In Defense of the Faith

Constantine’s Sunday Law

Thus a gradual change from Sabbath observance to Sunday observance came in after the first centuries of the Christian Era had passed, especially among the Western churches. The more the pagan world came to favor Christianity, and the further removed the church became from the influence of the apostolic example of the first century, the more Sunday observance and the other heathen festivals prevailed. This change, covering centuries, was greatly helped by Constantine’s civil law of 321 in favor of the first day of the week, which banned work on that day in the cities, and commanded the people to rest on “the venerable day of the sun.” This famous decree said nothing about the “Lord’s day,” but was promulgated apparently for the purpose of finally establishing a heathen festival. This law of Constantine’s is quoted in the old Chambers’s Encyclopedia, in its article “Sabbath,” as follows: DOF 169.7

“‘Let all judges, inhabitants of the cities, and artificers, rest on the venerable day of the sun. But in the country, husbandmen may freely and lawfully apply to the business of agriculture; since it often happens that the-sowing of corn and the planting of vines cannot be so advantageously performed on any other day’ DOF 170.1

“But it was not until the year 538 that abstinence from agricultural labor was recommended, rather than enjoined, by an ecclesiastical authority (the third Council of Orleans), and this expressly that people might have more leisure to go to church and say their prayers.” DOF 170.2

From the Encyclopedia Britannica we read: DOF 170.3

“The earliest recognition of the observance of Sunday as a legal duty is a constitution of Constantine in 321 AD., enacting that all courts of justice, inhabitants of towns, and workshops were to be at rest on Sunday (venerabili die solis), with an exception in favor of those engaged in agricultural labor.”—Article “Sunday,” vol. 26 (11th ed.), p. 95. DOF 170.4

This, then, is admittedly the very first law for the observance of Sunday, the first day of the week, and it is made, not by “the Lord from heaven,” our, one and only Lawgiver, but by Emperor Constantine, who was of questionable character, and whose sympathies were more with paganism than with Christianity. Even this was not an ecclesiastical law of the church at that time, but merely a civil law made by the ruling emperor, and it was made in the fourth century after Christ, too late, it seems to us, to deserve any recognition from Christians as establishing a Christian institution which they are bound, under penalty of sin, to recognize; and, besides, it comes from a very questionable source. DOF 170.5

The fact seems to be that Constantine’s law for Sunday observance was not made for the purpose of favoring and establishing a Christian day of worship at all, but to enforce a pagan festival upon Christians and pagans alike, Mr. Canright’s argument to the contrary notwithstanding. Thus his law, instead of commanding rest upon “the Lord’s day,” commands it “on the venerable day of the sun.” He did not recognize Sunday as a Christian ordinance, but as a day sacred to the sun-god worshipped by the pagan world. It was the holy day of Mithraism, the great rival of Christianity. His law, therefore, was not for the purpose of enforcing Christianity on the pagans under his jurisdiction but for enforcing the new paganism upon the Christians. DOF 171.1

In his book The Lords Day, Mr. Canright makes a, long, labored effort to prove that Constantine had become a Christian convert some years before the promulgation of this famous Sunday law, and that he was therefore enforcing Sunday rest as a Christian ordinance, and not as a heathen festival. Now there is one difficulty here. When Constantine made his law, it was to the effect that people were to “rest on the venerable day of the sun,” not on the Sunday-Lord’s day. Does this indicate that he was enforcing a Christian Sabbath? The answer is clear. The emperor was enjoining upon Christians and pagans alike the festival of the sun-god, and was thereby legalizing sun worship and making it a civil crime for Christians to work on Sunday, as thousands were still doing up to this time. It was an effort to enforce heathen practices upon the Christian church. DOF 171.2

Mr. Canright admits that when Constantine made his famous Sunday law, he was still ordering that sacrifices be made to pagan gods, and that he had pagan rites performed for himself, but asserts that he was doing this, not from choice, but to avoid a rebellion among his pagan subjects. (See The Lords Day, by D. M. Canright, p. 197.) But how can it be demonstrated that this was his motive? The admitted fact is that he was still a heathen, and that when he made a law enforcing Sunday rest, he chose a pagan title for the day, boldly calling it “the venerable day of the sun,” not the day of the Son, or Lord. DOF 172.1

