Sun Worship and the
Origin of Sunday

The Date of Christmas

The adoption of the 25th of December for the celebration of Christmas is perhaps the most explicit example of Sun-worship’s influence on the Christian liturgical calendar. It is a known fact that the pagan feast of the dies natalis Solis Invicti—the birthday of the Invincible Sun, was held on that date. (71) Do Christian sources openly admit the borrowing of the date of such a pagan festivity? Obviously not. (72) To admit borrowing a pagan festival, even after due re-interpretation of its meaning, would be tantamount to an open betrayal of the faith. This the Fathers were anxious to avoid. Augustine and Leo the Great, for instance, strongly reprimanded those Christians who at Christmas worshiped the Sun rather than the birth of Christ. (73) Therefore, it is well to keep in mind that in the investigation of the influence of the Sun-cults on the Christian liturgy, the most we can hope to find are not direct but indirect indications. This warning applies not only for the date of Christmas but for that of Sunday as well.

Gaston H. Halsberghe in his recent monograph The Cult of Sol Invictus, already cited, similarly concludes:

"The authors whom we consulted on this point are unanimous in admitting the influence of the pagan celebration held in honor of Deus Sol Invictus on the 25th of December, the Natalis Invicti, on the Christian celebration of Christmas. This influence is held to be responsible for the shifting to the 25th of December of the birth of Christ, which had until then been held on the day of the Epiphany, the 6th of January. The celebration of the birth of the Sun god, which was accompanied by a profusion of light and torches and the decoration of branches and small trees, had captivated the followers of the cult to such a degree that even after they had been converted to Christianity they continued to celebrate the feast of the birth of the Sun god." (77)

Let us note that the Church of Rome (as in the case of Easter Sunday so in the question of the celebration of Christmas) pioneered and promoted the adoption of the new date. In fact the first explicit indication that on the 25th of December Christians celebrated Christ’s birthday, is found in a Roman document known as Chronograph of 354 (a calendar attributed to Fuzious Dionysius Philocalus), where it says: "VIII Kal. Jan. natus Christus in Betleern Judaeae —On the eighth calends of January [i.e., December 25th] Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea." (78) That the Church of Rome introduced and championed this new date, is accepted by most scholars. For instance, Mario Righetti, a renowned Catholic liturgist, writes:

"After the peace the Church of Rome, to facilitate the acceptance of the faith by the pagan masses, found it convenient to institute the 25th of December as the feast of the temporal birth of Christ, to divert them from the pagan feast, celebrated on the same day in honor of the "Invincible Sun" Mithras, the conqueror of darkness." (79)

In the Orient, however, the birth and the baptism of Jesus were celebrated respectively on January 5 and 6. B. Botte, a Belgian Benedictine scholar, in a significant study concludes that this date also evolved from an originally pagan feast, namely Epiphany, which commemorated the birth and growth of light. (80) It was not an easy task for the Church of Rome to get the Eastern churches to accept the new date of December 25th, since many of them "firmly adhered to the practice of observing the festival of Christ’s birth in its old form as an Epiphany festival on January 5th-6th." (81)

It would take us beyond our immediate scope to trace the process of adoption by the various Christian communities of the Roman Christmas date. It will be sufficient to notice that the adoption of the date of December 25th for the celebration of Christ’s birth provides an additional example not only of the influence of the Sun-cult, but also of the primacy exerted by Rome in promoting liturgical innovations.

The three examples we have briefly considered (Christ-the-Sun, the eastward orientation, and the Christmas date) evidence sufficiently the influence of Sun-cults on Christian thought and liturgy. J. A. Jungmann summarizes it well when he writes that "Christianity absorbed and made its own what could be salvaged from pagan antiquity, not destroying it but converting it, Christianizing what could be turned to good." (82)

These conclusions justify a more direct investigation of the influence of the pagan veneration of the day of the Sun on the Christian adoption of the very same day.

