CHAPTER 2 - HISTORY OF THE SABBATH
The observance of a different day of the week from that enjoined in the fourth
commandment, and for a different reason from that which is there assigned, is by
many, supposed to be the apostolic mode of rendering obedience to that precept.
That such an idea has no foundation in the New Testament, we have already
seen. For the benefit of such as wish to learn the manner in which the first day of
the week obtained the place of the Lord's Sabbath, we present the following
important testimony. It is taken from the "History of the Sabbath" published by the
American Sabbath Tract Society, New York. We think that those who will read the
testimony on this subject with care, will acquiesce in the frank testimony of Dr.
Neander, the distinguished historian of the church. In his "History of the Christian
Religion and Church," page 168, he thus remarks: "Opposition to Judaism
introduced the particular festival of Sunday, very early, indeed, into the place of
the Sabbath. . . . The festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a
human ordinance; and it was far from the intention of the apostles to establish a
divine command in this respect-far from them; and from the early apostolic
church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday. Perhaps at the end of the
second century, a false application of this kind had begun to take place; for men
appear by that time to have considered laboring on Sunday as a sin."
The apostle Paul informed the Thessalonian church that the mystery of
iniquity had already begun to work, and that in the predicted period, the man of
sin would be revealed. As the great apostasy had begun to develop itself in the
days of the apostles, it follows that the early observance of any precept, or belief
of any doctrine does not stamp it as apostolic or divine, if it have no foundation in
the word of God. To us, therefore, it is a matter
16
of peculiar interest to trace the gradual corruption of the truths of the Bible, even
from the days of the apostles, down to the complete development of the man of
sin.
"The History of the Sabbath," after proving from the New Testament that the
Lord Jesus and his inspired followers observed the Sabbath according to the
commandment, narrates the circumstances connected with its observance in the
early church. It speaks as follows:
OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH FROM THE TIME OF THE APOSTLES TO
CONSTANTINE
After the period described in the Acts of the apostles, Christianity soon
became widely spread in the Roman empire, which, at that time, extended over
most of the civilized world. But as it receded from the time of the apostles, and
the number of its professors increased, the church became gradually less
spiritual, and more disposed to deck the simple religion of Jesus with mysteries
and superstitious formalities; and the bishops or pastors became ambitious of
their authority over the churches. Those churches, even in Gentile cities, appear
to have been composed, at first, principally of converted Jews, who not only
observed the weekly Sabbath, but also the feast of the Passover, adapted
particularly to Christian worship; respecting which, there was much contention. In
the mean time, converts were greatly multiplied from among the Gentiles, and
were united with those from the Jews, who, not without reason, considered
themselves entitled to some distinction as the original founders of the gospel
church, and as being better informed in the writings of Moses and the prophets,
having been in the habit of reading them every Sabbath in the synagogues.
About three years after the martyrdom of Peter and Paul, according to the
common account, Judea was invaded by the Roman armies, and Jerusalem was
besieged and destroyed, as our Lord had predicted. By this awful calamity it is
supposed that most of the churches in Judea were scattered; for they fled their
country at the approach of their enemies, as they were taught by Jesus Christ to
do. Matt. xxiv, 16. This war resulted not only in the breaking up of the nation, and
the destruction of a great portion of the people, but also in bringing a general
odium upon the Jews wherever they were found; so that even the Christians of
Judea suffered what our Saviour taught them to expect, (Matt. xxiv, 9,) "And ye
shall be hated of all nations for my name's sake." These circumstances, added to
the enmity which formerly existed between the Gentiles and the Jews, produced
a prejudice which
17
had its influence in the church, in bringing into disrepute, and in fixing a stigma
upon, whatever was regarded as Judaism. "The doctrines of our Saviour and the
church flourishing from day to day, continued to receive constant accessions,"
says Eusebius, "but the calamities of the Jews also continued to grow with one
accumulation of evil upon another." The insurrectionary disposition of the
conquered Jews in the reign of Trajan, in the early part of the second century,
and the calamities that followed them, seemed to confirm the opinion, that the
Jews were given over by the Almighty to entire destruction. But their calamities
increased in the reign of Adrian, who succeeded Trajan, in whose reign the revolt
of the Jews again proceeded to many and great excesses, "and Rufus, the
lieutenant governor of Judea, using their madness as a pretext, destroyed
myriads of men, women and children, in crowds; and by the laws of war, he
reduced their country to a state of absolute subjection, and the degraded race to
the condition of slaves." The transformation of the church in Jerusalem is thus
described by Eusebius: "The city of the Jews being thus reduced to a state of
abandonment for them, and totally stripped of its ancient inhabitants, and also
inhabited by strangers; the Roman city which subsequently arose changing its
name, was called AElia, in honor of the emperor AElias Adrian; and when the
church was collected there of the Gentiles, the first bishop after those of the
circumcision was Marcus." Thus was extinguished the Hebrew church in
Jerusalem, having had a succession of fifteen pastors; "all which," says
Eusebius, "they say, were Hebrews from the first. At that time the whole church
under them," he adds, "consisted of faithful Hebrews, who continued from the
time of the apostles to the siege that then took place."
