I

THREE hundred years ago there was born at Elstow in Bedfordshire one whose descent, as he describes it himself, was “of a low and inconsiderable generation.” This was John Bunyan, whose “Pilgrim’s Progress” was to make him the most popular of religious writers, and to raise him to a pinnacle of fame as one of the master stylists of the English tongue. Our interest in him, however, is more in the religious than the literary side of his remarkable career. Though no one who has a taste for elegance of diction and language of chaste simplicity clothing the ideas in words so suitable for their purpose can help feeling the spell the greatest master of allegory in our language casts over the mind. In Bunyan there met in a remarkable degree an imagination as fertile as ever exercised a human brain, but it was an imagination controlled by a judgment so well poised that it held in check any tendency to reckless extravagance either in thought or diction. We are not taking into account, meantime, that this imagination and judgment were sanctified by grace, and were used by the Holy Ghost for work that has made the name of John Bunyan immortal in the religious literature of the world. Mere imagination in itself could never have produced the well-balanced descriptions of the various phases of Christian experience so pithily and happily expressed in the various characters that walked on the Pilgrim Road. On the other hand, a sober judgment, unassisted by an imagination of unusual fertility, could never have given us those vivid and life-like descriptions—so vivid

and life-like indeed that, in spite of ourselves, we cannot help regarding his personifications of feelings and experiences as real, living persons. It is very rarely that these two gifts are bestowed in such a rich degree on one person. Imagination of surpassing fertility is not uncommon, neither is a sound, solid judgment. But it is a very rare thing to get them combined, and still rarer to get them combined to such a degree as they were in Bunyan. But, after all is said about his remarkable gifts, it was grace that gave heavenly fire to his imagination, and Christian sobriety to his judgment. Or, as Christian says to Piety, the sedate and chaste maiden he met in the Palace Beautiful, “I saw One, as I thought in my mind, hang bleeding upon a tree.” It was that sight, which infused life into the soul of Bunyan and moved his whole being, without which the greatest allegory of the world would never have been written, and the name of Bunyan would never have been known. It has been said, and truly said, that had the “Pilgrim’s Progress” never been written, Bunyan’s fame as an allegorist would rest secure in the next best known of his works—”The Holy War.” Here again, those who read these famous works for religious instruction will observe, as a matter of personal spiritual experience, that the “Progress” precedes “The War.” In the “Pilgrim’s Progress” we have Christian under the deepest concern and soul agony, setting out with one overwhelming desire—”Eternal life! Eternal life!” It is the story of the Christian’s journey, and though we are told of contests that he had on the way, Bunyan reserved for “The Holy War” a description of the stern and never-ceasing conflict that is being waged in the believer’s heart. Here we have the din of battle, the clash of arms right through, and with what masterly skill the field and the combatants engaged in a life and death struggle are described! How true to Christian experience is his description of Mr Evil-questioning with his numerous progeny, of Lord Will-be-will’s valiant efforts in despatching some of these varlets, and imprisoning others. And what a masterly touch there is in the words: “But Mr Unbelief was a nimble jack, him they could never lay hold of, though they attempted to do it often. He, therefore, and some few more of the subtlest of the Diabolonian tribe, did yet remain in Mansoul, to the time that Mansoul left off to dwell longer in the kingdom of Universe.” But we must restrain ourselves meantime from entering a field so fascinating to the heart and so in-

instructive to the understanding. In this opening article it is our intention to give a short biographical sketch of Bunyan, and to make reference to his works later on.

In his “Grace Abounding,” one of the great Christian autobiographies, Bunyan tells the story of his life. “It was my delight to be taken captive by the Devil at his will, being filled with all unrighteousness: the which did also so strongly work and put forth itself, both in my heart and life, and that from a child, that I had few equals (especially considering my years, which were tender, being few), both for cursing, swearing lying, and blaspheming the holy name of God.” These things, he further adds, had become a second nature to him. Owing to Bunyan’s pre-eminent position in the world of letters—not only his literary excellencies, but his religious opinions have come under the review of men, who, whatever qualifications they may have as masters of literature, are about as capable of judging the religious experiences of Bunyan as a blind man is capable of describing some matchless piece of scenery of God’s wonderful world. These critics, forgetting that Bunyan’s religion was of the type that the natural man cannot know, thoughtlessly intrude into those matters of which they are ignorant, and tell us that Bunyan is not to be taken seriously in the above and similar descriptions. Those who know anything of these things will certainly not take these critics seriously. We consider it necessary to refer to this matter, because in quite a number of standard works dealing with English literature such sentiments are freely expressed, and are apt to influence young people in believing that after all, Bunyan’s deep sense of sin was only a morbid feeling, produced to a large extent by a melancholy brooding spirit, assisted by a lively imagination. Those who take such a view, would do well to read what he so impressively says in the introduction to “Grace Abounding”:—”God did not play in convincing me; the devil did not play in tempting me; neither did I play when I sunk as into the bottomless pit, when the pangs of hell caught hold upon me; wherefore, I may not play in my relating of them, but be plain and simple, and lay down the thing as it was.” Well might Bunyan say in this as he said in another connection: “The Philistines do not understand me.”

