THE BIBLE SABBATH - Part 3

THE BIBLE SABBATH

Part 03

JAMES WHITE.

Paris, Maine, January, 1851.

THE BIBLE SABBATH:

THE SABBATH FROM THE TIME OF CONSTANTINE TO THE REFORMATION.

            "WE here see how the matter stood until the commencement of Constantine's career.  The Sabbath was generally observed, while Lord's day was regarded as a festival of no greater importance or authority than Good Friday or Holy Thursday.  No text of Scripture, or edict of emperor, or decree of council, could be produced in its favor.  But from this time forth may be found emperors and councils combining to give importance to the Lord's day and to oppose the Sabbath." James White - Bible Sabbath,  THE SABBATH FROM THE TIME OF CONSTANTINE TO THE REFORMATION. page 0026 paragraph 1

.           "An important change was undoubtedly produced upon the regard paid to the first day, soon after the accession of Constantine, the first Christian emperor, in the early part of the fourth century.  When he became master of Rome, he soon gave himself up to the guidance of the Christian clergy.  "He built places of public worship.  He encouraged the meeting of synods and bishops - honored them with his presence, and employed himself continually in aggrandizing the church.  He was scrupulously attentive to the religious rites and ceremonies which were prescribed to him by the clergy.  He fasted, observed the feasts in commemoration of the martyrs, and devoutly watched the whole night on the vigils of the saints,"* and showed great anxiety for uniformity in the doctrines and observances of religion in the church.  He was, therefore, exactly suited to the wishes of the Roman bishop and clergy, in establishing, by his imperial authority, what they had no Scripture to support, and what their influence had hitherto been unable to effect, viz. a uniformity in the celebration of Easter and the first day. [emphasis supplied]  In 321, Constantine first published his edicts enjoining upon his subjects these superstitious celebrations which he had been taught to perform." IBID, page 0026 paragraph 2.

            "Eusebius says,+ "He appointed as a suitable time for prayers the dominical day, which then was an especial day, and now is undoubtedly the very first.  His body guard observed the day, and offered in it prayers written by the Emperor.  The happy prince endeavored to persuade all to do this, and by degrees to lead all to the worship of God; [emphasis supplied] wherefore he determined that those obeying Roman power should abstain from every work upon the days named after the Saviour, that they should venerate also the day before the Sabbath, in memory, as seems to me, of the events occurring in those days to our common Saviour."IBID, page 0026 paragraph 3

----------

**Jones' Ch. Hist. p. 164, Am. Ed., 1824.

+Life of Constantine, B. 4, ch. 18.  Busle ed.*

                                                            0027

            "He says again, "An edict also, by the will and pleasure of the emperor, was transmitted to the Prefects of the provinces, that they thenceforth should venerate the dominical day; that they should honor the days consecrated to the Martyrs, and should celebrate the solemnities of the festivals in the churches, all of which was done according to the will of the emperor."  And as quoted by Lucius, he says, that he admonished his subjects likewise that those days which were Sabbaths should be honored or worshipped." IBID, page 0027 paragraph 1

            "Sozomen says,* "He (Constantine) also made a law that on the dominical day, which the Hebrews call the first day of the week, the Greeks the day of the Sun, and also on the day of Venus, (i.e. Friday,) judgments should not be given, or other business transacted, but that all should worship God with prayer and supplications, and venerate the dominical day, as in it Christ rose from the dead; but the day of Venus, as the day in which he was fixed to the cross." IBID, page 0027 paragraph 2

            "Dr. Chambers says,+ "It was Constantine the Great who first made a law for the observance of Sunday, [emphasis supplied] and who, according to Eusebius, appointed that it should be regularly celebrated throughout the Roman Empire.  Before him, and even in his time, they observed the Jewish Sabbath as well as Sunday; both to satisfy the law of Moses, and to imitate the Apostles, who used to meet together on the first day."  He adds, "Indeed, some are of opinion that the Lord's day mentioned in the Apocalypse, is our Sunday; which they will have to have been so early instituted."  "By Constantine's laws, made in 321, it was decreed that for the future the Sunday should be kept a day of rest in all cities and towns; but he allowed the country people to follow their work.  In 538, the Council of Orleans prohibited this country labor." IBID, page 0027 paragraph 3.

            "To give the more solemnity to the first day of the week, Sylvester, who was bishop of Rome while Constantine was Emperor, changed the name of Sunday, giving it the more imposing title of Lord's Day.++  IBID, page 0027 paragraph 4

            "It is not to be doubted, that the laws of Constantine made the first day more conspicuous throughout the empire, as all public business was forbidden upon it.  They changed its character from a special day, in which, as a weekly festival, all kinds of business and labor were performed in city and country, to be, as Eusebius says, the very first.  This imperial favor for the first

----------

**Eccl. Hist. B. 1, ch. 8.

+Encyclop. Art. Sund.  Lond. 1791.

++Lucius' Eccl. Hist. Cent. 4, p. 740.  Bamp. Enq. p. 98.

                                                            0028

day was oppressive to all who conscientiously regarded the Sabbath from respect to the fourth commandment, in obedience to which the seventh day had always been observed; and if it had produced a general abandonment of its observation, it would not have been very surprising, considering the influence of court example and the general ignorance and darkness of the age.  Yet this does not appear to have been the case.  The Sabbath was still extensively observed; and to counteract it the Council of Laodicea, about A. D. 350, passed a decree saying, "It is not proper for Christians to Judaize and to cease from labor on the Sabbath, but they ought to work on this day, and put especial honor upon the Lord's day, as Christians.  If any be found Judaizing let him be anathematized." [emphasis supplied] IBID, page 0027 paragraph 5

            "Yet this did not produce any material change, for Socrates, a writer of the fifth century, who resided at Constantinople, makes the following remarks upon the celebration of the Sabbath, at the time he wrote, A. D. 440.  He says, "There are various customs concerning assembling; for though all the churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath day, yet the Alexandrians and the Romans, from an ancient tradition, refuse to do this; but the Egyptians who are in the neighborhood of Alexandria, and those inhabiting Thebeis, indeed have assemblies on the Sabbath, but do not participate in the mysteries, as is the custom of the Christians.  At Caesarea, Cappadocia, and in Cyprus, on the Sabbath and dominical day, at twilight, with lighted lamps, the Presbyters and Bishops interpret the Scriptures.  At Rome they fast every Sabbath."* IBID, page 0028 paragraph 1

.           "This account of the manner of celebrating the Sabbath in the fifth century, is corroborated by Sozomen.+  He says, "At Constantinople, and almost among all, the Christians assemble upon the Sabbath, and also upon the first day of the week, excepting Rome and Alexandria; that the ecclesiastical assemblies at Rome were not upon the Sabbath, as in almost all other churches of the rest of the world; and that in many cities and villages in Egypt, they used to commune in the evening of the Sabbath, on which day there were public assemblies." IBID, page 0028 paragraph 2

            "In regard to fasting on the Sabbath at Rome, here referred to, it ought to be said, that from the earliest times to the fourth century, the practice had been to observe the Sabbath as a holiday.  But the Church of Rome, in its opposition to the Jews, made it a fast day, that the separation might be marked and strong.  In the eastern churches they never fasted upon the Sabbath, excepting

----------

*Socrates' Eccl. Hist. B. 5. ch. 21. Basle ed.

