Jesus and the Origin of Sunday
A popular view holds that Christ by his provocative method of Sabbath keeping-which caused considerable
controversy with the religious leaders of His day-intended to pave the way for the abandonment of the Sabbath and the adoption of Sunday keeping
instead. This view clearly distorts the intent of Christ's controversial Sabbath activities and teachings which were clearly designed not to nullify
but to clarify the divine intent of the Fourth Commandment.
Christ never conceded to have broken the Sabbath commandment. On the contrary He defended
Himself and His disciples from the charge of Sabbath breaking by appealing to the Scriptures: "Have you read . . ." (Matthew 12:3-5). The intent
of Christ's provocative Sabbath teachings and activities was not to pave the way for Sunday keeping, but rather to show the true meaning and function
of the Sabbath, namely, a day "to do good" (Matthew 12:8), "to save life" (Mark 3:4), to loose people from physical and spiritual bonds
(Luke 13:16), and to show "mercy" rather than religiosity (Matthew 12:7).
The Resurrection and the Origin of Sunday
Did the apostles introduce Sunday keeping instead of Sabbath keeping in order to commemorate Christ's
resurrection by means of the Lord's Supper celebration? This view, though popular, is devoid of Biblical and historical support. The major reasons,
briefly stated are the following.
No Command of Christ or of the Apostles
The New Testament never suggests or commands to celebrate Christ's resurrection by a weekly or annual
Sunday celebration. This silence is noteworthy in view of the specific instructions given by Christ regarding such practices as baptism (Matt
28:19-20), the Lord's Supper (Mark 14:24-25; 1Corinthians 11:23-26) and foot-washing (John 13:14-15).
If Jesus wanted the day of his resurrection to be observed as a day of rest and worship, would He not told the
women and the disciples when He rose: "Come apart and celebrate My Resurrection?" Instead He told the women "Go and tell my brethren to go to
Galilee" (Matthew 28:10) and to the disciples "Go . . . make disciples . . . baptizing them" (Matthew 28:19).
None of the utterances of the risen Savior reveal an intent to memorialize His resurrection by making Sunday
the new day of rest and worship.
No Designation of Sunday as Day of the Resurrection
Sunday is never called in the New Testament as "Day of the Resurrection." It is consistently called
"First day of the week." The references to Sunday as day of the resurrection first appear in the early part of the fourth century. (3)
By that time Sunday had become associated with the resurrection.
Sunday-Resurrection Presupposes Work
The Sunday resurrection does not mark the completion of Christ's earthly ministry which ended on a Friday
afternoon when the Savior said: "It is finished" (John 19:30), and then rested in the tomb according to the commandment. Instead, the
resurrection marks the beginning of Christ's new intercessory ministry (Acts 1:8; 2:33), which, like the first day of creation, presupposes work
rather than rest.
Lord's Supper: Sacrifice and Parousia
The very Lord's Supper which many Christians regard as the core of Sunday worship, initially was celebrated on
different days of the week and commemorated Christ's sacrifice and Second Coming rather than His resurrection. Paul, for instance, who claims to
transmit what "he received from the Lord" (1Corinthians 11:23), explicitly states that the rite commemorated not Christ's resurrection, but His
sacrifice and Second Coming ("You proclaim the Lord's death till he comes" (1Corinthians 11:26)).
Similarly, Passover, known today as Easter Sunday, was celebrated during apostolic times, not on Sunday to
commemorate the resurrection, but on the fixed day of Nisan 14, primarily as a memorial of Christ's suffering and death.
The Earliest Reference to Sunday
The earliest explicit references to Sunday keeping are found in the writings of Barnabas (about 135 A.D.) and
Justin Martyr (about 150 A.D.). Both writers do mention the resurrection as a basis for Sunday observance but only as the second of two reasons,
important but not predominant. Barnabas' first theological motivation for Sunday keeping is eschatological, namely, that Sunday as "the eight day"
represents "the beginning of another world." (4) Justin's first reason for the Christians' Sunday assembly is the inauguration of creation: "because
it is the first day on which God, transforming the darkness and prime matter, created the world." (5)
The above indications suffice to discredit the claim that Christ's resurrection on the first day of the week
caused the abandonment of the Sabbath and the adoption of Sunday. The truth is that initially the resurrection was celebrated existentially rather
than liturgically, that is, by a victorious way of life rather than by a special day of worship.
