Commandments of man or the commandments of God

SabbathBlessings · Friday at 2:13 PM

This thread is to discuss the commandments of man versus the commandments of God. This thread is not meant to be a personal attack on anyone as there are Christians in all churches living up to the light they have and this discussion is about institutions, not individuals.

In Daniel it was prophesied that a government would change God's times and laws

Dan 7:25 He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, Shall persecute the saints of the Most High, And shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand For a time and times and half a time.

There is only one law that is both a time (every seventh day Sabbath Exo 20:10) and is a law (4th commandment Exo 20:8-11) and it was changed not by God.

Do we see this in history?

Yes, the Catholic church takes credit for this change

Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

The change happened a long time ago in the council of Laodicea in 364 AD

The Seven Ecumenical Councils — Philip Schaff
Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

This is very similar to the decree that went out to Daniel and his three friends that went against one of God's commandments - God told us to rest on the seventh day, this is a decree to work on God's holy Sabbath, the opposite of what God commanded.

Pope Leo ratified the Council of Laodicea at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD

I know a national Sunday law has been in the works for a while and Trump has surrounded himself with people who want to tear down the separation of church and state and is it a coincidence the new pope choose to be called pope Leo- I do not think so, I believe prophecy is fulfilling before our eyes.

God's Ten Commandments was written personally by God and spoken by God the Creator of everything and He promised He would not alter the words of His covenant Exo 34:28 Psa 89:34 not a jot or tittle Mat 5:18 it is His own personal Testimony. Exo 31:18 Who could possibly claim they have more Authority than God Himself?

The pope claims to be the vicar of Christ on earth, but Jesus said:

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.
And He is the only Mediator needed
1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

He also said His kingdom is not of this world

John 18:38 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world; if My kingdom were of this world, My attendants would fight that I might not be betrayed to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from here."

And there is much talk about the antichrist in the last days. The word antichrist also means in place of Christ.

Only God can forgive our sins because His blood is what paid the penalty of our sins but the Catholic church teaches they can forgive sins

Volume 12 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights Of Columbus Special Edition 1913 : Knights of Columbus. Catholic Truth Committee : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Volume 01 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights of Columbus Special Edition 1913 Volume 02 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights of Columbus Special Edition...

archive.org

The Roman Catholic church teaches they are above God's Word and above the Testimony of God by changing God's Law

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

God tells us His Word is a light to our path

Psa 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.

The Catholic church teaches tradition, not God's Word is what we are to follow

Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.
—Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157

God said no one can modify His Word
Deu 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Pro 30:6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

The Catholic church teaches they can modify it

The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.

In the end we will be in two groups, those who have the mark of the beast and those who are sealed by God. The Sabbath contains God's seal.

A seal, as illustrated in Scripture, authenticates authority and ownership. In the book of Esther, King Ahasuerus’s seal—comprising his name, title, and territory—validated his decrees, rendering them irrevocable (Esther 8:8-10).
Similarly, God’s seal in Scripture carries His divine authority. The fourth commandment, embedded in the Decalogue, uniquely contains all three elements of a legal seal:
1. Name: “The Lord your God” (Exodus 20:10).
2. Title: “Maker” or Creator (Exodus 20:11).
3. Territory: “Heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11) .
This alignment identifies the Sabbath commandment as God’s seal, authenticating His law and sovereignty. Unlike other commandments, the Sabbath explicitly declares His creatorship, making it the “signature of the Omnipotent” .

The Catholic church claims the change in the Sabbath is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority essentially over God's authority since they changed God's commandments when He promised He would not Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18

Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.

Rev 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."

Compared to the antidote which is in the next verse

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

Is this what we were warned about in Revelation? Where is the commandment to keep Sunday holy- where did God sanctify Sunday? He didn't, it is a man-made tradition leading people away from being faithful to God's commandments.

We are told whoever we obey is who we serve. Ron 6:16

Rome says this:

It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

God said:

Exo 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

It comes down to our test of loyalty and who we are going to obey. Shall we obey God the Creator of everyone and the only way we are saved, or follow what has been handed down to us over the centuries, the commandments of man.

Jesus answered this question, but will we listen to Him? Mat 15:3-14 Mark 7:7-13

Mar 7:7 AND IN VAIN THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN.'

Mat 15:3 He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?
Mat 15:4 For God commanded, saying, 'HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER'; and, 'HE WHO CURSES FATHER OR MOTHER, LET HIM BE PUT TO DEATH.'
Mat 15:5 But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God"—
Mat 15:6 then he need not honor his father or mother.' Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.
Mat 15:7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
Mat 15:8 'THESE PEOPLE DRAW NEAR TO ME WITH THEIR MOUTH, AND HONOR ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR FROM ME.
Mat 15:9 AND IN VAIN THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN.' "

JSRG · Friday at 3:56 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

It seems proper to respond to your copy/pasted quotes with another copy/pasted quote, which also applies to several other quotes you offer.

But do not the catechism and Catholic writers, when controverting Protestants, assert that the "Holy Catholic Church" changed the day? Certainly, but they also claim that the Catholic Church began with the apostles who changed the day. Do not Adventists know this? Yes. Why, then, do they not tell the whole facts in the case? Let them answer.

Consider the high Catholic authorities quoted on this subject - the Council of Trent; the papal delegate, Cardinal Gibbons; Archbishop Ireland; the Catholic Encyclopedia; the Catholic Dictionary; written statements of priests; and the teachings of the catechism. All agree that the change in the day was made by the apostles. Beyond dispute, this establishes the doctrine of the Catholic Church on the origin of the Lord's Day. Not a single Catholic authority can be quoted teaching that the change of the Sabbath was made by the Popes or by the Papacy centuries later. That is purely an invention of Seventh-Day Adventists. Here, then, is the testimony of two hundred and fifty million Roman Catholics, all agreeing that the observance of Sunday as the Lord's Day originated with the apostles. Now if Adventists quote the Catholics, then let them abide by their testimony.

Now read "Rome's Challenge," "Father Enright's Challenge," and a lot of other Catholic "challenges," which Adventists gleefully gather up and endorse and peddle the world over as unanswerable. Read them very carefully and notice particularly that not one of these Catholic "challenges" ever locates the time when the "Catholic Church" made the change. In all these "Challenges" they adroitly leave this point out, and presume on the ignorance of the general public, which supposes that the Catholic Church began centuries after Christ. Then Adventists take advantage of this popular idea of the Catholic Church and locate the change about 300 years after Christ. Such deception is unworthy of Christian teachers.
-Dudley Canright, "The Lord's Day from Neither Catholics Nor Pagans", pages 97-98

Canright does precede this by quoting a whole lot of Catholic sources confirming what he says (hence his mention of "the Council of Trent, the papal delegate" and the rest), which can be read in his book (see pages 88-97) or if one prefers just the text of the most relevant part, it's reproduced here. For the record, I did make a point of checking into his references to ensure they were accurate, and--aside from the ones he gathered himself--they all match up.

So, yes, various Catholic sources do refer to the Catholic Church as changing the day, but what they are doing--as Canright shows in citing a considerable number of Catholic authorities--this is in reference to the apostles doing so. I expect one could perhaps find a few Catholics somewhere or another locating it as occurring later, but such would be in the clear minority.

SabbathBlessings said:
The change happened a long time ago in the council of Laodicea in 364 AD

The Seven Ecumenical Councils — Philip Schaff
Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

Christians had abandoned Saturday Sabbathkeeping long before this. Laodicea was confirming prior practice; the claim that the change "happened" with Laodicea is not really true. It seems to me that at most, one could say Laodicea was the first time a council formally recognized what was already longstanding practice.

SabbathBlessings said:
Pope Leo ratified the Council of Laodicea at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD

View attachment 367114

It is not clear where this is from--it looks like this was grabbed this from an AI of some sort. AI like ChatGPT has its uses, but one must always be very careful with it--I remember when AI told me that James Buchanan, who was president, was considered a terrible Supreme Court justice.
(also, ironically, when I put the question "Which ecumenical council, if any, ratified the Council of Laodicea?" to ChatGPT, it told me "the Council of Laodicea was not ratified by any later ecumenical council" and even specified "the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD), the fourth ecumenical council, issued canons that dealt with issues of Church discipline, but it did not ratify the Council of Laodicea.")