+Eccl. Hist: B. 7, ch. 9.

                                                            0029

one Sabbath in the year, which was the day before the Passover.  But in the western churches they celebrated a fast every week.  It was in reference to this that Ambrose said, "When I come to Rome, I fast upon the Sabbath; when I am here, I do not fast."  Augustine also said concerning this, "If they say it is sinful to fast on the Sabbath, then they would condemn the Roman Church, and many places near to and far from it.  And if they should think it a sin not to fast on the Sabbath, then they would blame many eastern churches, and the far greater part of the world."  This Sabbath fasting was opposed by the eastern church; and in the sixth general Council held at Constantinople, it was commanded that the Sabbath and dominical day be kept as festivals, and that no one fast or mourn upon them.  The practice of fasting, therefore, was chiefly in the western churches, about Rome." IBID, page 0028 paragraph 3

            "It is perhaps difficult to determine exactly the relative importance attached to the seventh and first day of the week, at this time.  Sufficient may be found, however, to assure us, that the Sabbath was observed, and that no one regarded Sunday as having taken its place.  This is shown by the provision of the Council of Laodicea, A. D. 365, that the Gospels should be read on that day.  It is shown by the action of a Council in 517, (mentioned in Robinson's History of Baptism,) which regulated and enforced the observance of the Sabbath.  It is shown by the expostulation of Gregory of Nyssa, "How can you look upon the Lord's day, if you neglect the Sabbath?  Do you not know that they are sisters, and that in despising the one you affront the other?"  And as sisters we find them hand in hand in the Ecclesiastical Canons.  Penalties were inflicted by the councils both of Laodicea and Trull, on clergymen who did not observe both days as festivals." IBID, page 0029 paragraph 1

            "How the first day of the week, or Lord's day, was observed in the early part of the fifth century, we may learn from the words of St. Jerome.  In a funeral oration for the Lady Paula, he says: "She, with all her virgins and widows who lived at Bethlehem in a cloister with her, upon the Lord's day, repaired duly to the church, or house of God, which was nigh to her cell; and after her return from thence to her own lodgings, she herself and all her company fell to work, and every one performed their task, which was the making of clothes and garments for themselves and for others, as they were appointed." IBID, page 0029 paragraph 2

            "St. Chrysostom, patriarch of Constantinople, "recommended to his audience, after impressing upon themselves and their

                                                            0030

families what they had heard on the Lord's day, to return to their daily employments."* IBID, page 0029 paragraph 3

            "Dr. Francis White, Lord Bishop of Ely, speaking of this matter, says, "The Catholic Church for more than six hundred years after Christ, permitted labor, and gave license to many Christian people to work upon the Lord's Day at such hours as they were not commanded to be present at the public service by the precepts of the church." IBID, page 0030 paragraph 1

            "In the sixth century efforts were made to prevent this labor.  The following promulgation of a synod held by command of King Junthran, of Burgundy, will show the condition of things, and the means used to improve them: "We see the Christian people, in an unadvised manner, deliver to contempt the Dominical day, and, as in other days, indulge in continual labor."  Therefore they determined to teach the people subject to them, to keep the dominical day, which, if not observed by the lawyer, he should irreparably lose his cause, but if a countryman or servant did not keep it, he should be beaten with heavier blows of cudgels.+  The council of Orleans, held 538, prohibited the country labor on Sunday, which Constantine, by his laws, permitted.  This council also declared, "that to hold it unlawful to travel with horses, cattle and carriages, to prepare food, or to do anything necessary to the cleanliness and decency of houses or persons, savors more of Judaism than Christianity.++  In another council held at Narbonne in France, in the seventh century, they also forbid this country work.$ IBID,  page 0030 paragraph 2

            "Early in the 7th century, in the time of Pope Gregory I., the subject of the Sabbath attracted considerable attention.  There was one class of persons who declared, "that it was not lawful to do any manner of work upon the Saturday, or the old Sabbath; another that no man ought to bathe himself on the Lord's day, or their new Sabbath."#  Against both of these doctrines Pope Gregory wrote a letter to the Roman citizens.  Baronius, in his Councils, says, "This year (603) at Rome, St. Gregory, the Pope, corrected that error which some preached, by Jewish superstition, or the Grecian custom, that it was a duty to worship on the Sabbath, as likewise upon the dominical days; and he calls such preachers the preachers of Antichrist."  Nearly the same doctrine was preached again in the time of Gregory VII., A. D. 1074, about five hundred years after what we are now speaking of.  This is sufficient to show that the Sabbath was

----------

*Burnside on the Sabbath, p. 16.

++Chambers' Cyclop. Art. Sunday.

#Dr. Peter Heylyn's Hist. Sab. part 2, p. 135.

+Lucius' Eccl. Hist. p. 323.

$Lucius' Eccl. Hist. p. 103.

                                                            0031

kept until those times of decline which introduced so many errors in faith and practice.  Indeed, it is sufficient to show, that wherever the subject has been under discussion, the Sabbath has found its advocates both in theory and in practice." IBID, page 0030 paragraph 3

            "According to Lucius, Pope Urban II., in the eleventh century, dedicated the Sabbath to the Virgin Mary, with a Mass.*  Binius says, "Pope Innocent I., constituted a fast on the Sabbath day, which seems to be the first constitution of that fast; but dedicating the Sabbath to the Virgin Mary was by Urban II. in the latter part of the eleventh century."+  About this time we find Esychius teaching the doctrine that the precept for the observance of the Sabbath is not one of the commandments, because it is not at all times to be observed according to the letter; and Thomas Aquinas, another Romish ecclesiastic, saying, "that it seems to be inconvenient that the precept for observing the Sabbath should be put among the precepts of the Decalogue, if it do not at all belong to it; that the precept, `Thou shalt not make a graven image,' and the precept for observing the Sabbath, are ceremonial."  [emphasis supplied] IBID, page 0031 paragraph 1