Careless though he was, yet he was not without thoughts about the Day of Judgment and dread of the torments of hell, yet he could not let go his sins. He went from bad to worse, and “delighted in all trans-

gressions against the Law of God,” so that he was the very ringleader of all the youth that kept him company, “in all manner of vice and ungodliness.” On looking back on the years which the locusts had eaten, Bunyan feelingly adds: “Had not a miracle of precious grace prevented I had not only perished by the stroke of eternal justice, but had also laid myself open to the stroke of those laws, which bring some to disgrace and open shame before the face of the world.” While he was wallowing thus in sin he says that when he saw one that was reputed godly do wicked things it made his spirit tremble. One instance he specially mentions when he was at the “height of vanity,” “yet hearing one to swear,” he says, “that was reckoned for a religious man, it had so great a stroke upon my spirit, that it made my heart ache.”

The next stage he mentions in his spiritual state is that God now visited him with judgments. On two occasions he was saved from drowning, and on another occasion, during his army career, he was one of a party drawn to besiege a certain place, but when he was ready to go one of the company desired to go in his room. This man as he was doing sentry duty “was shot in the head with a musket bullet, and died.” On these he adds this comment: “Here, as I said, were judgments and mercy, but neither of them did awaken my soul to righteousness; wherefore I sinned still, and grew more and more rebellious against God, and careless of mine own salvation.”

Such was his state when he married. His wife’s father was counted a godly man, and through her he was led to read religious books. He now became very religious in his own way, but all the while he was not sensible of the evil or danger of sin. As for Christ he had no need of Him—”nay, I never thought of Him,” he says, “nor whether there was such an one or no.”

It was a sermon on Sabbath-breaking that first roused him out of the dull stupor of sin. The Sabbath was one of the special days in which he “took much delight in all manner of vice.” That was, according to his own testimony, the first time he felt what guilt was, and when the sermon was ended he went home with a great burden on his spirit. But this concern soon passed off, and Bunyan betook himself to his games on the Sabbath as before. It was while playing at a game called Cat that he was brought face to face with the Judge of all. He had given one blow to the piece of wood, and while he was about to strike it again, as he so

impressively records in the classic passage in “Grace Abounding:” “A voice did suddenly dart from Heaven into my soul, which said, ‘Wilt thou leave thy sins and go to Heaven, or have thy sins and go to hell?’ At this I was put to an exceeding maze. Wherefore, leaving my Cat upon the ground, I looked up to Heaven, and was as if I had with the eyes of my understanding seen the Lord Jesus looking down upon me, as being very hotly displeased with me, and as if He did severely threaten me with some grievous punishment for these and other of my ungodly practices.”

(To be continued).

Lecture on the Sabbath.

BY REV. N. CAMERON, GLASGOW.

“Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, 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, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: 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” (Exodus xx. 8).

THE Sabbath Day rest was instituted in the garden of Eden. It was the first whole day man enjoyed after God created him. Although no mention is made directly of the Sabbath Day as a day for rest and worship, there is indirectly in the case of Cain and Abel’s sacrifices: “And in process of time it came to pass that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering to the Lord. And Abel, he brought also of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof.” The expression, “in process of time,” means at the end of days, which may mean either at the end of the days they remained with their father (as we can trace down through the succeeding ages that the father acted priest in his own family), and that they began then to act as priests in their own homes. The end of days, we firmly believe, meant also the end of the week, or the Sabbath.

From the manner in which reference is made to the Sabbath in the 16th Chapter of Exodus, it must have been lost sight of and forgotten during the bondage of

*

the children of Israel in Egypt. The divine record of the event reads thus:—”And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omer for one man; and all the rulers of the congregation came to Moses. And he said unto them, this is that which the Lord has said, ‘To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord.’ ” This is one reason why this commandment is prefaced by the word, “Remember,” and, indeed, we as a generation have much need of considering seriously the obligation which this charge of Almighty God will one day mean to us should we forget our duty as to this commandment.

Let us consider now a few things in connection with this commandment of God’s moral law. May the Holy Spirit guide us in our thoughts and words.

I. Let us consider the perpetually binding obligation of this commandment.

(1) It was declared by the mouth of God from the top of Mount Sinai on that never-to-be-forgotten day in the hearing of all the children of Israel. We read:—”And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled. And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with God. . . . And the mount was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire . . . and the whole mount quaked greatly. And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice.” The fourth commandment is a part of the expressions of the voice of God that day. It was placed in the middle of the moral law, not only as God expressed it, but also as He wrote it by His own finger on the tables of stone. We have it in the very words which came out of the mouth of God that day. No sane man will deny God’s right to make and declare a law to show His rational, responsible creatures the rule of their duty towards Him, and towards one another. This is exactly what the moral law contains. No man, having his reason unimpaired, will deny that God has power enough to demand obedience to His law, and in the case of disobedience to punish the transgressor even with everlasting destruction. None will deny these things but “the fool who says in his heart there is no God”: but even the fool will not deny it at the Great Day, and before the Judge and the great white throne.

Let any man consider the precepts of God’s moral law and he will feel convinced that they are unchangeable in their nature. It will never be right for sons or daughters to disobey and dishonour their parents. Neither can it ever be right for a man to kill, commit adultery, steal, slander, or covet. The same thing is true concerning the first table of the moral law. It can never be but sin that any of His creatures should have any false God; or worship the true God by images; or blaspheme God’s great and terrible name by taking it into their lips in vain; or transgress the fourth commandment by doing any work on that day save those of necessity and mercy.

