Referendum, but no Recall

     Here in Nova Scotia, the new conservative government is pushing for a referendum on whether to allow stores and businesses to open on Sunday.  The province is the last holdout, it seems; restaurants and hotels and other accommodations for the bodily needs of human beings are allowed to open, but almost everything else (Wal-Mart, for one notable example) remains closed.  Now the conservatives, who are the heads of a new plurality government in the legislative assembly in Halifax (Canada has no separation of the executive from the legislative branches), are clearly being motivated by economic worries: the province is losing population as young people move out to the oil sands of Alberta and other places where work is plentiful.

     Still, their position is not really a conservative one, and that fact was brought home to me by a member of the Liberal party, in an editiorial in what is still called a newspaper (they are as awful up here as they are in the states).  The move to repeal this last pale blue law failed a couple of years ago, as a majority of Nova Scotians accepted the argument that the repeal would fundamentally alter a way of life that they treasured.  They did not argue from the Ten Commandments, but reasoned that there ought to be one day a week set aside for rest, so that people could visit one another and enjoy something of a community.  To see more clearly what they meant, perform a simple thought experiment: imagine your home state with not only blue laws for Sunday, but for nighttime too, and imagine that there is no television on Sunday either.  People would have to entertain themselves, and they might just do that by, of all things, going outside, visting their neighbors, playing a ballgame, and so forth.  Not that such things go on regularly in Nova Scotia -- the ballfields are depressingly vacant, because the children are kept in school too long, the vacation is much too short, and there are not that many children anyway -- but a vital remnant of community life is still here, and the people rightly treasure it.

     The true conservative argument, applicable to more than a blue law in Nova Scotia, is that laws and customs are so intertwined with a way of life that we alter them at the risk of losing many good things we take for granted.  That does not mean they should never be altered, or that we should always reject the slow organic change that occurs in customs whether we like it or not.  It does mean that true statesmanship must be farsighted enough to see at least a few of the unintended consequences of our actions.  And some changes are, practically speaking, irrevocable; a society that embraces them will never return; the return can come only after the society in question has ceased to exist.  The repeal of a blue law is a minor example of a change that, once enacted, cannot be retracted.  Other changes are not so minor: if you decide to legalize the pill, for instance, you must understand that you are choosing a fundamentally different society from the one you have been used to.  That may be good or bad -- readers here know that I believe it to be unmitigatedly bad -- but, good or bad, it will involve a change that is radical and, as long as the society survives, irrevocable.

     That being the case, the true statesman will conduct the political debate accordingly.  We cannot talk about Wal-Mart`s right to stay open on Sunday, when that right will change the very society that Wal-Mart purports to serve.  We must debate rather what a seemingly innocent change will do to the struggling family owned businesses that do not open on Sunday, or what all-hour every-day employment does to the family and the community.  The innovators have to win their case on the benefits of the change for other people.  Similarly, no individual can claim the right to alter the fundamental social conditions for everybody else around him; that is a contradiction in terms.  But that is what we have allowed technocrats, developers, and sexual innovators to do.

Comments

[Chris Roberts]

Here in the States ballgames have taken on so much of a life of their own, I wish the fields were empty more than they are! Too many schedules are driven by the the ballgame. The game itself is no longer a game, it's no longer a place for children to enjoy themselves and engage in healthy competition. The sports are now engaged in for performance and success, not for enjoyment and recreation. Nothing is wrong with a team wanting to win; there is something wrong with putting victory as the chief motivator.

[Bill R]

Dr. Esolen, I suspect that blue laws are possible only in a community or area that still honors its rural roots. Increased urbanization has swept most of them away.

But if the state or community will not enforce a blue law, there is still the question of how we will honor the Sabbath and keep it holy. Ought we to refrain from patronizing all businesses (other than in the case of emergencies) on a Sunday, even if the state will not provide a substitute for personal discipline?

[GL]

But if the state or community will not enforce a blue law, there is still the question of how we will honor the Sabbath and keep it holy. Ought we to refrain from patronizing all businesses (other than in the case of emergencies) on a Sunday, even if the state will not provide a substitute for personal discipline?

Bill,

I think we should refrain from patronizing businesses on Sundays except in cases of emergency-- but I do. Following what is nearly a Baptist Tradition (capital "T"), we often go out for lunch on Sunday. Beginning this year, we have begun to avoid Sunday lunches out most Sundays, but old habits are hard to break and some days we slip back into old ways. It seems clear to me, however, that just as it is a sin to work on Sundays if it can be avoided, it is a sin to cause others to do unnecessary work.