            "The observance of the first day was not so early in England and in Scotland as in most other parts of the Roman Empire.  According to Heylyn, there were Christian societies established in Scotland as early as A. D. 435; and it is supposed that the gospel was preached in England in the first century by St. Paul.  For many ages after Christianity was received in these kingdoms, they paid no respect to the first day.  Binius, a Catholic writer, in the second volume of his works, gives some account of the bringing into use the Dominical day [Sunday] in Scotland, as late as A. D. 1203.  "This year," he says, "a council was held in Scotland concerning the introduction of the Lord's day, which council was held in 1203, in the time of Pope Innocent III.," and quotes as his authority, Roger Horeden, Matth. Paris, and Lucius' Eccl. Hist.  He says, "By this council it was enacted that it should be holy time from the twelfth hour on Saturday noon until Monday." IBID, page 0031 paragraph 2

            "Boethus (de Scottis, p. 344) says, "In A. D. 1203, William, king of Scotland, called a council of the principal of his kingdom, by which it was decreed, that Saturday, from the twelfth hour at noon, should be holy; that they should do no profane work, and this they should observe until Monday." IBID, page 0031 paragraph 3

            "Binius says that in A. D. 1201, Eustachius, Abbot of Flay, came to England, and therein preached from city to city, and from place to place.  He prohibited using markets on Dominical

----------

*Bampfield's Enq. p. 101.

+Eccl. Hist. p. 29.

++Lucius Eccl. Hist. p. 134.

                                                            0032

days; for he said that this command underwritten concerning the observation of the Dominical day, came from heaven.  The history of this singular epistle, entitled A holy command of the Dominical day, the pious Abbot stated to be this: "It came from Heaven to Jerusalem, and was found on St. Simon's tomb in Golgotha.  And the Lord commanded this epistle, which for three days and three nights men looked upon, and falling to the earth, prayed for God's mercy.  And after the third hour, the patriarch stood up; and Akarias the archbishop stretched out his mitre, and they took the holy epistle of God and found it thus written." IBID, page 0031 paragraph 4

            [We will give some extracts from this epistle, partly as a matter of curiosity, and partly to show the credulity of our ancestors, and by what means they were awed into what was to them a new religious observation.] IBID, page 0032 paragraph 1

            "I, the Lord, who commanded you that ye should observe the Dominical day, and ye have not kept it, and ye have not repented of your sins, as I said by my gospel, heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away; I have caused repentance unto life to be preached unto you, and ye have not believed; I sent pagans against you, who shed your blood, yet ye believed not; and because ye kept not the Dominical day, for a few days ye had famine; but I soon gave you plenty, and afterwards ye did worse: I will again, that none from the ninth hour of the Sabbath until the rising of the sun on Monday, do work any thing unless what is good, which if any do, let him amend by repentance; and if ye be not obedient to this command, Amen, I say unto you, and I swear unto you by my seat, and throne, and cherubim, who keep my holy seat, because I will not change any thing by another epistle; but I will open the heavens, and for rain I will rain upon you stones and logs of wood, and hot water by night, and none may be able to prevent, but that I may destroy all wicked men.  This I say unto you, ye shall die the death, because of the Dominical holy day, and other festivals of my saints which ye have not kept.  I will send unto you beasts having the heads of lions, the hair of woman, and tails of camels; and they shall be so hunger-starved that they shall devour your flesh, and ye shall desire to flee to the sepulchres of the dead and hide you for fear of the beasts; and I will take away the light of the sun from your eyes; and I will send upon you darkness, that without seeing, ye may kill one another; and I will take away my face from you, and will not show you mercy; for I will burn your bodies [emphasis supplied] and hearts of all who keep not the Dominical holy day.  Hear my voice, lest ye

                                                            0033

perish in the land because of the Dominical holy day.  Now know ye, that ye are safe by the prayers of my most holy mother Mary, and of my holy angels who daily pray for you.  I gave you the law from Mount Sinai, which ye have not kept.  For you I was born into the world, and my festivals ye have not known; the Dominical day of my resurrection ye have not kept; I swear to you by my right hand, unless ye keep the Dominical day and the festivals of my saints, I will send pagans to kill you." IBID, page 0032 paragraph 2

            "Provided with this new command from heaven, "Eustachius preached in various parts of England against the transgression of the Dominical day, and other festivals; and gave the people absolution upon condition that they hereafter reverence the Dominical day, and the festivals of the saints."  The time appointed as holy, was from the ninth hour on the Sabbath until Monday morning at sunrise. [emphasis supplied] And the people vowed to God, that hereafter they would neither buy nor sell any thing but food on Sunday." IBID, page 0033 paragraph 1

            "Then," says Binius, "the enemy of man, envying the admonitions of this holy man, put it into the heart of the king and nobility of England, to command that all who should keep the aforesaid traditions, and chiefly all who had cast down the markets for things vendible upon the Dominical day, should be brought to the king's court to make satisfaction about observing the Dominical day."  Binius relates many miraculous things that occurred on the Sabbath to those that labored after the ninth hour - i.e. after three o'clock in the afternoon of the seventh day, or Saturday.  He says, upon a certain Sabbath, after the ninth hour, a carpenter, for making a wooden pin, was struck with the palsy; and a woman, for knitting on the Sabbath, after the ninth hour, was also struck with the palsy.  A man baked bread, and when he broke it to eat, blood came out.  Another grinding corn, blood came in a great stream instead of meal, while the wheel of his mill stood still against a vehement impulse of water.  Heated ovens refused to bake bread, if heated after the ninth hour of the Sabbath; and dough left unbaked, out of respect to Eustachius's new doctrine, was found on Monday morning well baked without the aid of fire.  These fables were industriously propagated throughout the kingdom; "yet the people," says Binius, "fearing kingly and human power, more than divine, returned as a dog to his own vomit, to keep markets of saleable things upon the Dominical day." IBID, page 0033 paragraph 2

            Mr. Bampfield says,* "The king and princes of England, in  IBID, page 0033 paragraph 3

----------

*Enq. p. 111.

                                                            0034

            "1203, would not agree to change the Sabbath, and keep the first day, by this authority.  This was in the time of King John, against whom the popish clergy had a great pique for not honoring their prelacy and the monks, by one of whom he was finally poisoned." IBID, page 0034 paragraph 1

            "Binius (Councils, Cent. 18) states that King John of England, in 1208, in the tenth year of his reign, for not submitting to popish impositions upon his prerogatives, was excommunicated by the Pope, and his kingdom interdicted, [emphasis supplied] which occasioned so much trouble at home and abroad, that it forced him at last to lay down his crown at the feet of Mandulphus, the Pope's agent.  After he was thus humbled by that excommunication and interdiction, the king, in the fifteenth year of his reign, by writ, removed the market of the city of Exon from Sunday, on which it was held, to Monday.*  The market of Lanceston was removed from the first to the fifth day of the week.  In the second and third years of Henry III. many other markets were removed from the first to other days of the week, which King John would not permit to be done.  He also issued a writ which permitted the removal of markets from the first day to other days without special license." IBID, page 0034 paragraph 2