As to whether Constantine was here seeking to enforce a heathen or Christian festival, Professor Webster makes the following pertinent statement: DOF 172.2

“This legislation by Constantine probably bore no relation to Christianity; it appears, on the contrary, that the emperor, in his capacity of Pontifex Maximus, was only adding the day of the sun, the worship of which was then firmly established in the Roman Empire, to the other festival days of the sacred calendar.”—Prof. Hutton Webster, Ph.D. (University of Nebraska), Rest Days, p. 122. DOF 172.3

“What began, however, as a pagan ordinance, ended as a Christian regulation; and a long series of imperial decrees, during the fourth, fifth, and sixth centuries, enjoined with increasing stringency abstinence from labor on Sunday.”—Ibid., p. 270. DOF 172.4

Dean Stanley declares: DOF 173.1

“The retention of the old pagan name ‘Dies Solis,’ or ‘Sunday,’ for the weekly Christian festival, is, in great measure, owing to the union of pagan and Christian sentiment with which the first day of the week was recommended by Constantine to his subjects, pagan and Christian alike, as the ‘venerable day of the sun.’ ... It was his mode of harmonizing the discordant religions of the empire under one common institution.”—Arthur Penimyn Stanury, D.D., Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church, lecture 6, par. 15, p. 184. DOF 173.2

And from Philip Schaff we quote: DOF 173.3

“The Sunday law of Constantine must not be overrated.... There is no reference whatever in his law either to the fourth commandment or to the resurrection of Christ. Besides, he expressly exempted the country districts, where paganism still prevailed, from the prohibition of labor.... Christians and pagans had been accustomed to festival rests; Constantine made these rests to synchronize, and gave the preference to Sunday.”—Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Third Period, chap. 7, sec. 75 (vol. 3, p. 380). DOF 173.4

But suppose Constantine had been a Christian when he made his Sunday law, and that he did it to establish a Christian Sabbath. Would that prove anything for its sacredness? Was this Roman emperor, who, according to Mr. Canright, was still sacrificing to heathen deities, a suitable founder of the Christian religion? Was he among the prophets called of God to deliver His oracles to His people? Was his authority above that of Christ and the apostles? Does God’s rest day require such props to hold it up? Is not this very effort thus to bolster up the Sunday rest day an admission of the weakness of the claims made for it? DOF 173.5

If a single, text of Scripture in favor of Sunday observance could have been found, how totally unnecessary would be all this effort to prove Constantine to have been a great benefactor to the Christiad church! The Sabbath law is found in the Word of God. Failing to find a Sunday law there, Mr. Canright resorts to the edict of a half Christian, half pagan emperor, of the fourth century. The Sabbath was given at creation, spoken by God on Sinai, observed by patriarchs and prophets, and kept by Christ and the apostles to the very close of New Testament times. Sunday came in later. The earliest trace Mr. Canright can find of it is in the second century. DOF 174.1

People in that century were saying the apostles changed it, but they offered no proof. No word of Christ or apostle is ever quoted by them on this point. The testimony of Scripture is silent on the subject of Sunday sacredness not a word about it. There is not an instance of observance. Had there been such a word spoken, Mr. Canright would certainly have built his argument upon it, instead of trying to bolster it up with this Sunday law of Constantine, who he admits was still head of the heathen religion when his Sunday law was enacted. Mr. Canright cites certain texts where he thinks perhaps Sunday is alluded to, but later frankly admits that they do not furnish a real record of a change. For such a record he has to go to his Christian-heathen emperor, Constantine, and there too he is disappointed, because this man, unfortunately, referred to Sunday by using its pagan name instead of calling it the Lord’s day. It seems to us that Mr. Canright’s Lord’s day argument is built upon a sandy foundation. DOF 174.2