My eating out on Sundays, in fact, contributes to the very changes in society that I dislike. When I was a young boy, most businesses were closed on Sundays and Sundays were a lot less hectic than they are today. It gave time for extended family to be together and that time produced many of the fond memories I have of my grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins. Even though my children's grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins live at least three hours away, the folks who are working because I am buying might have such family close by to visit if people like me would stop doing so.

Tony,

I hate it when my own sins and their consequences are highlighted. My father-in-law says that this is when the preacher stops preaching and starts meddling. ;-)

[Bill R]

GL, that is my situation as well, and I find it troubling--more troubling in fact than the demise of the blue laws, for now it confronts my own sense of responsibility! I've weaned myself from shopping on a Sunday, but oh, those post-church lunches!

[Juli]

Well, how about if you go out to eat on Sunday but only to restaurants staffed (on those days at least) only by devout Jews and Muslims (who have their Saturdays and/or Fridays off)?

[Bill R]

Juli, there's a thought! Except that the Sabbath is, as I understand it, made for man--all men, and not just for Christians.

[John]

I find your contradictions highly amusing.
On the one hand you champion adolescent predatory Darwinist capitalism which is in the process of quite literally reducing everything to rubble. Capitalism having its origins in the drive to total power and control at the root of the entire western "cultural" project.

And then you complain about the inevitable loss of human community and culture!

These two profoundly conservative essays/references address the origins and consequences of the disintegrative process. And the only possible solution.

1. www.dabase.net/coopcomm.htm

2. www.cotedea.com/fundamentals/index.html

Plus an essay re the origins & consequences of the power/control drive.

3. www.dabase.net/spacetim.htm

[Juli]

Except that the Sabbath is, as I understand it, made for man--all men, and not just for Christians.

Sure, but isn't Saturday still the Sabbath, and Sunday the Lord's Day?

[Bill R]

"Sure, but isn't Saturday still the Sabbath, and Sunday the Lord's Day?"

Juli, your point being...?

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>Sure, but isn't Saturday still the Sabbath, and Sunday the Lord's Day?"

Juli, your point being...?<<<

Juli raises an interesting point. For the early Christians, Saturday was indeed the Sabbath and was meant to be observed by a day of rest. Sunday, on the other hand, was the Lord's Day, the Eighth Day that completes the new creation, the day on which the Eucharist was celebrated. This "Eighth Day" theology is still maintained in the liturgical cycles of the Eastern Churches (Catholic, Orthodox, Oriental and Assyrian).

It is not at all clear that, until such time as Constantine actually declared Sunday to be an official day of rest within the Roman Empire that Christians in fact rested on Sundays, other than taking time off to attend the Eucharist. So, whatever rationale one wants to use to declare Sunday a day of rest, calling it "the Sabbath".

Besides which, why should businesses owned by Jews, Muslims, Hindus or other non-Christians be forced to close on Sunday, while not being given any similar dispensation for their own particular days of rest or worship? If the government is supposed to be "neutral" with regard to religion, then "blue laws" must also be neutral. Rather than mandating one particular day as a day of rest, the law should stipulate only that businesses can (with a few exceptions) only be open for six days a week. This would then accommodate all faiths and non-faiths equally. Christians, being the overwhelming majority, would close on Sunday. Jews, closing on Saturday, would be able to provide services on Sunday. Muslims, closed on Fridays, would be open on the other two days. Atheists, animists, polytheists, neo-pagans and the like can pick and choose.

[firinnteine]

I'm glad the Sabbath/Lord's Day distinction was pointed out. Is it a sin to work on Sunday? Well, "One man esteems one day higher, another esteems all days alike; let each be convinced in his own mind." (Romans... 14? I'm paraphrasing from memory, but it's something like that.) We no longer live under the Law, but under grace -- which is much more difficult. Law said, "Do not work this day." Straightforward and easily understood, if sometimes hard to obey. Grace says "Do everything out of love" -- that is, the kind of love with which God has loved you. That is a great deal harder.