            "The parliament of England met on Sundays until the time of Richard II., who adjourned it from that to the following day." IBID, page 0034 paragraph 3

            "In A. D. 1203, "A council was held in Scotland to inaugurate the king, and [concerning] the feast of the Sabbath: and there came also a legate from the Pope, with a sword and purple hat, indulgences and privileges to the young king.  It was also there decreed, that Saturday, from the twelfth hour at noon, should be holy."++  The Magdeburgenses say, this Council was about the observation of the Dominical day newly brought in, and that they ordained that it should be holy from the twelfth hour of Saturday even till Monday.$"  IBID, page 0034 paragraph 4

            "Binius says, "A synod was held in Oxford, A. D. 1223, by Stephen, Archbishop of Canterbury, where they determined that the Dominical day be kept with all veneration, and a fast upon the Sabbath.#  IBID, page 0034 paragraph 5

            "The first law of England made for the keeping of Sunday, was in the time of Edward VI., about 1470. [emphasis supplied] "Parliament then passed an act, by which Sunday and many holy days, the feasts of all Saints, of holy Innocents, were established as festivals by law.  This provided also, that it should be lawful for husbandmen,

----------

*Prinn's Hist. Pope's Usurpa. part 3, p. 17.

+Bamp. Enq. p. 116.

++Boethus, B. 13, of Scotland, p. 788. Bamp. Enq. 114.

$Ibid.

#Binius, p. 385.

                                                            0035

laborers, fishermen, and all others in harvest, or any other time of the year when necessity should require, to labor, ride, fish, or do any other kind of work, at their own free will and pleasure, upon any of the said days."*  IBID, page 0034 paragraph 6

            "By such means as these, the observation of the first day was gradually but forcibly urged upon the people, wherever they owned allegiance to the Pope as head of the church, and in England and Scotland, as late as the thirteenth century, and the Sabbath was as gradually brought into contempt and disuse." IBID, page 0035 paragraph 1

            "The process by which the change was effected appears to be this: By first obtaining an annual celebration of the first day at the close of the Passover in honor of the resurrection; then a partial observation of the day weekly, it being then generally so observed among the heathen; then obtaining for it the support of civil laws, ecclesiastical canons, and penalties, and by giving it the title of Lord's day; then by requiring the consecration of the entire day.  To abate and ultimately eradicate all respect for the Sabbath, it was first turned into a fast, then it was dedicated to the Virgin Mary, resting upon it stigmatized as Judaism and heresy, and the preaching of it called Antichrist; and finally, pronouncing the fourth commandment ceremonial, and abstracting it from the Decalogue.  And thus, so far as the Roman church was concerned, the point was gained, and thus probably she performed her part in the fulfillment of the prophecy of Daniel, (vii,25,) "He shall think to change TIMES and LAWS; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." IBID, page 0035 paragraph 2 [emphasis suplied]

            "The cause of the Sabbath must also have been seriously affected by the rise of the Ottoman empire in the seventh century, and the success of the Mahometans in conquering the eastern division of the church.  Mahomet, as he professed, formed the plan of establishing a new religion; or, as he expressed it, of replanting the only true and ancient one professed by Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and the prophets; by destroying idolatry, and weeding out the corruptions which the later Jews and Christians had, as he supposed, introduced.  He was equally opposed to both Jews and Christians.  To distinguish his disciples the more fully from both, he selected as their day of weekly celebration, the sixth day, or Friday.  And thus, as a writer of the seventeenth century remarked, "they and the Romanists crucified the Sabbath, as the Jews and the Romans did the Lord of the Sabbath, between two thieves, the sixth and the first day of the week." [emphasis supplied] IBID, page 0035 paragraph 3

----------

*Bamp. p. 118.

                                                            0036

            "We have thus traced the history of the Sabbath in the Roman church down to the thirteenth century; and we see that through the whole of this period, the seventh day every where retained at least the nominal honor of being called the Sabbath,[emphasis supplied] and that no other day had ever borne that title; and that not until the remarkable letter found on St. Simon's tomb, had it been asserted by any one that the observation of the first day, Lord's day, or Sunday, was enjoined by the authority of Jesus or his apostles, nor any example of theirs plead in its favor.  Even then it was not pretended that the Scriptures suggest its observation." IBID, page 0036 paragraph 1

            "There are some traces of the Sabbath found among those Christians who separated from the Catholic communion, or were never embraced in it.  Among these is the Greek church, which separated from them about the middle of the eleventh century, and had a larger extent of empire than the papists now have.  According to Brerewood's Enquiries, p. 128, this church solemnizes Saturday festivals, and forbids as unlawful to fast on any Saturday except in Lent; retaining the custom followed before their separation.  The same author states that the Syrian Christians, who composed a numerous body in the East, celebrate divine worship solemnly on both the Sabbath and first day, continuing the custom of the Roman church at the time they separated from that community.  Sandy's Travels, p. 173, speak of a Christian empire in Ethiopia that celebrate both Saturday and Sunday, "that they have divers errors and many ancient truths."  The Abyssinian Christians are another numerous body, whose principal residence is in the empire of Abyssinia, in Central Ethiopia.  They are represented as being similar in some respects to the Papists.  Purchase speaks of them as "subject to Peter and Paul, and especially to Christ, as observing the Saturday Sabbath."*  They are also mentioned by Brerewood.  Mosheim mentions a sect of Christians in the twelfth century in Lombardy, called Pasaginians, charged with circumcising their followers, and keeping the Jewish Sabbath.  Mr. Benedict considers the account of their practicing the bloody right a slander charged on them on account of their keeping the Jewish Sabbath.+  Binius says that in 1555 there were Christians in Rome who kept the Sabbath, and therefore called Sabbatarii, and are represented as differing in other respects from the Romanists.' "   IBID, page 0036 paragraph 2

----------

*Purchase's Pilgrim, part 2, p. 1176.

+Hist. Bap. v. 2, p. 44.

++Page 877, Bamp. Enq. p. 117.

