53, Harper's edition.
I._What is the charge of the Definite Platform against the Augsburg Confession on this subject ?_ It is, that The Augsburg Confession "treats the Sabbath as a mere Jewish institution, and supposes it to be totally revoked whilst the propriety of our retaining the Lord's Day or Christian Sabbath as a day of religious worship, is supposed to rest only on the agreement of the churches for the convenience of general convocation.
II.

What ground does the Plea take?
It denies the position, and affirms the contrary, as above stated, while it supposes the Confession to object not to the divine institution and obligation of the Lord's Day, but to the corruptions which the Romish church had connected with it, and especially the idea that the observance of the Lord's Day was a meritorious work, which would secure our justification before God.
The observations of the Plea against the self-righteous abuse of the Sabbath are just and Christian, but do not affect the position of the Platform.

The author also intersperses other useful practical remarks, which we have not have room to quote.

The simple point of difference, of any moment, is that relating to the question whether our obligation to observe the Christian Sabbath rests on its appointment by God or by the church.

Indeed, it can scarcely be said that this question remains, for the author of the Plea, at the close of his discussion, virtually acknowledges the point affirmed by the Platform, when he says: "The Augsburg Confession, notwithstanding her definite assertion that the Christian Sabbath rests on _no special dictate of the Word of God_, maintains that by necessity, and by right, the _church_ instituted our Christian Sabbath, and we ought to keep it." P.34.To this we shall confine our proof.
III.