First, then, the physical nature of man requires the Sabbath.

The fact is clearly established, that both the body and mind of men, demand more relaxation than the night affords them. Protracted toil, continued without cessation beyond six days, detracts from the vigor and comfort of the body, and wears it out, prematurely. The necessity of food and drink is not more clearly attested by nature itself, than that of a weekly rest for man. body of facts, attesting the accuracy of this position, is elsewhere found in this work. And what is this, but the attestation of nature, and of God, in behalf of the Sabbath?

So also man's moral nature needs the Sabbath.

A

This part of our original constitution, equally with the former, has claims and wants, which can be met only by keeping the Sabbath. Indeed, these interests are infinitely higher and more enduring. They belong to our immortality. To meet this class of interests is the great purpose of redemption. Christ died, and angels watch, and the whole plan of Gospel grace is adopted, that man's moral nature may be so cultivated, as to fit him for his appropriate enjoyment here and hereafter. But how shall these arrangements be made available—this inestimable object be secured? By plunging into the bottomless abyss of worldly avocations, and never withdrawing the mind, from year to year, from youth to old age, except at casual intervals? The very supposition is incredible. Under such circumstances all man's moral interests, his eternal wellbeing, must of necessity be overlooked. Those minds which are most deeply imbued with religious principle find it difficult, even with the help of the Sabbath, to keep in check the rising spirit of worldliness. Take that Sabbath away, and they even might tremble for the safety of all their moral and religious interests. What then must be the effect on minds wholly devoted to the world? It would be, it must be, the utter sacrifice of those mighty interests, which God's own Son suffered and died to secure. Even the foresight of a man, would show that to carry out the design of Redemption, just such an institution as the Sabbath was indispensable. Would not God then institute it? He surely would, He has: "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy."

And whatsoever observances God enjoins, are positively needful to the physical and moral good of mankind. This we have seen to be true of marriage. It is equally true of them all. He made man, and knew what laws he needed. As the eye is adjusted to the laws of light; as the digestive system is adapted to the nature of food; so the whole nature of man is adjusted to the requisitions of God's Law.

These remarks apply as clearly to the law of the Sabbath, as to the law of marriage. Both were provided to meet the emergency of man's fallen condition. Before man was made, it was known in the counsels of eternity that he would apostatize, and that some powerful instrumentalities must be employed for his recovery. In view of the event thus foreseen, and the necessity thus created, God has so made man, that not only the voice of law, but of self-interest; not only authority, but nature shall command him to obedience.

The goodness of God, in relation particularly to the Sabbath, is wonderfully manifest. It is as if He had said: "I know that man will strongly incline to neglect the things which belong to his peace, and to eternity. The influence of the world, if not in some way greatly interrupted, will absorb every thought. To hold in check this tendency, to force, if possible, his thoughts away from earth, occasionally at least, I will ordain the holy Sabbath. And I will so make man, that his whole physical, social, and moral nature shall invite him to repose, just so much of his time, as the necessity of his condition, and my Law, founded on that necessity, require him to rest. I will give him the Sabbath. And I will so constitute him that while he must seek the relaxation of the body, he may seek the salvation of the soul. And lest he forget my Sabbath and eternity, I will write the necessity for their remembrance on the very frailty of his nature. I will make obedience necessary for this world as well as the next. Godliness shall be gain to him in every respect." This would not create such physical necessity as to destroy man's free agency, though his nature is perpetually calling on him to obey this law. It is an important question, pertaining to this subject; When was the Sabbath instituted? If it was made for man, and is so wonderfully adjusted to his whole nature, the inference seems almost irresistible, from this consideration only, that it was given in Eden.

If not, where was it given? Can any other period be assigned for its institution, so well authenticated, as this is in the first of Genesis? Was it at Sinai? Most assuredly not. All the commands of the Moral Law, there given, relate either to moral beings, or things of a moral nature already, in existence. God and man are the moral beings there introduced. The Sabbath is an institution of a moral nature, and must therefore have had a previous existence. No new moral obligations were there originated; no new moral acts were there required. In the ceremonial law many new duties were enjoined. The case admitted this. New circumstances, involving new duties, had sprung up. In reference to these, new and original legislation could take place. "If thou shalt make an altar of earth." "Three times shalt thou keep a feast unto me in a year." The first is merely a supposition, referring to a contingency that might arise, viz., they might build "an altar of earth." The second was a command to keep three annual feasts. These were new injunctions, and became obligatory from that time, because their new circumstances rendered that a duty to them, then, which had not been so before. There was no inherent and universal obligation to do these things, as is the case with a moral law. Nor are these duties spoken of in terms like those used in reference to the Sabbath. It was not the altar, the feast; as if speaking of something already existing, and to all familiar. But when the law of the Sabbath is proclaimed, the language used is entirely different. It is not a new enactment: no Sabbath was instituted at Sinai. The Law simply enjoins-not the origination of something new, like the ceremonial feasts, but the observance of what was old, and already understood. The chief magistrate of a nation may find it requisite, for particular reasons, to issue a proclamation, enjoining the observance of certain laws. And he might use the very form of expression used at Sinai, with reference to the Sabbath: "Remember and observe a particular law." Who would imagine that such language implied that no such law existed until then? The very phraseology assumes its pre-existence. So does the language of the moral law imply the pre-existence of the Sabbath. "Remember" what? Something they never until then had heard of, and consequently till they had time to forget it, could not "remember?" Most certainly not. They must then, if such

