EARLY FIRST-DAY OBSERVANCE.
By John Nevins Andrews
We have given every statement in the fathers of the first three centuries in which the manner of celebrating the Sunday festival is set forth. We have also given every reason for that observance which is to be found in any of them. These two classes of testimonies show clearly that ordinary labor was not one of the things which were forbidden on that day. We now offer direct proof that other days which on all hands are accounted nothing but church festivals were expressly declared by the fathers to be equal if not superior in sacredness to the Sunday festival. The "Lost Writings of Irenæus" gives us his mind concerning the relative sacredness of the festival of Sunday and that of either Easter or Pentecost. This is the statement:475"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." Tertullian in a passage already quoted, which by omitting the sentence we are about to quote, has been used as the strongest testimony to the first-day Sabbath in the fathers, expressly equals in sacredness the period of Pentecost—a space of fifty days—with the festival which he calls Lord's day. Thus he says:— "Similarly, too, in the period of Pentecost; which period we distinguish by the same solemnity of exaltation." He states the same fact in another work:— "We count fasting or kneeling in worship on the Lord's day to be unlawful. We rejoice in the same privilege also from Easter to Whitsunday." Origen classes the so-called Lord's day with three other church festivals:— "If it be objected to us on this subject that we ourselves are accustomed to observe certain days; as for example the Lord's day, the Preparation, the Passover, or Pentecost, I have to answer, that to the perfect Christian, who is ever in his thoughts, words, and deeds, serving his natural Lord, God the Word, all his days are the Lord's, and he is always keeping the Lord's day." Irenæus and Tertullian make the Sunday Lord's day equal in sacredness with the period from the Passover to the Pentecost; but Origen, after classing the day with several church festivals, virtually confesses that it has no pre-eminence above other days. Commodianus, who once uses the term Lord's day, speaks of the Catholic festival of the Passover as "Easter, that day of ours most blessed." This certainly indicates that in his estimation no other sacred day was superior in sanctity to Easter. The "Apostolical Constitutions" treat the Sunday festival in the same manner that it is treated by Irenæus and Tertullian. They make it equal to the sacredness of the period from Easter to the Pentecost. Thus they say:— "He will be guilty of sin who fasts on the Lord's day, being the day of the resurrection, or during the time of Pentecost, or in general, who is sad on a festival day to the Lord." These testimonies prove conclusively that the festival of Sunday, in the judgment of such men as Irenæus, Tertullian, and others, stood in the same rank with that of Easter, or Whitsunday. They had no idea that one was commanded by God, while the others were only ordained by the church. Indeed, Tertullian, as we have seen, expressly declares that there is no precept for Sunday observance. Besides these important facts, we have decisive evidence that Sunday was not a day of abstinence from labor, and our first witness is Justin, the earliest witness to the Sunday festival in the Christian church. Trypho the Jew said to Justin, by way of reproof, "You observe no festivals or Sabbaths." This was exactly adapted to bring out from Justin the statement that, though he did not observe the seventh day as the Sabbath, he did thus rest on the first day of the week, if it were true that that day was with him a day of abstinence from labor. But he gives no such answer. He sneers at the very idea of abstinence from labor, declaring that "God does not take pleasure in such observances." Nor does he intimate that this is because the Jews did not rest upon the right day, but he condemns the very idea of refraining from labor for a day, stating that "the new law," which has taken the place of the commandments given on Sinai requires a perpetual Sabbath, and this is kept by repenting of sin and refraining from its commission. Here are his words:— "The new law requires you to keep a perpetual Sabbath, and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose you are pious, not discerning why this has been commanded you; and if you eat unleavened bread, you say the will of God has been fulfilled. The Lord our God does not take pleasure in such observances: if there is any perjured person or a thief among you, let him cease to be so; if any adulterer, let him repent; then he has kept the sweet and true Sabbaths of God." This language plainly implies that Justin did not believe that any day should be kept as a Sabbath by abstinence from labor, but that all days should be kept as Sabbaths by abstinence from sin. This testimony is decisive, and it is in exact harmony with the facts already adduced from the fathers, and with others yet to be presented. Moreover it is confirmed by the express testimony of Tertullian. He says:— "By us (to whom Sabbaths are strange, and the new moons, and festivals formerly beloved by God) the Saturnalia and new year's and mid-winter's festivals and Matronalia are frequented." And he adds in the same paragraph, in words already quoted:— "If any indulgence is to be granted to the flesh, you have it. I will not say your own days, but more too; for to the heathens each festive day occurs but once annually; you have a