[428] Lectures on Romanism, p. 203.
[429] Commentary on Prov. 8.
[430] Autobiography of Adam Clarke, LL. D., p. 134.
[431] Christianography, part ii. p. 59, London, 1636.
[432] Translation of the Apologies of Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and others, vol. ii. p. 375.
[433] John 21:20-23.
[434] 2 Tim. 3:16, 17.
[435] Note of the Douay Bible on 2 Tim. 3:16, 17.
[436] Obligation of the Sabbath, pp. 254, 255.
[437] Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10.
[438] A Treatise of Thirty Controversies.
[439] The writer has prepared a small work entitled, “The Complete Testimony of the Fathers of the first Three Centuries concerning the Sabbath and First Day,” in which, with the single exception of Origen, some of whose works were not at that time accessible, every passage in the fathers which gives their views of the Sabbath and first-day is presented. This pamphlet can be had of the publishers of the present work for fifteen cents. To save space in this History, a general statement of the doctrine of the fathers is here made with brief quotations of their words. But in “The Complete Testimony of the Fathers” every passage is given in their own words, and to this little work the reader is referred.
[440] Those who dispute these statements are invited to present the words of the fathers which modify or disprove them. The reader who may not have access to the writings of the fathers is referred to the pamphlet already mentioned in which their complete testimony is given.
[442] Justin Martyr’s First Apology, chap. lxvii.
[443] Eusebius’s Eccl. Hist., book iv. chap. xxiii.
[444] See chap. xviii. of this History.
[445] See his Ecclesiastical History, book iv. chap. xxvi.
[446] Sabbath Manual, p. 114.
[447] See chap. xvi. of this work; and also Testimony of the Fathers, pp. 44-52.
[448] The Miscellanies of Clement, book v. chap. xiv.
[449] The Miscellanies of Clement, book vii. chap. xii.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 61.
[450] The Miscellanies, book vii. chap. vii.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 62.
[451] Kitto’s Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature, original edition, article Lord’s Day.
[452] Tertullian on Prayer, chap. xxiii.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 67.
[453] On Idolatry, chap. xiv.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 66.
[454] Ad Nationes, book i. chap. xiii.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 70.
[455] De Corona, sects. 3 and 4; Testimony of the Fathers, pp. 68, 69.
[456] An Answer to the Jews, chap. iv.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 73.
[457] Against Celsus, book 8. chap. xxii.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 87.
[458] Eusebius’s Eccl. Hist., book v. chap. xxiv.
[459] Socrates’s Eccl. Hist., book v. chap. xxii.
[460] Anatolius, Tenth Fragment.
[461] Socrates’s Eccl. Hist., book v. chap. xxii.
[462] Sozomen’s Eccl. Hist., book vii. chap. xviii.; see also Mosheim, book i. cent. 2, part ii. chap iv. sect. 9.
[463] Socrates’s Eccl. Hist., book v. chap. xxii.; McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, vol. iii. p. 13; Bingham’s Antiquities, p. 1149.
[464] Maclaine’s Mosheim, cent. 1, part ii. chap. iv. sec. 4. I have given Maclaine’s translation, not because it is an accurate version of Mosheim, but because it is so much used in support of the first-day Sabbath. Maclaine in his preface to Mosheim says: “I have sometimes taken considerable liberties with my author.” And he tells us what these liberties were by saying that he had “often added a few sentences, to render an observation more striking, a fact more clear, a portrait more finished.” The present quotation is an instance of these liberties. Dr. Murdock of New Haven who has given “a close, literal version” of Mosheim, gives the passage thus:—
“The Christians of this century, assembled for the worship of God, and for their advancement in piety, on the first day of the week, the day on which Christ reassumed his life: for that this day was set apart for religious worship, by the apostles themselves, and that, after the example of the church of Jerusalem, it was generally observed, we have unexceptionable testimony.”—Murdock’s Mosheim, cent. 1, part ii. chap. iv. sec. 4.
[465] Neander’s Church History, translated by H. J. Rose, p. 186. To break the force of this strong statement of Neander that “the festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance, and it was far from the intentions of the apostles to establish a divine command in this respect, far from them, and from the early apostolic church, to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday,” two things have been said:—
1. That Neander, in a later edition of his work, retracted this declaration. It is true that in re-writing his work he omitted this sentence. But he inserted nothing of a contrary character, and the general tenor of the revised edition is in this place precisely the same as in that from which this out-spoken statement is taken.
