WILL BAPTISTS THINK OF IT?
In the Examiner and Chronicle of Feb. 26 is a letter from some one who subscribes himself “Churchman,” the object of which is to justify the “church” in changing the ordinance of baptism, and show the unreasonableness of Baptists in objecting to this. He begins by attempting to show that several changes have been made by the church in the administration of the Lord’s supper, some of one character and some of another; and yet Baptists allow these, and then the question is raised, Why should Baptists be more particular to enforce the exact form of administering the rite of baptism than that of the Lord’s supper? In the course of its reasoning, it calls the attention of the Examiner to the Sabbath, after this fashion:— “Permit me to say, in conclusion, that I fail to see how the simple statement in the New Testament that the apostles were gathered together, and that Paul preached to the brethren at Troas ‘on the first day of the week,’ can abrogate and annul the fourth commandment, given at Sinai ‘midst tempest, fire and smoke,’ written upon tables of stone which were the work of God, the writing thereon being the writing of God, graven upon the tables. Ex. 24:12. The setting aside of the fourth commandment was without question the solemn act of ‘the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth,’ of which act we certainly have no record whatever in the New Testament. If the church had the right and power to abrogate one of the God-given ten commandments, and if she duly exercised that right, why deny to her the right and the power to decide as to the best mode of applying the element of water in the administration of holy baptism?” The object of this is to show the inconsistency of Baptists in refusing to accept the action of the church in changing the form of baptism, while they accept that in relation to the Sabbath. The point made is that Baptists indorse the principle in regard to the Sabbath that they condemn in respect to baptism. If from respect to the Scriptures they maintain the necessity of performing the rite of baptism according to the commandment of Christ, why not be equally scrupulous in regard to the Sabbath; for the commandment plainly requires the observance of the seventh day? To this, the Chronicle offers the following reply:— “Baptists do not believe that the Troas example abrogated and annulled the fourth commandment. They believe that it never has been abrogated or annulled, and that it never will be. What they believe is, that Christ and his apostles observed the first day of the week as the Lord’s day, or Christian Sabbath, in commemoration of the completion of a grander event than that of the creation, and that it ought to be observed with a twofold sense of obligation,—that arising out of a command of the decalogue, setting apart for rest and worship a seventh part of the week, and the example of Christ and his apostles in making the first day of the week the Lord’s day.” This is an important statement. Baptists do not believe that the fourth commandment has been abrogated or annulled, or that it ever will be. Now, what is the “fourth commandment,” and how does it read? Here it is, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work. . . . For 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.” We mean no offense when we ask, Do Baptists believe this commandment still binding? What evidence do they give that they believe it binding on them? During our whole life we have been acquainted with the denomination of which the Examiner is an honored representative, and we declare that they do not even try to obey the fourth commandment. That requires the keeping of the seventh day, but these Baptists keep the first day, a day not known in the commandment. The Examiner goes on to say, “What they believe is, that Christ and his apostles observed the first day of the week as the Lord’s day, or Christian Sabbath, in commemoration of the completion of a grander event than that of the creation, and that it ought to be observed with a twofold sense of obligation,—that arising out of a command of the decalogue, setting apart for rest and worship a seventh part of the week, and the example of Christ and his apostles in making the first day of the week the Lord’s day.” We have, then, the Examiner as authority that this is the Baptist’s creed on this subject; on which we remark:— 1. Nothing is said in the Scriptures about Christ and his apostles observing the first day of the week for any purpose whatever. How, then, can Baptists hold, as an article of their faith, that concerning which the Bible is entirely silent? We had supposed this was unbaptistic. 2. There is nothing in the Scriptures concerning keeping the Lord’s day, unless this phrase refers to the Sabbath day, the day Jehovah calls his holy day, the day of which Christ said he was Lord. There is no evidence whatever that Rev. 1:10 refers to the first day of the week. 3. The phrase “Christian Sabbath” is unknown to the Bible, and should not appear here. It is a gilded phrase, and has no other effect than to deceive. 4. To keep the first, or any other day of the week, to commemorate the work of redemption is, to say the least of it, a work of supererogation, as the Bible lays on us no such obligation. That we are to commemorate the redemptive work is not denied; but for this, two ordinances are appointed, baptism and the Lord’s supper. If another had been required, the record would have informed us concerning it. Its silence upon the subject should teach us to be silent. 5. The decalogue does not simply set apart one day in the week for sacred purposes, but it sets apart for that purpose a particular day, which it especially marks and describes. It is the day Jehovah rested on, blessed, and sanctified at the close of creation. It is more, then, than “a seventh part of a week;” it is a particular seventh part. The keeping of the first day of the week cannot be done in obedience to the fourth commandment of the decalogue. The thing is impossible.—Sabbath Recorder.