We have to discern, not a simple command, but a broader principle -- what is in fact best to help us be full human beings as God created us to be? What is healthiest for a society? I don't work on Sunday; and yet, I cannot condemn someone else for working on Sunday. Nevertheless, believing (as I do) that a day of rest is good for the soul, I should be cautious (more cautious, sad to say, than I usually am) about shopping on Sundays.

If people are skipping Church because "I have too much to do" -- at that point we raise more serious questions (and have, in my mind, much clearer answers). The "ox in the ditch" is only a plausible excuse if you didn't knowingly put it there....

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>If people are skipping Church because "I have too much to do" -- at that point we raise more serious questions (and have, in my mind, much clearer answers). The "ox in the ditch" is only a plausible excuse if you didn't knowingly put it there....<<<

Custom and the discipline of most Churches and ecclesial communities obligates us to attend divine worship--and especially the Eucharist--on Sunday, which is the Eucharistic day par excellence. But in fact, the fullness of Christian existence requires our entire lives to be lived "eucharistically"--as a continual sacrifice of praise to God who is the source of all blessings. The Fathers emphasized the importance of living the "liturgy outside of the liturgy", together with the importance of receiving the Eucharist. They placed a lot less emphasis on reserving the bulk of Sunday--or any day--for abstention from work.

[Juli]

Juli, your point being...?

Stuart made it for me (thanks!), while I was out running errands on, um, the Sabbath.

My suggestion about non-Christians working on Sunday was prompted by a memory of a Jewish bakery in Mpls (not sure if it still exists), which was run and staffed by gentiles on Saturdays. I've also noticed proportionately more Muslim employees (at least women w/head coverings) working on Sundays at some of our local supermarkets. The issue has come up in our household because my teenage daughter has her first part-time job, bagging groceries, and she just learned that the pay scale is higher on Sunday ...

[mclaugh]

It is not at all clear that, until such time as Constantine actually declared Sunday to be an official day of rest within the Roman Empire that Christians in fact rested on Sundays, other than taking time off to attend the Eucharist.

In fact, documentary evidence strongly suggests—if not proves—that the almost universal practice until well into the fifth century was for Christians to rest on the Sabbath and to observe the Lord's Day. (The Apostolic Constitution (IV century), for example, enjoins Christians to keep both days (7.23), and the fifth century church historians Sozomen and Socrates Scholasticus both affirm that in their day, Christians throughout the Empire kept both the Sabbath and the Lord's Day, except in Alexandria and Rome, which "on account of ancient tradition" (Sozoman) kept only the Lord's Day.

That Christians did, in fact, rest on the seventh day rather than the Lord's Day is also reflected in Canon 29 of the Council of Laodicea (AD 362-364), which attempts to suppress the practice by anathematizing those who rest on the seventh day as "judaizers." What is interesting, however, is that the Council does not mandate that Christians rest on the Lord's Day, only that they do so "if they can."

[Luthien]

Juli, The pay scale is higher on Sundays? That's interesting; is that a widespread practice? I do work some Sundays (Firinnteine, you *said* no condemning, I shall hold you to it), but the pay scale isn't higher; I do it because I work as a waitress in a retirement home, and if we aren't there, a lot of the residents wouldn't eat. Unfortunately, some jobs really are necessary 7 days a week. (It's Sunday evenings, not morning shift, which I work)

GL et al. If we should avoid causing others to work on sunday, then what should I, as an Orthodox Christian do about picking a day for my wedding? Orthodox weddings are really supposed to be on sundays, but they do cause an awful lot of work-even a very small wedding with a home reception would entail a lot of work that day for my mom, grandmother, dad, assorted other relatives, and probably me, too. I'm not trying to start an argument-the principle of what you said is sound-just wondering about that one practical thing.

[Bill R]

Juli, Stuart, and all, thanks very much for your points—all well taken and thoughtful. The last thing I’d want to be concerning the Lord’s Day, the Sabbath, or whatever we should call our Day of Rest, is a legalist. (So, OK, maybe those Sunday lunches aren’t so bad? ;-) But still, He came not to abolish the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them. So without becoming a legalist, or depending on the government, what is a wise way to fulfill our duty to remember the Sabbath and to keep it holy?