But let's leave the AIs behind. Here's the Council of Chalcedon:

The Council of Chalcedon – 451 A.D. - Papal Encyclicals

The council was convoked at Nicaea but later transferred to Chalcedon, so as to be close to Constantinople and the emperor.

www.papalencyclicals.net

I see no mention of approving the Council of Laodicea at all, or indeed any mention of the Council of Laodicea. Can you point me to where this occurred in the Council of Chalcedon?

SabbathBlessings said:
I know a national Sunday law has been in the works for a while and Trump has surrounded himself with people who want to tear down the separation of church and state and is it a coincidence the new pope choose to be called pope Leo- I do not think so, I believe prophecy is fulfilling before our eyes.

Ah yes, it's "in the works" and people around Trump want to enact it, which explains why... as far as I am aware, none of them ever expressed any desire to do so. This "National Sunday Law" paranoia among some is hard to take seriously at this point. As seems well explained here:

National Sunday Law: Fact or Fiction?

Online book investigates Ellen White's National Sunday Law doctrine

www.nonsda.org

Or, even most specifically, this portion:

National Sunday Law - Chapter 7

Does it Really Matter?

www.nonsda.org

3. Sunday-keepers have little interest in the issue

There is very little interest in establishing Sunday laws even amongst the most ardent Sunday-keepers. Even among the very few who are most passionate to enact laws, they have little interest in persecuting Sabbath-keepers or even preventing them from worshipping on Sabbath. They merely want laws declaring Sunday as a religious day of rest. The truth is, the opposite has been happening for decades. Most existing Sunday laws are being repealed. This is happening because in the modern church, most Sunday-keepers regard the Sabbath-Sunday issue as irrelevant. The legalistic attitude of keeping Sunday as a "Sabbath" is rapidly fading among Sunday-keepers. Many Sunday-keepers regard Sunday worship as an hour of worship versus a day of worship. Most Sunday-keepers are comfortable with the idea of going to church in the morning and spending the rest of the day as they please. They enjoy the convenience of having stores, sports stadiums, restaurants and theaters open on Sunday afternoon. Modern Sunday-keepers simply do not regard Sunday with the same legalistic constraints as the Christians of the nineteenth century. Furthermore, there is no evidence that Sunday-keeping Christians have the least inclination to persecute Sabbath-keepers over their day of worship. Most Christians today would be appalled at the very thought of persecuting another Christian to death over a doctrinal issue.

4. Sunday-keepers do not have the political power to pass a Sunday law

The landscape of the United States has changed to the extent that it would be virtually impossible to pass a Sunday law over the objections of Jews, Muslims, secularists, homosexuals, and Sabbath-keeping Christians. These groups have become increasingly powerful in a post-Christian world where mainstream Christianity has been on a downward trend for decades. Sunday-keeping Christians have neither the political power nor the will to pass a Sunday law, as is evidenced by an unbroken string of dismal failures to keep the vestiges of Christianity alive in American society.

Certainly, there is a far stronger movement among Christians to end abortion than to force everyone to respect Sunday, and as we have clearly seen, there has been little progress there on the national level. Yeah, Roe got overturned, but that was a judicial matter (and one, for the record, that even various pro-choice lawyers (e.g. Akhil Amar) admitted was the right decision judicially) and all that overturn did was leave it up to legislatures to determine. So, what have those legislatures been doing? Certainly, the federal congress has done essentially nothing to restrict it since. Some individual states have enacted stricter abortion restrictions, but on the whole the trend has been towards liberalization. Given the inability of Christians to pass a national abortion ban--agian, something for which there is certainly more support by Christians than a "National Sunday Law"--how will they suddenly have the power to force this "Sunday law" idea into place that has far less support?

SabbathBlessings said:
The Roman Catholic church teaches they are above God's Word and above the Testimony of God by changing God's Law

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

The Catholic Record appears to have been a layman's newspaper, not anything actually endorsed by the Catholic Church, so to say "the Roman Catholic church teaches" this based on this means about as much as claiming that something Catholic Answers wrote is some kind of automatic teaching of the church. It certainly indicates the opinion of whatever Catholic wrote that, but to turn that into "the Roman Catholic church teaches..." is unwarranted.

JSRG · Friday at 3:57 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
The Catholic church teaches they can modify it

The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.

I've seen this one before, and there are several issues here. First, to say a writing by an individual Catholic shows "the Catholic church teaches" is an exaggeration. But okay, someone will say, this work was published with an imprimatur, which, while not making it church teaching, still means that in the opinion of the approving bishop, it contained nothing contrary to Catholicism. However, let's say this is some kind of authoritative teaching. First, someone quite a while ago offered this analysis:

I did a bit of research to find some more details. First off, this is the page on which the sentence appears – I’ve highlighted the relevant phrase.

Notice that the phrase appears in italics, after a citation: “Petrus de Anchar [asserit], in consil 373, n. 3, vers.” This citation is a reference to a book by Peter of Ancarano, whose name is also spelled Petrus de Anchar. The book in question is probably Consilium, which, according to an Italian page I found, is indeed by Peter of Ancarano and is available in printed form at the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana. The book principally discusses a heresy called conciliarism.

After googling for more information about this Peter of Ancarano fellow, I think I may have found out why he seems to have said that the pope can modify divine laws. The explanation involves a case of marriage law, so bear with me.

This page contains a description of a controversy in the 1400s, when Peter of Ancarano was alive, involving two competing anti-popes. One of these antipopes refused to grant a marital dispensation to a couple who wanted to marry but were impeded from doing so because they were members of the same family by a previous marriage. The other anti-pope acted differently in a similar case invovling a couple who thought he was the rightful pope – he granted them permission to marry even though they too were impeded for the same reason the other couple was. Before he made this decision, this second anti-pope consulted Peter of Ancarano and asked him for his opinion.

Now, in this controversy some people appealed to divine law to prove that the pope could not grant a dispensation in these cases. Specifically, they appealed to Leviticus 18:16, which forbids a man to marry his brother’s wife. The couples in question were each a nobleman and his brother’s widow – they probably wanted to marry to keep an inheritance in the family. Peter of Ancarano apparently argued that the pope had the power to dispense with the law of Lev. 18:16, even though it was a divine law, because Old Testament laws don’t work in the New Covenant.

So that seems to be the context in which this claim about the pope “modifying divine law” appears: it is a reference to the pope’s power to dispense with canonical impediments arising from Levitical laws that are no longer binding in the New Testament. Not the whopper that Seventh Day Adventists appear to think it is.

This seems to clear up some of the things. But there is a larger problem that is, surprisingly to me, not even touched on in that analysis. Namely, the Latin word does not mean modify. What you offer is a mistranslation.

The Latin word being translated as modify is modificare (or modifico--some dictionaries list Latin words as infinitive (modificare), whereas others use the first person singular present tense (modifico). This is where the word "modify" in English comes from. However, meanings can shift over time, and especially when they cross languages. In Latin, modificare does not mean to modify; it means to set limits or to control or regulate. This can be easily confirmed by any Latin dictionary; see, for example, this one. Thus what this was saying, especially when viewed in the context of the above, is that the pope has authority to determine instances when divine law--the example being marriage law--does not apply. It says nothing about modifying it.

SabbathBlessings said:
The Catholic church claims the change in the Sabbath is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority essentially over God's authoirty since they changed God's commandments when He promised He would not Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18

Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.

This one is another copy/paste that I have seen from you and others. What people curiously never seem to do is to say where this is from. Okay, it's a letter, but a letter in response to who? Can we see the full letter? Where was this published?

In any event, someone else sent a letter to Gibbons asking about the question of the "Sabbath change" which offered some considerable clarification on the above. This is from Dudley Canright's work I quoted from in my prior post (pages 90-91):

Cardinal Gibbons comes next in authority. I wrote him with regard to when his Church began and when the day was changed. Here is the answer:

Baltimore, Md., July 1896
REV. D. M. CANRIGHT,

Dear Sir: In reply to your favor of the 20th inst., to his Eminence the Cardinal, I beg to say:

First. The Catholic Church dates back to the day when our Lord made St. Peter the visible head of the Church, and when St. Peter established, first at Antioch, then at Rome, the seat of his residence and jurisdiction.