The moral law cannot and will not be abrogated. Our Lord says—”Think not that I am come to destroy, the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” Notice that this fulfilment will not be consummated “till heaven and earth pass.” So it would be well for its transgressors to make sure that God has abrogated the fourth commandment before they dare profane it. But they will search in vain for its annulment in any place in God’s Word. It is written in God’s statute book, and while it remains there, its transgressors are in danger of being apprehended, and charged before the Great Judge, and condemned as sinners against God’s law. This takes place in the case of every Sabbath desecrator when death lands him in the presence of God in eternity. “O that they were wise, that they understood this, that they would consider their latter end!” But no. The Papacy, when it introduced images into its worship as a body, removed the Second Commandment from the manuals which were placed in the hands of its people. If it had left it, its followers would have read—”Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them,” etc. It, therefore, removed it, because it prohibited the idolatrous form of worship which it purposed to impose upon the people. So the millions who adhere to the Papacy are idolators, and will be condemned for that sin at the day of final judgment.

There is now a supreme effort made by Satan and his servants to banish the Sabbath Day. Very few are met with anywhere who hold that the Fourth Command-

ment is an integral part of God’s moral law, and that such as transgress it, and such as will continue transgressing it to the end, will be punished with eternal death. They will tell one that it was only a Jewish institution, and that we as Christians are not bound to observe it. Some will allow that it should be observed for morning worship in our churches; while others deny that they are under any obligation to keep it holy, or to refrain from doing work on it. On account of these sophistries, Sabbath profanation has come in like a flood into industry of every description in this country, and also into the churches everywhere. Men go to their work on this holy day without a qualm of conscience, and ministers, office-bearers, and members travel by trains and street cars which are run for the very purpose of earning money. All seem to forget, or to disbelieve, that “sin is the transgression of the law, and that the wages of sin is death.” This flood has risen so high that one reads in speeches made ostensibly in defence of Sabbath observation that the speaker does not desire to go back to the puritanical manner in which the Sabbath was observed in the past. We are afraid that such statements are made to avoid being considered narrow and bigoted by such as hate holiness, or puritanism, on Sabbath or week days. The desire after popularity is the moving cause of such expressions.

An effort is being made to prove that the Christian Sabbath is unscriptural, and that the seventh day should be observed and not the first. (1) The seventh day was instituted by God to commemorate the work of creation. This day was the Sabbath Day during the Old Testament economy. It was the Son of God that created the heavens and the earth, and all that they contain, as it is written—”Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. . . And thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thy hands.” (2) It was the Son in our nature, that suffered, obeyed, and died for His own elect people. This work of redemption He finished on the morning of the Resurrection. “There remaineth therefore a rest” (Sabbath-keeping) to the people of God. For He that entered into His rest hath ceased from His own works, as God did from His.” Who is said to cease from His works in this scripture? Who but Christ, and the Sabbath-keeping that remains to the

* The word translated “rest” in the original is “sabbatismos,” Sabbath-keeping.

people of God now commemorates the work of the Son of God by which He laid the foundation of the new creation, which shall not pass away like the old creation. That the Church, especially among the Gentiles, in the apostolic age and ever since held the first day of the week as the Christian Sabbath is manifest in the Scriptures of the New Testament. On the evening of the Resurrection day Christ met with His disciples, Thomas being not then present. Eight days after that He came into their midst and cured Thomas of his unbelief. Again, we find that at Troas “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” (Acts xx. 7). Again, we find in I. Cor. xvi. 1-2, “Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia.” This shows that these churches assembled together on the first day of the week, and that an order was given them to make a collection for the poor on that day. In Revelation we read—”I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day” (Rev. i. 10). This shows that the first day of the week was called “the Lord’s Day.”

There was no cause why the terms of the Fourth Commandment should be altered; for the command is, “Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work; but the seventh day.” The seventh day after six days of labour is quite in agreement with the terms of the Fourth Commandment. I think every fair-minded man will feel convinced that notwithstanding the Jews met in the synagogues on the Sabbath day as before, the Gentile believers kept the Lord’s Day, i.e., the Christian Sabbath, from the beginning. If further proof were necessary, the many occasions upon which the Lord sent the Holy Spirit since the day of Pentecost to bless His word to poor sinners on the Lord’s Day should satisfy any reasonable person that the Lord still blesses this day of rest.

II. Let us now consider who are commanded to keep it holy.

(1) We have the father of the family commanded strictly to keep the Sabbath holy, and also to see to it that neither son, nor daughter, man-servant, nor maid-servant, nor his beast of burden, nor the strangers within his gates did any work on it save works of necessity and mercy. If the father should profane the Sabbath and ordered his son, etc., to do any unnecessary work on that day, the son, or daughter, or man-

servant, or maid-servant, etc., should not obey him, for God alone is the ruler of man’s conscience. Each one should tell father, or master, “if you transgress the law of God contained in the fourth commandment, you have no right to ask me to do it; for God commands me not to do any work on the Sabbath day. You should remember that sin is the transgression of the law, and that the wages of sin is death.”