Jerusalem and the Origin of Sunday
Many believe that Sundaykeeping began in Jerusalem by the authority of the apostolic church. This view rests
on two incorrect assumptions. The first is that because the resurrection and appearance of Jesus occurred in Jerusalem on Sunday, the Apostles
instituted Sunday worship to commemorate these events by a distinctive Christian liturgy. The second incorrect assumption is that the Apostles were
encouraged by the fact that the earliest Christians in Jerusalem "no longer felt at home in the Jewish Sabbath service." (6) The earliest documentary
sources refute both these assumptions.
Regarding the first assumption we saw earlier that nothing in the New Testament prescribes or even suggests
the commemoration of Jesus' resurrection on Sunday. The very name "Day of the Resurrection" does not appear in Christian literature until early in
the fourth century.
No Radical Break
Regarding the second assumption, if the early Jerusalem Church had pioneered and promoted Sundaykeeping
because they no longer felt at home with Jewish Sabbath keeping, we would expect to find in such a church an immediate break from Jewish religious
traditions and services. Those who argue for an apostolic origin of Sunday observance make precisely this contention. But the opposite is the
case.
The book of Acts as well as several Judeo-Christian documents persuasively demonstrate that both the ethnic
composition and the theological orientation of the Jerusalem Church were profoundly Jewish. (7) Luke's characterization of the Jerusalem Church as
"zealous for the law" (Acts 21:20), is an accurate description.
Attachment to the Law
The attachment of the Jerusalem Church to the Mosaic Law is reflected in some of the decisions of the first
Jerusalem Council held about 49-50 A.D. (See Acts 15). The exemption from circumcision is there granted only "to brethren who are of the
Gentiles" (Acts 15:23). No concession is made for Jewish-Christians, who must continue to circumcise their children.
Moreover, of the four provisions made applicable by the Jerusalem Council to Gentiles, one is moral
(abstention from "unchastity") but three are ceremonial (even Gentile Christians are ordered to abstain "from contact with idols and from [eating]
what has been strangled and from [eating] blood" (Acts 15:20). This concern of the Jerusalem Council for ritual defilement and Jewish food laws
reflects its continued attachment to Jewish ceremonial law and its commands. It would be unthinkable that this Church at this early time would
change the Sabbath to Sunday.
James' statement at the Jerusalem Council in support of his proposal to exempt Gentiles from circumcision but
not from Mosaic laws in general, is also significant: "For generations past Moses has had spokesmen in every city; he is read every Sabbath in the
synagogues" (Acts 15:21). All interpreters recognize that both in his proposal and in its justification, James reaffirms the
binding nature of the Mosaic Law which was customarily taught every Sabbath in the synagogue.
Paul's Last Visit
Further insight is provided by Paul's last visit to Jerusalem. The Apostle was informed by James and the
elders that thousand of converted Jews were "all zealous for the Law" (Acts 21:20). The same leaders then pressured Paul to prove to the
people that he also "lived in observance of the law" (Acts 21-24), by undergoing a rite of purification at the Temple. In the light of this
deep commitment to the observance of the Law, it is hardly conceivable that the Jerusalem Church would have abrogated one of its chief
precepts-Sabbath keeping-and pioneered Sunday worship instead.
Did Sunday Originate After 70 A.D.?
The foregoing evidences has led some scholars to argue for the Palestinian origin of Sunday observance at a
slightly later time, namely, after the Roman destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. (8) They presume that the flight of the Christians from Jerusalem
to Pella as well as the psychological impact of the destruction of the Temple weaned Palestinian Christians away from Jewish observances such as
Sabbath keeping.
This assumption is discredited by both Eusebius and Epiphanius who inform us that the Jerusalem Church after
70 A.D. and until Hadrian's siege of Jerusalem in 135 A.D., was composed of and administered by converted Jews, characterized as "zealous to insist
on the literal observance of the Law." (9) The orthodox Palestinian Jewish-Christian sect of the Nazarenes, who most scholars regard as "the very
direct descendants of the primitive community" (10) of Jerusalem, retained Sabbath keeping on Saturday until the fourth century. Indeed, seventh-day
Sabbath keeping was regarded as one of this Church's distinguishing characteristics. (11) This implies that Sabbath observance was not only the
traditional custom of the Jerusalem Church, but also of Palestinian Jewish-Christians long after 70 A.D.