In proof of this, we cite from the later edition of Neander his statement in this very place of what constituted Sunday observance in the early church. He says:—
“Sunday was distinguished as a day of joy, by being exempted from fasts, and by the circumstance that prayer was performed on this day in a standing and not in a kneeling posture, as Christ, by his resurrection, had raised up fallen man again to Heaven.”—Torrey’s Neander, vol. i. p. 295, ed. 1852.
This is an accurate account of early Sunday observance, as we shall hereafter show; and that such observance was only a human ordinance, of which no feature was ever commanded by the apostles, will be very manifest to every person who attempts to find any precept for any particular of it in the New Testament.
2. But the other method of setting aside this testimony of Neander is to assert that he did not mean to deny that the apostles established a divine command for Sunday as the Christian Sabbath, but meant to assert that they did not establish a divine command for Sunday as a Catholic festival! Those who make this assertion must know that it is false. Neander expressly denies that the apostles either constituted or recognized Sunday as a Sabbath, and he represents Sunday as a mere festival from the very first of its observance, and established only by human authority.
[466] See chapters x. and xi., in which the New Testament has been carefully examined on this point.
[467] Epistle of Barnabas 13:9, 10; or, as others divide the epistle, chapter 15.
[468] Eccl. Hist., cent. 1, part ii. chap. ii. sect. 21.
[469] Historical Commentaries, cent. 1, sect. 53.
[470] Rose’s Neander, p. 407.
[471] Note appended to Gurney’s History, Authority, and Use of the Sabbath, p. 86.
[472] Ancient Church, pp. 367, 368.
[473] Commentary on Acts, p. 251.
[474] History of the Church, cent. 1, chap. xv.
[475] Cyc. Bib. Lit., art. Lord’s day, tenth ed. 1858.
[476] Encyc. of Rel. Knowl., art. Barnabas’ Epistle.
[477] Eccl. Hist., book iii. chap. xxv.
[478] The Sabbath, or an Examination of the Six Texts commonly adduced from the New Testament in proof of a Christian Sabbath, p. 233.
[479] Ancient Christianity, chap. i. sect. 2.
[480] Epistle of Barnabas, 9:8. In some editions it is chap. 10.
[481] Coleman’s Ancient Christianity, pp. 35, 36.
[482] Ancient Christianity Exemplified, chap. 26, sect. 2.
[483] Buck’s Theological Dictionary, art. Christians.
[484] Tertullian’s Apology, sect. 2.
[485] Obligation of the Sabbath, p. 300.
[486] Historical Commentaries, cent. 1, sect. 47.
[487] 1 Pet. 1:1. See Clarke’s Commentary, preface to the epistles of Peter.
[488] Ignatius to the Magnesians, 3:3-5; or, as others divide the epistle, chap. 9.
[489] Ancient Church, pp. 413, 414.
[490] Id. p. 427.
[491] Future Life, p. 290.
[492] Examination of the Six Texts, p. 237.
[493] Ecclesiastical Researches, chap. vi. pp. 50, 51, ed. 1792.
[494] Ignatius ad Magnesios, sect. 9.
[495] Cyc. Bib. Lit., art. Lord’s day.
[496] Dialogues on the Lord’s Day, pp. 206, 207.
[497] A first-day writer, author of the “History, Authority, and Use, of the Sabbath.”
[498] Examination of the Six Texts, pp. 250, 251.
[499] For a more full statement of the case of Ignatius, see the “Testimony of the Fathers,” pp. 26-30. The quotation from Ignatius examined in this chapter is there shown, according to the connection, to relate, not to New-Testament Christians, but to the ancient prophets.
[500] Sabbath Manual, p. 120.
[501] See his “History, Authority, and Use, of the Sabbath,” chap. iv. pp. 87, 88.
[502] Examination of the Six Texts, pp. 258-261.
[503] The date in Baronius is A. D. 303.
[504] Examination of the Six Texts, pp. 263-265.
[505] Note by Domville. “Dominicum is not, as may at first be supposed, an adjective, of which diem [day] is the understood substantive. It is itself a substantive, neuter as appears from the passage, ‘Quia non potest intermitti Dominicum,’ in the narrative respecting Saturninus. The Latin adjective Dominicus, when intended to refer to the Lord’s day, is never, I believe, used without its substantive dies [day] being expressed. In all the narratives contained in Ruinart’s Acta Martyrum, I find but two instances of mention being made of the Lord’s day, and in both these instances the substantive dies [day] is expressed.”
