juft, he fhall furely live, faith the Lord God." Ezek. xviii. 5-9. The fame thing may be obferved of the apoftolic decree recorded in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts." It feemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than thefe neceffary things; that ye abftain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things ftrangled, and from fornication: from which, if ye keep yourselves, ye fhall do well."

II. If the law by which the fabbath was instituted, was a law only to the Jews, it becomes an important question with the Chriftian inquirer, whether the Founder of his religion delivered any new command upon the fubject; or, if that fhould not appear to be the cafe, whether any day was appropriated to the service of religion, by the authority or example of his Apostles?

The practice of holding religious affemblies upon the first day of the week, was fo early and univerfal in the Christian church, that it carries with it confiderable proof of having originated from fome precept of Chrift, or of his Apoftles, though none fuch be now extant. It was upon the first day of the week that the difciples were affembled, when Chrift appeared to them for the first time after his refurrection; "then the fame day at evening, being the firft day of the week, when the doors were fhut, where the difciples were aflembled, for fear of the Jews, came Jefus and stood in the midst of them." John, xx. 19. This, for any thing that appears in the account, might, as to the day, have been accidental : but in the 26th verfe of the fame chapter we read, that after eight days," that is, on the first day of the week following, "again the difciples were within,' which fecond meeting upon the fame day of the week looks like an appointment and defign to meet on that particular day. In the twentieth chapter of the Acts of the Apoftles, we find the fame cuftom in a Chriftian church at a great diftance from Jerufalem: "And we came unto them to Troas in five days, where we abode feven days; and upon the first

day of the week, when the difciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them." Acts xx. 6, 7. The manner in which the hiftorian mentions the difciples coming together to break bread on the first day of the week, fhews, I think, that the practice by this time was familiar and established. St. Paul to the Corinthians writes thus: "Concerning the collection for the faints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even fo do ye; upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in ftore as God hath profpered him, that there be no gatherings when I come." 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2. Which direction affords a probable proof, that the first day of the week was already amongst the Chriftians, both of Corinth and Galatia, diftinguished from the reft, by some religious application or other. At the time that St. John wrote the book of his revelation, the first day of the week had obtained the name of the Lord's day: "I was in the spirit," fays he, “on the Lord's day." Rev. i. 10. Which name, and St. John's use of it, fufficiently denote the appropriation of this day to the fervice of religion, and that this appropriation was perfectly known to the churches of Afia. I make no doubt but that by the Lord's day was meant the first day of the week; for we find no footsteps of any diftinction of days, which could entitle any other to that appellation. The fubfequent hiftory of Christianity correíponds with the accounts delivered on this fubject in fcripture.

It will be remembered, that we are contending, by thefe proofs, for no other duty upon the firft day of the week, than that of holding and frequenting religious affemblies. A ceffation upon that day from labour beyond the time of attendance upon public worship, is not intimated in any paffage of the New Teftament, nor did Chrift or his Apoftles deliver, that we know of, any command to their difciples for a difcontinuance, upon that day, of the common offices of their profeffions. A referve which none will fee reafon to wonder at, or to blame as a defect in the inftitution, who confider that in the primitive con

dition of Chriftianity, the observation of a new fabe bath would have been useless, or inconvenient, or im practicable. During Christ's personal ministry, his religion was preached to the Jews alone. They already had a fabbath, which, as citizens and subjects of that economy, they were obliged to keep, and did keep. It was not therefore probable that Chrift would enjoin another day of rest in conjunction with this. When the new religion came forth into the Gentile world, converts to it were, for the most part, made from thofe claffes of fociety, who have not their time and labour at their own difpofal; and it was fcarcely to be expected, that unbelieving mafters and magiftrates, and they who directed the employment of others, would permit their flaves and labourers to reft from their work every seventh day; or that civil government, indeed, would have fubmitted to the lofs of a feventh part of the public induftry, and that too in addition to the numerous feftivals which the national religions indulged to the people at leaft, this would have been an incumbrance which might have greatly retarded the reception of Chriftianity in the world. In reality, the institution of a weekly fabbath is fo connected with the functions of civil life, and requires fo much of the concurrence of civil laws in its regulation and support, that it cannot, perhaps, properly be made the ordinance of any religion, till that religion be received as the religion of the state.