Of all the Christian Churches, the Jerusalem Church was both ethnically and theologically the closest and most
loyal to Jewish religious traditions, and thus the least likely to change the day of the Sabbath.
Hadrian's Legislation
After 135 A.D. radical changes occurred in the Jewish world. In that year, the Roman Emperor Hadrian crushed
the Second Jewish Revolt which had been unsuccessfully led by Bar-Kokhba. Jerusalem became a Roman colony from which Jews (and Jewish Christians)
were excluded. Hadrian renamed the city Aelia Capitolina and, more important still, he outlawed the practice of the Jewish religion in general and of
Sabbath keeping in particular throughout the empire. (12)
A whole body of Adversos Judaeos ("Against all Jews") literature began to appear at this time. Following the
Roman lead, Christians developed a "Christian" theology of separation from and contempt toward the Jews. Characteristic Jewish customs such as
circumcision and Sabbathkeeping were castigated.
There are indications that Sunday observance was introduced at this time as an attempt to emphasize to the
Roman authorities the Christian distinction from Judaism.
New religious festivals such as Sunday keeping could be adopted and enforced only by a church that had severed
it ties with Judaism. As we have seen, this excludes the Jerusalem Church prior to 135 A.D. After 135 A.D. the Jerusalem Church lost is religious
prestige and went almost into oblivion, so it could hardly have pioneered such an important a change.
Rome and the Origin of Sunday
The most likely church for the source of this change is the Church of Rome. Here can be found the social,
religious and political conditions which permitted and encouraged the abandonment of Sabbathkeeping and the adoption of Sunday worship
instead.
Predominance of Gentile Converts
Contrary to most Eastern churches, the Church of Rome was predominantly composed of Gentile converts. Paul in
his Epistle to this Church explicitly affirms: "I am speaking to you Gentiles" (Romans 11:13). (13) The predominant Gentile membership
apparently contributed to an early Christian differentiation from the Jews in Rome. In 64 A.D., for instance, Nero placed the charge of arson
exclusively on Christians, thus distinguishing them from the Jews.
Repressive Measures
Beginning with the First Jewish Revolt against Rome (66 A.D.), various repressive measures-military, political
and fiscal-were imposed upon the Jews, especially as their resurgent nationalism resulted in violent uprisings in many places outside of Palestine.
Militarily, Vespasian and Titus crushed the First Jewish Revolt; and Hadrian, the Second Jewish Revolt (132-135 A.D.). Politically, Vespasian (69-79
A.D.) abolished the Sanhedrin and the office of the High Priest; later Hadrian outlawed the practice of Judaism altogether (ca. 135 A.D.). Fiscally,
the Jews were subjected to a discriminatory tax (the fiscus judaicus) which was introduced by Vespasian and increased first by Domitian (81-96
A.D.) and later by Hadrian.
Anti-Jewish Contempt
That these repressive measures were intensely experience in Rome is indicated by the contemptuous anti-Jewish
literary comments of such writers as Seneca (d. 65 A.D.), Persius (34-62 A.D.), Petronius (ca. 66 A.D.), Quintillian (ca. 35-100 A.D.), Martial (ca.
40-104 A.D.), Plutarch (ca. 46-119 A.D.), Juvenal (125 A.D.) and Tacitus (ca. 55-120 A.D.), all of whom lived in Rome most of their professional
lives. (15) They revile the Jews racially and culturally, deriding Sabbathkeeping and circumcision as examples of Judaism's degrading
superstitions.
The mounting hostility of the Roman populace against the Jews forced Titus, though "unwilling"
(invitus), to ask the Jewess Berenice, sister of Herod the Younger, whom he wanted to marry, to leave Rome. These circumstances as well as the
conflict between Jews and Christians, apparently encouraged not only the production of a whole body of anti-Jewish literature in which a "Christian"
theology of contempt for the Jews was developed, but also the repudiation of characteristic Jewish customs such as Sabbath keeping.
Measures Taken by the Church of Rome
The Church of Rome adopted concrete measures to wean Christians away from Sabbathkeeping and to encourage
Sunday worship instead. Justin Martyr, for instance, writing in the mid-second century reduces the observance of the Sabbath to a temporary Mosaic
ordinance which God imposed exclusively on the Jews as "a mark to single them out for punishment they so well deserve for their infidelities."
