idual and
'supposes it must be all right, as every one seems to do it'; this
congregation follows that {152} congregation in adopting a popular
practice, without its real basis and justification being considered.
But fashion and the influence of members is a great danger in religion.
'Let every man be fully assured in his own mind.' 'Whatever is not of
faith is sin[27].'

2. Plainly, when St. Paul wrote his epistles, there was no observance
of a Sabbath obligatory upon Christians[28]. But was there none of
Sunday? 'The first day of the week' was already 'the Lord's day,' so
far as that Christians who could not meet to 'break the bread' every
day, met on that day specially to commemorate the death of their risen
Lord till He should come again[29]. It was already sufficiently
distinctive for St. Paul to name it as the appropriate day for laying
by alms for the poor[30]. But these special observances of it were not
obligatory. Christians, when they could meet every day, might make
their eucharist every day. No such observance of Sunday was yet
enjoined as was incompatible with regarding {153} all days of the week
alike. Nothing less than this can satisfy St. Paul's words. In
principle, as Bishop Lightfoot said[31], 'the kingdom of Christ has no
sacred days or seasons, because every time alike is holy.'

Yet the bishop adds, 'appointed days are indispensable to her
efficiency.' This was soon found to be the case. Probably before the
end of the first century, the _Didache_ mentions not only the
observance of Sunday by the eucharistic service, but the observance
also of the Wednesday and Friday fasts. Clement, about the same date,
strongly emphasizes the principle of order in place and time, as still
belonging to Christian worship. 'They, therefore, that make their
offering at the appointed seasons are acceptable and blessed.' The
Canons of Hippolytus show that by the end of the second century there
must have been a great development of ecclesiastical regulations, so
far restraining the individual {154} liberty of the earliest days, and
that, as far as we know, without protest or sense of alarm. Nor need
St. Paul have been in opposition to such church rules. The spirit of
regulation is strong in him[32]. On the other hand, there is no doubt
that the Church has not generally, one might say has hardly ever, been
conscious, as St. Paul was, of the danger of religious regulations as
such. It is so much easier