language was at all proper, have perfectly understood that there was a holy Sabbath. All that was then needed was to republish that law, and enjoin on the Jewish people, not the establishment of a new, but the observance of an old institution.

66

Should it be said, that if the Sabbath was not given at Sinai, it was at the first fall of manna-we may reply, that of this there is no proof, and no probability. The language of Moses, in respect to the Sabbath, at that time, clearly implies that it was not a new, but a pre-existing institution, equally with the language used in the ten commandments: "To-morrow is the rest of the holy. Sabbath to the Lord thy God." It is not a Sabbath,” but “the Sabbath.” "The Lord hath said," not " the Lord now says." The surprise of the people, on seeing twice as much manna fall on the sixth day as on others, was because it was unexpected. As they knew it could not be preserved from one day to another, they of course expected it would fall on the Sabbath, as at other times. The whole history shows that the Sabbath was not then instituted, but only recognized and honored of God, by a two-fold miracle, wrought to guard it against profanation.

When, then, was it instituted? When but in Eden, and at the very beginning of time. The prevailing silence of the Scriptures, together with the manner in which the Sabbath and the marriage institution are often alluded to, confirms this hypothesis. If, on the very threshold of creation, God had enacted and promulged them, and had also inscribed them on man's original constitution, and they were therefore already familiar to the Hebrew race as Heaven's own appointed ordinances, then, and only on that supposition, is the Scripture method of only adverting to those institutions natural. The whole subject being perfectly understood, and no one questioning that God had from the beginning appointed a Sabbath, it would be superfluous to re-enact its observance. It might become important to call attention to it, and to write it, to enjoin upon the people to remember it, and keep it holy. And while on this theory the language of Scripture is perfectly natural, on any other it is incapable of any satisfactory explanation. It was doubtless given at the beginning, and Sinai only witnessed its republication.

But let us examine a little more minutely the precepts of the decalogue. The first three prohibit certain things in relation to

"Re

God, the Lawgiver. The fourth is addressed to man: member the Sabbath day to keep it holy." Here the institution is first particularized as already existing: it is "the Sabbath day." Then follow specific enactments to secure its observance : "Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work:" so as to be prepared for the seventh. The remaining six refer to duties which men everywhere, and in all ages, were bound to perform toward each other; duties the obligation of which did not originate then, nor did those enjoined toward God. That obligation existed always. It grew out of the very nature and relations of man: not of the Jews, but of all men, in all ages. With what propriety, then, could the Sabbath alone be supposed to be o. recent origin, or limited obligation, while all the other precepts are universal? Besides, as if to guard against the possibility of such an hypothesis, the Sabbath is spoken of explicitly-as if, however ignorant men might be of every other duty, they already knew that this institution existed, there was no necessity for enjoining a day of rest, but only of enforcing the remembrance of one which they already knew to have been ordained.

From these considerations, it is obvious that the Sabbath is not peculiar to any dispensation, patriarchal, Jewish, or Christian. It is older than either, and belongs to the race. It was "made for man." It derives none of its authority from either, as such; they rather have been dependent upon its influence for their entire efficiency and support. It has had, therefore, the approbation of good men, not only in the times of Moses, but before and since: and the pious upon earth will continue, with religious veneration, to cherish it, till they shall enter upon that eternal Sabbath, of which it is both the type and the preparative.

It is certainly no virtue in man that he is so constituted as to need the rest of every seventh day. Nor is it any sin in him that he is so constituted that he cannot, without detriment, feed on poison. These are arrangements which he did not originate, and for whose existence he has no responsibility. But finding such a constitution of things already established, he is bound to fall in with it, as expressing the will of God. Indeed, a kind o. necessity is thus created for a compliance with the divine law. True virtue, however, consists not so much in yielding to those arrangements, because we suffer for it if we do not, as in a cheerful acquiescence in them, because they are the will of God, thus