Trading in London, its Causes and Remedies; or, the Case of the Tradesmen briefly stated; by A LONDON EMPLOYER (Lond. 1856; 8vo, pp. 28).*-Three Letters to a Friend on the Sunday Question, viewed chiefly in Relation to its Social and Political Aspects; with a Parliamentary Speech which will not be found in any of the "Debates;" by N. M. P. [reputed to be HENRY ROGERS.] (Lond. 1856; 8vo, pp. 57.)-The Lord's Day; the Blessings consequent upon its due observance; a Sermon preached before the University of Oxford, Nov. 4, 1855, by CHARLES A. HEURTLEY, D.D., Margaret Professor of Divinity (Oxford, 1856; 8vo, pp. 49).-Article on The Lord's Day, in the Journal of Sacred Literature for Jan. 1857, p. 265 (Lond. 1857).—The Sabbath made for Man; or, the Origin, History, and Principles of the Lord's Day; by the Rev. MICAIAH HILL, Secretary of the Birmingham Town Mission (Lond. 1857; cr. 8vo. pp. 503). Contents: 1. God and the Sabbath. 2. Moses and the Sabbath; the Manna. 3. The Decalogue. 4. Christ and the Sabbath. 5. The Apostles and the Sabbath. 6. Christianity and the Sabbath. 7. Morality and the Sabbath. 8. The Physiology of the Sabbath. 9. Hallowing the Lord's-day. 10. Historical Survey of the Sabbath. 11. Sabbath observance and Sunday desecration in Europe and America.-The Typology of Scripture, viewed in connection with the entire Scheme of the Divine Dispensations, by PATRICK FAIRBAIRN, D.D., Professor of Divinity, Free Church College, Glasgow; Book III. chap. ii. sect. iii., On the Weekly Sabbath, vol. ii. p. 118; and Appendix A, On the Views of the Reformers regarding the Sabbath, vol. ii. p. 475. (3d ed., Edin. 1857; 2 vols. 8vo). The 1st ed. was published in 1847. The Lord's Day is the Sabbath of the Lord; a Sermon in reply to "The Lord's Day NOT the Sabbath," by the Rev. C. P. Reichel, D.D.; by the Rev. Henry Henderson, Holywood (Belfast, 1859; 8vo, pp. 27).—The Patriarchal Sabbath, the Jewish Sabbath, and the Lord's Day; a Sermon in reply to Dr Reichel, by the Rev. JOHN WRIXON, M.A., perpetual curate of Malone (Belfast, 1859; 8vo, pp. 39).— Observations on the Rev. Dr Reichel's Sermon, entitled, &c., by the Rev. ALEX. IRWIN, M.A., Precentor of Armagh Cathedral (Dublin, 1859; 8vo, pp. 89).-The Lord's Day the Sabbath; a Lecture in reply to Dr Reichel, by the Rev. JOHN MACNAUGHTAN, A.M. (Belfast, 1859; 8vo, pp. 60.)—The Christian Sabbath, in reply to Dr Reichel, by the Rev. WILLIAM O'NEILL, Prebendary of St Michael's, Dublin (Belfast, 1859; 8vo, pp. 111).-I. The Church of England on the Fourth Commandment, or an humble attempt to ascertain the sense in which the Church of England holds the Fourth Commandment to be obligatory on her members: And, II. The Word of God on a Seventh day Sabbath, or an humble attempt to ascertain the Teaching of the Scriptures on a day of holy rest obligatory upon man by divine authority; by the Rev. FRANCIS EXTON, M.A., late Scholar of St John's College, Cambridge, curate of Filby, Norfolk (Camb.

*A Report by a Select Committee of the House of Commons, on Sunday Trading in London, was ordered to be printed, 15th July 1847.

N

6

1860; 8vo, pp. 48). It is here shown that in the Service for the public baptism of infants, the Catechism, the proceedings at Confirmation, and the Ante-Communion Service, the Church of England plainly affirms the Ten Commandments to be obligatory in some sense or other upon Christians; and that the obligation is recognised also in the Injunctions issued in 1536 and 1538, the Bishops' Book, A.D. 1537, the King's Book. A.D. 1543, the Injunctions of Edward VI. A.D. 1547, and the Articles of Visitation by Archbishop Cranmer in the second year of that king; that it was recognised before the Reformation, in the ninth of Peckham's Constitutions at Lambeth, A.D. 1281, and the first of Archbishop Nevill's Constitutions, A.D. 1466; and that hence the introduction of the Fourth Commandment into the Communion Service in 1552 cannot be regarded as the introduction of a new doctrine into the Church, or even as the statement for the first time of a doctrine previously held. It is next inquired, In what sense is the commandment considered obligatory by the Church? Not, replies Mr Exton, as to the day, but only as to some fixed day, which in her case is the first day of the week. The petition, Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this law,' can be used only with the understanding that there is some fixed day of holy rest, which we may misuse or neglect; and the fact that the first day of the week has always practically borne that character amongst us, coupled with the fact that our Church has never endeavoured, nor even so much as hinted a wish, to bestow it upon the seventh day, must lead all reasonable men to conclude that she considers the observance of the first day as a day of holy rest, to derive some sanction from the Fourth Commandment; that, from the abrogation of the seventh day the moral requirements of the Commandment pass on to the first day of the week; that there is an essential moral analogy between the first day and the seventh ; so that the moral conditions of the latter, as expressed in the Decalogue, are now inherited by the former" (p. 12). It is further maintained, that the Church declares the law of the Lord's-day to be divine, not ecclesiastical, although she directs holy days and festivals to be kept in the same manner as Sunday. In the second part of the pamphlet, Mr Exton advocates a primeval Sabbath, universal and perpetual, the day being changed by Christ.—The North British Review, No. 67, Feb. 1861, art. 9.