                                                            0037

this.  He says, "Their doctrines are, as far as the author knows, the doctrines of the Bible.  Besides this, they maintain the solemn observation of Christian worship throughout our empire on the seventh day."*  If the author used the phrase in its usual and Scripture sense, he has added a numerous body of Christians to those who have retained the ancient Sabbath." IBID, page 0036 paragraph 3

            "There has probably not existed a class of Christians since the Apostles' time, who could more justly claim to be apostolic than the Waldenses, who were formerly a numerous people living in the valleys of Piedmont, whither they retired, says Mr. Burnside, on the promulgation of Constantine's laws for the observation of the first day, in the fourth century; where they remained, according to Scaliger and Brerewood, in the time of Elizabeth of England, i.e. the latter part of the sixteenth century.+  They adhered firmly to the apostolic faith, and suffered severe persecutions from the Catholics, who were their most bitter enemies.  Mr. Robinson, in his History of Baptism, says, "they were called Sabbati and Sabbatati; so named from the Hebrew word Sabbath, because they kept the Saturday for the Lord's day."  They were also called Insabbatati, because they rejected all the festivals, or Sabbaths, in the low Latin sense of the word.  The account the Papists gave of their sentiments in 1250, is briefly this: That they declared themselves to be the apostolic successors, and to have apostolic authority; that they held the church of Rome to be the `Whore of Babylon;' that none of the ordinances of the church which have been introduced since Christ's ascension, ought to be observed; that baptism is of no advantage to infants, because they cannot actually believe.  They reject the sacrament of confirmation, but instead of that, their teachers lay their hands upon their disciples.  Mr. Jones says, because they would not observe saints' days, they were falsely supposed to neglect the Sabbath also.  Another of their enemies, an Inquisitor of Rome, charged them with despising all the feasts of Christ and his saints.  Another, a Commissioner of Charles XII. of France, reported to him, "that he found among them none of the ceremonies, images nor signs of the Romish church, much less the crimes with which they were charged; on the contrary, they kept the Sabbath day, observed the ordinance of baptism, according to the primitive church, and instructed their children in the articles of the Christian faith and commandments of God." [emphasis supplied]  IBID, page 0037 paragraph 1

----------

*Researches, p. 160.

+Burnside on the Sab. p. 108.

++Jones's Ch. Hist. p. 986.

                                                            0038

the Waldenses, that they rejected all the traditions and ordinances of the church of Rome as being superstitious and unprofitable, and that they made light of the whole body of clergy and prelates; on which account, having been expelled their country, they dispersed themselves in different places, viz. Piedmont, Calabria, Dauphiny, Provence, Languedoc, Bohemia, England, and elsewhere."*  James White - Bible Sabbath,  THE SABBATH FROM THE TIME OF CONSTANTINE TO THE REFORMATION.  page 0037 paragraph 2

[ TO BE CONTINUED ]

THE BIBLE SABBATH - Part 2

THE BIBLE SABBATH

Part 02

JAMES WHITE.

Paris, Maine, January, 1851.

THE SABBATH:

AUTHORITY FOR THE CHANGE OF THE DAY.

            "It being clear from the Scriptures, that the seventh day was instituted by divine authority for a weekly Sabbath, and religiously regarded throughout the times of the Old Testament, those who now relinquish its observance, and keep the first day of the week, take the ground that the Sabbath was either abrogated and a new institution introduced in its room, or that the time of its observance was changed from the seventh to the first day of the week, in commemoration of the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.  To be consistent with themselves, therefore, they are bound to evince one or the other of these positions.  The burden of proof evidently lies on their part.  For unless it can be shown, that the fourth commandment, which requires the sanctification of the seventh day, has been abolished, or amended by the substitution of the first for the seventh day of the week, it is clear that the original appointment remains obligatory and is now binding on the entire human family.  And to substantiate either of these points, the proof must be clear and decisive.  It will not do to rest upon doubtful deductions.  We have an unquestionable right to demand that divine warrant, in either case, which pertained to the institution as originally delivered." The Bible Sabbath by James White,  page 0014 paragraph 1.

            "We will therefore first examine the proofs adduced in favor of the abrogation of the former weekly Sabbath and the introduction of a new institution." IBID, page 0014 paragraph 3

            "To sustain this position, the broad ground is taken by some, that the Decalogue itself, in which the law of the Sabbath is contained, was abrogated; and that, under the new dispensation, no part of it is binding but what is newly enjoined or expressly recognized, either by Christ or his Apostles." IBID, page 0014 paragraph 4.

            "The perpetual obligation of the Decalogue implies, of course, the perpetual obligation of the Sabbath as enjoined in the fourth commandment.  But if that was abrogated, the Sabbath which it enjoined was also abrogated; and, consequently, it ceases to be binding, unless renewed under the new economy.  What, then, is the proof here relied upon?  One of the principal passages in which this proof is supposed to be contained is 2Cor.iii,7,8,13.  "But if the ministration of death, written and engraven on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done away, how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be rather glorious? . . . And not as Moses, which put a veil over his face, that the children of Israel could not steadfastly look to the end of that which is abolished."  It is argued from this passage, that the clauses "which  (IBID, page 0014 paragraph 5)

                                                            0015

glory was to be done away," and "to the end of that which is abolished," refer to the whole law, moral as well as ritual, because mention is made of "that which was written and engraven in stones," which is an evident allusion to the Decalogue.  But, on careful examination, it will be found that "that which was to be done away," was not the Decalogue itself, but "the ministration of it," which was then appointed - the same being emblematically illustrated by the glory of Moses' countenance, which was merely temporary.  This clause refers expressly to the glory of his countenance, and not to the glory of the law itself.  So also the clause "that which is abolished," does not refer to the Decalogue, but to the ministration of Moses, including the appended rights and usages, the priesthood and its sacrifices, which were useful merely for the time being.  It cannot be supposed that the Decalogue was abolished, without expressly contradicting Christ's testimony, Matt.v,17-19, as well as many other representations of the Scriptures.  The abolishment spoken of, therefore, evidently respected no other than what the Apostle calls in another place "the law of commandments contained in ordinances," inclusive of the entire ministration of Moses.  There is unquestionably a reference in this chapter to the Decalogue, but not as abolished.  It was merely the ministration of it, or the then instituted manner of teaching, illustrating, and enforcing it, which was abolished, to be succeeded by a new ministration of the same law by the Spirit.  For it is written, "I will put my law" - (the very law of the ten commandments) - "in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts."  Again, "We are not without law to God, but under the law of Christ."  What law but the Decalogue is here referred to?  Evidently none.  For surely we are not under the Mosaic ritual.  Again, "Do we make void the law through faith? . . Yea, we establish the law."  The same, no doubt, which was contained in the Decalogue.  Hence, the Apostle James says, "If ye fulfil the royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well."  Here the title "the royal law," is given by way of eminence to the Decalogue; and its permanent obligation is manifestly recognized; for the precept alluded to is a summary of the last six commandments of this code, and the allusion is so made as to imply the continued obligation of the first four, which are summed up in supreme love to God.  Again, the Apostle John testifies, "Hereby do we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments."  And again, "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."  In both these passages reference is evidently had to the precepts of the Decalogue, as the essential and permanent rule of obedience for Christians.  The doing away or abolishment, therefore, spoken of in the above passage, cannot refer to the Decalogue or the moral law itself, but to the Mosaic dispensation or ritual." (IBID, page 0015 paragraph 5).