In these days and those immediately following, we find traces of the beginning of the custom of the Sunday observance. You may refer to the Christian writers of that period. (Confer Ignatius ad Magnes, 9; Justin Martyr, 1, Apol. 59; Tertul., Apol. 16.) All these writers speak of the Sunday as the Lord's Day; no other more distinct trace has been preserved, and the mention which occurs in the following centuries rests on the fact of a previous custom more or less general.

C. T. THOMAS, Sect.

It will be seen that the Cardinal locates the introduction of the Lord's Day at the beginning of the Church with St. Peter.

This therefore clarifies the matter. What Gibbons was saying was that this was done in the apostolic period by the apostles, who were (in his view) the Catholic Church. Many of course will disagree with this assertion, but the point here is what Gibbons was claiming--after all, if he's going to be cited as evidence, it's important to know what his actual position was!

SabbathBlessings · Friday at 4:05 PM

JSRG said:
It seems proper to respond to your copy/pasted quotes with another copy/pasted quote, which also applies to several other quotes you offer.

But do not the catechism and Catholic writers, when controverting Protestants, assert that the "Holy Catholic Church" changed the day? Certainly, but they also claim that the Catholic Church began with the apostles who changed the day. Do not Adventists know this?

There is no Scripture that says the apotles changed one of God’s commandments, they did not change God’s times and laws, but the disciples are shown keeping the Sabbath after the Cross according to the commandment Luke 23:56 and apotles keeping every Sabbath some 3 decades later Acts 13:42 Acts 13:44 Acts 15:21 Acts 16:8 Acts 17:2 Acts 18:4 just as Jesus said His faithful would be doing Mat 24:20 I am assuming thats why you never quoted Scripture to support your case, just man-made doctrine. The apostles were commissioned to spread the gospel, not play god and change God’s own Testiomy Exo 31:18 He said He would not change Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18-19

The Catholic church claims they changed the Sabbath based on their own authroity, not based on the Bible.

Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.
—The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.

To claim the The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine and A Doctrinal Catechism is not a reliable doctrine of the Catholic church is not convincing. I have personally found every reference I quoted.

BobRyan · Friday at 4:16 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
This thread is to discuss the commandments of man versus the commandments of God.

SabbathBlessings said:
Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

SabbathBlessings said:
The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.

SabbathBlessings said:
Rome says this:

It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

Catholic church newsletter stated,
"Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. 'The Day of the Lord' [dies domini] was chosen, not from any direction noted in the Scriptures, but from the Church's sense of its own power..... People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become [Seventh-Day] Adventists, and keep Saturday holy." Saint Catherine Catholic Church Sentinel, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995.

"Sunday is a Catholic institution and its claim to observance can be defended only on Catholic principles..... From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first." Catholic Press, Sydney, Australia, August 1900.

“The church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact." The Catholic Record, London, Ontario, September 1, 1923.

Catholic Catechism

"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?"

"Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath."

"Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?"

"Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 336) transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday." The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, by Peter Geiermann, 50.

=== next

The Faith Explained (Catholic commentary on the Baltimore catechism post Vatican ii) states on Page 242 that
====================begin my short summary
P 242 "..changing the Lord's day to Sunday was in the power of the church since "in the gospels ..Jesus confers upon his church the power to make laws in his name".

page 243

"nothing is said in the bible about the change of the Lord's day From Saturday to Sunday. We know of the change only from the tradition of the Church - a fact handed down to us...that is why we find so illogical the attitude of many Non-Catholics, who say that they will believe nothing unless they can find it in the bible and Yet will continue to keep Sunday as the Lord's day on the say-so of the Catholic church"

================= that quote above is huge!

It means that instead of claiming that the Catholic church changed the day in the first century ( as if such a thing were documented in the New Testament text) - the claim is that there is no support at all for that first century change from actual NT scripture. And it claims that sola-scriptura Protestants have a bit of egg-on-face when claiming sola-scriptura for doctrine and yet clinging to something that is sourced solely from the traditions of the Catholic church.

JSRG said:
Well, it's a good thing I never claimed "the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine and A Doctrinal Catechism is not a reliable doctrine of the Catholic church is not convincing." I claimed that it was not supporting your claim that the later "Roman Catholic Church" made this adjustment, when the Catholic teaching, as demonstrated by the various Catholic sources that Canright cited, said it was the apostles who did so, and the mention of the Catholic Church doing so was because it was considering the apostles to be the Catholic Church.

As we can see in this post - the charge made in the catholic document "the Faith Explained" is aimed directly at the Protestant idea of "sola-scriptura" basis for all doctrine and practice. See the quote above in this post.

The assumption that one of the Ten Commandment were changed by the Apostles in the first century - but then not documented in the NT text - is weak. The Faith Explained is pinning Protestant scholars on the point that this is not coming to us from scripture.

"From Sabbath to Sunday" - published by "The Pontifical Gregorian University Press" 1977 in Rome - makes the case that this was not a first century feature in the christian Church. It also makes the case that the change did NOT originate from Apostles IN Jerusalem. They admit that the origin is not from the Jerusalem church.

SabbathBlessings · Friday at 4:19 PM

BobRyan said:
Catholic Catechism

"Question: Which is the Sabbath day?"
"Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath."

"Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?"
"Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 336) transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday." The Convert's Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, by Peter Geiermann, 50.

Yes, which pope Leo ratified making them ecumenical

Pope Leo ratified the Council of Laodicea at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD

JSRG · Friday at 4:27 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
There is no Scripture that says the apotles changed one of God’s commandments, they did not change God’s times and laws, but all of the apostles and the disciples are shown keeping the Sabbath after the Cross according to the commandment Luke 23:56 and every Sabbath some 4 decades later Acts 13:42 Acts 13:44 Acts 15:21 Acts 16:8 Acts 17:2 Acts 18:4 just as Jesus said His faithful would be doing Mat 24:20

I generally do not argue about theological or biblical issues of the Sabbath, as others have done plenty of that, including addressing those verses you cited. However, you went beyond those in your post and went into issues of history, which is what I responded to.

SabbathBlessings said:
I am assuming thats why you never quoted Scripture to support your case, just man-made doctrine.

Of what use would quoting Scripture to support my "case" have been? I was asserting you were misusing the non-scriptural quotes. If you don't want to argue about things outside of scripture, then perhaps... don't bring up things outside of scripture?

SabbathBlessings said:
The apostles were commissioned to spread the gospel, not play God and change God’s own Testiomy Exo 31:18 He said He would not change Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18

The Catholic church claims they changed the Sabbath based on their own authroity, not based on the Bible.

Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.

—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

To claim the The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine and A Doctrinal Catechism is not a reliable doctrine of the Catholic church is not convincing.

Well, it's a good thing I never claimed "the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine and A Doctrinal Catechism is not a reliable doctrine of the Catholic church is not convincing." I claimed that it was not supporting your claim that the later "Roman Catholic Church" made this adjustment, when the Catholic teaching, as demonstrated by the various Catholic sources that Canright cited, said it was the apostles who did so, and the mention of the Catholic Church doing so was because it was considering the apostles to be the Catholic Church.

In other words, you're essentially ignoring the points I raised. Again, here was the point he made:

But do not the catechism and Catholic writers, when controverting Protestants, assert that the "Holy Catholic Church" changed the day? Certainly, but they also claim that the Catholic Church began with the apostles who changed the day. Do not Adventists know this? Yes. Why, then, do they not tell the whole facts in the case? Let them answer.

Consider the high Catholic authorities quoted on this subject - the Council of Trent; the papal delegate, Cardinal Gibbons; Archbishop Ireland; the Catholic Encyclopedia; the Catholic Dictionary; written statements of priests; and the teachings of the catechism. All agree that the change in the day was made by the apostles. Beyond dispute, this establishes the doctrine of the Catholic Church on the origin of the Lord's Day. Not a single Catholic authority can be quoted teaching that the change of the Sabbath was made by the Popes or by the Papacy centuries later. That is purely an invention of Seventh-Day Adventists. Here, then, is the testimony of two hundred and fifty million Roman Catholics, all agreeing that the observance of Sunday as the Lord's Day originated with the apostles. Now if Adventists quote the Catholics, then let them abide by their testimony.