To the works above specified may be added numerous tracts published by the (London) Lord's Day Observance Society; the Sabbath Alliance, instituted at Edinburgh Nov. 1, 1847; the Religious Tract and Book Society of Scotland (Edinburgh); the (London) Religious Tract Society; Mr PETER DRUMMOND of Stirling; and the Rev. DAVID C. A. AGNEW, minister of the Free Church, Wigtown, a son of Sir Andrew.

On the Dominical side, again, the principal treatises published during the last thirty years are the following:-Thoughts on Materialism, and on Religious Festivals and Sabbaths, by HENRY

BRADSHAW FEARON (Lond. 1833; 8vo, pp. 214). This writer treats of, 1. Heathen and Jewish festivals; 2. The Jewish Sabbath; 3. The Lord's Day, or Christian Sabbath; and, 4. A National Sabbath. He discusses sundry opinions of Paley, Dwight, Whately, Dr S. Lee, and others; and agrees with Spencer and Vitringa that rest was the only Sabbath duty commanded to the Jewish laity (pp. 170-175). The book was answered by Dr Lee in an appendix to the 2d ́edition of his Sermon mentioned in p. 339.— Brief Animadversions on a Pamphlet by Dr Richard Whately, entitled Thoughts on the Sabbath," by BIBLICUS (Dublin, 1833; 12mo, pp. 23). Biblicus was JOHN WALKER, some time a Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, and a clergyman in the Establishment, but who afterwards became a Separatist. The tract is reprinted in his Essays and Correspondence, edited by William Burton, vol. ii. p. 143 (Lond. 1846, 8vo). Agreeing with Whately that the Lord's-day is not the Sabbath, he denies the power of any "Church" to sanctify days; charges the Archbishop with confusing his argument by employing the word church in three different senses; and thinks the example of the apostles a sufficient law to Christians for the observance of the Lord's-day. The leading purpose of the weekly assembling of the apostolic Christians is held to have been the showing forth Christ's death in the ordinance of his Supper (Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xi. 17, 20), and his resurrection by the day of their meeting.* Throughou this tract Mr Walker prefers to call that day the first day of the week, rather than the Lord's-day. "The former," says he, "continually occurs in the Scriptures of the New Testament; the latter is to be found there only in the one passage, Rev. i. 10, and it is more than doubtful whether it be there employed to mark any particular day of the week, though I am aware that such an application of it is very common in ecclesiastical writers posterior to the Apostolic age. Certainly, the day of the Lord' is used in very different applications, in other parts of Scripture, both of the Old Testament and of the New" (p. 23). See other passages, in his Essays, i. 228, 326, 370, 559; ii. 74-77, 415, 429, 443, 499, 505-7.-The Mosaic Sabbath and the Christian Sabbath contrasted and explained; a clear, full, and free Discussion, earnestly offered, in the present public circumstances, to the consideration of the British Nation and its august Senate, by J. L. CHIROL, A.M., one of His Majesty's Chaplains, and minister of the Church called Le Quarré, Little Dean Street, Soho Square, London (Lond. 1834; 8vo, pp. 84).—Mistaken Views regarding the Observance of the Sabbath, by ALEX. MARJORIBANKS, 7th ed. (Lond. 1840; 18mo, pp. 72).—Sabbatism no part of Christianity; a Discourse preached in Union Street Chapel, Glasgow, by JOHN TAYLOR (Glasg. 1842; 8vo, pp. 14). This was opposed by EDDOWES BOWMAN, in Arguments against the Divine Authority of the Sabbath, contained in a Discourse, &c., considered, and shewn to be inconclusive (Glasg. 1842;

*There is a pamphlet entitled An Essay on the Obligation of Christians to observe the Lord's Supper every Lord's-day, by J. M. CRAMP (Lond. 1824, 8vo, pp. 62).