(2) The magistrates of our cities and towns are called city fathers, and are bound to obey the fourth commandment, and to see to it that all within their gates, or as far as their jurisdiction extends, shall keep it. They are to keep it holy in their own families, as regards their own sons and daughters and servants, and also to restrain all, even strangers, or aliens, who may live within their bounds from desecrating God’s holy day. I know the most of those in authority in our cities and towns will scoff at the idea, yea rather the fact, of their responsibility in this matter. But will God, who will be, and who is now, their judge, be put off by a scornful laugh at Sabbath Day profanation, or will it serve their turn to say with Cain: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” I am very sure that parents, masters, and magistrates will see their desperate madness in desecrating the Lord’s Day themselves, and in giving their consent to others to do so either in time or in eternity. The Sabbath-breaker may walk about with a high head, laugh at such as make conscience of doing their best to keep it holy; but you will yet see that scoffer, who is a tyrant in commanding to profane it with his head low enough when he will have to answer for his conduct to the august Judge of eternity. O what pangs of agony will seize the conscience of these men on that day! “Consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces, and there be none to deliver.”

(3) Kings, who should be nursing fathers to the Church of God, their Counsellors, both Houses of Parliament, and all in authority under them, are bound to keep the Sabbath day holy, and to prohibit any one who may be within their gates, i.e., so far as their authority reaches, from doing any work save that of necessity and mercy. This will include strangers, or aliens, as well as the natives of this kingdom.

How are men in the highest places of authority in this nation keeping the Sabbath day? The fact is, with very few exceptions, they themselves are the chief transgressors, and their example is followed by the vast majority of the people. Instead of making laws to safe-

guard the fourth commandment, they allow all manner of profanation to go on without any restraint, notwithstanding the many salutary enactments on their statute books for the preservation of the Sabbath; statutes enacted by men of conscience, who had the fear of God in their hearts, and who were the builders of the British nation. But the Author of the moral law has no respect of persons. He is King of kings, and Lord of lords, and He will assuredly make kings and lords to give an account of their Sabbath desecration; but the fact that they do not do their duty will not excuse others who may now be following their example. “Be wise now therefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve God with fear.” Nehemiah set a good example before all governors, as we find him recording:—”In those days saw I in Judah some treading wine-presses on the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wines, grapes and figs, which they brought into Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals. There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the Sabbath to the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem. Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil is this that ye do, and profane the Sabbath day? Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city. . . . Why lodge ye without the wall? if ye do so again, I will lay hands on you.” This he said to the aliens from Tyre, so that they came no more. Is this not a really good example for the Government of this country? May the Lord open their eyes, and give them grace and courage to do their duty. For God has not changed in His regard for the Sabbath, and He will assuredly, in His own time, punish men and nations for desecrating it.

The Fourth Commandment is more binding in the religious sphere, if that be possible, than it is in the temporal and moral. The Church of Christ has obligations relative to the Sabbath Day. The records of that Church in the past prove that the true servants of Christ realised their responsibility as to this matter.

(1) Kirk Sessions are bound to keep the Sabbath Day holy within their gates, i.e., their congregations respectively. They are not to admit to Church privileges any who are employed in doing any work save works of necessity or mercy on God’s holy day. They are not to consider the pecuniary interests of men, who

endeavour to bring works of necessity within the range of loss to their own purse; or who use the argument that they are compelled to work or to lose it; or who think that the guilt of it falls on the employer, but not on them. Works of necessity and mercy are (a) to attend to the sick on the Lord’s Day; (b) to feed and give drink to man, or beasts that are hand-fed; (c) to attend the outward and ordinary means of grace as enjoined: “Cease not the assembling of yourselves together.” If the means be at a distance beyond the reach of the man except he takes his horse, we see no reason why he should not do so: for if it is the man’s duty to go himself, we cannot see why he should not be allowed to open his gate for the beast of burden on that day. Motor cars have come to stay with us, and they have taken the place of the horse and conveyance. We have now come to the conclusion that a man may have the right to use his car provided the distance is too far for him to walk to God’s house, or for a doctor to visit cases of serious sickness. We consider also that such men as use their cars for hire on week days, but who do not go out for hire on the Lord’s Day, may, if they like, charge for the oil consumed on the journey, but we cannot agree to their charging any other fare for passengers on God’s holy day. Such as use their cars, etc., for earning money on the Sabbath must not be employed on the Sabbath by Free Presbyterians, or even on the week day so far as they can avoid doing so. (d) Navigating a ship at sea, providing they sailed not from port on the Sabbath, and providing that no unnecessary work is done on board on the Lord’s Day, is a work of necessity. (e) Watching or keeping fires alive in public works, which depend upon steam-power or fire-power during the week, we consider necessary, providing that no other work be done but the keeping of fires from becoming extinguished. (f) Policing a city or town, and lighting lamps on streets or stairs, are necessary to be done, as otherwise life and property would not be safe.

The running of trains and street cars and ‘buses on the Lord’s Day which are run for monetary purposes is a direct violation of the Fourth Commandment. Such as travel by these on the Lord’s Day ought not to receive Church privileges from our Kirk-Sessions. Since 1896 there has been a resolution on the records of the Kirk-Session of St Jude’s, Glasgow, to the effect “that no one who worked, or travelled by street cars or trains on the Lord’s Day would receive Church privileges from the Session.” This has been adhered to ever since, and

there have been no complaints against it after the first year of its operation. If it should be relaxed now, as some demand (none of them in St Jude’s, I am thankful to say) I am convinced that it would appear to our people south and north as a long step of backsliding by the Free Presbyterian Church. The Synod’s finding on the subject shows that this is the unanimous judgment of all our ministers in Scotland, and of all our office-bearers and people. Consequently, it is the duty of our Kirk-Sessions to see to it that no one who works on the Lord’s Day, or who travels by trains or street cars, or Sabbath-breaking ‘buses, shall receive baptism or the Lord’s Supper from them.