Now read "Rome's Challenge," "Father Enright's Challenge," and a lot of other Catholic "challenges," which Adventists gleefully gather up and endorse and peddle the world over as unanswerable. Read them very carefully and notice particularly that not one of these Catholic "challenges" ever locates the time when the "Catholic Church" made the change. In all these "Challenges" they adroitly leave this point out, and presume on the ignorance of the general public, which supposes that the Catholic Church began centuries after Christ. Then Adventists take advantage of this popular idea of the Catholic Church and locate the change about 300 years after Christ. Such deception is unworthy of Christian teachers.
-Dudley Canright, "The Lord's Day from Neither Catholics Nor Pagans", pages 97-98

I suppose that, in response to your enjoyment of copying and pasting quotes, I should perhaps share the various quotes he offers on the subject.

"The Sabbath was kept holy from the time of the liberation of the people of Israel from the bondage of Pharaoh; the obligation was to cease with the abrogation of the Jewish worship, of which it formed a part; and it therefore was no longer obligatory after the death of Christ... The apostles therefore resolved to consecrate the first day of the week to the divine worship, and called it 'the Lord's Day'; St. John, in the Apocalypse, makes mention of 'the Lord's Day'; and the apostle commands collection to be made 'on the first day of the week,' that is, according to the interpretation of St. Chrysostom, on the Lord's Day; and thus we are given to understand that even then the Lord's Day was kept holy in the Church"
(Catechism of the Council of Trent, pages 264, 265)

" 'And on the first day of the week.' Here St. Chrysostom, with many other interpreters of the Scripture, explain that the Christians, even at this time, must have changed the Sabbath into the first day of the week (the Lord's Day), as all Christians now keep it: This change was undoubtedly made by the authority of the Church: hence the exercise of the power which Christ had given to her; for He is Lord of the Sabbath."
(Comment on Acts 20:7 in the Catholic Haydock Bible Commentary)

"In the New Law the time for the fulfillment of this [Sabbath] obligation was changed by the apostles from the Sabbath, or the seventh day of the week, to Sunday, or the first day of the week, primarily to commemorate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who, early in the morning on the first day of the week, arose, glorious and triumphant, from the dead. Hence it is that in Scripture, the first, day of the week is called the 'Lord's Day' (Rev 1:10). It was also on this same day of the week that the Holy Ghost came down upon the apostles, and that the faith and law of Christ was for the first time solemnly published to the world by them."
("Why Sunday is the First Day", an article by Giovanni Bonzano (Canright incorrectly cites him as John Bunyan, though perhaps he went by that name in America), the papal ambassador to the United States at the time, published in Washington Times, October 11, 1913)

Dear Sir: In reply to your favor of the 20th inst., to his Eminence the Cardinal, I beg to say:
First. The Catholic Church dates back to the day when our Lord made St. Peter the visible head of the Church, and when St. Peter established, first at Antioch, then at Rome, the seat of his residence and jurisdiction.
In these days and those immediately following, we find traces of the beginning of the custom of the Sunday observance. You may refer to the Christian writers of that period. (Confer Ignatius ad Magnes, 9; Justin Martyr, 1, Apol. 59; Tertul., Apol. 16.) All these writers speak of the Sunday as the Lord's Day; no other more distinct trace has been preserved, and the mention which occurs in the following centuries rests on the fact of a previous custom more or less general.
C. T. THOMAS, Sect.
(letter received by Dudley Canright in July of 1896 in response to his query to Cardinal Gibbons asking when the Catholic Church began and when Sunday observance started)

My dear Sir:
In answer to your question I would state that the Jewish Sabbath was simply a positive precept in the Mosaic law and lapsed with that law. The apostles and early Christians instituted the Sunday as a day of special prayer in honor of the great mysteries of the Christian religion, the resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit, both occurring on the first day of the week.
Very sincerely,
JOHN IRELAND.
C. T. THOMAS, Sect.
(letter received by Dudley Canright in March of 1914 in response to his query to Cardinal Ireland asking when the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath)

"Sunday was the first day of the week according to the Jewish method of reckoning time, but for the Christians it began to take the place of the Jewish Sabbath in apostolic times as the day set apart for the public solemn worship of God"
(Catholic Encyclopedia, "Sunday" Article)

"The precept of observing the Sabbath was completely abrogated in the Christian Church. In commemoration of Christ's resurrection, the Church observes Sunday. The observance does not rest on any positive law, of which there is no trace. Sunday is of merely ecclesiastical institution, dating however from the time of the apostles. Such is the opinion of St. Thomas. The Scripture given above (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10) shows that the observance of Sunday had begun in the apostolic age; but even were Scripture silent, tradition would put the point beyond doubt."
(Canright cites this to ""The Catholic Dictionary, the Universal Christian Educator, Containing Doctrine of the Church," by Rev. Wm. A. Addis and Thomas Arnold" but does not give the page. This is on page 781 of the 1896 printing. Earlier editions of this work I looked at did not include this remark, but did say the apostles observed Sundays in a footnote elsewhere: "St. Paul reproaches the Galatians (iv. 10) for observing "days" (such as the Sabbath), "months" (such as the Feast of the New Moon), "times" (καιροὺς, anual festivals, such as the Passover), "years" (such as the Sabbatical Year and Year of Jubilee, &c). The reference is clearly to Jewish feasts. The Apostles themselves observed "days"–viz. Sundays.")

"Having lived for years among the Seventh-Day Adventists, I am familiar with their claims that the Pope of Rome changed the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week. Such assertions are wholly unfounded. Catholics claim no such thing; but maintain that the apostles themselves established the observance of Sunday and that we received it by tradition from them. The councils and Popes afterwards simply confirmed the keeping of the day as received from the apostles."
(John Meiler, Rector of St. John's Church, Healdsburg, California, in a statement obtained by Canright)

"The Catholic doctrine of the change of the Sabbath is this: The apostles, by instruction from Jesus Christ, changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday to commemorate the resurrection of Christ and the descent of the Holy Ghost, both of which occurred on Sunday. The change was made by the apostles themselves, and hence by divine authority, at the very beginning of the Church. There are references to this change in Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1, 2; Rev. 1:10, etc. Yet these texts do not state positively such a change; hence Catholics go to the statements of the early Christian Fathers, where this change by the apostles is confirmed and put beyond doubt. Catholics also rely upon the tradition of the Church which says that the change was made by the apostles. Catholics never teach that the change of the day was made by the Church two or three hundred years after Christ. Such a statement would be contrary to all the facts of history and the traditions of the Church.
The Holy Catholic Church began with the apostles. St. Peter was the first Pope. Hence, when they say that the Church changed the Sabbath, they mean that it was done by the Church in the days of the apostles. Neither the Church nor the Pope, two or three hundred years after the apostles, had anything whatever to do with changing the Sabbath, for the change had been made ages before. Catholics do not call the first day of the week the Sabbath, for that was Saturday; but they call it Sunday, or the Lord's Day."
(James C. Pulcher, Pastor of St. James' Church, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Canright offered him this statement to ask if it represented Catholic teaching, and he agreed)

"The Church from the time of the apostles has changed the Sabbath into the Lord's Day."
("Systematic Study of the Catholic Religion" page 294)

"Quest. What warrant have you for keeping the Sunday, preferable to the ancient Sabbath, which was the Saturday?
" Ans. We have for it the authority of the Catholic Church, and apostolic tradition."
("The Catholic Christian Instructed" by Richard Challoner pages 231-232, 1843 edition)

"Third [Sabbath] commandment. Its obligation transferred from Saturday to Sunday." "What day of the week is the seventh day or Sabbath Day?" "It is Saturday." "Then why do we not keep Saturday holy?" "Because the Church in the apostles' time transferred the obligation from the seventh to the first day of the week." "Why was this done?" "In honor of Jesus Christ, and therefore the first day of the week is called the Lord's Day (Rev. 1:10). It was on the first day of the week (or Sunday) that Christ rose from the dead; that He commissioned His apostles to teach all nations; that He empowered them to forgive sins; that He sent down upon them the Holy Ghost; it was on this day that the apostles began to preach the doctrines of Christ and to establish the Christian religion"
(This is cited to "A Full Course of Instruction in Explanation of the Catechism" by Rev J. Perry, pages 168-169. I was not able to check on this, but "A Full Course of instructions for the use of catechists" by the same author on page 171 includes the quote; this may be a case of different editions with slightly different names)

Now, again, perhaps you disagree with all of these assertions of the apostles making any such change. Fine. But such is not the point. Your argument was to point to Catholic sources talking about how the Catholic Church made such an adjustment, when the position was rather that this was done by the apostles, and therefore was done by the Catholic Church because they were, in the Catholic Church's view, the Catholic Church. Thus this position, that the apostles changed it, is in harmony with the quotations you copy/pasted. And thus those quotes you offered do not support the argument you made.

