A FALSE CRITICISM by John Nevins Andrews

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 19, 1878

A FALSE CRITICISM.

By John Nevins Andrews

Some time since a Methodist clergyman found, as he supposed, a contradiction in the History of the Sabbath, and he published this discovery in the columns of his denominational paper.

Yesterday a friend informed me of this fact and requested me to give him an explanation of the matter. The supposed contradiction is found by comparing pages 217, 273, with page 295 of my History of the Sabbath. In the first two references it is said that the term Lord’s day is never found in the works of Irenæus nor in any sentence written by him found in any other author. But in the last of these references there is a quotation from what is called the “Lost Writings of Irenæus” in which the term “Lord’s day” is found. This appears to be a contradiction, and it is paraded before the public as such.

The facts in the case are that the quotation from the “Lost Writings of Irenæus” is not the language of Irenæus himself, but a statement of some unknown writer concerning him. The quotation, as given in full in the “Testimony of the Fathers,” p. 49, is as follows:—

“This [custom] of not bending the knee upon Sunday is a symbol of the resurrection, through which we have been set free, by the grace of Christ, from sins, and from death, which has been put to death under him. Now this custom took its rise from apostolic times, as the blessed Irenæus, the martyr and bishop of Lyons, declares in his treatise On Easter, in which he makes mention of Pentecost also; upon which [feast] we do not bend the knee, because it is of equal significance with the Lord’s day, for the reason already alleged concerning it.”

The reader will see at once that this is not the language of Irenæus himself, but of some one concerning him. This is so fully set forth in the remarks following this extract in the work above referred to, that I here append a portion of them:—

“This is something very remarkable. It is not what Irenæus said, after all, but is what an unknown writer, in a work entitled Quæs. et Resp. ad Orthod., says of him. And all that this writer says of Irenæus is that he declares the custom of not kneeling upon Sunday ‘took its rise from apostolic times’! It does not even appear that Irenæus ever used the term Lord’s day as a title for the first day of the week. Its use in the present quotation is by the unknown writer to whom we are indebted for the statement here given respecting Irenæus. And this writer, whoever he be, is of the opinion that Pentecost is of equal importance with the so-called Lord’s day.”

During the same time that the revised edition of the History of the Sabbath was being issued, I published the “Testimony of the Fathers,” from which the foregoing extract and explanation are given, and hence closed up the history with the impression that this was in the history, which would fully explain the extract on p. 295.

On page 273 of the History I make this statement: “It appears, however, from several statements in ancient writers, that he did mention the day, though no sentence of his in which it is mentioned is in existence.” And on this page and p. 217, I refer to the “Testimony of the Fathers” for the full testimony on this point. And this is not contradicted by the extract on p. 295; for I do not there say that the extract is the language of Irenæus himself.

It thus appears that the statements in the History of the Sabbath are true to the letter, and the criticism of the Methodist clergyman wholly unfounded.

Those who wish to look the matter up for themselves will find the testimony in the Ante-nicene Christian Library, Vol. ix. p. 162. This library can be found at any of the larger bookstores. It contains all the extant writings of all the fathers previous to the Council of Nicæa, A. D. 325. A foot-note by the editor, on the page above referred to, justifies the statement I have made. If that Methodist clergyman had looked the matter up for himself, he would have seen that there was no cause for criticism. J. N. A.