(16)
This kind of negative reinterpretation of the Sabbath led Christians to transform their Sabbath observance
from a day of feasting, joy and religious celebration into a day of fasting, with no eucharistic celebration or religious assemblies permitted. (17)
The Saturday fast served not only to express sorrow for Christ's death, but also, as emphatically stated by Pope Sylvester (314-335 A.D.), to show
"contempt for the Jews" (exsecratione Judaeorum) and for their Sabbath "feasting" (destructione ciborum). (18) The sadness and hunger
resulting from the fast would enable Christians to avoid "appearing to observe the Sabbath with the Jews" (19) and would encourage them to enter more
eagerly and joyfully into the observance of Sunday.
Because the basic function of the Saturday fast was to discourage Sabbath keeping and to enhance Sunday
worship, it seems likely that the Saturday fast and Sunday worship both originated contemporaneously and at the same place. There is no question that
the Saturday fast was introduced by the Church of Rome.
Easter Sunday and Weekly Sunday
The weekly Saturday fast developed as an extension or counterpart of the annual Holy-Saturday of Easter
season, when all Christians fasted. (20) The annual Holy-Saturday Easter fast, like the weekly Saturday fast, was designed to express not only sorrow
for Christ's death but also contempt for those whom Christians considered its perpetrators, namely the Jews. (21) Moreover, since the weekly and the
annual Saturday fasts, as well as the weekly Sunday observance and Easter-Sunday, are frequently presented by the Church Fathers as interrelated in
their meaning and function, presumably all these practices originated at the same time as part of the Easter-Sunday celebration. (22) It is
important, therefore, to ascertain the time, place, and causes of the origin of Easter-Sunday, since this could well mark the genesis of Sunday
observance as well.
In his account of the Easter controversy, Eusebius describes Bishop Victor of Rome (189-199 A.D.) as the
champion of the Easter-Sunday custom, and Polycrates, Bishop of Ephesus, as the defender of the Quartodeciman tradition. (23) Quartodeciman means
14 and refers to the 14th of the Jewish month of Nisan, the date when Jews observe passover.
Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyon (from ca. 178 A.D.), intervened as peacemaker in the controversy. He urged Bishop
Victor to emulate his predecessors, namely "Anicetus and Pius and Hyginus and Telesphoros and Sixtus" who though they celebrated Easter on Sunday,
nevertheless were at peace with those who observed it on the 14th of Nisan. (24)
The fact that Irenaeus mentions Bishop Sixtus (ca. 116-126 A.D.) as the first bishop who did not observe the
Quartodeciman Passover suggests the possibility that the feast began to be celebrated in Rome on Sunday at about that time. The innovation could well
have been motivated by the desire to avoid Hadrian's repressive measures against Judaism.
This hypothesis is indirectly supported by Epiphanius' statement that the Easter controversy "arose after the
time of the exodus of the bishops of the circumcision" from Jerusalem. (25) This exodus occurred after Hadrian crushed the Second Jewish Revolt in
135 A.D. Since Sixtus (ca. 116-126 A.D.) was Bishop of Rome only a few years earlier, he could well have been the initiator of Easter Sunday. Some
time must be allowed before a new custom becomes a sufficiently widespread to provoke a controversy.
Differentiation From the Jews
While the exact date of the origin of Easter Sunday may be a subject of dispute, there seems to be a consensus
of scholarly opinion that it was in Rome that the new custom was introduced to avoid "even the semblance of Judaism." (26) Constantine, in his
letter to the Christian bishops at the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) exemplifies the marked anti-Judaic motivation for the repudiation of the
Quartodeciman Passover. He writes:
"We ought not therefore to have anything in common with the Jews, for the Savior has shown us another
way . . . In unanimously adopting this mode [i.e. Eastern Sunday] we desire, dearest brethren, to separate ourselves from the detestable company of
the Jews." (27)
This letter of the Council of Nicaea represents the culmination of a controversy initiated two centuries
earlier which centered in Rome.
The same anti-Judaic motivations which caused the replacement of the Jewish Quartodeciman Passover with Easter
Sunday also accounts for the contemporaneous substitution of Sabbath keeping with Sunday worship. This argument is supported not only by the fact
that the Jewish Sabbath shared the same anti-Judaic condemnation as the Jewish Quartodeciman Passover, but also by the close nexus between the
observance of the annual Easter Saturday-Sunday (a fast followed by a day of joy) and that of its weekly counterpart (the Saturday fast followed by
Sunday worship). The basic unity between these annual and weekly observances is explicitly affirmed by the Fathers, (28) and further suggests a
common origin in the Church of Rome at the same time and owing to similar causes.