[506] This testimony is certainly decisive. It is the interpretation of the compiler of the Acta Martyrum, himself, and is given with direct reference to the particular instance under discussion. An independent confirmation of Domville’s authorities, may be found in Lucius’s Eccl. Hist., cent. 4, chap, vi.: “Fit mentio aliquoties locorum istorum in quibus convenerint Christiani, in historia persecutionis sub Diocletiano & Maximino. Et apparet, ante Constantinum etiam, locos eos fuisse mediocriter exstructos atque exornatos: quos seu Templa appellarunt seu Dominica; ut apud Eusebium (li. 9, c. 10) & Ruffinum (li. 1, c. 3).”
It is certain that Dominicum is here used as designating a place of divine worship. Dr. Twisse in his “Morality of the Fourth Commandment,” p. 122, says: “The ancient fathers, both Greek and Latin, called temples by the name of dominica and κυρίακα.”
[507] Domville cites St. Augustine’s Works, vol. v. pp. 116, 117, Antwerp ed. A. D. 1700.
[508] Examination of the Six Texts, pp. 267, 268.
[509] Id. pp. 270, 271.
[510] Id. pp. 272, 273.
[511] Historical Commentaries, cent. 1, sect. xxxii.
[512] The Sabbath, by James Gilfillan, p. vii.
[513] To break the force of Domville’s statement in which he exposes the story originally told by Bishop Andrews as coming from the Acta Martyrum, it is said that Domville used Ruinart’s Acta Martyrum, and that Ruinart was not born till thirty-one years after Bishop Andrews’ death, so that Domville did not go to the same book that was used by the bishop, and therefore failed to find what he found. Those who raise this point betray their ignorance or expose their dishonesty. The Acta Martyrum is a collection of the memoirs of the martyrs, written by their friends from age to age. Ruinart did not write a new work, but simply edited “the most valued collection” of these memoirs that has ever appeared. See McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, vol. i. pp. 56, 57. Domville used Ruinart’s edition, because, as he expresses it, it is “the most complete collection of the memoirs and legends still extant, relative to the lives and sufferings of the Christian martyrs.” Domville’s use of Ruinart was, therefore, in the highest degree just and right.
[514] Ibique celebrantes ex more Dominica Sacramenta.—Baronius, Tome 3, p. 348, A. D. 303, No. xxxvi. Lucæ, A. D. 1738.
[515] Qui contra edictum Imperatorum, & Cæsarum Collectam Dominicam celebrassent.—Baronius, Tome 3, p. 348, A. D. 303, No. xxxix.
[516] Utrum Collectam fecisset. Qui cum se Christianum, & in Collecta fuisse profiteretur.—Id. Ib.
[517] Nam & in Collecta fui, & Dominicum cum fratribus celebravi, quia Christiana sum.—Id. No. xliii. p. 344. This was spoken by a female martyr.
[518] Dominicum celebravimus. Proconsul ait: Quare? respondit: Quia non potest intermitti Dominicum.—Id. No. xlvi. p. 350.
[519] In cujus dome Collecta facta fuit.—Id. No. xlvii. p. 350.
[520] Intermitti Dominicum non potest, ait. Lex sic jubet.—Id. No. xlvii. p. 350.
[521] In tua, inquit proconsul, domo Collectæ factæ sunt, contra praecepta Imperatorum? Cui Emeritus sancto Spiritu inundatus: In domo mea, inquit, egimus Dominicum.... Quoniam sine Dominico esse non possumus.—Id. No. xlix. pp. 350, 351.
[522] Non quaero an Christianus sis sed an Collectam feceris.... Quasi Christianus sine Dominico esse possit.—Id. No. li. p. 351.
[523] Collectam, inquit, religiosissime celebravimus; ad scripturas Dominicas legendas in Dominicum convenimus semper.—Id. Ib. p. 351.
[524] Cum fratribus feci Collectam, Dominicum celebravi.—Id. No. lii. p. 351.
[525] Post quem junior Felix, spem salutemque Christianorum Dominicum esse proclamans.... Ego, inquit, devota menta celebravi Dominicum; collectam cum fratribus feci, quia Christianus sum.—Id. liii.
[526] Utrum egeris Dominicum. Cui respondit Saturninus: Egi Dominicum, quia Salvator est Christus.—Id. Ib. p. 352.
[527] Per Collectam namque, & Collectionem, & Dominicum, intellegit semper auctor sacrificium Missæ.—Baronius, Tome 3, A. D. 303, No. xxxix. p. 348.
[528] Scilicet lex Christiana de Dominico, nempe sacrificio celebrando.—Id. No. xlvii. p. 350.
