and spiritual, is not merely a loss to him who neglects the ordinance, but a sin against the Lord, and an unruliness in the Church " (p. 18). Again, " If a line can be firmly drawn against the opening of places of amusement, we see no valid objection to allow access to picture galleries and museums, at all events in crowded cities, on the day named after the Lord of all. But to open places of amusement would be quite derogatory to His sacred day, and therefore is rightly forbidden by civil law and national usage" (p. 22).
To one who has learned how Scripture speaks of Christians, such language as we have quoted will make plain that the writer does not draw his ideas from the pages of sacred writ. We need not wonder, therefore, if in other parts of the pamphlet confusion as to things which in the Word are kept distinct is plainly to be seen. Nor will it excite surprise if the author be shown to quote Scripture unintelligently, as he surely does when he applies the rest of Hebrews (4: 3) to rest of conscience which believers now have; and tells us that the civil as well as spiritual power is bound to render allegiance to the throne of God and of the Lamb (pp. 12, 19). The rest of Heb. 4 is God's rest, into which believers are to enter by and by. Has God rest of conscience? He did rest from all His works, so will the saints in the future. Allegiance to the throne of God and of the Lamb! Perfectly right, when that throne is set up. At present it is not. John tells us, writing of the New Jerusalem, that the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it (Rev. 22:3). Till the church is on high, and the Lord reigns, that for which Dr. Donald Fraser now claims the allegiance of Church and State will not be set up.
With one remark we fully agree: "If Christians generally were more correctly guided as to the character and value of the day, perhaps they would do better in its observance " (p. 27). Perhaps they would. But amongst guides for this purpose, we say it with regret, we could not class the pamphlet by Dr. Donald Fraser.