As no writer before Eusebius had ever hinted at the doctrine of the
change of the Sabbath, and as there is the most convincing proof, as we
have shown, that before his time Sunday possessed no Sabbatic character,
and as Eusebius does not claim that this doctrine is asserted in the
Scriptures, nor in any preceding ecclesiastical writer, it is certain
that he was the father of the doctrine. This new doctrine was not put
forth without some motive. That motive could not have been to bring
forward some neglected passages of the Scriptures; for he does not quote
a single text in its support. But the circumstances of the case plainly
reveal the motive. The new doctrine was exactly adapted to the new order
of things introduced by Constantine. It was, moreover, peculiarly suited
to flatter that emperor’s pride, the very thing which Eusebius was under
the strongest temptation to do.
It is remarkable, however, that Eusebius, in the very connection in
which he announces this new doctrine, unwittingly exposes its falsity.
He first asserts that Christ changed the Sabbath, and then virtually
contradicts it by indicating the real authors of the change. Thus he
says:—
“All things whatsoever that it was duty to do on the Sabbath,
these WE have transferred to the Lord’s day.”[762]
The persons here referred to as the authors of this work are the Emperor
Constantine, and such bishops as Eusebius, who loved the favor of
princes, and Sylvester, the pretended successor of Saint Peter. Two facts
refute the assertion of Eusebius that Christ changed the Sabbath: 1. That
Eusebius, who lived three hundred years after the alleged change, is
the first man who mentions such change; 2. That Eusebius testifies that
himself and others made this change, which they could not have done had
Christ made it at the beginning. But though the doctrine of the change
of the Sabbath was thus announced by Eusebius, it was not seconded by
any writer of that age. The doctrine had never been heard of before,
and Eusebius had simply his own assertion, but no passage of the Holy
Scriptures to offer in its support.
But after Constantine, the Sabbath began to recover strength, at least
in the eastern churches. Prof. Stuart, in speaking of the period from
Constantine to the council of Laodicea, A. D. 364, says:—
“The practice of it [the keeping of the Sabbath] was continued
by Christians who were jealous for the honor of the Mosaic law,
and finally became, as we have seen, predominant throughout
Christendom. It was supposed at length that the fourth
commandment did require the observance of the seventh-day
Sabbath (not merely a seventh part of time), and reasoning
as Christians of the present day are wont to do, viz., that
_all_ which belonged to the ten commandments was immutable and
perpetual, the churches in general came gradually to regard the
seventh-day Sabbath as altogether sacred.”[763]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account