            "Another of the proofs alleged for the abrogation of the Decalogue, and consequently of the Sabbath, is Colossians ii,14-17.  "Blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; and, having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.  Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." IBID,  page 0016 paragraph 1.

            "By "the hand-writing of ordinances," is most evidently meant the ceremonial law - not the Decalogue, or the moral law.  This is never characterized as "the hand-writing of ordinances."  Therefore, the "blotting out," "taking away," and "nailing to the cross," spoken of, have no reference to this law, but to the Mosaic ritual.  This is particularly distinguished from the Decalogue, and fitly described as "the law of commandments contained in ordinances."  It was this, and this only, which was "blotted out" and "nailed to the cross."  As, therefore, the reference made by the Apostle is expressly to this law, it follows, by a fair inference, that "the sabbath days" alluded to, or, strictly rendered "sabbaths," are those which were contained in this law, or among these "ordinances," and do not include the Sabbath of the fourth commandment.  There were, besides the weekly Sabbath, various other sabbaths appointed, which belonged to that ritual, and not to the Decalogue.  Accordingly, these were expressly included in "the hand-writing of ordinances," and like the rest were "a shadow of things to come," and ceased to be obligatory at the death of Christ.  There is evidently no authority in this passage for including any sabbaths but what properly belonged to the Mosaic ritual.  This view of the matter is corroborated by a more literal rendering of the 17th verse, viz: "Let no one therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in a part or division of a festival, or of a new moon, or of sabbaths."  The sabbaths alluded to are obviously those which are found in the same place with meats and drinks, festivals and new moons, and which were of the same general character.  The weekly Sabbath, therefore, is not affected at all by their abrogation, but remains in full force, as does every other precept of the Decalogue." IBID, page 0016 paragraph 2

                       

            "We find the same distinction as to the law which was abolished, in Ephesians ii,14,15.  "For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace."  Here the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles, called "the enmity," is expressly defined, as before, to be "the law of commandments contained in ordinances."  This, and this only, therefore, was abolished, leaving the Decalogue, or the moral law, in its original character and obligation.  This is the language of the whole Bible.  There is no proof in any of these passages, that the law of the ten commandments was abolished, or that the Sabbath enjoined therein was done away." IBID,  page 0017 paragraph 1.

JW   JWBS THE SABBATH:            Nor is there such proof in Romans xiv,5,6.  "One man esteemeth one day above another; another esteemeth every day alike.  Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.  He that regardeth the day, regardeth it to the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.  He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks: and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks."  This passage is frequently adduced as proof that the obligation to keep the ancient Sabbath has ceased, and that under the Gospel dispensation there is no divinely authorized distinction in the days of the week; that there is no one constituted holy in distinction from the rest; and consequently that every one is left at his own liberty to keep a Sabbath or not.  It will be easily perceived, that if this argument has any weight in reference to the seventh day as the Sabbath, it operates equally against the obligation to keep the first day, either as a substitute for the seventh, or as a memorial of the resurrection, seeing it places all distinctions whatever as to days on the same ground with the confessedly obsolete rites of the Mosaic ritual.  According to this view of the passage, we have under the Gospel dispensation no Sabbath at all - not so much as an authorized memorial of the resurrection.  He who claims the least authority for the observance of the first day of the week for any purpose, takes a course which completely overthrows the argument based upon this passage.  But, in reality, this text has nothing more to do with the subject before us, than either of those which have been examined.  It respects merely the distinctions which formerly existed in regard to the six working days of the week - some of them being appointed in the Mosaic ritual as sabbaths, others as days of atonement and purification, and others as festivals.  Some of the early Christians thought these distinctions still binding, as also the distinctions in regard to meats and drinks; others thought they were not.  Hence the exhortation which is subjoined to mutual forbearance.  That the distinctions referred to as to days, were those noted in the Mosaic ritual, and did not include the one contained in the fourth commandment, is manifest from the whole scope of the chapter.  There is particular reference made to one's freely eating all things, while another would eat only herbs; and accordingly the following rule, to be respectively observed, is laid down: "Let not him that eateth, despise him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not, judge him that eateth; for God hath received him."  This quotation clearly evinces that the Apostle was treating of ritual distinctions, and not of that distinction of days which was constituted by the ancient law of the Sabbath."IBID, page 0017 paragraph 2

            "Again, the abrogation of the Decalogue is supposed to be taught in Romans vii,4,5,6.  "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.  For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sin which were by the law, did work in our members, to bring forth fruit unto death.  But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter."  But if the term law here includes the moral as well as the ceremonial law, it is manifest that believers are not said to be delivered from it, considered in any other light than as a covenant of works.  Certainly they are not delivered from it as a rule of obedience.  To suppose this, is inconsistent with Christ's sermon on the mount, before alluded to, and many other decisive proofs of the perpetual obligation of the Decalogue.  It is probable the Apostle had special reference to the deliverance of believers from the curse of the moral law.  This is reasonably inferred from the clause, "that being dead wherein we were held."  If any thing more pertaining to this law be intended, it must be its original character when given to Adam as a covenant of works or of life.  For surely we are not and cannot be delivered from it as a rule of obedience, so long as God is what he is, and we are what we are.  Seeing that as long as the relation constituted by his character as Supreme Ruler, and by ours as moral subjects, exists, we shall be bound to love him supremely, and our neighbor as ourselves, which is the fulfilling of this law.  And to suppose that this law, as a rule of obedience, was actually annulled, and that those precepts only are now to be considered obligatory, which are enacted or published anew under the Gospel, is to suppose that God, at a certain time, actually rescinded the rule requiring supreme love to him, and to our neighbor as ourselves, which is palpably inconsistent, and contrary both to the current of Scripture and the nature of things.  It would be maintaining that to be changed which is manifestly unchangeable.  It would imply that, for the time being, the obligation recognized by the law did not exist; that the tie by which God and moral beings are united, was sundered, not by rebellion on the part of his subjects, but by his own act of abrogation.  Can this be admitted?" IBID, page 0018 paragraph 1.

            "But if it were admissible, and if no part of this law is binding on Christians but what is newly enacted or particularly recognized under the Gospel dispensation, the Sabbath of the fourth commandment could not in this way be set aside; because its continued obligation is plainly taught in the New Testament.  It is altogether a mistake, that we have no express recognition of this precept under the Christian dispensation.  It is plainly recognized by the Saviour in Matt.v,17-19, where he says, that he "came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill;" that "one jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled;" and that "whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."  If any commandment of this law is binding, the fourth is binding of course, even if it should be called the least.  It is also recognized in the following declaration of Christ, Mark ii,27 - "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath."  The word man is here obviously used for the entire race - not for a part - not for the Jews in distinction from the Gentiles - not for those who lived under the Old Testament dispensation, or till the time of Christ's death; but for man in his protracted existence during all future periods of time, i.e. for mankind in general.  This is the plain import of the declaration.  And if we render the original with the article, it is still more evident that the entire race is included.  "The Sabbath was made for the man," i.e. for Adam, the original parent of man, including, of course, his posterity.  But, according to either rendering, the entire human race is manifestly included in the term.  The Sabbath, then, was as truly made for the Gentiles as for the Jews; and for those who should live after the crucifixion, as for those who lived before; which is an explicit recognition of its perpetual obligation." IBID, page 0019 paragraph 1.

                                                           

            "The same recognition also appears from its continued observance under the ministry of the Apostles, and there being not the least hint or stir in reference to its abrogation, or to the substitution of another day in its room.  The weekly Sabbath is frequently mentioned in the Apostolic records, as a part of practical duty, and it was unquestionably the seventh day.  Thus we have the continued obligation of the Sabbath sanctioned by Apostolic example.  If, therefore, a new edition, or an express recognition of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment be considered necessary, to bind the consciences of men under the new dispensation, the foregoing considerations will show that we have such an edition or recognition, as truly as we have of the other precepts of the Decalogue.  So that nothing is gained in regard to setting aside the seventh day of the week, by attempting to show the abrogation of the Decalogue.  If those precepts of that law which require that we should have no other gods before the Lord - that we should not kill, nor commit adultery, nor steal - are newly enjoined or expressly recognized under the present dispensation, and, consequently, universally binding; the same is true of the fourth commandment, which requires the keeping of the seventh day." IBID, page 0020 paragraph 1.

            "Again, an attempt is made to prove the abrogation of the original Sabbath, by showing that the entire Decalogue was peculiar to the Jewish nation, constituting a national covenant, which, at the coming of Christ, was annulled, and a new covenant introduced.  But admitting that it was delivered immediately to them, in the form of a national covenant, this does not in the least imply that it was not equally binding, as a rule of obedience, upon other portions of the human family.  We might as well argue that the New Testament belonged merely to the primitive Christians, because it was delivered directly to them, and constituted the rule of their conduct and the basis of their hopes.  Yea, we might as well suppose that no nation except the Jews were bound not to have any other gods before the Lord, not to kill, not to commit adultery, not to steal, not to bear false witness, as to suppose that the Decalogue was purely of a national character, and binding merely on that people during their continuance as a national church.  And, as the Decalogue was not merely national as a whole, so there was nothing national in the fourth commandment.  It belonged, equally with the other nine, to the entire family of man, inasmuch as the essential reasons of all and of either of the commandments, were of universal obligation." IBID, page 0020 paragraph 2.

            "Again, that the original Sabbath was peculiar to the Jews, and consequently abrogated by the introduction of the new dispensation, is argued from its being specially urged upon them by the consideration of their deliverance from Egypt.  But this argument is of no force, because the same reason is urged in the preface to the entire Decalogue." IBID, page 0020 paragraph 3.

            "For the same purpose, also, an argument is founded upon the fact that the fourth commandment was enforced with a deadly penalty.  But this argument also fails; because a similar penalty was annexed to the breach of the other precepts of this law.  The truth of the case is, that these penalties belonged not to the Decalogue itself as first promulgated, any more than they belong to it now under the milder dispensation of the Gospel.  They were added in the Mosaic ritual, and constituted a part of the political arrangements for the time being.  Their abrogation, therefore, affects not the original law.  Though there be no civil power now given to the church to enforce obedience to this precept by temporal punishments, as formerly, the sacredness and obligation of the institution are not thereby at all affected.  The sin of disobedience will be visited in God's own time." IBID, page 0021 paragraph 1.

            "Again, some have inferred the abrogation of the former Sabbath, or at least its change, from our Lord's vindication of the act of the disciples, in plucking the ears of corn, and rubbing them in their hands, as they passed through the corn-fields on the Sabbath day, and from his saying, that "the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath day," Mark ii,23-28.  But there is evidently nothing in this narrative, or in this declaration, to justify such an inference.  It must be admitted on all hands, that the fourth commandment was obligatory, as originally given, till the death of Christ, if no further; and therefore Christ, who "was made under the law," was bound to obey it in its original strictness.  Admitting that he possessed the right, in a given instance, to intermit its obligation, it is not consistent to maintain that he did it; because he came to render perfect and universal obedience.  Hence he affirmed that one jot or one tittle should in no wise pass from the law "till all be fulfilled."  His whole life was a perfect comment on the requirements of the law.  Had he failed in the least particular, he would have been inadequate to the great purposes of our salvation.  It is obvious, therefore, that the transaction alluded to was not, under the circumstances, a breach of the fourth commandment, but in perfect accordance with its prescriptions - the labor implied by the act of the disciples being a matter of urgent necessity.  "It is lawful," said he, "to do well on the Sabbath day."  Neither does the declaration, that "the Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath day," imply that he abrogated or changed it, but rather that he was bound and engaged to protect it as a divine institution, and to enforce an enlightened and strict obedience to its requirements." IBID, page 0021 paragraph 2

            "The foregoing being the principal proofs adduced for the abrogation of the Decalogue, and the original Sabbath, it is evident that this view of the subject cannot be sustained.  It is not sanctioned by any plain scriptural evidence.  It is, therefore, palpably absurd to rest so important a matter upon so slender a basis.  It is laying violent hands on a code of moral and immutable precepts, given by God, and promulgated under peculiar and terrible signs of purity and majesty, to vindicate a practice which was introduced long after the commencement of the Christian era." IBID, page 0022 paragraph 1 [From Sabbath Tract No. 3.]

What day of the week was observed by the Apostles and Primitive Christians?

            "The practice of the Apostles and early Christians is justly admitted to have an influence in determining how we should understand and discharge our religious duties.  For this reason, the strongest efforts are made to show that they regarded the first day of the week as the Sabbath.  But the Scriptures afford no evidence of this.  On the contrary, there is the fullest proof that they religiously observed the seventh day - the only day which is called Sabbath in the New Testament.  In confirmation of this statement, we notice the distinction that is constantly made in the writings of the Apostles between the Sabbath and the first day of the week.  The seventh day is uniformly called the Sabbath, and the first day is mentioned only as such.  Had the writers of the New Testament adopted any other day for the Sabbath than the one commonly called by that name, their manner of speaking of these days is both mysterious and deceptive, as it is directly calculated to mislead us respecting a religious duty.  No person who regards the first day for the Christian Sabbath, will apply this name to the seventh day; neither will one observing the seventh day, style the first day of the week the Sabbath.  The reason is obvious.  Such a course would be contrary to his understanding of truth, and it would lead others to misunderstand his sentiments.  For this reason the Apostles would not do it." IBID, page 0022 paragraph 2.

