p. 7 | ORIGIN OF SUNDAY

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, Cal. · Sep 8, 1898

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 24, No. 36.

ORIGIN OF SUNDAY.

In an article in the oldest and leading Presbyterian journal of America, the New York Observer, of June 30, the question is asked, “Is Sunday a common holiday?” It discusses the question of the day in respect to “its history” and “the character of its observance.” After speaking of the intermittent and “partial” observance of the day in the earlier centuries, the writer, the learned Marcus Dods, D.D., says:—

But at length the imperial throne itself was Christianized, and that observance of the day which had been difficult, interrupted, and partial was made regular and universal. In the year 321, while the Emperor Constantine was tending towards Christian belief and was already desirous to legislate favorably for his Christian subjects, he issued the following decree: “On the venerable day of the sun (i. e., Sunday) let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country, however, persons engaged in the work of cultivation may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits; because it often happens that another day is not so suitable for grain sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost.” This edict issued by Constantine would take effect throughout the Roman world—virtually wherever there were Christians. It is in this imperial edict that we find the earliest express and definite institution of the first day of the week to be a weekly holiday. . . . And he appointed the first day of the week to be thus observed because already the Christians, wherever they could, observed this day by meeting for worship. In other words, the world owes this day not to nature, not to enlightened legislation or out of consideration for man’s physical well-being, but to a Christian sentiment.

But if Dr. Dods will carefully read Constantine’s decree, he will fail to find the shadow of a proof for his allegation that Constantine “appointed the first day of the week to be thus observed because already the Christians . . . observed this day.”

Notice: (1) Constantine was an idolater and a sun-worshiper. All who have read the history of those times, know this.

2. It was the day of the sun, not “the Lord’s day,” or “the first day of the week,” that he appoints. It is appointed in honor of the sun.

3. The decree shows that it was not a new institution appointed or ordained. It was old, the “venerable day of the sun.”

4. He does not mention Christians or remotely refer to them. “The venerable day of the sun” was to be kept in cities, but husbandry was to go on in the country. Did the Christians then regard the day in the city, but not in the country?

Dr. Dods tells us again:—

The early Christians did not cite the fourth commandment, nor did they go back upon any example, Jewish or Gentile, for the observance of the day.

This is true in this respect, that the day had no Biblical command or example for its observance. It did, however, on the Gentile side have “the wild solar holiday of all pagan times.” This was the origin of the day. It was purely heathen. It was upheld by heathen and apostate ecclesiastical law.

Can an institution with such an origin ever obtain a strong hold upon a good Biblical conscience?—Never. It has always had to seek the support of civil law; it is seeking it to-day. Man may endeavor to surround it with the glories of the resurrection, he may clothe it in the stolen livery of the law of God, but it will ever remain heathen in origin, and in nature, standing, if at all, on the heathen doctrine of civil force. And that is why men are now clamoring for Sunday laws.