Argument 7: Early Christian Believers Met on Sunday
Another argument used to affirm the sacredness of Sunday is created from “cherry picking” the writings of early church fathers such as Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Didache, Ignatius, Dionysius, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. This argument maintains these writers affirmed that early Christians met on Sunday for worship. This approach to the problem of Sunday sacredness is a smoke screen to hide the fact that the New Testament says nothing about Sunday becoming a holy day. Everyone knows that if certain historical facts are kept from sight, people can twist them to create a skewed view of history and make it be whatever they want. However, when all of the historical facts are presented, they tell a very different story than what is often represented as history.
During the first century A.D., Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire because of persecution. Christians were constantly on the move to escape capture, confiscation, punishment, and death. For a while, each Caesar seemed to be more intent on destroying Jews and Christians than his predecessor. Therefore, early Christians made theological compromises to survive. During the second century A.D., Judaism’s influence over Christianity in Italy had faded because three or four generations of Roman-born Christians had come and gone. Jerusalem was a non-important heap of ruins and Christians wanted their own religious identity – an identity that had nothing to do with the Jews.
To make matters worse, many Gentiles had “joined the church” and brought their peculiar religious baggage. Consequently, Christianity in Rome mutated into a Romanesque version, which was unlike Christianity in other parts of the world.
By A.D. 150, 120 years after Jesus ascended, Christians, in Rome, had found areas where compromise was possible with Mithraism. This led to theological ecumenism and apostasy. Many Christian denominations are participating in a similar process today and again, the result will be awful.
When Rome destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70, Christianity was deprived of its headquarters and “main office.” Each church quickly found itself alone and became its own authority in matters of faith and doctrine. Early Church history indicates that Christians adjusted beliefs and doctrines as needed, depending on location and leadership. During the last part of the second century A.D., Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyons, located in what is now called France, became alarmed with
the heresies that had infiltrated the Christian movement. He was aware of how Christians in Rome had begun to meet on Sunday and abandoned the seventh day Sabbath, and he spoke against it. He wrote: “For He [Christ] did not make void, but fulfilled the law [Ten Commandments].” (Irenaeus, Ante-Nicean Christian Library/Against Heresies, Vol 1, (Boston, 1887) p. 471, insertions mine)
Tertullian, another early church father, wrote extensively concerning Christian doctrine. He, like Irenaeus, was alarmed at the practices of certain Christians, especially those in Rome. In regards to the seventh day Sabbath he wrote: “Thus
Christ did not at all rescind the Sabbath. He kept the law [Ten Commandments] thereof . . . He restored to the Sabbath the works for were proper for it.” (Tertullian, Ante-Nicean Christian Library/Book IV, Chap 12, Vol 3, (Boston, 1887)
p. 362, insertion mine)
Debate over Sunday observance grew in those early years because the church in Rome defended the practice. Bishop Archelaus responded to bishop Manes, saying: “Again as to the assertion that the [seventh day] Sabbath has been abolished we deny that He [Christ] has abolished it plainly. For He Himself was also Lord of the Sabbath.” (Archelaus, Ante-Nicean Christian Library/The Disputation with Manes, Vol 4, (Boston, 1887) p. 217, insertions mine)
By A.D. 320, confusion and compromise had devastated many early Christian beliefs. Christians in Alexandria, Egypt were defending views on the deity of Jesus that opposed the church in Rome. The Christian leaders discussed, debated, and argued the need for centralized church authority and leadership. Many agreed that church doctrine needed to be de ned and protected so that heresy would not destroy Christianity, but they could not agree on a process or who would do the job best.
Poor communication, distance, differences in culture, education, language, and social factors began to define Christianity according to geography. It was easy to see the result would be a highly fractured church. Both the world and Christianity needed a strong unifying leader and Constantine concluded he was “the chosen one!” He believed God had divinely appointed him to rescue a crumbling Roman empire and the universal Christian Church. When Constantine ascended to the throne as sole ruler of the empire, about A.D. 312, he had transformed himself into a Christian for political advantage. Constantine was clever and saw Christianity as
a means of unifying an ethnically and religiously diverse empire. When he endorsed the version of Christianity that was centered in Rome, he set a sequence of events in motion that could not have been imagined.
To put the empire on notice that Constantine had established a new world order, he had his army baptized into Christianity by marching them through a river. Then, to promote a universal day for worship, he implemented a Sunday law in March, A.D. 321 as a political compromise. Constantine patronized everyone by declaring a weekly holy day/holiday. His Sunday law meshed with customary Roman practice and it aligned with the desires of the church at Rome. Even non-Christians were quite happy with a national day of rest. “Let all judges and all city people and all tradesmen, rest upon the venerable day of the Sun. But let those dwelling in the country freely and with full liberty attend to the culture of their fields; since it frequently happens, that no other day is so t for the sowing of grain, or the planting of vines; hence the favorable time should not be allowed to pass, lest the provision of heaven be lost.” (Cod. Justin, III Tit 12, L.3., March 7, A.D. 321) Did you notice that Constantine’s decree did not mandate worship on Sunday?
Although Christians in Rome had been meeting on Sunday for more than a century when Constantine announced his decree, other Christians around the Mediterranean Sea were not overjoyed. Most of the Christians outside Rome were still observing the seventh day Sabbath. Socrates writes near the turn of the fourth century: “Such is the difference in the churches on the subject of fasts. Nor is there less variation
in regard to religious assemblies. For although almost all churches through the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Rome and Alexandria have ceased to do this.” (Socrates, Ante-Nicean Christian Library/Ecclesiastical History, Book V, chap 22, Vol II, (Boston, 1887) p. 132)
Constantine’s decree did not abolish the importance of the seventh day Sabbath; something else would have to occur before that could be accomplished. The leaders from the church in Rome needed a doctrine that dealt directly with the “Lord’s Day” to present a strong case before a contentious and divided body of Christians. Eusebius, another apologist (peacemaker) of the era, was a Christian confidant and advisor of Constantine.
He masterminded a doctrine for Sunday observance that remains intact for Catholics today. Carefully notice his anti- Semitic argument for the observance of Sunday:
