The Sabbath in the Apostasy.
By G.
After the captivity the Jews did not depart from the day of the Sabbath as commanded in the law, but they did depart from the manner of Sabbath-keeping as contemplated in the Spirit of the commandment. This was illustrated in the example of Christ, who had given the Sabbath law and knew how to practically fulfil it as a Jew. So, in the line of apostasy in the Christian Church, a departure from the Sabbath of the Lord was conspicuous. This “Christian” departure, however, took on the nature of a gradual turning away from the day which the Lord had sanctified and blessed. This was mainly because that, after the apostolic period, the accessions to the church were largely of the Gentile, or heathen, classes, who were intensely prejudiced against the Jews. They discouraged Sabbath observance because they claimed that it was merely a Jewish custom. Various efforts were made to establish days of special observance other than the seventh day; for instance, Friday, because that was the day of the Saviour’s passion; Wednesday, because on that day the Lord was betrayed; and Sunday, because of Christ’s resurrection. The Eastern churches held longer to the true Sabbath than did those of the West. But Sunday had the prestige among the heathen, because it was already an established holiday, or festival, dedicated to the popular sun deity. The leading spirits of the post-apostolic church were from the ranks of the heathen philosophers, and the coincidence of the resurrection of Christ, the “Sun of Righteousness,” made it easy for them to incline to the popular day which they had been accustomed to observe. This, too, made the reproach of the cross all the lighter, and made missionary work among their heathen friends much more successful. But no statement has yet been substantiated wherein any writer of the first three centuries ventured to call the first day of the week the Sabbath. Some of those who observed the first day did so in addition to a formal recognition of the seventh day, and others kept the day instead of the Sabbath, which they claimed was Jewish. J. N. Andrews, who published an elaborate history of the Sabbath in 1873, fully investigated a large number of false statements in regard to the writings of the “fathers” prior to the Council of Nice, 325, and after a close research summarized as follows:— - The fathers are so far from testifying that the apostles told them Christ changed the Sabbath, that not even one of them ever alludes to such a change.
- No one of them ever calls the first day the Christian Sabbath, nor, indeed, ever calls it a sabbath of any kind.
- They never represent it as a day on which ordinary labor was sinful; nor do they represent the observance of Sunday as an act of obedience to the fourth commandment.
- The modern doctrine of the change of the Sabbath was therefore absolutely unknown in the first centuries of the Christian Church.
Sir Wm. Domville, also author of a treatise on the Sabbath question, gives the following testimonial:— “Not any ecclesiastical writer of the first three centuries attributed the origin of Sunday observance either to Christ or to His apostles.” Sunday observance was only one of several “voluntary festivals” that sprung up in the church during the second and third centuries. But this particular feature of apostasy, which is not mentioned by any writer until A. D. 140, by Justin Martyr, took the lead, on account of its prominence among the heathen and the desire of Christians who were fast backsliding, to popularize the church. In this way the church increased in numbers and in political influence, but rapidly declined in spiritual power. Such was the deteriorating influence of the observance of this festival that it became necessary for both Justin and Tertullian to defend their brethren against the charge of sun-worship. This was peculiarly embarrassing to Justin, for, in endeavoring to gain favor for Christians with the emperor, he had laid special stress upon the fact of their holding meetings on this day of general observance. And Tertullian acknowledged that there was apparent ground for the accusation that Christians worshiped the sun. He admitted that they worshiped toward the sun like the heathen, and devoted Sunday to rejoicing, but he plead that they did so for a different purpose. Of course they did it for a different purpose; but by departing from the commandment of God, and substituting human tradition, the people were misled, the truth was compromised, error was deeply rooted in the church, and the cause of Christ was brought under reproach.