■MAGS EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) \,\J |io ■■■ ll I.I 11.25 2.5 Ui tili lAo IIII2.0 lU 1.4 1.6 ^ ■» ^ Photographic ^Sciences Corporatiun ^ .\w <^ \ \ % s 23 WEST MAIN STREET WE3STER,N.Y. 14580 (716) 8/2-4503 o^ ,-" JF^AV^i'. t-^Vj '■ -f.t. m^: " . ^ l.% ■ , . 1 ■ ' \ •■"/'^ .,',< I-rk^mA tf.i-'-," u ^. ».'•'•■'-'' ^Mmm BH E C.S v The , Divine rounclcition of the Lorcl'5 Dciv. ^ For information regarding The Ontario Lord's Day Alliance, address A. K. O'Meara, Secretary, Room 77 Confederation life liuildinj?, Toronto. THE MAIL JOB PRINTING CO. TORONTO ADDRESS OK THE REV. WILLIAM CAVEN, D.D. Principal of Knox College. DELIVEr.KM AT THE CONVENTION OK The ONTARIO LORDS DaV AlLIANCK HtLD IN ASSOCIATION HaLL, TpRONTp, ON THK 10th September, 1897. .,, ^^'\- 1 i;!ii^'ipal Caveu .said : Mr. Chfiiiiiian ami 1 hnstian tneiuls, I have been asked to sav soiiie- tliing upon the Divine Foundation of the Skbhath. I was asked, indeed by our respected secietaiv to write soinething upon this subject, but was unable to hnd tune to do so. I cons(>nted, however to say a few words, which I trust the friends present will accept as a slight contribution to the work of the day. In regard to this subject I niav say, that legislation in prcjtection of the Sabbath has its own value, and is not to be despised or spok^^n against. Some maintain that the Sabbath, being a spiritual or moral institution, ought not to be bolstered up by legislation of any kind, but that the observance of it should be left entirely to the religious sentiment of the community. Were I arguing this subject at length, I would seek to shew that the sentiments of a (Christian com- munity will necessarily, in many ways, affect k'^iylation. A coinnninity lias a cominon life, and the fiindaincntal ((Hivictions of any coninuniity nnist at length necessarily influence and find ex- pression in its laws. I entirely agree with the sentiment that what we shoidd appeal to in this rnatter of the Sabhath is above all the religious convictions of the people. If these are right, our position is strong; and notwithstanding any teni- porai'y advantage that niay be gained, or seem to be gained, over us, the contest will at last be decided in our favor. If we can truly sav, " The Lord is on our side," we can add, * We will not fear ; what can man do mito us?" It is a gieat thing to be found upon the fiord's side. In pioceeding to make a few statements upon this subject — The Divine Foundation of the Sab- bath -my first ])oint is: That the Sabbath was certainly a part of the .Tewifeh economy. This is a position which I think has not been cpiestioned by anyone, certaiidy by none of our friends, and so far as I know, by ncme of our opponents. The Sabbath, I say, was a part of the .Jewish economy. It is entrenched in the heart of the decalogue, which is tlu^ fimdamental law for the Jew, and for all men. It was made in a special sense the sign of the covenant between God and His ancient people. It is so referred to repeatedly in the Pentateuch, and very impress'vely by Nehemiah, by Isaiah at least twice, viz., in the fifty-sixth and fifty-eighth chapters and by Ezekitd in the twen- tieth chapter. The propliets, moreover, say a *^reat deal about the importance of Sabbath ob- servance, and their way of speaking about it seems to i)lace it in a different category from those ordinances and institutions which were purely ceremonial. But, inasmu(*h as this point is not one under dispute, I merely mention it as prelimi- nary to other points that I wish to bring forward. Our first position, then, is, that the Sabbath, WEt boyond all (pu'stion, was a nait, a most imnoitant part, a central part, of tlie Jcwisli cfonomy. *i /v.'/m''**^''*' ^*^*' >^al)l)ath, as n^voalcd to us in tlic O (I lestanient S(rii>tures, is much more than a pjirt of Judaism. The Scripture that has been read this morning decich's that point. After tli.» SIX days of (Teation, (iod "rested on tlie seventh •J*,^'' xr"'* l\*!'*''^:««''l the seventh (hiy and sanctitic <1 It. i>Jo\v this IS, as you are a\var(>, 2,5(10 vears, acconhnK to tli(> most limited chronoloKV, hef(»re the Jewish institutions weie estahlished. This blessing- and sanctifyin^r of the Sabbath takes place before nations are formed, when the population of the earth consists of the first man and the first woinan. Ihe Sabbath, therefore, was i-iven at the begmniiiK, and it was jriven-I shall afterwards refer to this more l)articularlv-to commemorate an event^, a fai't, which has no givater sij.niHcance for the Jews than it has for other peoph^s ; it was given to commemorate (lods creation work He created the world in six days ; He rested upon the Sabbath day. This, then, is the second point ^o poi'son who accepts the Bible as historicallv true will (lis])ute these two positions that have b(»en laid (l()wn- the first, that the Sabbath was a part of Judaism; the second, that it has wider relatKms and wider scope, as