TIME
LOST:
0LD
STYLE
AND
NEW
STYLE.
A
CORRESPONDENT
writes
us,
wishing
some
one
to
tell
about
‘the
change
from
Old
to
New
Style.”
The
writer
says
:
“We
ave
told
by
some
of
the
wise
men
of
our
Bible
Class,
that
we
cannot
know
to
any
certainty
about
the
day
of
the
week
as
regards
the
Sabbath,
on
uceount
of
the
many
chang-
es
wid
loss
of
time:
and
mentions
particularly
the
so-eall-
ed
change
from
Old
to
New
Style,
as
the
prominent
objection
that
is
urged
by
these
¢
wise
men’
against
a
definite
day
for
the
Sabbath.
As
this
old
objection
is
still
urged
against
our
view
of
the
Sabbath,
by
many,
not
only
of
the
no-Sabbath
school,
but
also
by
first-day
advocates,
1
will
give
it
a
passing
notice.
The
claim
is,
that
by
the
change
in
question,
a
‘loss
of
time”
is
involved,
and
consequently
we
have
not
sufficient
da-
ta
to
determine
a
definite
day
for
the
Sabbath.
Those
who
advocate
the
no-Sabbath
theory,
have
nothing
to
Jose
in
making
this
claim:
but
it
scems
not
a
little
strange
that
men
who
are
accredited
©
wise,”
and
who
have
so
many
weighty
arguments
at
hand
in
favor
of
the
first
day
as
the
only
true
Sabbath,
should
be
so
blind
as
to
raise
objections
against
the
seventh
day,
which
ave
equally
crushing,
and
alike
fatal
to
their
own
theory.
But
so
it
is.
Satan,
that
he
may
better
accomplish
his
pur-
pose,
is
careful
not
to
disclose
to
those
whom
he
instigates
to
fight
against
the
truth,
the
necessity
of
covering
their
own
re-
treat,
and
seldom
warns
them
against
the
danger
of
hazarding
their
own
position.
Many,
who
so
gravely
urge
this
objec-
tion
against
the
seventh
day,
are,
nevertheless,
great
sticklers
for
the
first
day
as
the
true
Sabbath.
Why
?
Because,
say
they,
the
Saviour
rose
from
the
dead
or
that
day.
«This
is
the
day
which
the
Lord
hath
made,”
&e.
How
soon
they
forget
the
fact
(7)
that
was
so
fresh
and
vivid
in
their
minds
when
taking
position
against
the
seventh
day!
Thoughts
of
Oll
Style,
or
New
Style,
or
+
loss
of
time,”
never
so
much
as
come
into
their
minds
when
the
ques-
tion
of
first-day
isatissue!
Surely
our
first-day
friends
should
not
raise
an
issue
with
ng
on
this
deinite-day
question,
1f
they
can
determine
a
definite
day
for
the
Sabbath,
so
enn
we.
If
they
can
identify
the
girst
day
of
the
week
on
which
the
Saviour
vose
from
the
dead,
as
they
claim
to
do,
then
surely
we
can
identity
the
seventh
hy
the
same
rule.
Sut
what
about
Ol
Style
and
New
Style?
Tow
is
the
Sih-
bath
affected
thereby?
“1
answer,
Not
at
all.
Let
us
for
a
moment,
consider
the
facts:
OLD
AND
NEW
STYLE.
The
Julian
Calendar,
so
called,
or
that
which
was
estab-
lished
by
Julius
Cesar,
by
which
every
fourth
year
was
made
to
consist
of
366
days,
and
the
other
years
of
865
days,
is
called
Old
Style.
By
this
mode
of
computation,
the
years
were
made
to
average
something
over
eleven
minutes
too
much
;
so
that
in
the
course
of
a
few
centuries
there
would
be
a
per-
ceptible
disarrangement
of
the
equinoxes;
i.
e.,
the
sun
would
actually
arrive
at
an
equinoctial
point
several
days,
perhaps,
before
the
time
indicated
by
the
day
of
the
month
on
which
it
should
annually
recur.
Tt
will
be
seen
that
if
such
a
mode
of
computation
were
to
be
continued,
a
complete
displacement
of
the
seasons
of
the
year
would
eventually
be
wrought.
Pope
Gregory
XIII,
4.
».
1582,
in
order
to
correct
the
Equinoxes
at
that
time,
or
to
bring
back
the
Vernal
Equinox
to
the
same
day
as
at
the
Council
of
Nice,
A.
D.
325,
found
it
necessary
to
retrench
ten
days.
He
accordingly
retrenched
that
number
of
days
in
October,
A.
.
1582,
which
was
done
by
simply
calling
the
fifth
day
of
the
month
the
fifteenth.
This
reformation
of
the
Julian
Calendar
by
Pope
Gregory
was
adopted
in
Great
Britain
by
act
of
Parliament,
a.
».
1751,
at
which
time
it
was
necessary
to
retrench
eleven
days.
Ac-
cordingly
eleven
days
were
retrenched
in
the
month
of
Sep-
tember
in
the
following
year,
simply
by
reckoning
the
third
day
as
the
fourteenth.
This
method
(hy
which
every
year
di-
visible
by
4,
unless
it
he
divisible
hy
100,
without
being
di-
visible
by
400,
lias
366
days,
and
all
other
years
365
days)
is
what
is
called
New
Style.
By
reckoning
according
to
this
in-
genious
mole,
there
can
never
occur
any
perceptible
disar-
rangement
of
the
Equinoxes,
as
would
continually
oceur
un-
der
the
former
Calendar,
or
Old
Style.
We
will
now
consider
the
effect
of
the
change
in
question
with
reference
to
the
Sabbath.
Query.
Does
the
simple
act
of
calling
the
third
day
of
September
the
fourteenth
day—and
thereby
retrenching
eleven
days
in
that
month—make
any
change
whatever
in
the
days
of
the
week
?
‘Suppose
tlie
third
day
of
September
fell
on
Friday,
the
sixth
day
of
the
week,
would
it
not
still
be
Friday,
the
sixth
day
of
the
week,
though
it
be
called
by
act
of
Parliament
the
fourteenth
day
of
the
month?
And
would
not
the
next
day
be
the
seventh
day
of
the
week
us
really
as
though
no
such
retrenchment
had
been
made
?
Most
assuredly
it
would.
And
no
act
of
Parliament
would
suffice
to
convince
the
most
simple-minded
person
that
his
reckoning
was
wrong
;
or
the
faithful
Sabbath-keeper
that
the
earth
in
her
diurnal
revolutions
had
made
a
mistake
in
measuring
off
to
him
the
true
Sabbath.
I
care
not
if
there
be
a
change
like
that
from
Old
to
New
Style,
as
often
as
every
new
moon,
the
Sabbath
cannot
be
affected
thereby.
The