BobRyan · Friday at 4:28 PM

Ask yourself this question - why are so many authentic Catholic sources making the claim that the change from Saturday to Sunday for the Sabbath commandment is an act of the Catholic church without any NT source at all claiming that change? Why are they so happy to point that out for us in so many places?

SabbathBlessings · Friday at 4:31 PM

JSRG said:
I generally do not argue about theological or biblical issues of the Sabbath, as others have done plenty of that, including addressing those verses you cited. However, you went beyond those in your post and went into issues of history, which is what I responded to.

Of what use would quoting Scripture to support my "case" have been? I was asserting you were misusing the non-scriptural quotes. If you don't want to argue about things outside of scripture, then perhaps... don't bring up things outside of scripture?

Well, it's a good thing I never claimed "the Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine and A Doctrinal Catechism is not a reliable doctrine of the Catholic church is not convincing." I claimed that it was not supporting your claim that the later "Roman Catholic Church" made this adjustment, when the Catholic teaching, as demonstrated by the various Catholic sources that Canright cited, said it was the apostles who did so, and the mention of the Catholic Church doing so was because it was considering the apostles to be the Catholic Church.

In other words, you're essentially ignoring the points I raised. Again, here was the point he made:

But do not the catechism and Catholic writers, when controverting Protestants, assert that the "Holy Catholic Church" changed the day? Certainly, but they also claim that the Catholic Church began with the apostles who changed the day. Do not Adventists know this? Yes. Why, then, do they not tell the whole facts in the case? Let them answer.

Consider the high Catholic authorities quoted on this subject - the Council of Trent; the papal delegate, Cardinal Gibbons; Archbishop Ireland; the Catholic Encyclopedia; the Catholic Dictionary; written statements of priests; and the teachings of the catechism. All agree that the change in the day was made by the apostles. Beyond dispute, this establishes the doctrine of the Catholic Church on the origin of the Lord's Day. Not a single Catholic authority can be quoted teaching that the change of the Sabbath was made by the Popes or by the Papacy centuries later. That is purely an invention of Seventh-Day Adventists. Here, then, is the testimony of two hundred and fifty million Roman Catholics, all agreeing that the observance of Sunday as the Lord's Day originated with the apostles. Now if Adventists quote the Catholics, then let them abide by their testimony.

Now read "Rome's Challenge," "Father Enright's Challenge," and a lot of other Catholic "challenges," which Adventists gleefully gather up and endorse and peddle the world over as unanswerable. Read them very carefully and notice particularly that not one of these Catholic "challenges" ever locates the time when the "Catholic Church" made the change. In all these "Challenges" they adroitly leave this point out, and presume on the ignorance of the general public, which supposes that the Catholic Church began centuries after Christ. Then Adventists take advantage of this popular idea of the Catholic Church and locate the change about 300 years after Christ. Such deception is unworthy of Christian teachers.
-Dudley Canright, "The Lord's Day from Neither Catholics Nor Pagans", pages 97-98

I suppose that, in response to your enjoyment of copying and pasting quotes, I should perhaps share the various quotes he offers on the subject.

"The Sabbath was kept holy from the time of the liberation of the people of Israel from the bondage of Pharaoh; the obligation was to cease with the abrogation of the Jewish worship, of which it formed a part; and it therefore was no longer obligatory after the death of Christ... The apostles therefore resolved to consecrate the first day of the week to the divine worship, and called it 'the Lord's Day'; St. John, in the Apocalypse, makes mention of 'the Lord's Day'; and the apostle commands collection to be made 'on the first day of the week,' that is, according to the interpretation of St. Chrysostom, on the Lord's Day; and thus we are given to understand that even then the Lord's Day was kept holy in the Church"
(Catechism of the Council of Trent, pages 264, 265)

" 'And on the first day of the week.' Here St. Chrysostom, with many other interpreters of the Scripture, explain that the Christians, even at this time, must have changed the Sabbath into the first day of the week (the Lord's Day), as all Christians now keep it: This change was undoubtedly made by the authority of the Church: hence the exercise of the power which Christ had given to her; for He is Lord of the Sabbath."
(Comment on Acts 20:7 in the Catholic Haydock Bible Commentary)

"In the New Law the time for the fulfillment of this [Sabbath] obligation was changed by the apostles from the Sabbath, or the seventh day of the week, to Sunday, or the first day of the week, primarily to commemorate the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who, early in the morning on the first day of the week, arose, glorious and triumphant, from the dead. Hence it is that in Scripture, the first, day of the week is called the 'Lord's Day' (Rev 1:10). It was also on this same day of the week that the Holy Ghost came down upon the apostles, and that the faith and law of Christ was for the first time solemnly published to the world by them."
("Why Sunday is the First Day", an article by Giovanni Bonzano (Canright incorrectly cites him as John Bunyan, though perhaps he went by that name in America), the papal ambassador to the United States at the time, published in Washington Times, October 11, 1913)

Dear Sir: In reply to your favor of the 20th inst., to his Eminence the Cardinal, I beg to say:
First. The Catholic Church dates back to the day when our Lord made St. Peter the visible head of the Church, and when St. Peter established, first at Antioch, then at Rome, the seat of his residence and jurisdiction.
In these days and those immediately following, we find traces of the beginning of the custom of the Sunday observance. You may refer to the Christian writers of that period. (Confer Ignatius ad Magnes, 9; Justin Martyr, 1, Apol. 59; Tertul., Apol. 16.) All these writers speak of the Sunday as the Lord's Day; no other more distinct trace has been preserved, and the mention which occurs in the following centuries rests on the fact of a previous custom more or less general.
C. T. THOMAS, Sect.
(letter received by Dudley Canright in July of 1896 in response to his query to Cardinal Gibbons asking when the Catholic Church began and when Sunday observance started)

My dear Sir:
In answer to your question I would state that the Jewish Sabbath was simply a positive precept in the Mosaic law and lapsed with that law. The apostles and early Christians instituted the Sunday as a day of special prayer in honor of the great mysteries of the Christian religion, the resurrection and the coming of the Holy Spirit, both occurring on the first day of the week.
Very sincerely,
JOHN IRELAND.
C. T. THOMAS, Sect.
(letter received by Dudley Canright in March of 1914 in response to his query to Cardinal Ireland asking when the Catholic Church changed the Sabbath)

"Sunday was the first day of the week according to the Jewish method of reckoning time, but for the Christians it began to take the place of the Jewish Sabbath in apostolic times as the day set apart for the public solemn worship of God"
(Catholic Encyclopedia, "Sunday" Article)

"The precept of observing the Sabbath was completely abrogated in the Christian Church. In commemoration of Christ's resurrection, the Church observes Sunday. The observance does not rest on any positive law, of which there is no trace. Sunday is of merely ecclesiastical institution, dating however from the time of the apostles. Such is the opinion of St. Thomas. The Scripture given above (Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:2; Rev. 1:10) shows that the observance of Sunday had begun in the apostolic age; but even were Scripture silent, tradition would put the point beyond doubt."
(Canright cites this to ""The Catholic Dictionary, the Universal Christian Educator, Containing Doctrine of the Church," by Rev. Wm. A. Addis and Thomas Arnold" but does not give the page. This is on page 781 of the 1896 printing. Earlier editions of this work I looked at did not include this remark, but did say the apostles observed Sundays in a footnote elsewhere: "St. Paul reproaches the Galatians (iv. 10) for observing "days" (such as the Sabbath), "months" (such as the Feast of the New Moon), "times" (καιροὺς, anual festivals, such as the Passover), "years" (such as the Sabbatical Year and Year of Jubilee, &c). The reference is clearly to Jewish feasts. The Apostles themselves observed "days"–viz. Sundays.")

