The Fathers and Sunday Doctrine
ANIMADVERTING upon Mr. Parnell's unfortunate departure from the truth in the House of Commons some years since, the Congregationalist says:— “Mr. Parnell is accounted a Protestant, but we regret to see that he is reported unblushingly to have avowed that, in a certain memorable instance, he modeled his conduct on the Jesuitical maxim that ‘the end justifies the means.’ That wicked notion is indeed older than the Jesuits. In the fourth century Chrysostom shaped his action by it, and stoutly defended it. . . . And, with him, Origen and Jerome explain Gal. 2:13, etc., as an instance of its use by Paul for the purpose of persuading the Jewish Christians of the unneed of circumcision. There is more moral ozone in the atmosphere of our day, which long since toned up the general standard of veracity to a plane of purity of motive and utterance kindred to that of the New Testament itself, and far surpassing the defective and effete standard of the early Christian Fathers.” Yet some are wont to go to the writings of these same Fathers to prove important Christian doctrines. Indeed, they are almost the sole reliance of the champions of the Sunday sabbath. But the standard of the Fathers was worse than effete; it was wicked, and no one knows it so well as those who are most familiar with their writings. Will the Congregationalist be consistent and hold only that which can be proved by the Scriptures?