signified in the Old J estament. Jiut we now advance to a third posi- tion, as to which issue w ill be taken with vs. Manv deny t.hat under the New Testament we have any- thing to do with the Sabbath in anv form. Now, this IS a position which it behooves iis carefullv to exainine, and upon which we should have a dis- tinct opnuon ; because, if there is misgiving here it tliere is doubt in our minds about the divine authonty of the sacred day- call it the Sabbath ttay, the ( hristian Sabbath, or the Lord's Day, call It what you will-if there is anv doubt about the distinct div ne authority of it, the Sabbath will not t)e preserved to us simply on account of its 5 pliysirnl boneHts. (Ilrar, hcMi. ) The Sabbath, as we all iM'Iicvc, has iimiicnsc rcoiioniic value, iiii- mciiso sanitary iinixn'laiicc, and certainly no aject There are weighty considerations, then, in sup- port of the position, that the Sabbath was insti- tuteil for all nations and for all time. Some of the principal arguments in support of this view I shall now seek to adduce. The first is: That the weekly Sabbath, as already said, was instituted at the beginning. Now, I ain (pute aware of what is said by Dr. Paley and other theologi nis, that the passage read today from the second chapter of Genesis does not institute the Sabbalh. but simply notices a historical fact which, many centm-ies after, became the basis of Sabbath legislation. I have to say al)out this exegesis that it is entirely unnatnral. The statement is, that the liord rested on the seventh day, and that He blessed and sanctified it. And why did He sanctify it y To commemorate His w^ork of creation. Then, pray, why, if the Sabbath commemorates God's work of creation, should the institution of it be held in abeyance imtil at least twenty-live cen- turies had passed ? Is that probable ? It is not in accordance with the plain meaning of the words, and it has every consideration against it. I dis- 6 1 1 miss that vitnv, thncfoiv, ns imtoimhie aiicl un- natuni I may notice, fiiitluM-. as showing (hat tlie Sab hath was instituted hctoi*. Sinai, tliat as m-oiih'd in the sixteenth chapter nf Kxodus, when the nuinna hist eanie, no manna fell upon the Hahhath day, ani'eeedmg, and loi l)ih' thing that an institution which is not moral, which is purely positive and ceremonial, to be abolished when Judaism comes to an end, should fhid its way into tlie heart of the decalogue ? This is an argument for the perpetuity of the Sabbath that lias never Ix^en fairly met. Excellent people have said to nie, even in Toronto, during our recert street-car contest-people that were with us, that loughtwith us— " Now, you must be careful how you seek to put the (christian day of rest cm the ground of the commandment. That is rot Very sate. We would advise you to bring to the front iffA i, WT labor arguments and social arguments which are undonbtedly good ; but in regard to this theologi- cal argument, this argument from the decalogue, we have very serious doubts about it." I am quite aware that when we come to discuss the question of transference, as I may call it, of this ordinance from the Old Testament to the New Testament, there are difficulties, there are points which require to be carefully stated ; but as to the great, broad, obvious fact ot a Sabbath law^ given to commemo- rate creation, which has authority for the whole race and for all times, there cannot be reasonable doubt ; and I should decline to accept any inter- pretation of the decalogue which would degrade the fourth commandment to the place of a mere provincial statute. The next argument Is the great importance which the OldTestament prophets uniformly assign to this day —the great importance in comparison with what is purely cerenumial. Keeping the Sab- bath is joined with reverencing the sanctuary, as a fundamental thing in w(n^ship. Isaiah, for example, both in the fifty-sixth chapter and in the fifty- eighth, attaches the greatest importance to the Sabbath, Hear his language : " Blessed is the man that doeth this, and the son of man that layeth hold on it; that keepeth the Sabbath from polluting it, and keepeth his hand from doing any evil " " If thou tiu'n away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day ; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honor- able ; and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words, then shaltthoudelight thyself in the Lord, and I will cause thee to ride on tlie higli places of the earth." etc. Again I say, it is exti(»- mely improbable that an institution which was purely ceremonial, should be singled out by Isaiah — Isaiah, who, in some passages, seems almost to scorn ritual— to speak of it after this fashion, if it 8 I i I I I i I I were a purely ceremonial and temporary insti- tution. But now we eonie to notice the main arguments employed against our view of the Sabbath ; and 1 want to state them fairly, and just as strongly as om- opponents, if I may