"Having lived for years among the Seventh-Day Adventists, I am familiar with their claims that the Pope of Rome changed the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week. Such assertions are wholly unfounded. Catholics claim no such thing; but maintain that the apostles themselves established the observance of Sunday and that we received it by tradition from them. The councils and Popes afterwards simply confirmed the keeping of the day as received from the apostles."
(John Meiler, Rector of St. John's Church, Healdsburg, California, in a statement obtained by Canright)

"The Catholic doctrine of the change of the Sabbath is this: The apostles, by instruction from Jesus Christ, changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday to commemorate the resurrection of Christ and the descent of the Holy Ghost, both of which occurred on Sunday. The change was made by the apostles themselves, and hence by divine authority, at the very beginning of the Church. There are references to this change in Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 16:1, 2; Rev. 1:10, etc. Yet these texts do not state positively such a change; hence Catholics go to the statements of the early Christian Fathers, where this change by the apostles is confirmed and put beyond doubt. Catholics also rely upon the tradition of the Church which says that the change was made by the apostles. Catholics never teach that the change of the day was made by the Church two or three hundred years after Christ. Such a statement would be contrary to all the facts of history and the traditions of the Church.
The Holy Catholic Church began with the apostles. St. Peter was the first Pope. Hence, when they say that the Church changed the Sabbath, they mean that it was done by the Church in the days of the apostles. Neither the Church nor the Pope, two or three hundred years after the apostles, had anything whatever to do with changing the Sabbath, for the change had been made ages before. Catholics do not call the first day of the week the Sabbath, for that was Saturday; but they call it Sunday, or the Lord's Day."
(James C. Pulcher, Pastor of St. James' Church, Grand Rapids, Michigan; Canright offered him this statement to ask if it represented Catholic teaching, and he agreed)

"The Church from the time of the apostles has changed the Sabbath into the Lord's Day."
("Systematic Study of the Catholic Religion" page 294)

"Quest. What warrant have you for keeping the Sunday, preferable to the ancient Sabbath, which was the Saturday?
" Ans. We have for it the authority of the Catholic Church, and apostolic tradition."
("The Catholic Christian Instructed" by Richard Challoner pages 231-232, 1843 edition)

"Third [Sabbath] commandment. Its obligation transferred from Saturday to Sunday." "What day of the week is the seventh day or Sabbath Day?" "It is Saturday." "Then why do we not keep Saturday holy?" "Because the Church in the apostles' time transferred the obligation from the seventh to the first day of the week." "Why was this done?" "In honor of Jesus Christ, and therefore the first day of the week is called the Lord's Day (Rev. 1:10). It was on the first day of the week (or Sunday) that Christ rose from the dead; that He commissioned His apostles to teach all nations; that He empowered them to forgive sins; that He sent down upon them the Holy Ghost; it was on this day that the apostles began to preach the doctrines of Christ and to establish the Christian religion"
(This is cited to "A Full Course of Instruction in Explanation of the Catechism" by Rev J. Perry, pages 168-169. I was not able to check on this, but "A Full Course of instructions for the use of catechists" by the same author on page 171 includes the quote; this may be a case of different editions with slightly different names)

Now, again, perhaps you disagree with all of these assertions of the apostles making any such change. Fine. But such is not the point. Your argument was to point to Catholic sources talking about how the Catholic Church made such an adjustment, when the position was rather that this was done by the apostles, and therefore was done by the Catholic Church because they were, in the Catholic Church's view, the Catholic Church. Thus this position, that the apostles changed it, is in harmony with the quotations you copy/pasted. And thus those quotes you offered do not support the argument you made.

There is no Scripture to support the claim the apostles changed God’s Sabbath commandment, I guess that why you keep quoting the people who changed God’s law not based on Scripture but their own authroity they said is above the Bible.

The 4th commandment is not just the commandment for the Sabbath it is for all days. Exo 20:8-11, if we are exalting a day to be holy that God never made holy, but for works and labors, over the day God sanctified and made for holy use and is a commandment of God, the result is the same.

Eze 22:26 Her priests have [a]violated My law and profaned My holy things; they have not distinguished between the holy and unholy, nor have they made known the difference between the unclean and the clean; and they have hidden their eyes from My Sabbaths, so that I am profaned among them.

If the Scripture was there that the apostles rebelled against God and changed His commandments when God said He would not alter them Psa 89:34 not a jot or tittle Mat 5:18-19 it would be posted by now, instead of posting distractions.

This covers it
... you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.
—The Faith of Our Fathers, by James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, 88th edition, page 89. Originally published in 1876, republished and Copyright 1980 by TAN Books and Publishers, Inc., pages 72-73.

There is no commandment to keep the first day holy, God said it was for works and labors Exo 20:9 but God did command to keep the seventh day Sabbath holy based on His Authority. Be sanctified by Rome or God Eze 20:12

It’s all choices we will need to make, who do we obey and who is our authority, because that is who we serve Rom 6:16 Even if we don’t realize it.

JSRG · Friday at 4:37 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
Yes, which pope Leo ratified making them ecumenical

Pope Leo ratified the Council of Laodicea at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD

You made this point before, and I directly addressed it. You cannot claim you missed it, as you replied to my post. But now you post it again, as if I never responded. So, here we go again with it.

As I said before:

It is not clear where this is from--it looks like this was grabbed this from an AI of some sort. AI like ChatGPT has its uses, but one must always be very careful with it--I remember when AI told me that James Buchanan, who was president, was considered a terrible Supreme Court justice.
(also, ironically, when I put the question "Which ecumenical council, if any, ratified the Council of Laodicea?" to ChatGPT, it told me "the Council of Laodicea was not ratified by any later ecumenical council" and even specified "the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD), the fourth ecumenical council, issued canons that dealt with issues of Church discipline, but it did not ratify the Council of Laodicea.")

But let's leave the AIs behind. Here's the Council of Chalcedon:

Church Councils - Papal Encyclicals

For the modern Roman Catholic Church, a papal encyclical is specific category of papal document, a kind of letter concerning Catholic doctrine.

www.papalencyclicals.net

I see no mention of approving the Council of Laodicea at all, or indeed any mention of the Council of Laodicea. Can you point me to where this occurred in the Council of Chalcedon?

I will add one thing to what I said previously: It is now clear this was from AI. I know because when I used Google to search for "did the council of chalcedon approve the council of laodicea" something extremely similar to what you posted pops up (not exact same words, but close), including the little "link" icons at the end of it. So the above appears to have just been something you grabbed from Google AI. I really should have known by the link icons. So again, your source is just Google AI.

Anyway, one can't look at the link icons in your image, but looking at the one that came up in the search I did, it appears it gets this idea from this Wikipedia article:

Laodicean Church - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This article claims "There was a Council in Laodicea, A.D. c. 363–64, although the date is disputed. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 approved the canons of this council, making these canons ecumenical." No source is cited. So your argument appears to simply go back to Wikipedia article that offers no source for this claim.

So, will you do it this time? Please point to where in the Council of Chalcedon this occurred.

SabbathBlessings · Friday at 4:48 PM

JSRG said:
You made this point before, and I directly addressed it. You cannot claim you missed it, as you replied to my post. But now you post it again, as if I never responded. So, here we go again with it.

As I said before:

It is not clear where this is from--it looks like this was grabbed this from an AI of some sort. AI like ChatGPT has its uses, but one must always be very careful with it--I remember when AI told me that James Buchanan, who was president, was considered a terrible Supreme Court justice.
(also, ironically, when I put the question "Which ecumenical council, if any, ratified the Council of Laodicea?" to ChatGPT, it told me "the Council of Laodicea was not ratified by any later ecumenical council" and even specified "the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD), the fourth ecumenical council, issued canons that dealt with issues of Church discipline, but it did not ratify the Council of Laodicea.")

But let's leave the AIs behind. Here's the Council of Chalcedon:

Church Councils - Papal Encyclicals

For the modern Roman Catholic Church, a papal encyclical is specific category of papal document, a kind of letter concerning Catholic doctrine.

www.papalencyclicals.net

I see no mention of approving the Council of Laodicea at all, or indeed any mention of the Council of Laodicea. Can you point me to where this occurred in the Council of Chalcedon?

I will add one thing to what I said previously: It is now clear this was from AI. I know because when I used Google to search for "did the council of chalcedon approve the council of laodicea" something extremely similar to what you posted pops up (not exact same words, but close), including the little "link" icons at the end of it. So the above appears to have just been something you grabbed from Google AI. I really should have known by the link icons. So again, your source is just Google AI.