Preeminence of the Church of Rome
Another important consideration is that only in Rome was there the "preeminent authority" (potentior
principalitas) (29) exercised by the Bishop of Rome-the only one capable at that time of influencing the majority of Christians to adopt new
religious observances. Thus, it seems clear that Sunday observance originated in Rome in the early part of the second century (about 135 A.D.) for
the reasons I have outlined.
Sun Worship and the Origin of Sunday
The social, political, and religious conditions mentioned above, explain why the Sabbath was changed to
Sunday. These do not explain, however, why Sunday rather than another day, such as Friday (the day of Christ's passion) was chosen.
Sun Worship and Sunday
The influence of sun worship with its "Sun-day" provides the most plausible explanation. The
cult of Sol Invictus-the Invincible Sun-as shown by Gaston H. Halsberghe, became "dominant in Rome and in other parts of the Empire from the early
part of the second century A.D." (30)
We know that the Roman sun-cults influenced Christian thought and liturgy. The Church Fathers' frequently
rebuke Christians for venerating the sun. (31) In early Christian art and literature, the sun is often used as a symbol to represent Christ. (32) The
orientation of early Christian churches was changed; instead of facing Jerusalem like synagogues, churches were orientated to the East. (33) The dies natalis solis Invicti (the birthday of the Invincible Sun) was chosen as the Christian Christmas.
The Advancement of the Day of the Sun
A second century change in the Roman calendar also suggests that Sun worship influenced the Christian adoption
of Sunday as the new day of worship. The seven day week was first adopted by the Roman Empire in the first century A.D. At that time the days of the
week were named after the planets (as they still are). Saturn's day (Saturday) was originally the first day of the week, followed by Sun's day. Under
the influence of the Sun worship, however, a change occurred in the second century: The Sun's day (Sunday) was advanced from the position of second
day of the week to that of first and most important day of the week. (34) This required each of the other days to be advanced one day, and Saturn's
day thereby became the seventh day of the week for the Romans, as it had been for the Jews and Christians.
The advancement of the day of the sun to the first and most important day of the week presumably influenced
Roman Christians with a pagan background to adopt and adapt the Sun's day for their Christian worship. This would serve to emphasize to
non-Christian Romans the Christian similarity to Roman practices and the dissimilarity to Jewish customs. All of this supports-if only indirectly-the
suggestion that Sunday was chosen for Christian worship because it was the Sun's day.
A more direct indication is provided by the use of the sun as a symbol to justify the actual observance of
Sunday. The motifs of light and of the sun are frequently invoked by the Church Fathers to develop a theological justification for Sunday worship.
God's creation of light on the first day and the resurrection of the Sun of Justice which occurred on the same day coincided with the day of the sun.
Jerome, to cite only one example, explains:
"If it is called the 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 appeared and on this day the Sun of Justice has risen." (35)
The day of the Sun, then, may well have been viewed by Christians familiar with its veneration, as a
providential and valid substitution for the seventh day sabbath, since the substitution could well explain Biblical mysteries to the pagan mind by
means of effective and familiar symbols. (36)
Conclusion
Both anti-Judaism and Sun-worship contributed to the change from Sabbath to
Sunday. Anti-Judaism led many Christians to abandon the observance of the Sabbath to differentiate themselves from the Jews at a time when Judaism in
general and Sabbath keeping in particular were outlawed in the Roman empire. Sun-worship influenced the adoption of the observance of Sunday to
facilitate the Christian identification and integration with the customs and cycles of the Roman empire.
The change from Sabbath to Sunday was not simply one of names or numbers, but of authority, meaning and
experience. It was a change from a holy day divinely established to enable us to experience more freely and more fully the awareness of divine
presence and peace in our lives, into holiday which has become an occasion to seek for personal pleasure and profit. This historical change has
greatly affected the quality of Christian life of countless Christians who throughout the centuries have been deprived of the physical, moral and
spiritual renewal the Sabbath is designed to provide. The recovery of the Sabbath is especially needed today when our souls, fragmented, penetrated
and desiccated by a cacophonous, tension-filled culture, cry out for the release and realignment that awaits us on the Sabbath Day.
Footnotes
- Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Q. 122 Art. 4 (New York: Benzinger Brothers, Inc., 1947) II: 1702.