This church, which heretofore held the first rank in regard to its influence,
being now composed entirely of Gentiles, and stripped of its apostolic character
and influence, could no longer successfully oppose the growing ambition and
influence of the bishops of the church in the metropolis of the empire.
Up to this period, and for some time after, there does not appear to have been
any change in the sentiments or practice of the church, in any place, relative to
the Sabbath; but from what is related by subsequent writers, which will be
noticed in its place, it is certain that it was observed by the churches universally.
This fact is so generally acknowledged by those acquainted with the history of
the matter, that we need refer to only a few passages in proof:
The learned Grotius says, in his Explication of the Decalogue, "Therefore the
Christians also, who believed Christ would restore
18
all things to their primitive practice, as Tertullian teacheth in Monogamia, kept
holy the Sabbath, and had their assemblies on that day, in which the law was
read to them, as appears in Acts xv, 21, which custom remained till the time of
the council of Laodicea, about A.D. 365, who then thought meet that the gospels
also should be read on that day."
Edward Brerewood, Professor in Gresham College, London, in a treatise on
the Sabbath, 1630, says,: "It is commonly believed that the Jewish Sabbath was
changed into the Lord's Day by Christian emperors, and they know little who do
not know, that the ancient Sabbath did remain and was observed by the eastern
churches three hundred years after our Saviour's passion."
TESTIMONY FOR THE FIRST DAY EXAMINED
At what time the first day of the week came into notice as a festival in the
church, it is not easy to determine. The first intimation we have of this, in any
ancient writer of acknowledged integrity, is from Justin Martyr's Apology for the
Christians, about A.D. 140. He is cited as saying, "that the Christians, in the city
and in the country assembled on the day called Sunday; and after certain
religious devotions, all returned home to their labors;" and he assigns as reasons
for this, that God made the world on the first day; and, that Christ first showed
himself to his disciples on that day, after his resurrection. These were the best,
and probably all the reasons that could then be offered for the practice. He also
speaks of Sunday only as a festival, on which they performed labor, when not
engaged in devotions; and not as substitute for the Sabbath. From this author we
can learn nothing as to the extent of the practice; for though he says this was
done by those "in the city and in the country," he may have intended only the city
of Rome and its suburbs, since Justin, although a native of Palestine, in Syria, is
stated by Eusebius to have made his residence in Rome. Now can we determine
from this, that he intended any thing more, than that they did thus on the Sunday
in which the church of Rome, a short time after this, is known to have closed the
paschal feast, which was observed annually.
It is contended, however, that mention is made of keeping the first day
previous to Justin. The first intimation of this kind, it is believed, is from an
apocryphal writing, styled the Epistle of Barnabas. But to this epistle it is
objected, that there is no evidence of its genuineness. Eusebius, who lived near
the time when it was written, mentions it as a spurious writing, entitled to no
credit. Dr. Milnor says it is an injury to St. Barnabas, to ascribe this epistle to him.
Mosheim says it is the work of some superstitious
19
Jew of mean abilities. And we think it has but little to recommend it besides its
antiquity. Barnabas' theory for observing the first day, rests upon the tradition that
the seventh day was typical of the seventh millennium of the age of the world,
which would be purely a holy age; and that the Sabbath was not to be kept until
that time arrived; and he says, "We keep the eighth day with gladness, in which
Jesus arose from the dead."
The citations from Ignatius, are as little to the purpose. In the passage of
which most use has been made, he did not say that himself or any one else kept
the Lord's day, as is often asserted. His own words are, that "the prophets who
lived before Christ, came to a newness of hope, not by keeping Sabbaths, but by
living according to a lordly or most excellent life. In this passage, Ignatius was
speaking of altogether a different thing from Sabbath-keeping. There is another
quotation from him, however, in which he brings out more clearly his view of the
relation existing between the Sabbath and Lord's day. It is as follows: "Let us not
keep the Sabbath in a Jewish manner, in sloth and idleness. But let us keep it
after a spiritual manner, not in bodily ease, but in the study of the law, and in the
contemplation of the works of God." "And after we have kept the Sabbath, let
every one that loveth Christ keep the Lord's day festival."--From this it seems that
he would have the Sabbath kept first, as such, and in a manner satisfactory to
the strictest Sabbatarian, after which the Lord's day, not as a Sabbath, but as a
festival. Indeed with this distinction between the Sabbath and a festival before us,
it is easy to explain all those passages from early historians which refer to the
first day. We shall find them to be either immediately connected with instructions
about such seasons as Good Friday and Holy Thursday, or in the writings of
those who have recommended the observance of these festival days.
It is also said that Pliny, Governor of Bithynia, in A.D. 102, in a letter to Trajan,
states that the Christians met on the first day of the week for worship; but by no
fair interpretation of his words can he be so understood. He says, in writing about
those of his own province, "that they were accustomed to assemble on a stated
day." This might be referred to the first day, if there were credible testimony that
this day was alone regarded by Christians at that time; but as there is no
evidence of this, and as the Sabbath is known to have been the stated day of
religious assembling a long time after this, it seems more proper to refer it to the
Sabbath than to the first day.