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>But still, He came not to abolish the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfill them. So without becoming a legalist, or depending on the government, what is a wise way to fulfill our duty to remember the Sabbath and to keep it holy?<<<

I'll try not to work on Saturdays, then.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>GL et al. If we should avoid causing others to work on sunday, then what should I, as an Orthodox Christian do about picking a day for my wedding? Orthodox weddings are really supposed to be on sundays, but they do cause an awful lot of work-even a very small wedding with a home reception would entail a lot of work that day for my mom, grandmother, dad, assorted other relatives, and probably me, too. I'm not trying to start an argument-the principle of what you said is sound-just wondering about that one practical thing.<<<

Having spent more than my share of Sundays singing at weddings and sometimes even helping with the kitchen work at the reception, I have to say I am very sympathetic to Chrysostom's advice that married couples limit their post-Crowning celebrations to a sober dinner party of the immediate family and the celebrating priest. A lot less work and stress all around.

Of course, nobody listened to the Golden Tongued then, and I doubt they will follow his advice now.

[David Gray]

>I'll try not to work on Saturdays, then.

And most Christians will try not to on Sundays...

[Luthien]

Stuart, and what exactly was his reason for such a glum idea of wedding receptions? I'm not arguing for the big Princess Dianaesque weddings so popular right now, in fact I think they're generally a terrible idea unless one is actually royalty or close to, and therefore owes the people a show, but I still can't figure out what's so wrong with a slightly larger reception and maybe dancing. Furthermore, "sober dinner party" just plain sounds funereal. While I'[m hijacking this anyway, do you know if it's permissible to have the priest celebrate the wedding solely in English for the sake of one's Protestant relatives, and one's own sanity?

[James Kabala]

I believe Seventh-Day Adventists refuse to obey Sunday laws, even at the risk (which has been reality at certain points in history) of prosecution, because they interpret literally the Commandment's statement, "Six days SHALT [my emphasis] thou labor, and do all thy work" and regard not working on Sunday to be as great a sin as working on Saturday (presumably with an exception for extreme illness or indisposition, I hope). More recent translations say "six days you MAY labor" -is this more accurate or a watering down?

[Scott Walker]

Luthien, consult your Bishop for the local practice, but in our parish the wedding service (any service for that matter) is served in English. The only exception is during the Divine Liturgy, when the Lord's Prayer is offered in Slavonic along with English, as a bow to our Russian roots. I really don't want to stir up the hornet's nest here, but IMHO serving in anything but the local vernacular should be forbidden in all except new-immigrant parishes. The ethnic clubhouse nature of some parishes is most off-putting to those who are inquiring into Orthodoxy.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>Stuart, and what exactly was his [Chrysostom's] reason for such a glum idea of wedding receptions?

St. John wanted to transform the lives of his flock, to make them live in a more intensely Christian fashion. His reasons for picking out certain popular celebrations of life events--including both wedding celebrations and funerals--were that these were not consistent with Christian understanding of the events being marked.

Funerals, for instance, were marked with outpourings of grief and signs of mourning. For Chrysostom, this contradicted the Christian view of death as a passage from temporal to eternal life in Christ. He particularly chided excessive emotional displays, as well as the hiring of "professional mourners" (well known to us of Italian descent even to this day) singing dirges and pulling out their hair.

In regard to wedding receptions, Chrysostom regarded these as carryovers from paganism, in which a lifetime of charity and modesty were tossed out the door for an evening (actually,more like a week back then) of raucus merriment--not the way, he thought, to set off upon a life of sacramental marriage.

As always in such cases, the urgings of the preacher bumped up against common practices of popular piety and culture--and the preacher lost.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>I really don't want to stir up the hornet's nest here, but IMHO serving in anything but the local vernacular should be forbidden in all except new-immigrant parishes. The ethnic clubhouse nature of some parishes is most off-putting to those who are inquiring into Orthodoxy.<<<

In the words of Melkite Patriarch Maximos IV of blessed memory, "Every language is liturgical". With this statement at Vatican II he set off a firestorm that led to the almost exclusive use of the vernacular in Roman Catholic liturgy. But while this statement is true, it can in fact go too far, as witness the almost pathological fear and loathiing of Latin among many of the Roman Catholic clergy, and especially Roman Catholic liturgists.

With the exception of Ukrainians (for reasons having to do mainly with recurrent waves of immigration and intranecene ethnic politics), Eastern Catholics adopted English as their principal liturgical language back in the 1960s. There was some grousing about this at the time, but it has worked out very well as a rule. That does not mean, however, that we have totally abandoned our ancestral languages. On the contrary, we retain those and use them together with English interchangeably, as a way of honoring our ancestors, remembering the origins of our Church, and preserving something which deserves preservation on the grounds of both antiquity and beauty. To go from the Antiphons in English to the Hymn of Glorification in Slavonic, back to English for the Third Antiphon, and so on, is no big deal, and far better, in my opinion, than any alternative such as using one language or the other exclusively, or (in the fashion of many Greek parishes), singing something first in the the traditional tongue, and then again in English.