[529] De celebratione Dominici; Quod autem superius in recitatis actis sit demonstratum, flagrantis persecutionis etiam tempore solicitos fuisse Christianos celebrare Dominicum, nempe (ut alias pluribus declararimus) ipsam sacrosanctum sacrificium incruentum.—Id. No. lxxxiii. p. 358.
[530] Quod etsi sciamus eamdem vocem pro Dei templo interdum accipi solitam; tamen quod ecclesiæ omnes solo æquatæ fuissent; ex aliis superius recitatis de celebratione Dominici, nonisi sacrificium missæ posse intelligo, satis est declaratum.—Id. lxxxiv. p. 359.
[531] Collecta, Dominicum, Missa, idem, 303, xxxix. p. 677.
[532] Missa idem quod Collecta, sive Dominicum, 303, xxxix. p. 702.
[533] Dominicum celebrare idem quod Missas agere, 303, xxxix.; xlix.; li. p. 684.
[534] Vol. xviii. p. 409.
[535] Verstegan’s Antiquities, p. 10, London, 1628.
[536] Antiquities, p. 68.
[537] Jewish Antiquities, book iii. chap. i. See also McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, 4, 472, article Idolatry; Dr. A. Clarke on Job 31:26; and Dr. Gill on the same; Webster under the word Sabianism, and Worcester, under Sabian.
[538] Id. book iii. chap. iii.
[539] Vol. xviii. p. 409.
[540] Pp. 61, 62.
[541] 2 Kings 23:5; Jer. 43:13, margin.
[542] Dialogues on the Lord’s day, pp. 22, 23.
[543] Apology, chap. lxvii.; Testimony of the Fathers, pp. 34, 35.
[544] Apology, sect. 16; Testimony of the Fathers, pp. 64, 65.
[545] Ad Nationes, book i. chap. xiii.; Testimony of the Fathers, p. 70.
[546] Eccl. Hist., cent. 1, part ii. chap. iv. note ‡ to sect. 4.
[547] Eccl. Hist. cent. 2, part. ii. chap. i. sect. 12.
[548] History of the Sabbath, part ii. chap. i. sect. 12.
[549] Id. part ii. chap. iii. sect. 4.
[550] Hist. of the Sabbath, part ii. chap. i. sect. 10.
[551] Examination of the Six Texts, Supplement, pp. 6, 7.
[552] Du Pin’s Eccl. Hist. vol. i. p. 50.
[553] Hist. Church, cent. 2, chap. iii.
[554] Justin Martyr’s First Apology, translated by Wm. Reeves, p. 127, sects. 87, 88, 89.
[555] The Spirit of Popery, pp. 44, 45.
[556] Ductor Dubitantium, part i. book ii. chap. ii. rule 6, sect. 45.
[557] Brown’s Translation, pp. 43, 44, 52, 59, 63, 64.
[558] Sabbath Manual, p. 121.
[559] Dialogue with Trypho, p. 65.
[560] Sabbath Manual, p. 114.
[561] Examination of the Six Texts, pp. 131, 132.
[562] Id. p. 128.
[563] Id. p. 130.
[564] See his full testimony in the Testimony of the Fathers, pp. 44-52.
[565] Against Heresies, book iv. chap. xvi. sects. 1, 2; Id. book v. chap. xxviii. sect. 3.
[566] Id. book iv. chap. xvi. sects. 1, 2.
[567] Id. book v. chap. xxxiii. sect. 2.
[568] Against Heresies, book iv. chap. xv. sect. 1; chap. xiii. sect. 4.
[569] Bower’s History of the Popes, vol. i. pp. 18, 19; Rose’s Neander, pp. 188-190; Dowling’s History of Romanism, book i. chap. ii. sect. 9.
[570] History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 18.
[571] History of Romanism, heading of page 32.
[572] History of the Popes, vol. i. p. 18.
[573] Id. pp. 18, 19; Giesler’s Eccl. Hist. vol. i. sect. 57.
[574] History of the Sabbath, part ii. chap. ii. sects. 4, 5.
[575] Boyle’s Historical View of the Council of Nice, p. 52, ed. 1842.
[576] Hist. Sab. part ii. chap. ii. sect. 5.
[577] Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chap. xxvii.
[578] Id. chap. xxxviii.
[579] Tertullian’s Apology, sect. 16.
[580] Tertullian Ad Nationes, book i. chap. xiii.
[581] History of the Sabbath, part 2, chap. ii. sect. 3.
[582] Sermons on the Sacraments and Sabbath, p. 166.