The Day of the Sun and the Origin of Sunday

The association between the Christian Sunday and the pagan veneration of the day of the Sun is not explicit before the time of Eusebius (ca. A.D. 260-340). Though Christ is often referred to by earlier Fathers as "True Light" and "Sun of Justices" (83) no deliberate attempt was made prior to Eusebius to justify Sunday observance by means of the symbology of the day of the Sun. On the other hand Eusebius several times refers explicitly to the motifs of the light, of the sun and of the day of the Sun, to explain the substitution of the Christian Sunday for the Jewish Sabbath. For example, in his Commentary on Psalm 91 he writes:

"The Logos has transferred by the New Alliance the celebration of the Sabbath to the rising of the light. He has given us a type of the true rest in the saving day of the Lord, the first day of light. ... In this day of light, first day and true day of the sun, when we gather after the interval of six days, we celebrate the holy and spiritual Sabbaths.... All things whatsoever that were prescribed for the Sabbath, we have transferred them to the Lord’s day, as being more authoritative and more highly regarded and first in rank, and more honorable than the Jewish Sabbath. In fact, it is on this day of the creation of the world that God said: "Let there be light and there was light." It is also on this day that the Sun of Justice has risen for our souls." (84)

Eusebius’ two basic reasons for the observance of Sunday, namely, the commemoration of the creation of light and of the resurrection of the Sun of Justice, (85) are reiterated almost verbatim by Jerome (ca. A.D. 342-420), when he explains: "If it is called day of the Sun by the pagans, we most willingly acknowledge it as such,since it is on this day that the light of the world has appeared and on this day the Sun of Justice has risen." (86)

In a sermon attributed to Maximus of Turin (d. ca. A.D. 400-423) we find an extreme development. The very designation "day of the Sun" is viewed as a proleptic announcement of the resurrection of Christ:

"We hold the day of the Lord to be venerable and solemn, because on it the Savior, like the rising sun conquered the darkness of the underworld and gleamed in the glory of the resurrection. This is why the same day was called day of the Sun by the pagans, because the Sun of Justice once risen would have illuminated it." (87)

These and similar texts where the meaning of and the motivation for Sunday observance are explicitly interrelated to the symbology of the day of the Sun, come to us from a later period when Sunday was already well established. Since these statements represent later admissions, can they be legitimately utilized to ascertain the influence of the day of the Sun on the origin of Sunday observance? We shall answer this question by raising another, namely, is it not possible, as remarked by F. H. Colson, that "what the Christians of a later epoch wrote may well have been said and thought by them of the earlier, even if it was not written"? (88)

Let us not forget that prior to the Edict of Milan (A.D. 313) Christians were an illegal minority forced to defend their beliefs and practices from pagan accusations and influences. Tertullian, we noticed, though he speaks of the day of the Sun which both Christians and pagans celebrated, avoids using the sun-symbology to justify the Christian Sunday seemingly for two reasons: firstly because that would have supported the pagan accusation that Christians were Sun-worshipers (a charge he strongly resented); secondly, because he was cognizant of the influence which pagan festivals still had on the Christians. (89) In his treatise On Idolatry, for instance, Tertullian exclaims: "How wicked to celebrate them [i.e. pagan feasts] among brethren." (90) Therefore, any attempt to associate the day of the Sun with the Christian Sunday, at a time when the latter was still a young institution, could have been readily misinterpreted by Christians still susceptible to pagan influences. Besides, this would have sanctioned existing pagan accusations. A century later, however, when Sunday observance became well established, the Fathers, at least some, did not hesitate to designate the Christian Sunday as "the true day of the Sun." (91) This denomination should not be regarded as "a new apologetic technique," but rather an explicit admission of what had been an implicit recognition. (92)