Some use sophistry of this description, that they themselves would not work, or travel by trains or street cars, etc., on the Lord’s Day, but that the Synod should not debar from church privileges such as would use them. God’s Word says:—”Thou shalt not suffer sin on thy neighbours.” The real meaning of such an argument is that the Synod should consent to allow their people to do that which they (these sophists) feel to be sin in their own conscience. If that be not so, why do they say that they would not do it themselves? Such arguments are devoid of any real force in face of the terms of the Fourth Commandment, and integrity of conscience.

Should any Kirk-Session allow their people to travel by such God-dishonouring means to Church or otherwise on the Lord’s Day and extend to them the privileges of the Church, the Presbytery is bound to restrain it within their gates, that is, within their bounds. They have full powers to bring such a Session to an account, and to deal with recalcitrants in accordance with the law of the Church, even to the length of deposition. Each individual who may feel aggrieved by the decisions of Kirk-Session or Presbytery can appeal to the Synod for final decision. This is as it should be, in order to deal justly, in accordance with God’s Word and the law of the Church, in every case.

The Synod is bound to deal with every case or matter that comes before them. In the cases of laxity as regards breaches of the moral law, they are to see to it that no one guilty of transgressing it, shall, without repentance, confession, and reformation, receive the privileges of the Church. Transgressions of the fourth commandment should not be, and are not to be, connived at. This duty becomes more imperative on account of the fact that “the enemy has come in like

a flood” of Sabbath desecration into this sinful generation, and that those who ought to be shields against it in the State and Churches have collapsed before it. A very determined effort is now being made in order that barriers raised against Sabbath desecration by our Synod should be swept away. The Synod should realise that this effort is made, not in accordance with the clear requirements of the Fourth Commandment, nor with the creed and constitution of the Church of the Reformation in Scotland; which creed and constitution we have bound ourselves, by the most solemn vows, to maintain. The statements of the Confession of Faith are as follows:— “As it is the law of nature, that, in general, a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God; so in His Word, by a positive, moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men in all ages, He hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath, to be kept holy unto Him: which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ, was the last day of the week; and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which in Scripture is called the Lord’s Day, and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath. This Sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparation of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works, words, and thoughts about their worldly employments and recreations; but also are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of His worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy” (Confession of Faith, chap. xxi., sects. vii. and viii.).

The thin end of a wedge is being driven into the Free Presbyterian Church so as to split it on this question. It is well known that a thin wedge will not split a log; but a thick one may do it. Every man and woman who add to the wedge their support are doing what they can to split the Church. I appeal to all concerned to consider seriously as in the presence of God whether they desire to open the flood-gates of Sabbath desecration into our Church. All who are determined to have the laxity claimed can easily find churches in Scotland or elsewhere in which they may have it to their heart’s content.

III. Let us consider the punishment which follows the sin of Sabbath desecration.

The Jews were very guilty of Sabbath desecration as well as of their contempt of God’s prophets, and of

defiling God’s house. So we find on holy record the causes why God destroyed by sword, famine, and pestilence, the greatest number of them, and sent the few that remained to Babylon for seventy years:—”Moreover, all the chief priests and all the people transgressed very much, after all the abominations of the heathen, and polluted the house of the Lord which He had hallowed in Jerusalem. And the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by His messengers, rising up betimes and sending; because He had compassion on His people and on His dwelling-place: but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised His word, and misused His prophets until the wrath of God arose against His people, till there was no remedy. Therefore, He brought upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for age; He gave them all into his hand. . . To fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths; for as long as she lay desolate she kept Sabbath, to fulfil three score and ten years” (II. Chron. xxxvi. 14-21).

We have truly been guilty as a people in what used to be called Sabbath-loving Scotland, but may now be called Sabbath-hating Scotland of the very sins charged in the above catalogue against the Jews. Let us take serious notice of the fact that these things are written for our admonition. We have to deal with the same holy and just God, who is unchangeable in His hatred to sin, and who will not connive at the sins in us for which He punished others so severely. The desecration of the Sabbath was of the first magnitude in His estimation; for the land itself had to get rest from the desecrating feet of old and young during seventy years. Let us beware that our Sabbath desecration, etc., if not repented of, will assuredly bring down the wrath of God upon us as a country; and let Free Presbyterians take to heart that God will not connive at sin in them in the day of judgment.

The French acted as the Jews did, they persecuted to death on Bartholomew’s day the people of God, and did cast away the Sabbath, as those who were there during the Great War have reported to us. What is the effect? France is a nation of atheists. “God has given them over to believe a lie; because they received not the truth in the love of it.” The bulk of that nation are going to a lost eternity in their atheism and Sabbath

desecration. We are following hard in their footsteps as a country. Therefore, let us beware that God will take away the gospel and the Sabbath from us, unless timely repentance may prevent such a terrible judgment:—”If thou turn away the foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasures on my Holy Day: and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord honourable; and shalt honour Him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words. Then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord: and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it” (Isaiah lviii. 13, 14).