Anyway, one can't look at the link icons in your image, but looking at the one that came up in the search I did, it appears it gets this idea from this Wikipedia article:

Laodicean Church - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

This article claims "There was a Council in Laodicea, A.D. c. 363–64, although the date is disputed. The Council of Chalcedon in 451 approved the canons of this council, making these canons ecumenical." No source is cited. So your argument appears to simply go back to Wikipedia article that offers no source for this claim.

So, will you do it this time? Please point to where in the Council of Chalcedon this occurred.

Sure as soon as you can show me where the apostles changed the Sabbath commandment, given by the authority of God

BobRyan · Friday at 5:32 PM

I ended my post this way --

BobRyan said:
...

================= that quote above is huge!

It means that instead of claiming that the Catholic church changed the day in the first century ( as if such a thing were documented in the New Testament text) - the claim is that there is no support at all for that first century change from actual NT scripture. And it claims that sola-scriptura Protestants have a bit of egg-on-face when claiming sola-scriptura for doctrine and yet clinging to something that is sourced solely from the traditions of the Catholic church.

As we can see in this post - the charge made in the catholic document "the Faith Explained" is aimed directly at the Protestant idea of "sola-scriptura" basis for all doctrine and practice. See the quote above in this post.

The assumption that one of the Ten Commandment were changed by the Apostles in the first century - but then not documented in the NT text - is weak. The Faith Explained is pinning Protestant scholars on the point that this is not coming to us from scripture.

"From Sabbath to Sunday" - published by "The Pontifical Gregorian University Press" 1977 in Rome - makes the case that this was not a first century feature in the christian Church. It also makes the case that the change did NOT originate from Apostles IN Jerusalem. They admit that the origin is not from the Jerusalem church.

The documentation is all from Catholic sources other than "From Sabbath to Sunday" published by "The Pontifical Gregorian University Press" 1977 in Rome. IT is the Catholic documents themselves that directly challenge the "the change came from the Bible" narratives.

The Liturgist · Friday at 5:54 PM

BobRyan said:
"From Sabbath to Sunday" - published by "The Pontifical Gregorian University Press" 1977 in Rome - makes the case that this was not a first century feature in the christian Church. It also makes the case that the change did NOT originate from Apostles IN Jerusalem. They admit that the origin is not from the Jerusalem church.

Please provide a link to the article, in its original context, so I can assess what it is actually claiming.

I would note it is not an official document of the Roman Catholic Church, so your use of it is an appeal to unqualified authority, however, there were some liberal Catholics in the late 1970s who were liberal even by contemporary Anglican standards, who were cracked down upon by Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, memory eternal, who as an Orthodox I hope the Roman church will canonize. But I have an academic interest in the writings of these liberal Catholics, so I would like to see the original article.

I would note that unlike the Roman Catholics who are usually criticized, the left wing movement in the RCC actually warranted (and continues to warrant) criticism, albeit not the kind of aggressive anti-Catholic argumentation we have seen.

JSRG · Friday at 6:03 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
Sure as soon as you can show me where the apostles changed the Sabbath commandment, given by the authority of God

It strikes me as odd for you to demand that I offer evidence for a claim I didn't argue in order for you to provide evidence for a claim you did make. The whole reason I was citing all of those Catholic sources in identifying the apostles as making the change was to provide context to the quotations you were offering. Your throwing out quotes from some Catholic works as saying "the Catholic Church" made this adjustment as evidence of your claims ignores the fact that the Catholic Church identifies the apostles as being the Catholic Church, and asserts they were the ones to do so. Whether or not these claims are accurate is a separate matter--what matters is what the doctrine of the Catholic Church actually is.

pasifika · Friday at 6:05 PM

SabbathBlessings said:
This thread is to discuss the commandments of man versus the commandments of God. This thread is not meant to be a personal attack on anyone as there are Christians in all churches living up to the light they have and this discussion is about institutions, not individuals.

In Daniel it was prophesied that a government would change God's times and laws

Dan 7:25 He shall speak pompous words against the Most High, Shall persecute the saints of the Most High, And shall intend to change times and law. Then the saints shall be given into his hand For a time and times and half a time.

There is only one law that is both a time (every seventh day Sabbath Exo 20:10) and is a law (4th commandments Exo 20:8-11) and it was changed not by God.

Do we see this in history?

Yes, the Catholic church takes credit for this change

Question: Which is the Sabbath day?
Answer: Saturday is the Sabbath day.
Question: Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday?
Answer: We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.
—Rev. Peter Geiermann C.SS.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50

Q. Have you any other way of proving that the Church has power to institute festivals of precept?
A. Had she not such power, she could not have done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; —she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.
—Rev. Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism; New York in 1857, page 174

The change happened a long time ago in the council of Laodicea in 364 AD

The Seven Ecumenical Councils — Philip Schaff
Christians must not judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, rather honouring the Lord's Day; and, if they can, resting then as Christians. But if any shall be found to be judaizers, let them be anathema from Christ.

This is very similar to the decree that went out to Daniel and his three friends that went against one of God's commandments - God told us to rest on the seventh day, this is a decree to work on God's holy Sabbath, the opposite of what God commanded.

Pope Leo ratified the Council of Laodicea at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD

View attachment 367114

I know a national Sunday law has been in the works for a while and Trump has surrounded himself with people who want to tear down the separation of church and state and is it a coincidence the new pope choose to be called pope Leo- I do not think so, I believe prophecy is fulfilling before our eyes.

God's Ten Commandments was written personally by God and spoken by God the Creator of everything and He promised He would not alter the words of His covenant Exo 34:28 Psa 89:34 not a jot or tittle Mat 5:18 it is His own personal Testimony. Exo 31:18 Who could possibly claim they have more Authority than God Himself?

The pope claims to be the vicar of Christ on earth, but Jesus said:

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.

He also said His kingdom is not of this world

John 18:38 Jesus answered, "My kingdom is not of this world; if My kingdom were of this world, My attendants would fight that I might not be betrayed to the Jews. But now My kingdom is not from here."

And there is much talk about the antichrist in the last days. The word antichrist also means in place of Christ.

Only God can forgive our sins because His blood is what paid the penalty of our sins but the Catholic church teaches they can forgive sins

Volume 12 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights Of Columbus Special Edition 1913 : Knights of Columbus. Catholic Truth Committee : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Volume 01 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights of Columbus Special Edition 1913 Volume 02 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights of Columbus Special Edition...

archive.org

The Roman Catholic church teaches they are above God's Word and above the Testimony of God by changing God's Law

Deny the authority of the Church and you have no adequate or reasonable explanation or justification for the substitution of Sunday for Saturday in the Third - Protestant Fourth - Commandment of God... The Church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.'
—Catholic Record, September 1, 1923.

God tells us His Word is a light to our path

Psa 119:105 Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.

The Catholic church teaches tradition, not God's Word is what we are to follow

Tradition, not Scripture, is the rock on which the church of Jesus Christ is built.
—Adrien Nampon, Catholic Doctrine as Defined by the Council of Trent, p. 157

God said no one can modify His Word
Deu 4:2 You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Pro 30:6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

The Catholic church teaches they can modify it

The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine law". The pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man, but of God, and he acts a vicegerent of God upon earth
—Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca, art. Papa, II, Vol. VI, p. 29.

In the end we will be in two groups, those who have the mark of the beast and those who are sealed by God. The Sabbath contains God's seal.

A seal, as illustrated in Scripture, authenticates authority and ownership. In the book of Esther, King Ahasuerus’s seal—comprising his name, title, and territory—validated his decrees, rendering them irrevocable (Esther 8:8-10).
Similarly, God’s seal in Scripture carries His divine authority. The fourth commandment, embedded in the Decalogue, uniquely contains all three elements of a legal seal:
1. Name: “The Lord your God” (Exodus 20:10).
2. Title: “Maker” or Creator (Exodus 20:11).
3. Territory: “Heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them” (Exodus 20:11) .
This alignment identifies the Sabbath commandment as God’s seal, authenticating His law and sovereignty. Unlike other commandments, the Sabbath explicitly declares His creatorship, making it the “signature of the Omnipotent” .