festive day every eighth day." Tertullian tells his brethren in plain language that they kept no Sabbaths, but did keep many heathen festivals. If the Sunday festival, which was a day of "indulgence" to the flesh, and which he here mentions as the "eighth day," was kept by them as the Christian Sabbath in place of the ancient seventh day, then he would not have asserted that to us "Sabbaths are strange." But Tertullian has precisely the same Sabbath as Justin Martyr. He does not keep the first day in place of the seventh, but he keeps a "perpetual Sabbath," in which he professes to refrain from sin every day, and actually abstains from labor on none. Thus, after saying that the Jews teach that "from the beginning God sanctified the seventh day" and therefore observe that day, he says:— "Whence we [Christians] understand that we still more ought to observe a Sabbath from all 'servile work' always, and not only every seventh day, but through all time." Tertullian certainly had no idea that Sunday was the Sabbath in any other sense than were all the seven days of the week. We shall find a decisive confirmation of this when we come to quote Tertullian respecting the origin of the Sabbath. We shall also find that Clement expressly makes Sunday a day of labor. Several of the early fathers wrote in opposition to the observance of the seventh day. We now give the reasons assigned by each for that opposition. The writer called Barnabas did not keep the seventh day, not because it was a ceremonial ordinance unworthy of being observed by a Christian, but because it was so pure an institution that even Christians cannot sanctify it till they are made immortal. Here are his words:— "Attend, my children, to the meaning of this expression, 'He finished in six days.' This implieth that the Lord will finish all things in six thousand years, for a day is with him a thousand years. And he himself testifieth, saying, 'Behold, to-day will be as a thousand years.' Therefore, my children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, all things will be finished. 'And he rested on the seventh day.' This meaneth: When his Son coming [again], shall destroy the time of the wicked man, and judge the ungodly, and change the sun, and the moon, and the stars, then he shall truly rest on the seventh day. Moreover, he says, 'Thou shalt sanctify it with pure hands and a pure heart.' If, therefore, any one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things, we are deceived. Behold, therefore: certainly then one properly resting sanctifies it, when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having first been sanctified ourselves. Further he says to them, 'Your new moons and your sabbaths I cannot endure.' Ye perceive how he speaks: Your present sabbaths are not acceptable to me, but that which I have made [namely this], when, giving rest to all things, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, that is, a beginning of another world, where also, we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day, also, on which Jesus rose again from the dead." Observe the points embodied in this statement of doctrine: 1. He asserts that the six thousand years of creation prefigure the six thousand years which our world shall endure in its present state of wickedness. 2. He teaches that at that period Christ shall come again and make an end of wickedness and "then shall he truly rest on the seventh day." 3. That no "one can now sanctify the day which God hath sanctified, except he is pure in heart in all things." 4. But that cannot be the case until the present world shall pass away, "when we ourselves, having received the promise, wickedness no longer existing, and all things having been made new by the Lord, shall be able to work righteousness. Then we shall be able to sanctify it, having first been sanctified ourselves." Men cannot, therefore, keep the Sabbath while this wicked world lasts. 5. Therefore, he says, "Your present sabbaths are not acceptable," not because they are not pure, but because they are not now able to keep them as purely as their nature demands. 6. That is to say, the keeping of the day which God has sanctified is not possible in such a wicked world as this. 7. But though the seventh day cannot now be kept, the eighth day can, and ought to be, because when the seven thousand years are past there will be at the beginning of the eighth thousand, the new creation. 8. Therefore, he did not attempt to keep the seventh day, which God had sanctified; for that is too pure to be kept in the present wicked world, and can only be kept after the Saviour comes at the commencement of the seventh thousand years; but he kept the eighth day with joyfulness on which Jesus arose from the dead. 9. So it appears that the eighth day, which God never sanctified, is exactly suitable for observance in our world during its present state of wickedness. 10. But when all things have been made new, and we are able to work righteousness, and wickedness no longer exists, then we shall be able to sanctify the seventh day, having first been sanctified ourselves. The reason of Barnabas for not observing the Sabbath of the Lord is not that the commandment enjoining it is abolished, but that the institution was so pure that men in their present imperfect state cannot acceptably sanctify it. They will keep it, however, in the new creation, but in the meantime they keep with joyfulness the eighth day, which having never been sanctified by God is not difficult to keep in the present state of wickedness. J. N. A.