Separation Not Alone Our Privilege But Our Duty.

BY C. H. SPURGEON.

FRIENDS will have noticed with interest the repeated debates in the “London Baptist Association,” as to whether there should be “a credal basis,” and what that basis should be, if it were decided to have one. There seems to be a current opinion that I have been at the bottom of all this controversy, and if I have not appeared in it, I have, at least, pulled the wires. But this is not true. I have taken a deep interest in the struggles of the orthodox brethren; but I have never advised those struggles, nor entertained the slightest hope of their success. My course has been of another kind. As soon as I saw, or thought I saw, that error had become firmly established I did not deliberate but quitted the body at once.* Since then my one counsel has been “Come ye out from among them.” If I have rejoiced in the loyalty to Christ’s truth which has been shown in other courses of action, yet I have felt that no protest could be equal to that of distinct separation from known evil

I never offered to the [Baptist] Union, or to the Association, the arrogant bribe of personal return if a creed should be adopted; but, on the contrary, I told the deputation from the Union that I should not return until I had seen how matters went, and I declined to mix up

* The reference is to Mr Spurgeon’s separation from the Baptist Union.

my own personal action with the consideration of a question of vital importance to the community. I never sought from the Association the consideration of “a credal basis,” but on the contrary, when offered that my resignation might stand over till such a consideration had taken place, I assured the brethren that what I had done was final, and did not depend upon their action in the matter of a creed. The attempt, therefore, to obtain a basis of Union in the Association, whatever may be thought of it, should be viewed as a matter altogether apart from me, for so indeed it has been.

I may, however venture to express the opinion that the evangelical brethren in the Association have acted with much kindness, and have shown a strong desire to abide in union with others, if such union could be compassed without the sacrifice of truth. They as good as said—We think there are some few great truths which are essential to the reception of the Christian religion, and we do not think we should be right to associate with those who repudiate those truths. Will you not agree that these truths should be stated, and that it should be known that persons who fail to accept these vital truths cannot join the association? The points mentioned were certainly elementary enough, and we need not wonder that one of the brethren exclaimed, “May God help those who do not believe these things! where must they be?” Indeed, little objection was taken to the statements which were tabulated, but the objection was to a belief in these being made indispensable to membership. It was as though it had been said, “Yes, we believe in the Godhead of the Lord Jesus; but we would not keep a man out of our fellowship because he thought our Lord to be a mere man. We believe in the atonement; but if another man rejects it, he must not, therefore, be excluded from our number.” Here was the point at issue: one party would gladly fellowship every person who had been baptized, and the other party desired that at the least the elements of the faith should be believed, and the first principles of the Gospel should be professed by those who were admitted into the fellowship of the Association. Since neither party could yield the point in dispute, what remained for them but to separate with as little friction as possible?

To this hour, I must confess that I do not understand the action of either side in this dispute, if viewed in the white light of logic. Why should they wish to be together? Those who wish for the illimitable fellow-

ship of men of every shade of belief or doubt would be all the freer for the absence of those stubborn evangelicals who have cost them so many battles. The brethren, on the other hand, who have a doctrinal faith, and prize it, must have learned by this time that whatever terms may be patched up, there is no spiritual oneness between themselves and the new religionists. They must also have felt that the very endeavour to make a compact which will tacitly be understood in two senses, is far from being an ennobling and purifying exercise to either party.

The brethren in the middle are the source of this clinging together of discordant elements. These who are for peace at any price, who persuade themselves there is very little wrong, who care chiefly to maintain existing institutions, these are the good people who induce the weary combatants to repeat the futile attempt at a coalition, which, in the nature of things, must break down. If both sides could be unfaithful to conscience, or if the glorious Gospel could be thrust altogether out of the question, there might be a league of amity established; but as neither of these things can be, there would seem to be no reason for persevering in the attempt to maintain a confederacy for which there is no justification in fact, and from which there can be no worthy result, seeing it does not embody a living truth. A desire for unity is commendable. Blessed are they who can promote it and preserve it! But there are other matters to be considered as well as unity, and sometimes these may even demand the first place. When union becomes a moral impossibility, it may almost drop out of calculation in arranging plans and methods of working. If it is clear as the sun at noonday that no real union can exist, it is idle to strive after the impossible, and it is wise to go about other and more practicable business.

Numbers of good brethren in different ways remain in fellowship with those who are undermining the Gospel; and they talk of their conduct as though it were a loving course which the Lord will approve of in the day of His appearing. We cannot understand them. The bounden duty of a true believer towards men who profess to be Christians, and yet deny the Word of the Lord, and reject the fundamentals of the Gospel, is to come out from among them. To stay in a community which fellowships all beliefs in the hope of setting matters right, is as though Abraham had stayed at Ur, or

at Haran, in the hope of converting the household out of which he was called.

Complicity with error will take from the best of men the power to enter any successful protest against it. If any body of believers had errorists among them, but were resolute to deal with them in the name of the Lord, all might come right; but confederacies founded upon the principle that all may enter, whatever views they hold, are based upon disloyalty to the truth of God. If truth is optional, error is justifiable.

There are now two parties in the religious world, and a great mixed multitude who from various causes decline to be ranked with either of them. In this army of intermediates are many who have no right to be there; but we spare them. The day will, however, come, when they will have to reckon with their own consciences. When the light is taken out of its place, they may have to mourn that they were not willing to trim the lamp, nor even to notice that the flame grew dim.