The Catholic church claims the change in the Sabbath is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority essentially over God's authority since they changed God's commandments when He promised He would not Psa 89:34 Mat 5:18

Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act. And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.
—C. F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons, in answer to a letter regarding the change of the Sabbath, November 11, 1895.

Rev 14:11 And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name."

Compared to the antidote which is in the next verse

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints; here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.

Is this what we were warned about in Revelation? Where is the commandment to keep Sunday holy- where did God sanctify Sunday? He didn't, it is a man-made tradition leading people away from being faithful to God's commandments.

We are told whoever we obey is who we serve. Ron 6:16

Rome says this:

It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.
—Priest Brady, in an address, reported in the Elizabeth, NJ ‘News’ on March 18, 1903.

God said:

Exo 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

It comes down to our test of loyalty and who we are going to obey. Shall we obey God the Creator of everyone and the only way we are saved, or follow what has been handed down to us over the centuries, the commandments of man.

Jesus answered this question, but will we listen to Him? Mat 15:3-14 Mark 7:7-13

Mar 7:7 AND IN VAIN THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN.'

Mat 15:3 He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?
Mat 15:4 For God commanded, saying, 'HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER'; and, 'HE WHO CURSES FATHER OR MOTHER, LET HIM BE PUT TO DEATH.'
Mat 15:5 But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God"—
Mat 15:6 then he need not honor his father or mother.' Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition.
Mat 15:7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:
Mat 15:8 'THESE PEOPLE DRAW NEAR TO ME WITH THEIR MOUTH, AND HONOR ME WITH THEIR LIPS, BUT THEIR HEART IS FAR FROM ME.
Mat 15:9 AND IN VAIN THEY WORSHIP ME, TEACHING AS DOCTRINES THE COMMANDMENTS OF MEN.' "

Have you consider the Muslim religion? They hate the Jew, they don't worship on 7th day Sabbath, they have their own law (sharia law), and they like to attack Israel on the Sabbath or other Jewish holiday an example of that is the October 7 attack etc.

BobRyan · Friday at 6:16 PM

pasifika said:
Have you consider the Muslim religion? They hate the Jew, they don't worship on 7th day Sabbath, they have their own law (sharia law), and they like to attack Israel on the Sabbath or other Jewish holiday an example of that is the October 7 attack etc.

indeed - there are a great many non-Christian groups that disregard one or more of God's commandments.

But they did not control all of Europe for 1260 years -- as Daniel 7 predicts would happen in the case of the one changing "times and laws" in Dan 7.

JSRG · Friday at 6:30 PM

The Liturgist said:
Please provide a link to the article, in its original context, so I can assess what it is actually claiming.

I would note it is not an official document of the Roman Catholic Church, so your use of it is an appeal to unqualified authority, however, there were some liberal Catholics in the late 1970s who were liberal even by contemporary Anglican standards, who were cracked down upon by Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, memory eternal, who as an Orthodox I hope the Roman church will canonize. But I have an academic interest in the writings of these liberal Catholics, so I would like to see the original article.

I would note that unlike the Roman Catholics who are usually criticized, the left wing movement in the RCC actually warranted (and continues to warrant) criticism, albeit not the kind of aggressive anti-Catholic argumentation we have seen.

"From Sabbath to Sunday" wasn't an article, but a book, and was by Samuele Bacchiocchi. Bacchiocchi was not a Catholic--he was a Seventh Day Adventist, though he did attend and graduate from Pontificial Gregorian University, actually being the first non-Catholic to attend it. That presumably is why they published it (it was, I believe, either his graduate thesis, or at least very strongly based on it).

As I recall (I do not have the full book available), Bacchiocchi rejected both the frequent Catholic claim of this Saturday-to-Sunday change emerging from the apostles and the frequent Adventist claim that it only happened centuries afterwards; Bacchiocchi instead thought the practice started in the second century, particularly as an attempt to avoid being associated with Jews after the Bar Kokhba Revolt.

BobRyan · Friday at 7:15 PM

BobRyan said:
....

================= that quote above is huge!

It means that instead of claiming that the Catholic church changed the day in the first century ( as if such a thing were documented in the New Testament text) - the claim is that there is no support at all for that first century change from actual NT scripture. And it claims that sola-scriptura Protestants have a bit of egg-on-face when claiming sola-scriptura for doctrine and yet clinging to something that is sourced solely from the traditions of the Catholic church.

BobRyan said:
As we can see in this post - the charge made in the catholic document "the Faith Explained" is aimed directly at the Protestant idea of "sola-scriptura" basis for all doctrine and practice. See the quote above in this post.

The assumption that one of the Ten Commandment were changed by the Apostles in the first century - but then not documented in the NT text - is weak. The Faith Explained is pinning Protestant scholars on the point that this is not coming to us from scripture.

BobRyan said:
"From Sabbath to Sunday" - published by "The Pontifical Gregorian University Press" 1977 in Rome - makes the case that this was not a first century feature in the christian Church. It also makes the case that the change did NOT originate from Apostles IN Jerusalem. They admit that the origin is not from the Jerusalem church.

The Liturgist said:
Please provide a link to the article, in its original context, so I can assess what it is actually claiming.

"From Sabbath to Sunday" is an entire book - not an article. I have the book and you too can order it if you like.

The Liturgist said:
I would note it is not an official document of the Roman Catholic Church

It is published by them and has their imprimature.

I noted in my post that all the sources are Catholic - except this one even though it was their university student, their approved doctoral thesis, their own University and publishing house and they were the ones that approved/sponsored and signed off on the project including giving the book the "imprimatur" .

It was up to them to approve this project/topic AND content or else direct their own doctoral student to select another topic.

The Liturgist said:
, so your use of it is an appeal to unqualified authority,

Qualified authority according to the Vatican University. It is one of their own graduate student's PHD Thesis.

you are arguing from the void of what you have not read.

The Liturgist said:
however, there were some liberal Catholics in the late 1970s who were liberal even by contemporary Anglican standards

This is not at all about "Liberal Catholics" -- keep guessing.

The Liturgist said:
, who were cracked down upon by Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, memory eternal, who as an Orthodox I hope the Roman church will canonize

This is not a "liberal Catholic" topic.

Read more... guess less.

BobRyan · Friday at 7:18 PM

JSRG said:
"From Sabbath to Sunday" wasn't an article, but a book, and was by Samuele Bacchiocchi. Bacchiocchi was not a Catholic

True.

I think he was the first non-Catholic to graduate from the Vatican Univ and have his PHD Thesis published by the Vatican press.

JSRG said:
--he was a Seventh Day Adventist, though he did attend and graduate from Pontificial Gregorian University, actually being the first non-Catholic to attend it

Indeed. They actually were the sponsors of his PHD project and topic. Interestingly enough they had just completed this same exercise/topic for another student (who was indeed Catholic) - and turned right around and did this one on the same topic because Bacciocci proved that there was sufficient evidence missed by the project that they had just completed - to warrant another thesis on the topic.

BobRyan · Friday at 8:02 PM

JSRG said:
"From Sabbath to Sunday" wasn't an article, but a book, and was by Samuele Bacchiocchi. Bacchiocchi was not a Catholic--he was a Seventh Day Adventist, though he did attend and graduate from Pontificial Gregorian University, actually being the first non-Catholic to attend it. That presumably is why they published it (it was, I believe, either his graduate thesis, or at least very strongly based on it).

As I recall (I do not have the full book available), Bacchiocchi rejected both the frequent Catholic claim of this Saturday-to-Sunday change emerging from the apostles and the frequent Adventist claim that it only happened centuries afterwards; Bacchiocchi instead thought the practice started in the second century, particularly as an attempt to avoid being associated with Jews after the Bar Kokhba Revolt.

Which still removes it from being a command coming from the Apostles in Jerusalem.

Bacchiocchi argued that it was a practice that evolved over time not a decree coming from the Apostles in Jerusalem right out of the gate.

I spoke to him about this and he was pretty adamant about that.

Commandments of man or the commandments of God

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

3. Sunday-keepers have little interest in the issue​

4. Sunday-keepers do not have the political power to pass a Sunday law​

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Traditional Liturgical Christian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Well-Known Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Junior Member

Similar threads

3. Sunday-keepers have little interest in the issue

4. Sunday-keepers do not have the political power to pass a Sunday law