The opinion, that Chrift and his Apofiles meant to retain the duties of the Jewish fabbath, fhifting only the day from the seventh to the first, feems to prevail without fufficient proof; nor does any evidence remain in fcripture (of what, however, is not improbable) that the first day of the week was thus diftinguished in commemoration of our Lord's refurrection.

The conclufion from the whole inquiry (for it is our business to follow the arguments to whatever probability they conduct us) is this: the affembling upon the first day of the week, for the purpose of public worship and religious inftruction, is a law of Chrif

tianity, of divine appointment; the refting on that day from our employments longer than we are detained from them by attendance upon thefe affemblies, is to Chriftians, an ordinance of human inftitution binding nevertheless upon the confcience of every individual of a country in which a weekly sabbath is established, for the fake of the beneficial purposes which the public and regular obfervance of it promotes; and recommended perhaps in fome degree to the divine approbation, by the refemblance it bears to what God was pleased to make a folemn part of the law which he delivered to the people of Ifrael, and by its fubferviency to many of the fame ufes.

Chapter VIII.

BY WHAT ACTS AND OMISSIONS THE DUTY OF THE CHRISTIAN SABBATH IS VIOLATED.

SINCE the obligation upon Chriftians, to comply with the religious obfervance of Sunday, arifes from the public ufes of the inftitution, and the authority of the apoftolic practice, the manner of obferving it ought to be that which beft fulfils thefe ufes, and conforms the nearest to this practice.

The ufes, proposed by the inftitution, are:

1. To facilitate attendance upon public worship. 2. To meliorate the condition of the laborious claffes of mankind, by regular and feafonable returns of reft.

3. By a general fufpenfion of bufinefs and amufement, to invite and enable perfons of every defcription, to apply their time and thoughts to fubjects appertaining to their falvation.

With the primitive Chriftians the peculiar, and probably for fome time the only diftinction of the first day of the week, was the holding of religious affemblies upon that day. We learn, however, from the teftimony of a very early writer amongst them, that they also reserved the day for religious meditations. Unufquifque noftrum, faith Irenæus, fabbatizat fpiritualiter, meditatione legis gaudens, opificium Dei admirans.

WHEREFORE the duty of the day is violated:

ift. By all fuch employments or engagements, as (though differing from our ordinary occupations) hinder our attendance upon public worship, or take up fo much of our time, as not to leave a fufficient part of the day at leifure for religious reflection; as the going of journeys, the paying or receiving of vifits which engage the whole day, or employing the time at home in writing letters, fettling accounts, or in applying ourselves to ftudies, or the reading of books, which bear no relation to the bufinefs of religion.

2dly. By unneceffary encroachments upon the reft and liberty which Sunday ought to bring to the inferior orders of the community; as by keeping fervants on that day confined and bufied in preparations for the fuperfluous elegancies of our table, or drefs.

3dly. By fuch recreations as are cuftomarily forborne out of refpect to the day; as hunting, fhooting, fishing, public diverfions, frequenting taverns, playing at cards or dice.

If it be asked, as it often has been, wherein confifts the difference between walking out with your staff, or with your gun? between spending the evening at home or in a tavern? between paffing the Sunday afternoon at a game at cards, or in converfation not more edifying, nor always fo inoffenfive ?-To thefe, and to the fame queftion under a variety of forms, and in a multitude of fimilar examples, we return the following answer:-That the religious obfervance of Sunday, if it ought to be retained at all, muft be upheld by fome public and visible diftinctions-that draw the line of diftinction where you will, many actions, which are fituated on the confines of the line, will differ very little, and yet lie on the oppofite fides of it-that every trefpafs upon that referve, which public decency has established, breaks down the fence, by which the day is separated to the fervice of relig ion-that it is unsafe to trifle with fcruples and habits that have a beneficial tendency, although founded merely in custom-that these liberties, however intended, will certainly be confidered by those who ob