We will mention but one more of these misinterpreted citations,
20
and this is from Dionysius, bishop of Corinth, who lived a little after Justin. His
letter to Soter, bishop of Rome, is cited as saying, "This day we celebrated the
holy Dominical day, in which we have read your epistle." As given by Eusebius, it
is thus: "To-day we have passed the Lord's holy day," etc. the only ground upon
which this phrase can be referred to the first day, is, that this day was at that time
known by the same title that God had given to the Sabbath, [see Isa. lviii, 13,] of
which there is no proof. Therefore it is not just to cite this passage as evidence of
the observance of the first day at that time.
It is indeed, a well known fact, that the first day has come into very extensive
use among the great body of Christians, as the only day of weekly rest and
worship. The origin of this practice does not appear, however, to be as ancient by
some centuries, as many suppose; nor was its adoption secured at once, but by
slow and gradual advances it obtained general notice in Christian countries. This
is frankly admitted by Morer, an English Episcopalian, in his Dialogues on the
Lord's Day, page 236. He says, "In St. Jerome's time, (that is, in the fifth century,)
Christianity had got into the throne as well as into the empire. Yet for all this, the
entire sanctification of the Lord's day proceeded slowly, and that it was the work
of time to bring it to perfection, appears from the several steps the church made
in her constitution, and from the decrees of emperors and other princes, wherein
the prohibitions from servile and civil business advanced by degrees from one
species to another, till the day got a considerable figure in the world." The same
author says on the same page: "If the Christians in St. Jerome's time, after divine
service on the Lord's day, followed their daily employments, it should be
remembered, that this was not done till the worship was quite over, when they
might with innocency enough resume them, because the length of time and the
number of hours assigned for piety were not then so well explained as in after
ages."
It is probable that no other day could have obtained the same notice in
ancient times as the first day of the week did; for there were circumstances,
aside from the resurrection, that had an influence in promoting its observance. It
was at first a celebration of the same character as the fourth and sixth days of
the week, and the annual festivals of saints and martyrs. These celebrations
were comparatively unobjectionable, when not permitted to interfere with a divine
appointment; but when they were made to supersede or cause a neglect of the
Sabbath, they were criminal. In respect to these days of weekly celebration,
Mosheim, when remarking upon this early period, and the regard then paid to the
seventh and first days, says: "Many also observed the fourth
21
day, in which Christ was betrayed, and the sixth day, in which he was crucified."
He adds, "the time of assembling was generally in the evening after sunset, or in
the morning before the dawn."
SUNDAY-KEEPING OF HEATHEN ORIGIN
The respect which the Gentiles had for the first day, or Sunday, while they
were Pagans, contributed much to render its introduction easy, and its weekly
celebration popular, among such materials as composed the body of the church
of Rome in the second, third and fourth centuries. The observance of the first day
of the week, as a festival of the Sun, was very general in those nations from
which the Gentile church received her converts. That an idolatrous worship was
paid to the Sun and other heavenly bodies by the Gentiles, the Old Testament
abundantly testifies; and this kind of adoration paid to the Sun in later times, is so
plainly a matter of historical record. Thomas Bampfield, an English writer of the
seventeenth century, quoting Verstegan's Antiquities, page 68, says: "Our
ancestors in England, before the light of the Gospel came among them, went
very far in this idolatry, and dedicated the first day of the week to the adoration of
the idol of the Sun, and gave it the name of Sunday. This idol they placed in a
temple, and there sacrificed to it." He further states, that from his historical
reading, he finds that a great part of the world, and particularly those parts of it
which have since embraced Christianity, did anciently adore the Sun upon
Sunday. It is also stated by Dr. Chambers, in his Cyclopedia, "that Sunday was
so called by our idolatrous ancestors, because set apart for the worship of the
Sun." The Greeks and Latins also gave the same name to the first day of the
week. Dr. Brownlee, as quoted by Kingsbury, on the Sabbath, page 223, also
says: "When the descendants of Adam apostatized from the worship of the true
God, they substituted in his place the Sun, that luminary, which, more than all
others, strikes the minds of savage people with religious awe; and which,
therefore, all heathens worship." Attachment to particular days of religious
celebration, from habit merely, is well known, even in our own day, to be very
strong, and powerful convictions of duty are often required to produce a change.
This was no doubt well understood by the teachers of Christianity in those times.
Dr. Mosheim, when treating on that age, says: "That the leaders imagined that
the nations would the more readily receive Christianity when they saw the rites
and ceremonies to which they had been accustomed, established in the
churches, and the same worship paid to Jesus Christ and his martyrs which they
had formerly offered to
22
their idol deities. Hence it happened, that in those times, the religion of the
Greeks and Romans differed but little in its external appearance from that of
Christians."