We believe that the above historical quotations constitute a complete answer to Mr. Canright’s declaration that the pagans did not regard Sunday as a festival on which they worshiped the sun-god. The first day of the week as known throughout the pagan world as the sun’s day. ‘The name given to it was Dies Solis, or the day of the sun, sacred to the sun-god. The Religious Encyclopedia says: DOF 175.1

“The Ancient Saxons called it by this name, because upon it they worshipped the sun.” DOF 175.2

According to this, the title originated in heathen idolatry. Do authorities agree upon this? Yes; there is not recognized author in all the rounds of history or literature who dissents from this. Turning to Webster’s New International Dictionary we find this definition: DOF 175.3

“Sunday: so named because anciently dedicated to the Sin or its worship.” DOF 175.4

These authorities give an ancient origin to the name. Constantine was not the originator of the title which he gave to the day. Dr. T. H. Morer, of the church of England, says: DOF 175.5

“It is not to be denied but [that] we borrow the name of is day from the ancient Greeks and Romans, and we low that the old Egyptians worshipped the sun, and as a standing memorial of their veneration, dedicated this day to him.”—Dialogues on the Lord’s Day. DOF 175.6

Thus it is shown that Constantine probably had no thought of enforcing respect for a Christian institution by s famous Sunday law, but rather a very ancient heathen festival, which was then beginning to compete strongly with the Christian Sabbath (Saturday). This resulted from the influence of paganism upon the Christian church. Of the popularity of sun worship at Rome at that time, and the consequent influence this had on the Christian religion, the following historical quotations will testify: DOF 175.7

“Sun worship, however, became increasingly popular at Rome in the second and third centuries A. D. The sun god of Emesa in Syria-Deus Sol invictus Elagabalus-was exalted above the older gods of Rome by the emperor Marcus Aurelius, A. D. 217, taking the name Elagabalus]. Who, as his priest, was identified with the object of his worship. In spite of the disgust inspired by the excesses of the boy priest, an impulse was given to the spread of a kind of ‘solar pantheism,’ which embraced by a process of syncretism the various Oriental religions and was made the chief worship of the state by Aurelian.”—Stuart Jones, Companion to Roman History, p. 302. DOF 176.1

Milman says: DOF 176.2

“It was openly asserted that the worship of the sun, under his name of Elagabalus, was to supersede all other worship.”—Henry Hart Milman, The History of Christianity, book 2, chap. 8, par. 22. DOF 176.3

Prof. Hutton Webster calls Sunday a pagan institution which was engrafted onto Christianity: DOF 176.4

“The early Christians had at first adopted the Jewish seven-day week, with its numbered week days, but by the close of the third century A. D. this began to give way to the planetary week; and in the fourth and fifth centuries the pagan designations became generally accepted in the western half of Christendom. The use of the planetary names by Christians attests the growing influence of astrological speculations introduced by converts from paganism.... During these same centuries the spread of Oriental solar worship, especially that of ‘Mithra,’ in the, Roman world, had already led to the substitution by pagans of dies Solis for dies Saturni, as the first day of the planetary week.... Thus gradually a pagan institution was engrafted on Christianity.”—Prof. Hutton Webster, Rest Days, pp. 220,221. DOF 176.5

We now quote in this connection an amazing confession by Pr. Hiscox, author of the Baptist Manual, in which he also admits that Sunday came into the church from paganism. DOF 177.1

“Of course, I quite well know that Sunday did come into use in early Christian history as a religious day, as we learn from the Christian Fathers and other sources. But what a, pity that it comes branded with the mark of paganism, and christened with the name of the sun god, when adopted and sanctioned by the papal apostasy, and bequeathed as a sacred legacy to Protestantism!”—Dr. Edward T. Hiscox, author of The Baptist Manual, in a paper read before a New York City Ministers’ Conference, held in New York City, Nov. 13, 1893. DOF 177.2

On this point Mr. Canright, as an Adventist writing in 1885, before he had renounced his faith in the Bible Sabbath, truly said: DOF 177.3

