THE ANNIVERSARY OF A DEATH DAY

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 59, 27 March 1907, Page 3

THE ANNIVERSARY OF A DEATH DAY

M\» (Uo i:auov, Sir.- 1 •i ■ i■ 1 lor in your paper today riling the observance (if Friday next as si holy day an the anniversary day of Christ's death. I would ask ■"Colonial" or other of your readers, who may be superstitious enough to belie w it in wo, whether they ever noticed that, although Cood Friday, as it is callM, falls this year on 2!) th March, lasi year it was on l;Uh April, which of these is correct, or is either of them if We do not so keep the anniversary of our birth. Mine this year is on the 2(Hh of March, and has beeu so for the past "»:{ years, but I do not remember if it ever fell on a (Jood Friday before. I believe that the death bv crucifixion took place on a Friday, that He lay in the grave during Saturday (the -lewisli Sabbath), and rose again f »n the first, day of the week, generally known as Sunday. The day as is known has been handeii down from the ••fathers/'' and conies from heathen mythology, the variableness of the time being tine to the particular date of the new moon ;t this period. In conclusion, f would ask '•"Colonial." "What is Christ to vou?'' lie is my Saviour and Lord; yet 1 do not observe Friday as a holy daw— 1 am, etc., C. J. MACKIH. Waitara. 24.

To the Editor. Sir,- Permit me to say that, for my part, if .lesus of Nazareth had been a spiritual hero and only one of such martyrs as Savonarola or Latimer, 1 should regard the anniversary of the crucifixion of Christ as a holy day, and not a mere holiday, for to keep it sis a day for fun and frolic were foolish, like a carousal on the tomb of a living friend. Sir, we Cliristi.iiis adopt more thnu the Jewish 'faith of Christ, because His teachings

were tlio (lOSjX'l or good news to a \o>i world. The (iospel and tin* Cross have brought u* morn! u:i;l religious life. Sir, Christ did not "deny th.it 11? was good*' in His au-.wer l«i the rich. youny ruler, perhaps a -K 1 wish churchwarden. de.-.ns asserted llis own mora! purity when 11' said, "Who convicteth Me of sin? I and My Father are one; the prince of Ihis world, viz.. the devil, conieth and findeth nothing in .Me!'' Scripture s.aith that Jesus was holy, harmless, and separate from dinners. '1 he C.'ulurion said hefoie the cross, ••Truly this was a righteous Man!" What, then, did the Saviour mean when He said to the young nmn, "Why eallest Mo good ' There is none g»,od but one: that is Coil.'' For .lestis did not deny His spotless purity, nor His diviniiy. lie referred to the young man's siiying "(lood Master," etc. Tlr young rnjcr v/a.i an unconscious Pharisee seemingly, and the reply of desu* g:U'e the youth a genCi" rebuke for his notions of "periVvl gladness/' according to the hw. The voting man was blinded in regard to his own inner self. His refusal to fellow Chri-t. proved that, The Saviour surety meant this, viz.: "Why do yon call Me go: d? You do not know Me. if thru wilt i.e perfect keep the commandments.'-' Kul that keeper of the Law from his youth proved that his goodness was small and shadow like his words. "Cood MumUm'" e'.e. That and hi''. Mieeling seem to hive been compliments meaning little. Sir, Jesus did not '"d-"ny that lie was good," but as He said at another time, "Whatsoever the l'athcr doth, the Son doetn likewise." Neither Jesus nor the apostles denied the spotless character of our Saviour. —I am, etc., l'\ LARKINS.