Is it possible that even the Biblical notion of the sun and of light predisposed Christians favorably toward the day and the symbolism of the sun? It is a fact that there existed in Judaism and in primitive Christianity a rich and long-standing tradition which viewed the Deity as the True Light and the Sun of Righteousness. (93) Malachi, for example, predicted that "the Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in his wings" (4:2). (94) Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, announced the coming of Christ, saying "the sun rising (anatole) from on high has visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness" (95) (Luke 1:78-79). John, both in his Gospel and in Revelation, repeatedly describes Christ as "the light of men," "the light shining in darkness," "the true light," (96) "a burning and shining lamp." (97) Even Christ defined Himself as "the light of the world" (98) and urged His followers to "believe in the light’’ in order "to become sons of light." (99) The book of Revelation closes with the assurance that in the new earth there will be no need of the sun because "God will be their light." (100)

The existence of two distinct traditions, one Judaeo-Christian which associated the Deity with the Light and the Sun, and the other pagan which venerated the Sun, especially on Sun-day, could well have produced an amalgamation of ideas within the Christian community. This process could have predisposed those Christians who had previously venerated the Sun and who now needed to differentiate themselves from the Jewish Sabbath, to adopt the day of the Sun for their weekly worship, since its symbology well expressed existing Christian views. Such considerations were possibly encouraged by the valorization in the Roman society of the day of the Sun in place of the preceding day of Saturn. (101)

It should be clearly stated, however, that by adopting the day of the Sun, Christians did not intend to sanction and/or to encourage the worship of the pagan Sol Invictus (an insinuation that Tertullian emphatically repudiates), (102) but rather to commemorate on that day such divine acts as the creation of light and the resurrection of the Sun of Righteousness. Both events, they noticed, not only occurred on the day of the Sun, but could also be effectively proclaimed through the rich symbology of the sun.

Eusebius well exemplifies this in the passage we cited earlier, where referring to the day of the Sun he writes, "It is on this day of the creation of the world that God said. ‘Let there be light and there was light.’ It is also on this day that the Sun of Justice has risen for our souls." (103) In associating the creation of light and the resurrection of Christ with the day of the Sun, Eusebius was expressing explicitly what had been implicitly understood by many Christians for a long time. We noticed, for instance, that almost two centuries earlier, Justin Martyr placed in juxtaposition the creation of light and the resurrection of Christ with the day of the Sun. (104) Why? Presumably because all three (creation of light, resurrection of Christ and day of the Sun) shared a common denominator, namely, association with the Sun-Light of the first day.

How did Christ’s resurrection come to be associated with the sun rising? Apparently because, as we noted earlier, there existed a Judaeo-Christian tradition which described the Deity by means of the symbolism of the sun. Justin in his Dialogue with Trypho cites several Old Testament passages to prove that Christ is "more ardent and more light-giving than the rays of the sun." (105) This theme was undoubtedly encouraged by prevailing solar beliefs which Christians found to supply an effective symbology to proclaim the Christian message. Melito of Sardis (d. ca. A.D. 190), for example, utilizes the common belief of the daily baptism of the sun and stars in the ocean and of their daily rising to disperse darkness, (106) to explain the baptism and resurrection of Christ:

"If the sun washes itself with the stars and the moon in the ocean, why should not Christ have washed himself in the Jordan? He, the king of the heavens and the chief of creation, the Sun of the orient, who appeared both to the dead in Hades and to the mortals in the world! He, the only Sun who rose from heaven." (107)

An earlier indication of the viewing of Christ’s resurrection as the rising of the sun, is provided by Ignatius (ca. A.D. 110) in his Epistle to the Magnesians. Referring to what we have concluded to be the Lord’s life, he adds, "on [or by] which also our life arose through him and his death" (9:1). It has been noted that the Bishop here "uses a verb which is regularly applied to the rising of the heavenly bodies [anatello] and not that which is commonly used of the resurrection from the dead [anistemi] (108) Should we regard this as purely coincidental? B. Botte replies emphatically that "it is impossible." He then raises a significant question:

"If the resurrection of Christ is presented by the image of a rising star, is it rash to think that S. Ignatius intended to allude discreetly to the designation of the day of the sun which had been given to Sunday?" (109)

