166 OBLIGATION OF THE SABBATH. 



Tiews of Athanasius ; and Eusebius. Redemption higher than Creation. 



Be that as it may, however, such an idea is not a "werø 

 phase in theologj/'* According to Coleman (^Christian 

 Antiquities, p. 430), ^^ Athanasius, in the beginning of the 

 third [properly /ozo-^/i] century (a. d. 325), expressly declared 

 that ^ the Lord changed the Sabbath into the Lord's day/ '' 

 Coleman adds : " The account which Eusebius gives of thig 

 subject is that ^ the Logos, the Word, in the New Testament 

 transferred the Sabbath of the Lord God unto this day/ The 

 day, he also says, was nniversally observed as strictly as the 

 Jewish Sabbath, whilst all feasting, drunkenness, and recrea- 

 tion was rebuked as a profanation of the sacred day. — Com- 

 ment in Ps. 92." 



I had spoken of a change of the day as demanded by the 

 necessity of the case, because the work of redemption is " of 

 far higher and sweeter import in the esteem of all Christians,'' 

 than the work of creation. On which my friend makes the 

 following important concession : '^ This consideration may be a 

 very sufficient reason for its commemoration." I thank my 

 friend most sincerely for this concession. It is too important 

 ever to be forgotten by me, or by him. ''But," he adds, "it is 

 no reason whatever, either for superseding the former Divinel^ 

 appointed memorial, or for inferring a change in the applica- 

 tion of the original command" (p. 90) ; both which positions 

 I grant, if he refers merely to human authority. His illustra- 

 tion, however, is most unfortunate, for the plain reason that 



* Whether from a misprint in my copy or from a mistake in my 

 reading, it seems the word " theology" is liere an error. It shovdd 

 have been (as in page 89) " a new phase in the alogy f^ or, as my friend 

 regarded it, the illogical conclusion. As to the justice of applying 

 this term to my statement, I must leave the reader to judge. As, how- 

 ever, the facts suggested by the word "theology" are pertinent to the 

 argument, I let them stand. They show that my view was not consid- 

 ered absurd or unsound by such distinguished men as Eusebius and 

 Athanasius — the greatest men of their age. But I appeal to Common 

 Sense now. 



