LETTER OF POPE LEO THE GREAT

Having written thus much, and considering that the matter of Led the Great has been so greatly misunderstood, I think I could not do a better service to the reader in this connection, than to give him the benefit of a translation of this letter of Pope Leo. It is from an authorized and commended edition of the letters of the Popes, in German. It is No. IX of Leo’s letters, and is in two chapters; but the second chapter relates altogether to the mass, and that is of no interest in this discussion. It is as follows:-OGSO 67.5

“Leo, the Bishop, sends to Dioscorus, Bishop of Alexandria, Greeting:OGSO 68.1

“What great love in the Lord we cherish for your love, you can gather from this, that we wish to establish more firmly the beginning of your office, in order that nothing may be wanting to the perfection of your love, since, as we became convinced, the merits of spiritual grace attend you. The fatherly and brotherly conferring (of the office) must accordingly be most desirable to your holiness, and be so received by you as you see it proceed from us. For we must be one in thought and action, in order to verify what we read, (to wit,) that we have one heart and one soul. ‘For inasmuch as Peter received from the Lord the apostolic primacy, and since the Roman Church adheres to the institutions of this apostle, it is not to be supposed that his holy disciple Mark, who was the first to lead the Alexandrian church, shaped his institutions in accordance with other rules, for undoubtedly did the spirit of the disciple and that of the master both draw from one and the same fount of grace, and the ordained could teach nothing else but what he received from him who ordained him.’ ^{27 Decret. cf. C. XXIV. qu. I, c. 16.} We do not therefore suffer that we, who indeed profess the same faith in one body, should differ in anything from one another, nor that the institutions of the disciples should be distinguished from those of the teacher.OGSO 68.2

“I Chapter. On which day the consecration of priests and Levites is to be held.OGSO 68.3

“That which therefore, as we know, has been observed by our fathers with a devoted care, we wish to know to be likewise cherished by you, namely, that the consecration of priests and Levites be not undertaken on any day indiscriminately, but that [for this purpose] after the Sabbath-day the beginning of that night be chosen in which the morning of the first day of the week begins to dawn, ^{1Translator’s note to the German edition: “Ejus noctis quae in prima Sabbati lucesit, in which sentence Sabbatum equals week, consequently ‘the first day of the week,’ corresponding to our Sunday.”} when the ones to be consecrated, fasting, will receive the holy consecration by those who [themselves have] fasted. But the rule will even then be observed, when the consecration will be given, under a continuation of the fasting of Saturday, on Sunday morning, from which time the beginning of the preceding night is not distant, which no doubt, as becomes evident from the Passah of the Lord, belongs to the day of the resurrection. ^{28 Decret. of. D. LXXV. c. 4.} For besides the authority of custom, which evidently springs from the teachings of the apostles, the Holy Scriptures also state very plainly, that the apostles, at the time they sent Paul and Barnabas by command of the Holy Spirit to proclaim the gospel among the heathen, laid their hands upon them by fasting and prayer, in order that we might know with what devotion the one giving and the one receiving it must take care lest a sacrament so rich in blessing should appear to be performed thoughtlessly. For this reason you will observe the apostolic institutions in a devout and commendable way, when you observe this rule in the ordination of priests, in the churches over which the Lord has made you overseer, namely, that the one to be ordained receives the consecration solely and only on the day of the resurrection of the Lord, which, as you know, begins from the evening of the Sabbath, and is made sacred by so many divine mysteries, that whatever of greater prominence was commanded by the Lord, took place on this exalted day. On this day the world had its beginning; on it, through the resurrection of Christ, death found its end, and life its beginning; ^{39 Decret. of. D. LXXV. c. 5.} on it the apostles received their commission from the Lord to proclaim the gospel to all nations, and to dispense to the entire world the sacrament of the regeneration. On it, as the holy evangelist John testifies, the Lord, after he had joined the assembled disciples by closed doors, breathed upon them and said: ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins, ye retain, they are retained.’ On this day, finally, came the Holy Spirit, which the Lord had promised the apostles, in order that we might recognize, as it were, inculcated and taught by a heavenly rule, that we are to undertake on that day the mysteries of the priestly consecration, on which all gifts and graces were imparted.”OGSO 68.4

How much has been drawn from this letter that is not justified by its words, the reader can judge for himself. Though it is made almost the gospel of Protestant Sunday-keeping, it certainly was not written to prove that it is a day of general observance.OGSO 70.1

I have already noticed that there was no specific law in the Eastern empire against Sunday labor in the country, until the decree of Leo VI., called The Philosopher, early in the tenth century. I do not speak of the effect that may have resulted from the general enforcement of the Catholic faith, but only of Sunday law. In the West this work began with the third Council of Orleans, A. D. 538; and it is an interesting fact that this council, which was first to give a decision in favor of refraining from labor in the country on Sunday, gave as the reason, that the people might attend the services of church, and also proceeded to mitigate the rigors of the observance of the day, which many have superstitiously thrown over it. It was not in the province of this council to try to control the use of the day further than to advise to abstain from work during the time of public worship. But from this time forward there was a greater restraint placed upon Sunday labor, and the severity of the penalties was greatly increased. The emperors and kings, being the guardians and actual heads of the churches, were often most forward to advance the Sunday cause, granting even more than the church dignitaries had asked in the way of legal exactions; but there was little modesty on either side in this respect, for the history of the enforcement of Sunday and of opposition to the Sabbath, is one of remorseless cruelty, from the very time when the Council of Laodicea showed the true spirit of the Papacy in its curse upon Sabbath-keepers.OGSO 70.2

And it was not Sunday alone that was thus cared for; “other festivals of the saints” were enforced with no less rigor than was Sunday, and they were justly classed together in imperial and church action. And they were so classed together by the reformers. Coleman gives the following testimony to their faith in this respect:-OGSO 71.1

“The Augsburg Confession classes the Lord’s day under the same category as Easter, Whitsuntide, and the like; merely human ordinances.”-Bibliotheca Sacra, vol. 1, p. 538.OGSO 71.2

The reformers were deeply versed in the history and literature of the church, and were well qualified to judge whether the Sunday Lord’s day was an institution of the Papacy. Speaking of the Puritan idea of a Christian Sabbath, Coleman further says:-OGSO 71.3

“The law of the Sabbath was indeed a religious principle, after which the Christian church had, for centuries, been darkly groping. Pious men of every age had felt the necessity for divine authority for sanctifying the day.-Ancient Christianity Exemplified, p.533.”OGSO 71.4

Yes, and as far as any divine authority for sanctifying the Sunday is concerned, the necessity is no less deeply felt at the present time. This is manifested by the straits into which they are brought to defend the day; the contradictions which abound in the arguments of its advocates; the frauds by which it has been popularized, which are indorsed even in this enlightened age. This is a most striking confession from Coleman. It is strange indeed that the piety and erudition of almost fifteen centuries, from the time of the apostles to the rise of the Puritans, had not succeeded in discovering the law of the Sunday-sabbath, if such a law existed by divine authority!OGSO 72.1