8vo, pp. 14); to which Mr TAYLOR replied in The Sabbath; a Letter to Mr Eddowes Bowman (Glasg. 1842; 8vo, pp. 16).-Sunday no Sabbath, by CHARLES LARKIN (Newcastle, 1842; 8vo, pp. 53); answered in Remarks, &c., by WILLIAM TAYLOR (Tynemouth, 1842; 18mo, pp. 34).-Exercises, political and others, by Lieut.-Colonel (afterwards General) T. PERRONET THOMPSON, vol. v. pp. 103 sqq. (Lond. 1842).-Sermons, by THOMAS ARNOLD, D.D., Head Master of Rugby School (Lond. 1844; 3 vols. 8vo); Sermon xxii., On the Lord's Day, in vol. iii. p. 251. It is here taught that even if the patriarchs were commanded to keep the Sabbath, "a thing which we can never know," this would be no rule for us: for if the Law itself be done away in Christ, much more the things before the Law. The Sabbath, then, may have been necessary to the patriarchs; but it would not follow that it is needed now, when we have outgrown even the Law. But," proceeds Dr Arnold, "I must go somewhat further; for I know the real question is, Are we right in keeping the Sunday, or are we not right? The fourth commandment does not answer this question by itself; no, not though it be used every Sunday in our own service. For we do not keep the fourth commandment, seeing that we do not keep holy the seventh day, but the first; not the day on which God rested from all his works, but the day on which he raised up Jesus Christ from the dead. And as to altering a command of the Law, he must know little of the obedience which the Law requires, who could think that men might alter it at their discretion. Further, if we look into the Catechism of our own Church, we shall find the question asked of the child, 'What dost thou chiefly learn by these commandments?' and the answer is, 'I learn two things; my duty towards God, and my duty towards my neighbour.' Now it is clear that the duty towards God is learned from the four first commandments; the duty towards our neighbour, from the six last. The question then goes on-What is thy duty towards God?' or, in other words, What is the lesson taught by the four first commandments? And the answer, as we may all remember, says not one word of keeping the Sabbath; it is not this, according to our Catechism, which we learn from the fourth commandment, but to worship him, to give him thanks, to put our whole trust in him, to honour his holy name and his word, and to serve him truly all the days of our life.' It does not then appear, merely from our reading the fourth commandment in our Church service, that we are obliged to keep it, without question, as the law of God to us, and to keep holy the seventh day, while we do, in fact, keep holy the first. All this, I think, is quite true; and yet we are bound to keep holy the Sunday; and it would be great wickedness or great folly to give up the observance of it. We are bound by the spirit of the fourth commandment, because we are not fit to do without it. God commanded his people, in the old times, to keep holy the Sabbath day. He commanded them this when they were very ignorant, and very worldly-minded; when, had he told them to worship him every day in the spirit, they would have

spent every day without worshipping him at all; their hearts were too hard for a devotion so pure. Now, God having given this command to his people, it is manifest, that so long as they are in the same state as when he gave it them, they are bound to keep it; so long as the same sickness remains, they will need the same remedy. It was intended that the Gospel should put us in a very different state, so that we should need the command no more. It was intended so, and St Paul hoped fully that it would be so; and therefore he writes to the Colossians, 'Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy 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.' Such were his hopes for his fellow Christians, and to show that God designed them to be free from the Law, the command, in its letter, was kept no more; the seventh day, the Jews' Sabbath, was no longer observed by Christians. But St Paul's hopes were disappointed, and the gracious designs of God were thwarted. The state of Christians was not changed; the old sickness was not thrown off; and therefore the old remedy was still needed. As, then, the change of the day from the seventh to the first shows us what God designed for us, shows us the heavenly liberty to which we were called; so the long and unvaried practice of the Church in keeping the first day holy, shows us their sad feeling and confession that they were not fit for that liberty; that the Law, which God would fain have loosed from off them, was still needed to be their schoolmaster." And if there be any so full of the spirit of Christ as not to need for himself the aid of carnal ordinances, yet, says Dr Arnold, the duty of not becoming a stumbling-block to the weaker brethren would bind him to observe the Lord's-day. Dr Arnold's views are further stated in several letters published in his Life by A. P. Stanley (Letter 66, to his Sister, June 11, 1833, 5th ed. vol. i. p. 364; and Letters 231-233, to W. L. Newton, Esq., Feb. 1840, vol. ii. p. 206). To Mr Newton he writes on the question about railway trains on Sunday: these he thinks should be fewer than on other days, but not wholly discontinued. For extracts and observations, see Hessey, pp. 12, 187, 191; and Cox, pp. 221, 281.—Feasts and Fasts: an Essay on the Rise, Progress, and present State of the Laws relating to Sundays and other Holidays, and Days of Fasting; with Notices of the Origin of those days, and of the Sittings and Vacations of the Courts; by EDWARD VANSITTART NEALE, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-law (Lond. 1845; 12mo, pp. 436).—A Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature, edited by JOHN KITTO, D.D. (2 vols. 8vo, Edin. 1845); two articles in vol. ii. on the Lord's Day and the Sabbath, by the Rev. BADEN POWELL, Savilian Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford.*-First Day Sabbath not of Divine Appointment; with the Opinions of Calvin, Luther, Belsham, Melancthon, Bar

*In the second edition of the Cyclopædia an article on the Sabbath, more accordant with the views of the Puritans, has been substituted for Mr Powell's.