To learn certain fixed parts of the liturgy in another language, to sing them on occasion, and to know what they mean, deepen the liturgical experience and makes one appreciate the ties that connect us with the saints who have gone before us.

I write this as a convert to Eastern Christianity who has not a drop of Slavic blood in his veins, and who had never sung a note in Slavonic before converting a decade ago. As a member of our men's choir, we sing the responses once a month, mixing English and Slavonic versions of Carpatho-Rusyn plainchant (Prostopinje), and the congregation follows along perfectly well.

I would not want to see a return to all-Slavonic liturgy, nor would I want to see the parish divided on linguistic lines, but neither would I want us to abandon Slavonic entirely, for that would throw out the baby with the bathwater. Rather, I think all people of all backgrounds ought to be able to worship both in the vernacular and in the traditional language of their particular Church.

I have found this approach works very well not just in my own parish, but in most that I have visited. In parishes in the Southwest, our Church celebates tri-lingually, using interchangeably English, Slavonic and Spanish. In Dublin, Ireland, I attended a Divine Liturgy that was celebrated variously in Ukrainian, Slavonic and Gaelic. It was. . . interesting--but the parish was large, young, and dynamic, too. Given half a chance, people like to sing the songs in the Old Language.

It is not for nothing that the old saw goes, "If you speak many languages, you a a polyglot; if you speak two languages, you are bilingual; and if you speak only one, you are American".

[Tony Esolen]

Hello folks,

I'd like to steer the conversation back towards the community and its needs. (And, despite what one commentator here has assumed, I've never written anything in Touchstone or Mere Comments to praise capitalism.) The point of the blue law is that virtually everybody remains home or nearby on one day a week and the SAME day, regardless of religious belief or unbelief. Now the protection of community life may not have been intended by the original writers of the blue law, but that is neither here nor there. Many laws have been promulgated with one intention, one that after a century or so ceases to apply; but in the meantime the laws or customs have become deeply rooted in a people's way of life and serve all kinds of purposes unforeseen by the original writers. Such is the case with the school vacation in the summertime, originally intended to allow children to work in the fields on family farms (I regard the shortening of that vacation to be simply a disaster, educationally and for the family). Such is the case also with the much-maligned electoral college, which serves the purpose of almost always preventing plurality governments and the usually purchasable influence that a small swing party can exercise in them.

I'd also like to tease out the difference between a law that can be retracted, or that does not fundamentally alter a society (the raising or lowering of taxes, for instance), and a law that is practically irrevocable -- that commits a society that enacts it to follow it to its inevitable conclusion, whatever that may be.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>Such is the case with the school vacation in the summertime, originally intended to allow children to work in the fields on family farms (I regard the shortening of that vacation to be simply a disaster, educationally and for the family).<<<

As a die-hard opponent of year-round schooling, it is to my constant annoyance that this myth is constantly being used to denigrate summer vacation. That it would be used by someone in favor of the long vacation is just too much.

Are we all such city-slickers that we have lost complete contact with the cycles of agrarian life? For the farmer, it is the Spring and Fall that are the busy seasons in the field. During the former, one must prepare the fields and sow the seeds; in the latter, one harvests what one has sown.

Summer is a time of relative ease, as one watches the crops grow and engages in relatively low-intensity weeding. My late mother-in-law grew up in rural Texas and never advanced beyond eighth grade precisely because she could not go to school in the Spring and Fall, when she was needed in the fields.

Thus, the reasons for the summer vacation have nothing to do with our agrarian past, which means that our switch to an industrial and high-technology economy cannot be used as an excuse to change it. Rather, the long vacation was dictated by (a) a lack of air conditioning, which made many schools, especially in the South, uninhabitable after May and before September; and (b) the belief that kids are psychosomatic beings who have bodies that need to be exercised, as well as minds that learn things outside the stuffy confines of the classroom.