Our present sorrowful protest is not a matter of this man or that, this error or that; but of principle. There either is something essential to a true faith—some truth which is to be believed, or else everything is left to each man’s taste. We believe in the first of these opinions, and hence we cannot dream of religious association with those who might on the second theory be acceptable. Those who are of our mind should, at all cost, act upon it. The Lord give them decision, and wean them from all policy and trimming!

The party everywhere apparent has a faith fashioned for the present century—perhaps we ought rather to say, for the present month. The sixteenth century Gospel it derides, and that, indeed, of every period except the present most enlightened era. It will have no creed, because it can have none: it is continually on the move; it is not what it was yesterday, and it will not be tomorrow what it is to-day. Its shout is for “Liberty,” its delight is invention, its element is change. On the other hand, there still survive, amid the blaze of nineteenth century light, a few whom these superior persons call “Fossils;” that is to say, there are believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, who consider that the true Gospel is no new Gospel, but is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever. These do not believe in “Advanced views,” but judge that the view of truth which saved a soul in the second century will save a soul now, and

that a form of teaching which was unknown till the last few years is of very dubious value, and is in all probability “another gospel, which is not another.”

It is extremely difficult for these two parties to abide in union. The old fable of the collier who went home to dwell with the fuller is nothing to it. The fuller would by degrees know the habits of his coaly companion, and might thus save the white linen from his touch; but in this case there are no fixed quantities on the collier’s side, and nothing like permanency even in the black of his coal. How can his friend deal with him since he changes with the moon? If, after long balancing of words, the two parties could construct a basis of agreement, it would, in the nature of things, last only for a season, since the position of the advancing party would put the whole settlement out of order in a few weeks. The adjustment of difficulties would be a task forever beginning, and never coming to an end. If we agree, after a sort, to-day, a new settlement will be needed to-morrow. If I am to stay where I am, and you are to go travelling on, it is certain that we cannot long lodge in the same room. Why should we attempt it?

Nor is it merely doctrinal belief—there is an essential difference in spirit between the old believer and the man of new and advancing views. This is painfully perceived by the Christian man before very long. Even if he be fortunate enough to escape the sneers of the cultured, and the jests of the philosophical, he will find his deepest convictions questioned, and his brightest beliefs misrepresented by those who dub themselves “thoughtful men.” When a text from the Word has been peculiarly precious to his heart, he will hear its authenticity impugned, the translation disputed, or its Gospel references denied. He will not travel far on the dark continent of modern thought before he will find the efficacy of prayer debated, the operation of divine Providence questioned, and the special love of God denied. He will find himself to be a stranger in a strange land when he begins to speak of his experience, and of the ways of God to men. In all probability, if he be faithful to his old faith, he will be an alien to his mother’s children, and find that his soul is among lions. To what end, therefore, are these strainings after a hollow unity, when the spirit of fellowship is altogether gone?

The world is large enough; why not let us go our separate ways? Loud is the cry of our opponents for

liberty; let them have it by all means. But let us have our liberty also. We are not bound to belong to this society or to that. There is a right of association which we do not forego, and this involves a right of disassociation, which we retain with equal tenacity. Those who are so exceedingly liberal, large-hearted, and broad might be so good as to allow us to forego the charms of their society without coming under the full violence of their wrath.

At any rate, cost what it may, to separate ourselves from those who separate themselves from the truth of God is not alone our liberty, but our duty. I have raised my protest in the only complete way by coming forth, and I shall be content to abide alone until the day when the Lord shall judge the secrets of all hearts; but it will not seem to me a strange thing if others are found faithful, and if others judge that for them also there is no path but that which is painfully apart from the beaten track.

Christian Arrives at Palace Beautiful.

BY JOHN BUNYAN.

SO I saw in my dream, that he made haste and went forward, that if possible he might get lodging there. Now before he had gone far he entered into a very narrow passage, which was about a furlong off the Porter’s lodge; and looking very narrowly before him as he went, he espied two lions in the way. Now, thought he, I see the danger that Mistrust and Timorous were driven back by. (The lions were chained, but he saw not the chains.) Then he was afraid, and thought also himself to go back after them; for he thought nothing but death was before him. But the Porter at the lodge, whose name is Watchful, perceiving that Christian made a halt, as if he would go back, cried unto him, saying, “Is thy strength so small? Fear not the lions, for they are chained, and are placed there for trial of faith where it is, and for discovery of those that have none: keep in the midst of the path, and no hurt shall come unto thee.”

Then I saw that he went on trembling for fear of the lions; but taking good heed to the directions of the Porter, he heard them roar, but they did him no harm. Then he clapped his hands, and went on till he came and stood before the gate where the Porter was. Then said Christian to the Porter, Sir, what house is this

And, may I lodge here to-night? The Porter answered, This house was built by the Lord of the hill, and he built it for the relief and security of pilgrims. The Porter also asked whence he was? and whither he was going?

Christian—I am come from the City of Destruction, and am going to Mount Zion; but, because the sun is now set, I desire, if I may, to lodge here to-night.

Porter—What is your name? Christian—My name is now Christian, but my name at first was Graceless: I came of the race of Japheth, whom God will persuade to dwell in the tents of Shem.