“Now it is a very common error to suppose that a practice which is very old, and can be traced back to somewhere near the apostolic church, must be correct. But this is an evident mistake, for apostasy commenced so early that there is no safety in accepting tradition on any subject. Our only safety is the Scriptures themselves. Protestants claim to rely wholly on this authority, leaving tradition to Catholics; and yet, on this subject, as well as some others, they follow Rome, because the Bible gives them no help.... DOF 177.4

“Now the question arises, Just when did the practice of Sunday keeping commence? No one can tell exactly. Why? If the change had been made by divine authority, we could put our finger on the exact point, and show where it was done. But, like all error, its introduction was gradual. You cannot follow a river into the ocean, and put your finger down and say, There, just at that spot the fresh water stops and the salt water begins. Neither can you tell where Sabbath keeping stopped and Sunday observance began, as there was a gradual mingling of truth and error. DOF 177.5

“You will hear men say with all confidence that, while the seventh day was kept to the crucifixion, the practice of the church since then has been unanimous in keeping the first day. I do not see how a man can be honest and say this, unless he is very ignorant, as the most trustworthy historians ... testify to the contrary.... DOF 178.1

“When it [Sunday] was introduced, it did not come in as a Sabbath. Look at the word itself, ‘Sunday.’ Webster defines it as ‘so-called, because this day was anciently dedicated to the sun;’ and the North British Review styles it ‘the wild solar holiday of all pagan times.’ Now, how did it creep into the church? I’ll tell you how. When the early Christians evangelized the heathen tribes, they would do to the head, or chief, and labor with him to convince him of the superiority of the Christian religion. If he became convinced, he would command his entire tribe to be baptized. They were pagans, and had kept Sunday as a festival in honor of one of their gods, the sun; and when they outwardly accepted Christianity, they kept up their observance of Sunday, which gradually supplanted the Lord’s Sabbath. And while some of these might have been soundly converted, there is evidence to show that though the Sabbath was kept, Sunday was also observed as a kind of holiday, but with no idea of sacredness attached to it.... DOF 178.2

“And so we might trace the history down through the first centuries. The observance of Sunday, introduced as a holiday, or festival, gradually assumed more importance as a rival of God’s Sabbath, until, by the influx of half-converted pagans into the church, bringing with them their solar holiday, it began to supplant its divinely appointed rival.... It was not until the Council of Orleans, 538 A. D., that Sunday labor in the country was prohibited, and thus, as Dr. Paley remarked, it became ‘an institution of the church,’ and of that church into whose hands the saints, times, and laws were to be given for 1260 years; and it may be something more than a coincidence that 538 A. D. was the beginning of that period.”—D. M. Canright, Tabernacle Lectures, Lecture Ten, pp. 76-83. DOF 178.3

J. N. Andrews, author of The History of the Sabbath, tells us how Constantine was really responsible for laying the foundations of the Papacy. We quote two paragraphs from him: DOF 179.1

“Bower minutely details the order of the hierarchy, its divisions, and the orders of its officers, as established by Constantine, making it an ecclesiastical government closely modeled after the civil. Although the exarchs and metropolitan bishops were over all-the bishops in their dioceses and provinces, there was no one bishop over all. Yet it was declared by the Council of Nice that the primacy should rest in the bishop of Rome, in honor of that city. The title was then an empty one, except in the honor of the name; but it became fruitful both of dignity and power. The bishop of Rome soon became the representative of the faith of the church. To be in harmony with Rome was to be orthodox; disagreement with Rome was heresy.... DOF 179.2

“A certain writer well observed that Constantine would have proved himself a noble ruler if he had rested with the acts of toleration of Christianity. But he followed this up with acts of intolerance against all Christians but those Who happened to enjoy his favor, who composed that party which could best serve the interests of the empire. This party, of course, was represented by the bishop of Rome; for it would have been absurd to think of best serving the empire by conferring the primacy on any bishop but that of the ‘imperial city. It was Constantine who convened the Council,of Nice, where the famous creed of the church was formed. Thus was laid the foundation of the Papacy, or papal hierarchy.”—Replies to Elder Canright’s Attacks on Seventh day Adventists (1895), pp. 148, 149. DOF 179.3