            "In addition to this custom of calling the seventh day the Sabbath, we find it was the custom of those early Christians to assemble for divine worship on the Sabbath day.  The manner in which the Sabbath and the first day following our Lord's crucifixion

were observed, sufficiently proves what the sentiments and practice of the disciples were at that time.  It is said of them, that "they rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment," and on the first day they "traveled and went into the country."  In the 13th chapter of Acts, we are told that Paul and his company went to a place of worship in Antioch on the Sabbath day; and we have a sketch of the sermon preached by Paul on that occasion.  By the request of his Gentile hearers, he preached the \next Sabbath, when nearly the whole city came to hear him.  In Philippi, Paul and his company, on the Sabbath, resorted to the river side where prayer was wont to be made.  At this time Lydia was converted and baptized.  In the 18th chapter of Acts, it is said of Paul, who was associated with certain disciples in Corinth, that "he reasoned in the synagogues every Sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and Greeks;" and this practice he continued in their city a year and a half.  At Ephesus, Paul went into the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews, which is also admitted to have been on the Sabbath day.  In Thessalonica, there was a synagogue of the Jews, and Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures; Acts xvii,2. - These quotations are sufficient to show that the Apostles and primitive Christians observed the ancient Sabbath.  In Acts xxviii,17, Paul, in reply to the slanderous reports of his enemies, declares that he had committed nothing against the customs of the fathers.  Now, was it the custom of the fathers to keep the seventh day for the Sabbath?  And was it contrary to their custom to keep the first day?  If so, then Paul kept the seventh day of the week, and not the first, for the Sabbath.  In this thing there was a perfect agreement among all the Christians of the apostolic churches.  The Jews, who were ever ready to accuse them, and render them despicable in the eyes of their nation, never upbraided them with a violation of the weekly Sabbath, which with them was a crime worthy of death.  These facts are sufficient to prove that the Apostles and their associate Christians religiously observed the Sabbath of the fourth commandment." The Bible Sabbath, page 0022 paragraph 3.

What was the Practice of Christians after the Apostles?

"With a consistent Christian, the testimony and practice of what are called the Christian Fathers, have not authority sufficient to direct him either in devotion or in duty, when their testimony is not supported by the Scriptures.  It has, however, been generally alleged, by the advocates of the first day of the week that the united testimony of the earliest Christian writers prove that they observed this day as the Christian Sabbath, to the exclusion of the seventh day.  This is the more frequently admitted, on account of so few possessing the means of investigating the subject for themselves, and from the confidence had in the integrity of those who have assorted it.  But, for the honor of Christianity, it is to be hoped that this declaration is made more for want of information and consideration than from a thorough knowledge and recollection of what the Fathers have written on the subject.  To aid the reader in forming or correcting his opinion on this subject agreeably to facts, we briefly notice the grounds on which the advocates of the first day have erred, in stating that those early Christians kept this day as the Sabbath.  As vital piety declined in the church, after the days of the Apostles, outward ceremonies and unscriptural observances were made to supply its place; and under a pretence of doing honor to Christ, the Virgin Mary, the Apostles and Martyrs, a multitude of days were eventually introduced to religious notice, and urged upon the Christians by their teachers.  Among others were Ash Wednesday, Holy Thursday, Good Friday, &c.  The first day of the week, or Sunday, on which it was supposed Christ rose from the dead, was urged upon them as a festival in honor of the resurrection, and as such only it appears to have been used for a long time; and it appears not to have been originally intended to supersede the religious regard universally paid by Christians to the weekly Sabbath.  Agreeably to this view of the subject, the learned Morer, though an advocate for the first day, states that in St. Jerome's time, who was born as late as A. D. 544, the Christians, after divine worship on the Lord's day, followed their daily employment; and St. Jerome represents Paula, a devout lady, with the virgins and widows attending her, after coming home from worship on the Lord's day, as sitting down to their daily tasks, which consisted in making garments for themselves and others.  Chrysostom, Gregory, Augustine, and Jerome, not only connived at but recommended and enjoined this labor upon the Lord's day, from the consideration that only a small part of the day was occupied in divine worship.  The following authorities will shed more light on the subject." IBID, page 0023 paragraph 1.    

            "Athanasius, A. D. 340, says - "We assemble on Saturday, not that we are infected with Judaism, but only to worship Christ the Lord of the Sabbath." IBID, page 0024 paragraph 1

            "Socrates, an ecclesiastical historian, A. D. 412, says, "Touching the communion there are sundry observations and customs, for almost all the churches throughout the whole world do celebrate and receive the holy mysteries every Sabbath; yet the Egyptians adjoining Alexandria, together with the inhabitants of Thebes, of a tradition, do celebrate the communion on Sunday."  "When the festival meeting throughout every week was come, I mean the Saturday and the Sunday upon which the Christians are wont to meet solemnly in the church," &c." IBID, page 0024 paragraph 2.

            "Eusebius, A. D. 325, as quoted by Dr. Chambers, states that in his time "the Sabbath was observed no less than Sunday." IBID, page 0025 paragraph 1

            "Gregory expostulates thus - "With what eyes can you behold the Lord's day, when you despise the Sabbath?  Do you not perceive that they are sisters, and that in slighting one you affront the other?" IBID, page 0025 paragraph 2.

            "Sozomen says - "Most of the churches carefully observed the Sabbath." IBID, page 0025 paragraph 3.

            "Grotius, whose learning and candor eminently qualified him for a witness in this case, observes - "The Christians kept the holy Sabbath, and had their assemblies on that day, in which the law was read to them, which custom remained to the time of the council of Laodicea, about A. D. 355, who then thought meet that the gospel should also be read on that day.  These things considered, refute those who pretend that the first day of the week, or Lord's day, is substituted in the room of the Sabbath." IBID, page 0025 paragraph 4.

            "M. de la Roque, a French Protestant - "It evidently appears, that before any change was introduced, the church religiously observed the Sabbath for many ages; we of consequence are obliged to keep it." IBID, page 0025 paragraph 5.

            "The authors here quoted are resorted to by our opponents, whenever they have occasion for their testimony, and we have never heard their veracity questioned.  From their statements it is very evident, that the introduction of the first day of the week to religious notice was the effect of superstition; that it was at first but partially observed, and that by but few as a festival; afterwards by more; and finally by the greater part of professing Christians, who still observed the seventh day as the Sabbath.  It was by ecclesiastical councils and imperial decrees, that it finally superseded the Sabbath as a national and church holy day in most Christian countries. - Sab. Vindicator." IBID, page 0025 paragraph 6.

            "The reader will observe that some of the historical facts found on this, and the preceding page, are repeated in the four following pages.  In selecting this matter from different authors, we have found it difficult to avoid some repetition."   The Bible Sabbath, page 0025 paragraph 7.

                                                            0026 [ to be continued ]