Porter—But how doth it happen that you come so late? The sun is set. Christian—I had been here sooner, but that, wretched man that I am! I slept in the arbour that stands on the hill-side. Nay, I had, notwithstanding that, been here much sooner, but that in my sleep I lost my evidence, and came without it to the brow of the hill; and then feeling for it and finding it not, I was forced, with sorrow of heart, to go back to the place where I slept my sleep; where I found it, and now I am come.

Porter—Well, I will call out one of the virgins of this place, who will, if she like your talk, bring you in to the rest of the family, according to the rules of the house. So Watchful the Porter rang a bell, at the sound of which came out at the door of the house a grave and beautiful damsel, named Discretion, and asked why she was called?

The Porter answered, This man is on a journey from the City of Destruction to Mount Zion; but being weary and benighted, he asked me if he might lodge here to-night: so I told him I would call for thee, who, after discourse had with him, mayest do as seemeth thee good, even according to the law of the house.

Then she asked him whence he was? and whither he was going? and he told her. She asked him also how he got in the way? And he told her. Then she asked him what he had seen and met with in the way? and he told her. And at last she asked his name. So he said, It is Christian; and I have so much the more a desire to lodge here to-night, because, by what I perceive, this place was built by the Lord of the hill for the relief and security of pilgrims. So she smiled, but the water stood in her eyes, and after a little pause she said, I will call forth two or three more of the family. So she ran to the door, and called out Prudence, Pietv, and Charity, who after a little more discourse with him, had

him in to the family; and many of them meeting him at the threshold of the house, said, “Come in, thou blessed of the Lord; this house was built by the Lord of the hill on purpose to entertain such pilgrims in.” Then he bowed his head, and followed them into the house. So when he was come in and sat down, they gave him something to drink, and consented together, that until supper was ready, some of them should have some particular discourse with Christian, for the best improvement of time; and they appointed Piety, and Prudence, and Charity, to discourse with him; and thus they began.

Piety—Come, good Christian, since we have been so loving to you, to receive you into our house this night, let us, if perhaps we may better ourselves thereby, talk with you of all things that have happened to you in your pilgrimage. Christian—With a very good will; and I am glad that you are so well disposed. Piety—What moved you at first to betake yourself to a pilgrim’s life? Christian—I was driven out of my native country by a dreadful sound that was in mine ears; to wit, that unavoidable destruction did attend me if I abode in that place where I was. Piety—But how did it happen that you came out of your country this way? Christian—It was as God would have it: for when I was under the fears of destruction, I did not know whither to go; but by chance there came a man, even to me, as I was trembling and weeping, whose name is Evangelist, and he directed me to the Wicket-gate, which else I should never have found, and so set me into the way that hath led me directly to this house.

Piety—But did you not come by the house of the Interpreter? Christian—Yes, and did see such things there, the remembrance of which will stick by me as long as I live; especially three things: to wit, how Christ, in despite of Satan, maintains His work of grace in the heart; how the man had sinned himself quite out of hopes of God’s mercy; and also the dream of him that thought in his sleep the day of judgment was come.

Piety—Why, did you hear him tell this dream?

Christian—Yes, and a dreadful one it was, I thought; it made my heart ache as he was telling of it; but yet I am glad I heard it.

Piety—Was this all you saw at the house of the Interpreter? Christian—No; he took me, and had me where he showed me a stately place, and how the people were clad in gold that were in it; and how there came a venturesome man, and cut his way through the

armed men, that stood in the door to keep him out; and how he was bid to come in and win eternal glory. Me-thought those things did ravish my heart: I would have staid at that good man’s house a twelvemonth, but that I knew I had further to go.

Piety—And what saw you else in the way? Christian—Saw! Why, I went but a little further, and I saw One, as I thought in my mind, hang bleeding upon a tree; and the very sight of Him made my burden fall off my back; for I groaned under a very heavy burden, but then it fell down from off me. It was a strange thing to me, for I never saw such a thing before; yea, and while I stood looking up (for then I could not for-bear looking), three shining ones came to me: one of them testified that my sins were forgiven me; another stripped me of my rags, and gave me this embroidered coat which you see; and the third set the mark which you see in my forehead, and gave me this sealed roll (and with that he plucked it out of his bosom).

Piety—But you saw more than this, did you not? Christian—The things that I have told you were the best: yet some other matters I saw; as, namely, I saw three men, Simple, Sloth, and Presumption, lie asleep, a little out of the way as I came, with irons upon their heels; but do you think I could awake them? I also saw Formalist and Hypocrisy come tumbling over the wall, to go, as they pretended, to Zion; but they were quickly lost; even as I myself did tell them, but they would not believe. But, above all, I found it hard work to get up this hill, and as hard to come by the lions’ mouths: and truly, if it had not been for the good man, the Porter, that stands at the gate, I do not know but that, after all, I might have gone back again; but now, I thank God, I am here; and I thank you for receiving of me.

I never knew by my nine years’ preaching so much of Christ’s love as He has taught me in Aberdeen by six months’ imprisonment. I would not now give a drink of cold water for all the world’s kindness.—Rutherford.

I have little of Christ but groanings and longings, and desires. All my stock of Christ is some hunger for Him, and yet I cannot but say I am rich in that.—Rutherford.

Bartimeus An Dail.