Those who wish to abolish the school year use the myth of the agricultural summer to further their agenda of subjecting children to the strictures of the educational establishment throughout the year, thereby undermining further the authority of the family.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>The point of the blue law is that virtually everybody remains home or nearby on one day a week and the SAME day, regardless of religious belief or unbelief.<<<

Actually, Tony, the point of the Blue Law was to impose a particular sect's vision of what was required on Sunday upon the entire population, believer and unbeliever alike. As such, it certainly posed an economic and social disability upon those who were not Christians, as Christians obeying the Blue Laws did not have to choose between their faith and their work--when they closed, they could go to Church. On the other hand, Jews would be forced to close on Sunday, and then be forced to choose between observing Sabbath or losing one day of work relative to their Christian neighbors. Same, of course, for Muslims.

If, however, you are correct in your assessment of the true purpose of Blue Laws, well, then, the solution is clear: we will all shut down on Tuesdays, a day about as religiously neutral as one can get. Then the matter of whether to observe a day of worship is left to the individual conscience, where it should be.

For as the Fathers knew, true belief cannot be coerced.

[Joe Long]

"I'd also like to tease out the difference between a law that can be retracted, or that does not fundamentally alter a society (the raising or lowering of taxes, for instance), and a law that is practically irrevocable -- that commits a society that enacts it to follow it to its inevitable conclusion, whatever that may be."

Worse, even knowing the difference can be a trick. In some cases (the income tax amendment...) even little nudges can fundamentally alter society. Folks understand that about eco-systems, even exaggerate it...we ought to be conservationists with our communities, too. Who knows what precious moral habitit might shelter a rare and irreplaceable virtue...?

Our only "blue laws" here involve alcohol - you can shop on Sunday, but not for beer. Which, I think, gets it wrong BOTH ways, but I would be reluctant to vote to abolish that last little cultural marker. Better a little forethought stocking the 'fridge, and a reminder left in place that Sunday used to be a little different - even a teetotaling Baptist reminder.

[GL]

I am late getting back to this because I have resolved not to blog on Sundays, but to reserve the time to worship God and socialize with my family and friends.  :-)  I agree with Tony's first point, while it might not have been the original intent, the effect of Blue Laws was to set aside one day when everyone in the community had time to commune with one another (for Christians this included a time for common worship and for everyone time to spend with family and friends).  Before the automobile and improved roads made it possible to choose churches throughout a larger geographic region and suburbs enabled people of similar economic and social status to cluster together, this meant relatively small churches (or parishes) within walking or riding (on horses or by horse drawn transport) distance of one's home.  In rural areas, few choices of places to worship were available.  In urban areas and towns, a more wide selection might be available, but still limited by today's standards.  The result, the business owners, lawyers, doctors and similar persons of higher economic and social status worshiped together with their neighbors of more limited means and status and with people from the newest born infant to the oldest in the community.  Afterwards, they might stay for a common meal (not the Lord's Supper, but an actual sit down meal where everyone socialized together.  This was important to community life and more than the repeal of Blue Laws ended it -- the automobile, better roads, television, suburbs all also contributed to this change.  My older relatives still recall occasional Sunday afternoon gatherings of the entire (rural) community at my great-grandparents' house, which included Gospel singing.  On nice days, the piano and/or organ would be brought out to the lawn to facilitate the event.  Occasionally, some office-seeker would join in as an opportunity to meet folks in the neighborhood.  Admittedly, all this would be gone even without the repeal of Blue Laws.

When I was growing up, we meet family at one or the other of my grandparents' homes on Sunday afternoons and/or evenings.  Since many of my family were farmers, it really did take an ox in the ditch to excuse one's presence. ;-)  (Actually, of course, some work was required on every Sunday, such as feeding and checking on the livestock and, when Monday was a market day in late Spring through Summer, sorting the feeder pigs on Sunday afternoon to be ready to load up early (i.e., 2 a.m. to 3 a.m.) Monday morning to take them to market before the hot part of the day.

I really am not up to debating the issue, but I do believe we have lost something because of the repeal of Blue Laws.

[James Kabala]

I believe Muslims traditionally regard Friday as the day for communal worship but not for day-long rest, although in recent centuries this has changed under Judeo-Christian influence.

[YaknYeti]

Why are people are so strongly against year-round schooling? I spent 1.5 years in a boarding school that had quarters of 9-10 weeks, followed by vacations of 3-4 weeks, and found that it worked quite well. It still gave me plenty of time to play outside and vacation with family, but also kept a higher degree of continuity in my schooling. That is the principal argument I've heard against a long summer vacation: one has to re-teach last year's lessons for the first few months after vacation.

