Страница 41 из 120
[178]
whatever they chose, and brutally abusing men, women, and chil-
dren. In some instances, public notices were posted, calling upon
those who desired to assist in breaking the windows and robbing
the houses of the Methodists to assemble at a given time and place.
These open violations of all law, human and divine, were allowed
to pass without a reprimand. A systematic persecution was carried
on against a people whose only fault was that of seeking to turn the
feet of si
Said John Wesley, referring to the charges against himself and
his associates: “Some allege that the doctrines of these men are
false, erroneous, and enthusiastic; that they are new and unheard-of
till of late; that they are Quakerism, fanaticism, popery. This whole
pretense has been already cut up by the roots, it having been shown
at large that every branch of this doctrine is the plain doctrine of
Scripture interpreted by our own church. Therefore it ca
false or erroneous, provided the Scripture be true.” “Others allege
that their doctrines are too strict; they make the way to Heaven too
narrow; and this is in truth the original objection, as it was almost the
only one for some time, and is secretly at the bottom of a thousand
more which appear in various forms. But do they make the way to
Heaven any narrower than our Lord and his apostles made it? Is
their doctrine stricter than that of the Bible? Consider only a few
plain texts: ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and
with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and
[179]
thy neighbor as thyself.’ [Luke 10:27.] ‘Every idle word that men
Later Reformers
117
shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of Judgment.’
[Matthew 12:36.] ‘Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.’ [1 Corinthians 10:31.]
“If their doctrine is stricter than this, they are to blame; but
you know in your conscience it is not. And who can be one jot
less strict without corrupting the word of God? Can any steward
of the mysteries of God be found faithful if he change any part of
that sacred deposition?—No; he can abate nothing; he can soften
nothing; he is constrained to declare to all men, I may not bring
down the Scriptures to your taste. You must come up to it, or perish
forever. The popular cry is, The uncharitableness of these men!
Uncharitable, are they? In what respect? Do they not feed the
hungry and clothe the naked? No; that is not the thing; they are not
wanting in this, but they are so uncharitable in judging; they think
none can be saved but those who are of their own way.”
How similar are the arguments urged against those who present
the truths of God’s word applicable to this time.
Among the reformers of the church an honorable place should
be given to those who stood in vindication of a truth generally ig-
nored, even by Protestants,—those who maintained the validity of
the fourth commandment, and the obligation of the Bible Sabbath.
When the Reformation swept back the darkness that had rested down
on all Christendom, Sabbath-keepers were brought to light in many
lands. No class of Christians have been treated with greater injustice
[180]
by popular historians than have those who honored the Sabbath.
They have been stigmatized as semi-Judaizers, or denounced as su-
perstitious and fanatical. The arguments which they presented from
the Scriptures in support of their faith were met as such arguments
are still met, with the cry, The Fathers, the Fathers! ancient tradition,
the authority of the church!
Luther and his co-laborers accomplished a noble work for God;
but, coming as they did from the Roman Church, having themselves
believed and advocated her doctrines, it was not to be expected
that they would discern all these errors. It was their work to break
the fetters of Rome, and to give the Bible to the world; yet there
were important truths which they failed to discover, and grave errors
which they did not renounce. Most of them continued to observe the
Sunday with other papal festivals. They did not, indeed, regard it as
118
The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4
possessing divine authority, but believed that it should be observed
as a generally accepted day of worship.
There were some among them, however, who honored the Sab-
bath of the fourth commandment. Such was the belief and practice
of Carlstadt, and there were others who united with him. John Frith,
who aided Tyndale in the translation of the Scriptures, and who was
martyred for his faith, thus states his views respecting the Sabbath:
“The Jews have the word of God for their Saturday, since it is the
seventh day, and they were commanded to keep the seventh day
solemn. And we have not the word of God for us, but rather against
us; for we keep not the seventh day, as the Jews do, but the first,
which is not commanded by God’s law.”
[181]
A hundred years later, John Trask acknowledged the obligation
of the true Sabbath, and employed voice and pen in its defense. He
was soon called to account by the persecuting power of the Church
of England. He declared the sufficiency of the Scriptures as a guide
for religious faith, and maintained that civil authorities should not
control the conscience in matters which concern salvation. He was
brought for trial before the infamous tribunal of the Star Chamber,
where a long discussion was held respecting the Sabbath. Trask
would not depart from the injunctions and commandments of God
to obey the commandments of men. He was therefore condemned,
and sentenced to be set upon the pillory, and thence to be publicly
whipped to the fleet, there to remain a prisoner. This cruel sentence
was executed, and after a time his spirit was broken. He endured his
sufferings in the prison for one year, and then recanted. Oh that he
had suffered on, and won a martyr’s crown!
The wife of Trask was also a Sabbath-keeper. She was declared,
even by her enemies, to be a woman endowed with many virtues
worthy the imitation of all Christians. She was a school-teacher
of acknowledged excellence, and was noted for her carefulness in
dealing with the poor. “This,” said her enemies, “she professed to do
out of conscience, as believing she must one day come to be judged
for all things done in the flesh. Therefore she resolved to go by the
safest rule, rather against than for her private interest.” Yet it was
declared that she possessed a spirit of strange, unparalleled obstinacy
in adhering to her own opinions, which spoiled her. In truth, she
[182]
chose to obey the word of God in preference to the traditions of