For this reason, if there were no other, the Christian will render all his occupations, even those of a religious character, as varied as possible ; in his reading, for example, he will vary works of a more directly religious or devotional character with religious biography and history, and the poetry and fiction of devout imagination. If spent by the Christian as it ought to be, in harmony with the joyous events it commemorates, or the primitive traditions of the church, the day will certainly not be one of ascetic gloom or irksome constraint.
In the preceding remarks we have confined ourselves to the question as to what the Lord's day ' is, and what sort of celebration it may be sup posed to involve on the part of him who acknow ledges the divine authority of the N. T., judging from the evidence that can be adduced from the N. T. itself, or from primitive practice as inter preting it. If it be asked, What in this matter is required from those who are not in any sense Christians ? it must be replied, Nothing at all.' If it be further asked, Has not then the legislature the right to enjoin and enforce the observance of thc day on all classes of the community ? we answer, If it be an observance in any sense religious, it has no more right than to compel anybody to go to church or chapel, or to say his praycrs, or read his Bible ; and as all such rights are now distinctly re nounced by the legislature, so, in fact, is the right of enforcing the religious observances of the day. But, on the other hand, if it be asked whether it is not competent to the legislature to compel all classes of the community to abstain from their ordinary occupations, and to suspend all public business which is not necessary on that day—that is, to proclaim certain clays of rest and relaxation— We answer, It is ; but not on religious grounds ; not therefore to enforce the celebration of the day because it is the Lord's day.' If it can do that, it might as consistently attempt (as it used to do) a great deal more. Assuredly it cannot plead any, the slightest authority, from the statute-book of the N. T. for enforcing the observance of the Lord's day ' on the public generally. It is com petent, no doubt, on the part of our own or of any legislature, to take every seventh or every tenth day for the purpose of 'rest,' and on the general grounds of necessity and expediency (which prove some such days to be essential to a nation's welfare), to deter mine that on these days the ordinary toils of life and the turmoil of business in our streets, markets, and public offices shall cease. It may take any
days already fixed by custom for this purpose, or change those already fixed, and adopt others. If it be wise, indeed, it will do as our legislature actually does—take those days which public cus tom or religious reverence has already fixed upon for these very purposes, though not for these exclusively ; for otherwise the holidays ' would become too frequent. Among ourselves, for ex ample, the legislature, unless bereft of common sense, would never forget, in fixing such days, to take into consideration that the great bulk of the people are Christians, and will observe the Lord's day as a day of 'rest' (though not for that end alone), whether the legislature sanctions this or any other. And since two days of rest in seven would be too frequent, it would be obviously expedient that the legislature should adopt this day in pre ference to another, simply because, in point of fact, it is already set apart to attain the same object, though those who observe it contemplate other objects besides. Similarly, if the great bulk of a community were Jews, not therefore living under a foreign government, it would be as obviously wise to fix on the seventh day. But while conceding to any legislature the right to fix periodic suspension of all ordinary business and servile ' work, in obedience to one of its first and most vital duties,— that of providing the periodic recreation which all history and experience show to be necessary to the health and wellbeing of the community,—we deny that it has the right to enact any law on the sub ject which shall go beyond this end ; nor probably will governments in general ever be able to do all that they legitimately might, even within these re stricted limits, unchallenged or uncensured.
Whether we look at the civil or religious welfare of the nation, we are most anxious that the above view should prevail. Until it does, Christianity will never cease to be libelled and calumniated as intruding beyond its sphere, and as infringing on religious liberty'. Any, the most moderate intefer ence with individual freedom, the most moderate attempts to enforce the law of the public rest,' will be apt to be charged as an invasion of civil rights, and an act of persecution.* The conse quence is, that a clear, most legitimate, and bene ficial exercise of the civil right of the legislature (disguised by its being pressed on purely religious grounds) is questioned or denied, which otherwise would be readily conceded.