Mandating a day off each week would probably be beneficial to my community socially, but it might well drive out the largest manufacturer in the area (my employer), who is currently running multiple shifts 7 days a week to meet demand. I can't imagine such a resolution passing, and I'm not sure if I'd want to pass it if that were the effect. I'm comfortable reserving for myself one day a week for a day of rest, even if I lose prestige (or my job) in the long run. But would I chase away jobs for others who want to work (or will tolerate) that sort of schedule? Perhaps if someone could convince me that there would actually be long-term benefits of community growth outweighing the likely and immediate community economic collapse. Otherwise, not meddling seems the most prudent course, even if the current situation is far from optimal.

[Juli]

Why are people are so strongly against year-round schooling?

I'm not sure. I think a rhythm of shorter, more frequent breaks would work well. Here in MN, a stretch of snow days in January or February would be lovely. At any rate, the families I know that homeschool certainly don't take months off in the summer.

Back to my earlier comment that my daughter's employer pays more for Sunday hours, I realized that's because the workers at these grocery stores are unionized; they have good benefits generally, and I'm sure the Sunday perk was just one of many that were negotiated by the union.

[Stuart Koehl]

>>>I'm not sure. I think a rhythm of shorter, more frequent breaks would work well. <<<

It doesn't though. They have tried it here in Fairfax County, VA, and the results are uninspiring to say the least. It does, however, allow the county to offer virtually free day care to the pampered children of already overpaid professionals.

>>>At any rate, the families I know that homeschool certainly don't take months off in the summer.<<<

Parents who homeschool turn every vacation into a learning experience. To speak of "vacation" in the context of homeschooling borders on oxymoronic. If, e.g., a homeschooling family takes a month off to go on a road trip, they usually cram in history lessons, visits to museums, science experiments and so on. A trip to the beach is an opportunity for marine biology. A trip to New York is an opportunity to go to the theater. And so forth.

Most home schooling parents that I know also have a balanced enough perspective to know that kids need a lot of play time to complement their intellectual endevors.

[GL]

While research something else in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I decided to look up what it had to say about the Third Commandment, a portion of which follows:

A day of grace and rest from work

2184 Just as God "rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done," human life has a rhythm of work and rest. The institution of the Lord's Day helps everyone enjoy adequate rest and leisure to cultivate their familial, cultural, social, and religious lives.

2185 On Sundays and other holy days of obligation, the faithful are to refrain from engaging in work or activities that hinder the worship owed to God, the joy proper to the Lord's Day, the performance of the works of mercy, and the appropriate relaxation of mind and body. Family needs or important social service can legitimately excuse from the obligation of Sunday rest. The faithful should see to it that legitimate excuses do not lead to habits prejudicial to religion, family life, and health.

The charity of truth seeks holy leisure- the necessity of charity accepts just work.

2186 Those Christians who have leisure should be mindful of their brethren who have the same needs and the same rights, yet cannot rest from work because of poverty and misery. Sunday is traditionally consecrated by Christian piety to good works and humble service of the sick, the infirm, and the elderly. Christians will also sanctify Sunday by devoting time and care to their families and relatives, often difficult to do on other days of the week. Sunday is a time for reflection, silence, cultivation of the mind, and meditation which furthers the growth of the Christian interior life.

2187 Sanctifying Sundays and holy days requires a common effort. Every Christian should avoid making unnecessary demands on others that would hinder them from observing the Lord's Day. Traditional activities (sport, restaurants, etc.), and social necessities (public services, etc.), require some people to work on Sundays, but everyone should still take care to set aside sufficient time for leisure. With temperance and charity the faithful will see to it that they avoid the excesses and violence sometimes associated with popular leisure activities. In spite of economic constraints, public authorities should ensure citizens a time intended for rest and divine worship. Employers have a similar obligation toward their employees.

2188 In respecting religious liberty and the common good of all, Christians should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church's holy days as legal holidays. They have to give everyone a public example of prayer, respect, and joy and defend their traditions as a precious contribution to the spiritual life of society. If a country's legislation or other reasons require work on Sunday, the day should nevertheless be lived as the day of our deliverance which lets us share in this "festal gathering," this "assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven."

See http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c1a3.htm#II.