To conclude that Ignatius was referring to the day of the Sun when he employed the verb commonly used for sun rising to describe the resurrection is hazardous. The subject of the immediate context, as we noticed, is the prophets who obviously did not observe the day of the Sun. The fact however that Ignatius views the resurrection of Christ as the sun rising, suggests the possibility of an early amalgamation of ideas. In other words, since Sunday was the day of the Sun and since Christ’s resurrection was viewed as the rising of the "Sun of Justice," it would only take a short step for Christians to associate the two. In fact, in their search for a day of worship distinct from that of the Jews, Christians could well have viewed the day of the Sun as a providential and valid substitution. Its symbology fittingly coincided with two divine acts which occurred on that day: the first creation of light and the rising of "the Sun of the second creation." F. H. Colson rightly points out that this coincidence could well have been regarded as

"a proof that in this pagan institution the Divine Spirit had been preparing the world for something better. In fact, the devout convert might well rejoice to be able to put a Christian construction on what had been a treasured association of his pagan past." (110)

These feelings we noticed are explicitly expressed at a later date. Maximus of Turin views the pagan day of the Sun as the prefiguration of the "Sun of Justice" who "once risen would have illuminated it." (111) Eusebius similarly clearly states that "the Savior’s day.., derives its name from light, and from the sun.’’ (112) It is true that such bold admissions are not found in earlier sources, but the earlier unwillingness of the Fathers to acknowledge explicitly the adoption of the day of the Sun and/or of its symbology can be satisfactorily explained, as we said above, by the existing necessity to safeguard a recently introduced institution. Today, for instance, Christians generally do not fear to admit that their Christmas celebration (date, lights, trees, gifts, etc.) derives from the pagan festivity of the Natalis Solis Invicti. Why? Undoubtedly because such an admission would hardly tempt any Christian to commemorate the birth of the Sun-god rather than that of Christ. For early Christian converts from paganism however, the situation was altogether different. Any explicit acknowledgment that pagan dates and symbols had been borrowed to commemorate Christ’s birth and resurrection could readily have encouraged many Christians to relapse (as actually happened) into their recently abandoned pagan practices. It was therefore this danger of "paganizing" a recently "Christianized" pagan festivity that led the Fathers, initially at least, to avoid, as a precautionary measure, establishing an explicit interdependence between the Christian Sunday and the pagan day of the Sun.

Conclusion

In this chapter we have found that all the necessary ingredients for the day of the Sun to influence the origin of Sunday observance were already present when the latter made its appearance.

Various ‘Sun-cults were predominant in ancient Rome by the early part of the second century. That these attracted the imagination and interest of Christian converts from paganism, we found evidenced by the development of the theme of Christ-the-Sun, and by the adoption of the eastward orientation for prayer and of the date of the 25th of December. The existence of a rich Biblical tradition which associated the deity with the Sun and Light seemingly facilitated, if it did not encourage such an amalgamation of ideas.

The valorization of the day of the Sun over that of Saturn, as a result of the diffusion of the Sun-cults, possibly oriented Christians (who desired to differentiate themselves from the Sabbath of the Jews) toward such a day. (113) This choice how ever, it must be stated again, was not motivated by their desire to venerate the Sun-god on his day, but rather by the fact that its symbology could fittingly commemorate two important events of the history of salvation—creation and resurrection: "it is on this day that the Light of the World has appeared and on this day that the Sun of Justice has risen." (114) Moreover, the day of the Sun enabled Christians to explain also the Biblical mysteries to the pagan world by means of an effective symbology that was very familiar to them.

Our investigation into the origin of Sunday observance has so far focused on two major contributory factors. The first, anti-Judaism, which appears to have caused a widespread devaluation and repudiation of the Sabbath, thereby creating the exigency of a new day of worship. The second, the development of Sun-cults with the consequent enhancement of the day of the Sun over that of Saturn, a contingency which apparently oriented Christians toward such a day, since it provided an adequate symbolism to commemorate significant divine acts. However, no adequate consideration has yet been given to the theological motivations for Sunday observance presented in the early Christian literature. Since these provide additional insights into this complex question of the origin of Sunday, we shall now direct our attention to them before drawing a final conclusion.