use the word, would wish to state them. These say to us : " All your deduc- tions from the Old Testament— from 'the Edenic institution of the Sabbath, from the fact that the Sabbath law is in the decalogue, that the prophets speak so highly of it, that it constitutes the bond o^ the covenant, nmst not override the plain teach- ing of the New Testament that the Sabbath is obsolete." Largely, no doubt, by the New Testa- ment, nuist this question l)e decided. There is no person associated with us in this movement, who iloes not defer to the New Testament, who does not accept, I may say, every word of the New Testament as authoritative ; and if the Lord savs, or if his apostles say, that the Sabbath is obsolete, and that we have no day to take its place under the New Testament e(;onomy, we shall, with entire submis- sion, accept the teaching of our divine Master, or of his inspired servants. I do not think that the New Testament does thus teach. Just for a moment consider the position that our Lord and Master occupied, and you will see that he is for us, not against us. And if the cril ics, higher or lower, tell me that the Lord's knowledge was limited, that he thought and spoke as a Jew about all ceremonial matters, and that we nmst not refer to his words Avhen there is any question of strict exegesis to be considered— I must, with great decision, though with great humility, put myself by the side of the Lord rather than by the side of the cr''1 icsc Yes, I say that when any (piestion respecting the authority of the Old Testament or its institutions comes up, I want to be found upon the Lord's side -(hear, hear)— and I will believe that his know- ledge was not simply adequate to the revelation of spiritual truth, but was infallible in every part of his teaching. What, then, does He say 'about the Sabbath? We all know that our Lord was severely blamed and censured by the Pharisees for what he did apon the Sabbath day. He cleansed lepers upon the Sabbath day ; he' healetl the sick upon the Sabbath ; he restored a withered limb upon the Sabbath ; when his disciples were censured because they rubbed ears of corn, and did eat them on the Sabbath day, he vindicated them by reference to the Old testament itself. But when our Lord was vindicating himself, and vindicating his apostles, he has not said, either directly or inferentially, that the Sabbath was to come to an end, or that the keeping of it was of little importance. Suppose, now, that the view which I am arguing against were the right view. Would 11 not be most natural forhhn to have said that this Sabbath institution was about to termi- nate, that it never had any character but that of a ])ositive institution, and that they w^ere attaching' far too nuich value to it altogether? But our blessed Lord does not say that. He says that the Sabbath was " made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." He means : Don't add to the Sabbatji law ; don't fence it round about with rtstrictions, which have no divine authority ; take it as it is. And if I, the Son of man, the divine man, free this holy institution from all Pharisaical additions and accretions, I have surely authority to do so. " Therefore, the Son of Man is Lord 'of the Sab- bath day." These words of our Master, so far from suggesting that the Sabbath w^as temp(^rary and Jewish, by fair implication, if not by direct statement, are proof that the Sabbath is not Jew- ish, and that it is permanent. It was " made for man." Our Lord does not say it was made for the Jew ; for He is the Son of Man, not the son of the Jew. It was made " for man," pi-oclaimed in the beginning to connneniorate an event in which all lO are ecjiially interested, and for the benefit of all : "Therefore, the Son of Man," the divine represent- ative of the hnnian raee, 'Ms Lord of the Sabbath day. ' Is tber(^ anything here that states the abrogation of the Sabbath, or even looks in that dire(;tion ? Distinctly the eontiary. But it is the apostle Paul whom those who differ from us chiefly rely upon. There are three passages in the apostle Paul's writings that are held to be proof positive that we have no authori^fc for the observance of a Sabbath under the Nevv Testament dispensation : and so good a man, and so gt)od an expositcn' as Dean Alford, c-ommenting ui)on the last of these three passages, says, that it is inconsistent with any form of a Sabbath under the New Testament dispensation. An expositor not less able nor scholarly, the Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, states that this declaration of i^lford caimot be substantiated. I think he has good ground for saying that; but I shall read to you the three passages. The first is Romans xiv. 5 : " One man esteemeth one day above another ; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind." " If you think you should keep the Sabbath, do it. If I think there is no obligation upon me to keep the Sab- bath, I am free." Thus the ^y^n'ds are interpreted by many. Now, if any one will just read the context of these words, he w ill see that what the apostle is speaking about is the general question of observing the Jewish law, as insisted on by the Judaizing party in the church. The reference to meats and drinks, etc., clearly shows that it is so. But our ground is that the Lord's dav, of which we are presently to speak, has in realitV taken the place of the Sabbath -is, indeed, the Christian Sabbath ; and should any ont» now insist tliat we should observe not only' the Lord's dav, but the seventh day Sabbath as well, we should have to assert the Christian's liberty as the apostle does. 11 Efi3r.;V Why if any uiaii in Toronto. Jew or Gentile, should say : " You nuist rest upon the seventh day, you nuist keep the Sabhath on the very day on which it was kept before the coming of (Christ" —thus refusing to distinguish between what is moral and permanent in the connnandment, and what IS positive and temporary— the words of the apostle are the charter of our freedom. The Son of Man -the Lord of the Sabbath - has authorit\' to make the first day of the week the day of rest, in place of the seventh, and the question is, whether he has done so o- not. It may well be that he has re established the sacred day on a still broader basis, and with added significance ; if so, the Old Testament day is not binding, though the institution remains, and is invested with new glory. The same explanation is to be given in the other tw(j passages. The next of these is Galatians iv. 10,11: "leobserve days, and months, and times and years. 1 am afraid of you, lest I have bestow- ed upon you labor in vain." Thit is, "You are steeped in ceremonialism ; you have not yet com- prehended the fact that Judaism has matured and passed into (Christianity ; you wish to place Christ- ians under Jewish resti'ictions. I am afraid ye have not rightly understood the Gospel." That is what the apostle says, and you cannot legitimately make more than this out of his statement. The Jewish faction or party in the early church insisted that every one should enter the church through the Synagogue, and that Judaism, in all its niain parts, should be incorporated with Christ- iMiiity. That position the apostle fights against, and will by no mepns allow. The last of these passages is thought to be the strongest of all against the observance of a Sabbath under the new dispensation. It is Colossians ii. 16. To show the connexion I read from v. li : " Blotting out the hand- writing of ordinances that 12 was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross ; and having spoiled principalities and powers he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man, therefore, judge you in meat or in drink, or in respect of an holv day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days ; which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ." In the Christian dispensation at large, of which the Lord's day is part, we have the sub- stance of which the Jewish Sabbath and the other things named were a shadow. All that was pecu- liar to Judaism has passed away, and so far as tho Sabbath, incorporated into Judaism, had taken on Jewish characteristics, it had passed away. Juda- ism visited bre^achesof the Sabbath with the death penalty ; this has passed away. All restrictions imposed by Jewish and Pharisaical custom have passed away. And what is more, the first dav of the week has become the holy day in place of the seventh. But now I must come, and very briefly, to notice the institution of the Lord's day ; and the position that I wish to take, the position which I think gives unity to the statements of the Old Testament and the New Testament is: That the Lord's day has become heir to the Sabbath— call it the Jewish Sabbath or the Old Testament Sabbath as you will. In sanctioning the principle of one day in seven consecrated to the Lord, the New Testament continues that ordinance, while it gives it a still higher character, as commemorating not only God's creation Avork, but His redemption work, and the resurrection of our blessed Saviour from the grave. It cannot be said that under this new dispensation that day of holy re3t whose heavenly light first fell upon Eden has passed away, and that we have nothing but toil and unbroken secularity under the new dispensation. Can you believe, my Christian friends, that we 13 have no day of rest and worship under this better ec^>noniy I-' (No.) Can you believe that the muck- rake nuist be constantly in your hand, the crown that is above you never steadfastly regarded ? Has one of the most blessed elements of the old dispensation passed away, while nothing equal or better has taken its place ? If the New Testament had said not a word about it I shoidd not have believed that; but the New Testament is not silent. The Lord's day is the heir-at-law to the Old Testa- ment Sabbath, and perpetuates all that is distinc- tive and most important in the Sabbath of the old dispensation. AVell, what is our proof for the Lord's dav ? Will you allow me to introduce this by stating that there are three views regarding the founda- tion of the Lord's day or Christian Sabbath. The first IS that the Christian Sabbath is the same institution as the Sabbath of the Old Testament. It has its foundation in the fourth commandment. A second view is that we may not appeal to the Old Testament in support of a Sabbath under the new economy, but we have good authority in the New Testament for ol)serving the Lords day. And the third view is that the observance of the first day of the week as a sacred day rests merely on ecclesiastical authority. It is a good and valuable institution, helpful to the cultivation of spiritual life, but it cannot plead the direct sanction, either o F the Lord or of His apostles. The church . however, has power to decree such a day, and it should be observed. For myself I accept the first view, if it IS correctly stated. A large number of Christian scholars, no doubt, prefer the middle position, that the Lords day, or Christian Sabl)ath, rests purely upon New Testament ground. I believe that the Lord's day is so related to the Old Testa- ment Sabbath that we are not restricted to the New Testament for proof of the Weekly Rest, if the Old Testament testifies to the universalitv and 14 perpetuity of the Sabbath and tlie Now Testaiiieiit teaclies tliat the observance of the seventh day is no longer binding, the inference is clear that the first day of the week has become heir to the seventh. Having acconiplislied the great redemption, the l.ord arose ni)on the first day of the Aveeli, and tlie glorious event becomes the basis of our New Tes- tament sacred day. On the evening of His resur- rection day the Lord appears to the assembled disciples and says, "Peace be unto you." And eight days after He again is in their "midst with the same salutation. Thus does He mark the dav with honor, and not obscurely hint that it had received a special ccmsecration. It is highly prob able— though there are some critical considerations to be adjusted here— that Pentecost occurred upon the first day of the week. I^ depends up(m whether the Lord's last passover was observed at the usual time or a day earlier. In the Acts of the Apostles XX. 7, we read that, ''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. " Then the same apostle t hus instructs the (Corinthians : "Upon the first day of the w^eek let every one of you lay by him In store, that there be no gathering when I come." (1 Cor., xvi. 2.) There is little doubt that the "coming together in the church" to observe the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. xi 18) was on the same day. And lastly, the Apostle John tells us in Revelation i. 10, that he " was in the Spirit on the Lord's day." Here, then, as a matter of fact, vou have, in apostolic times and under apostolic sanction, a day set apart, and a distinctive character given to it for a distinctive purpose ; and this day has been observed by the Church of Christ from' the Lord's resurrection till the present time. All t rue disciples love that day. I trust we love it. 1 trust many in Toronto and Ontario love it and are prepared 15 to resist with all their might every eneroaeh- ment on the Lord's day. Toronto has seemed to go against us in our efforts to preserve a (luiot Sabbath: though the true voice of Toronto, we think, was smothered. In any case we make our appeal to the whole people of Ontario. I love Toronto, I speak highly of its moral and religious character as compared with other cities ; but does not every one know that the elements hostile to the Sabbath and all of sacredness that it repre- sents, are more strongly lepresented in our cities than in the country at large ? (Ht>ar, hear.) It is not for Toronto, Hamilton, St. ('atharines, or any city or locality to determine what the Lord's day should be in Canada. Viewing the day as a public institution it is for the people at large to speak upon that subject. That localities and corpora- tions should have special legislation relaxing the character of the day is entirely ivrong. The day is of inestimable value to every class, and has the sanction of divine authority. It is of utmost im- portance that our province and country should appreciate the issue which is at stake. It is not to laws in support of the Sabbath that we chiefly trust for regulating the sentiments of the coni- munity. But legislation has its own place and value. We seek no legislation to compel men to worship, or to perform any sacred duty. God cannot be honored by any service except it springs from the heart. But that the rest and quiet of the Lord's day, as a public institution, should be pro- tected by law is surely necessary and right. Is not this the judgment of the people of Ontario ? Will Ontario permit avarice and irreligioti to rob it of its Sabbath ? .If 16