by some, to be a part of the moral law; and of course to be of perpetual obligation. But the apostle, both to the Galatians and to the Hebrews, gives it another character; for he clearly makes it a shadow, and of course to cease when other shadows ceased. Heb. iv. 4, 10, 11.

“Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moons, or of the sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.” Col. ii. 16, 17. This single passage alone is sufficient to establish the position, that the particulars enumerated were parts of the ceremonial law, and not of perpetual obligation.

All that has been said on this subject, is intended to apply to the Jewish sabbath, or an observance of a portion of the ancient ceremonial law, on principles not warranted under the gospel dispensation.

And here the Society of Friends have always stopped. As a society, we have never objected to a day of rest—of relaxation from the business and cares of life, for the purpose of religious improvement. We know that the spirit of the world is apt to acquire an undue ascendancy over our affections; and were the ordinary business of life to engage our attention, in an uninterrupted train of occupation, the consequences would be extremely prejudicial to religious improvement and enjoyment. And as the mind requires abstraction, so the body requires relaxation: we require it for ourselves-we should observe it for those who have to perform the menial and laborious services for us; it is due also to the brute creation under our control. A day of rest, when, by common consent, the business of the world is suspended, is peculiarly favourable to the important object of social worship-without which, religious society would lack one of those connecting bonds, by which it is held together. For these, and other reasons which might be assigned, we freely concur in setting apart the first day of the week, as a day of rest and relaxation, to be devoted to public worship and religious improvement; without a superstitious veneration of one day above another, or supposing there is any inherent holiness in it.

I shall conclude by extracting from the writings of our Friends, at different periods, a statement of what the Society has believed and practised, in relation to this subject.

S

"We, not seeing any ground in scripture for it, cannot be so superstitious as to believe, that either the Jewish sabbath now continues, or that the first day of the week is the antitype thereof, or the true Christian sabbath, which with Calvin, we believe to have a more spiritual sense; and therefore we know no moral obligation by the fourth command, or elsewhere, to keep the first day of the week, more than any other, nor any inherent holiness in it. But, first, forasmuch as it is most necessary, that there be some time set apart for the saints to meet together to wait upon God; and, secondly, it is fit at some times that they be freed from their outward affairs; and, thirdly, reason and equity doth allow, that servants and beasts have some time allowed them, to be eased from their continual labour; and, fourthly, it ap pears that the apostles and primitive Christians did use the first day of the week for these purposes; we find ourselves sufficiently moved, from these causes, to do so also, without superstitiously straining the scriptures for another reason : which, that it is not there to be found, many Protestants, yea, Calvin himself, upon the fourth command, hath abundantly evinced. And though we therefore meet, and abstain from working on this day, yet doth not that hinder us from having meetings also for worship, at other times." Barclay's Apol. Prop. 11, § 4.

We, however, consider the setting apart of one day in seven, for cessation from business, and for religious services, no more than a reasonable duty; and we encourage the observance of it among our members. It has been our practice from the commencement of our religious Society; and although we do not consider the first, or any day of the week, as possessing a superior degree of holiness; yet we believe considerable advantages to religion and virtue arise, not only from a proper dedication and employment of it, but even from the imperfect observance, with which it is, on the whole, regarded." (Tuke's Principles, p. 132.)

66

But, as I have before observed, I am satisfied there is no particular holiness attached to one day more than another; yet if we were to lay aside the practice of setting apart one day in seven, no doubt the cause of religion would suffer by it. The Society therefore, although they do not believe that one day has any sacred preference to another, have never departed from the practice of other professors, in regard to the first day of the week." (Kersey's Treatise, p. 62.)

"In turning our attention to the state of the Society, as it has been now laid before us, the proper employment of the first day of the week, the day more particularly set apart for public worship, is a subject that has claimed our serious attention. It is no small privilege to be living in a country, where much regard is paid to this duty; and it highly becomes us to be careful that our example, in this respect, be consistent with the profession we make to the world. We desire that heads of families, and our younger friends also, may closely examine, whether they are sufficiently solicitous to improve that portion of this day, which is not allotted to the great duty of meeting with their friends for the purpose of divine worship. To those who are awakened to a due sense of the eternal interests of the soul—and O that this were the case with all !—we believe that these intervals have often proved times of much religious benefit. Many have derived great increase of strength, both at these and other times, from retiring to wait upon the Lord; from reading the holy scriptures with minds turned to their divine author, in desire that he would bless them to their comfort and edification; and from perusing the pious lives and experiences of those who have gone before them. But we avoid prescribing any precise line of conduct, believing that, if the attention be sincerely turned unto the Heavenly Shepherd, his preserving help and guidance will not be withheld." (London Epistle, 1817.)