- C. S. Mosna, for instance, states categorically: "Therefore we can conclude with certainty that the event of
the resurrection has determined the choice of Sunday as the day of worship of the first Christian community . . . . We can conclude without doubt
that Sunday was born in the primitive community of Jerusalem before that in the Pauline communities" (Storia della domenica dalle origini fino
agli inizi del V secolo [Rome, Pontifical Gregorian University Press, 1969], pp. 44, 53; cf., pp. 15, 20, 25, 27, 51, 77, 88); cf. Pacifico
Massi, La Domenica [Naples, 1967], p. 43; J. Danielou, Bible and Liturgy [South Bend, Indiana, 1956], pp. 242, 243, 222; W. Rordorf, Sunday:The
History of the Day of Rest and Worship in the Earliest Centuries of the Christian Church [Philadelphia, 1968], pp. 215-237; Paul K. Jewett, The Lord's Day [Grand Rapids, 1972], pp. 57, 64-67; J. Nedbal, "Sabbat und Sonntag im Neuen Testament" (Ph.D. dissertation, University
of Vienna, 1956) p. 170f.; Francis A. Regan, "Dies Dominica and Dies Solis: The Beginning of the Lord's Day in Christian Antiquity"
[Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.: 1961],p. 191; H. Dumaine, "Dimanche," DACL IV, col.
892f.
- See, for example, Eusebius of Caesarea, Commentary on Psalm 91, Patrologia Graeca 23, 1168; Apostolic
Constitutions 2, 59, 3. For texts and discussion, see C.S. Mosna, Storia della Domenica, pp. 233-240.
- The Episte of Barnabas 15, 8.
- Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 67
- W. Rordorf, Sunday, p. 218; cf. C. S. Mosna, Storia della Domenica, p. 53.
- For a concise survey of those works (such as Hegesippus, The Protoevangelium of James, the Gospel of the
Hebrews, the History of Joseph the Carpenter, the Gospel of Thomas, the divers Apocalypses of James and Clementine Recognitions and Homilies)
confirming the Jewish imprint of the Jerusalem Church, see B. Bagatti, The Church from the Circumcision (Jerusalem: Imprimerie des P.P.
Franciscains, 1971) pp. 70-78.
- This hypothesis is advanced by Francis A. Regan, "Dies Dominica . ." p. 18.
- Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 3, 27, 3; cf. 4, 5, 2-11; Epiphanius, Adversus Haereses 70, 10,
Patrologia Graeca 42, 355-356.
- M. Simon, "La migration a Pella. Legende ou realite," Judeo-Christianisme, ed. Joseph Moingt (Paris:
Recherches de science, 1972), p. 48. The same view is shared by J. Danielou, The Theology of Jewish Christianity (London: Longman and Todd,
1964), p. 56; cf. Bagatti, The Church from the Circumcision, p. 31-35.
- Epiphanius explains that those Jewish-Christians who fled from Jerusalem became known as the sect of the
Nazarenes who "fulfill till now Jewish rites as the circumcision, the Sabbath and others" (Adversus haereses 29, 7, Patrologia Graeca 42,
407).
- The rabbinic sources speak abundantly of the restrictions imposed during Hadrian's reign, which is commonly
referred to in the Talmud as "the age of persecution -shemad-," or "the age of the edict-gezerah" (cf. Shabbath 60a; S. Krauss,
"Barkokba," Jewish Encyclopedia, 1907, II, p. 509). The following quotation is a sample of statements often found in the Talmud regarding
Hadrian's anti-Jewish policies: "The Government of Rome had issued a decree that they should not study the Torah and that they should profane the
Sabbath" (Rosh Hashanah 19a in The Babylonian Talmud, trans. I. Epstein [London: The Soncino Press, 1938], vol. XIII, p. 78).
- cf. Romans 1:13-15. The predominance of Gentile members and their conflict with the Jews, resulted, as well
stated by Leonard Goppelt, in "a chasm between the Church and the Synagogue . . . unknown in the Eastern churches" (Les Origines de l'Eglise [Paris: Payot, 1961]), p. 203.
- According to Tacitus, Nero "fastened the guilt [of arson] and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a
class hated for their abomination, called Christians by the populace" (Annales 15, 44).
- For texts and comments, see From Sabbath to Sunday, pp. 173-177.
- Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 23, 3;
- Pope Innocent I (402-417 A.D.) in his famous decretal established that on the Sabbath "one should not
absolutely celebrate the sacraments" (Ad Decentium, Epist. 25, 4, 7, Patrologia Latina 20, 550); Sozomen (ca. 440 A.D.) reports that no
religious assemblies were held on the Sabbath in Rome or at Alexandria (Historia ecclesiastica 7, 19); cf. Socrates, Historia ecclesiastica 5,
22.
- S.R.E. Humbert, Adversus Graecorum calumnias 6, Patrologia Latina 143, 933.
- Victorinus of Pettau (ca. 304 A.D.), De Fabrica Mundi 5, Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum
Latinorum 49, 5.
- The connection between the two is clearly established by several Fathers, see Tertullian, On Fasting 14; Augustine, Epistle to Casulanus 36, 34; cf. Rordorf, Sunday, p. 143.
- The Didascalia Apostolorum (ca. 250 A.D.) enjoins Christians to fast on Easter-Friday and Saturday "on
account of the disobedience of our brethren [i.e., the Jews] . . . because thereon the people killed themselves in crucifying our Savior" (14, 19,
trans. H. Connolly [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1929], p. 190); cf. Apostolic Constitutions 5, 18.
- For a list of patristic testimonies treating the two feasts as being basically the same, see From Sabbath
to Sunday, pp. 204-205.
- Eusebius' account of the Easter controversy is found in his Historia ecclesiastica 5,
23-24.
- Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica 5, 24, 14.
- Epiphanius, Adversus haereses 70, 9, Patrologia Graeca 42, 355-356.
- J.B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, 4 vols. (London: Macmillan Company, 1885) 11, part I:88. Some
scholars rightly label Easter-Sunday as "Roman Easter," see Mosna, Storia della domenica 117, 119, 333; also Mario Righetti, L' Anno
liturgico, manuale di storia liturgica, 4 vols. (Milan: Ancora 1969), vol. 2, pp. 245-246.
- Eusebius, Life of Constantine 3, 18-19, NPNF 2nd, I:524-525 (emphasis supplied).
- From Sabbath to Sunday, pp. 204-205.
- Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 3, 3, 1.
- The Cult of Sol Invictus (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1972), p. 26. The study is part of the series on Oriental Religions in the Roman Empire edited by the greatest authority on the subject, M.J. Vermaseren.
- A concise survey of the influence of astrological beliefs on early Christianity is provided by Jack Lindsay, Origin of Astrology (London: Muller, 1972), pp. 373-400.
- For examples of literary application of the motif of the sun to Christ, see From Sabbath to Sunday,
pp. 253-254.
- That primitive Christians prayed toward Jerusalem is evidenced by the Judeo-Christian sect of the Ebionites,
who according to Irenaeus, "prayed toward Jerusalem as if it were the house of God" (Adversus haereses 1, 26). For references on the eastward
orientation, see for instance, Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 7, 7, 43; Origen De oratione 32; Apostolic Constitutions 2, 57,
2 and 14; Hippolytus, De Antichristo 59.
- That the day of Saturn was originally the first day of the week is clearly evidenced by the Indices
Nundinarii and by the mural inscriptions found in Pompeii and Herculaneum where the days of the week are given horizontally starting with the day of
Saturn. For a source collection see: A. Degrassi, Inscriptiones Italiae (Rome: Libreria Dello Stato, 1963) vol. XIII, pp. 49, 52, 53,
55, 56.
- In die dominica Paschae homilia, Corpus Christianorum Series Latina 78, 550, 1, 52; the same in
Justin Martyr, I Apology 67; Eusebius, Commentaria in Psalmos 91, Patrologia Graeca 23, 1169-1172; Maximus of Turin, Homilia
61, Patrologia Latina 57, 371; Augustine, Sermo 226, Patrologia Latina 38, 1099.
- In his Commentary on Psalm 91, Eusebius (ca. 260-340 A.D.) writes: "It is on this day [Sunday] 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" (Patrologia Graeca 23, 1169-1172). In his Life of Constantine, Eusebius states explicitly that "the Savior's day . . . derives its name
from light, and from the sun" (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 2nd, I, p. 544). Maximus of Turin (died ca. 400-423 A.D.) views the day of the sun as a proleptic announcement of the resurrection of Christ: "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" (Homilia 61, Patrologia Latina 57, 371).
Written by: Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi
|