The following extract of a letter of advice, from a meeting of the representatives of the Society, held in London, in the year 1751, will explain our reasons for giving the months and days of the week their proper numerical names, instead of those by which they are commonly called.

A brief account of the origin of the names of some months of the year, and of all the days of the week, now customarily and commonly used.

I. January was so called from Janus, an ancient king of Italy, whom heathenish superstition had deified; to whom a temple was built, and this month dedicated.

II. February was so called from Februa, a word denoting purgation by sacrifices; it being usual, in this month, for the priests of the heathen god Pan, to offer sacrifices, and perform certain rites; conducing, as was supposed, to the cleansing or purgation of the people.

III. March was so denominated from Mars, feigned to be the god of war, whom Romulus, founder of the Roman empire, pretended to be his father.

IV. April is generally supposed to derive its name from the Greek appellation of Venus, an imaginary goddess, worshipped also by the Romans.

V. May is said to have been so called from Maia, the mother of Mercury, another of their pretended ethnic deities, to whom, in this month, they paid their devotions.

VI. June is said to take its name from Juno, one of the supposed goddesses of the heathen.

VII. July, so called from Julius Cæsar, one of the Roman emperors, who gave his own name to this month, which before was called Quintilis, or the Fifth.

VIII. August, so named in honour of Augustus Cæsar, another of the Roman emperors. This month was before called Sextilis, or the Sixth.*

The other four months, namely, September, October, November, and December, still retain their numerical Latin names which, according to the late regulation of the calendar, will, for the future, be improperly applied. However, from the continued use of them hitherto, as well as from the practice of the Jews before the Babylonish captivity, it seemeth highly probable, that the method of distinguishing the months by their numerical order only, was the most ancient, as it is the most plain, simple, and rational.

As the idolatrous Romans thus gave names to several of the months, in honour of their pretended deities; so, the like idolatry prevailing among our Saxon ancestors, induced them to call the days of the week by the name of the idol, which, on that day, they peculiarly worshipped. Hence

The First day of the week was by them called Sunday, from their customary adoration of the Sun upon that day. The Second day of the week they called Monday, from their usual custom of worshipping the Moon on that day. The Third day of the week they named Tuesday, in honour of one of their idols, called Tuisco.

The Fourth day of the week was called Wednesday, from the appellation of Woden, another of their idols.

* Macrob. Saturn. lib. I. cap. 12.

+ See the scriptures to the time of Ezra.

The Fifth day of the week was called Thursday, from the name of an idol called Thor, to whom they paid their devotions upon that day.

The Sixth day of the week was termed Friday, from the name of Friga, an imaginary goddess by them worshipped. The Seventh day they styled Saturday, as is supposed from Saturn, or Seator, by them then worshipped.*

In the ages of popish superstition, not only the use of such heathenish names and customs was indulged, but also other unsound and unscriptural practices in religion, were invented and introduced. For, when the profession of the Christian religion became national, multitudes of the heathen priests, whose interest lay in the performance of rites, ceremonies, and sacrifices, embraced prevailing Christianity with selfish views; and laboured early, with too much success, to find employment for themselves, by imposing on the people a new set of ceremonies and sacrifices, bearing some resemblance to those, which, in their former state of heathenism, they had been accustomed to. From this corrupt source sprang the popish sacrifice of the mass, the celebration of which, at particular times, and on particular occasions, gave rise to the vulgar names of Michaelmas, Martinmas, Christmas, and the like.

Seeing, therefore, that these appellations and names of days, months, and times, are of an idolatrous or superstitious original, contrary to the divine command, the practice of good and holy men in former ages, and repugnant to the Christian testimony borne by our faithful friends and predecessors in the truth, for the sake of which they patiently endured many revilings; let neither the reproach of singularity, nor the specious reasonings of such as would evade the cross of Christ, turn you aside from the simplicity of the gospel; nor discourage you from keeping to the language of truth, in denominating the months and days according to the plain and scriptural way of expression: thereby following the example of our worthy elders, and coming up in a noble and honourable testimony against these, and all other remains of idolatry and superstition."

"From the Meeting for Sufferings in London,

the sixth day of the seventh month, 1751."

* See Verstegan and Sheringham.