saith Veteres subrogarunt diem dominicum in locum Sabbati The Ancients subrogated the Lords Day in place of the Sabbath But he takes no notice of that which immediately followes in Calvin as a reason of the former thus For whereas in the Lords Resurrection is found the end and accomplishment of the true rest which the ancient Sabbath shaddowed by the very day which set an end to shadowes Christians are admonished not to stick unto the shadowing ceremonie Where observe First as touching the persons noted by Veteres the Ancients first and then by Christiani Christians Are not these the Apostles as much as any other and they in the first place as wee best knew what that was which did set an end to shadowes and accordingly to give notice of the pregnant signification of the Day of the Lords Resurrection and therefore 1 Cor. 16. 2. Hee doth intirely referre this to the Apostles as whom he confesseth constrayned by the Iewish superstition to have abrogated the Sabbath and in the place thereof ordeyned the Lords Day Secondly observe that the accomplishment of that which was signified by the Jewish Sabbath he ascribes to the Resurrection And Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester in his speech delivered in the Starre Chamber in the case of Traske professeth that It hath ever beene the Churches doctrine that Christ made an end of all Sabbaths by his Sabbath in the grave That Sabbath saith he was the last of them And that Christs Resurrection brought with it a new Creation and a new Creation requires a new Sabbath And hee alleageth Austin Ep. 119. saying The Lords Day was declared to Christians by Christ his Resurrection and from thence began to have its festivity But that at this time Calvin should thinke it alterable by the Church no colour of proofe is brought and most unreasonable it is for any to conceave the Sabbath to be as alterable now as in the Apostles dayes it was when from the Saturday they translated it unto the Sunday For that alteration depended upon a second Creation as both Bishop Andrewes observes and that out of Athanasius de Sabbato circumcision◠And Bishop Lakes was of the same opinion as his discourse in Manuscript yet to be seene doth manifest So that unlesse this Prefacer can devise a third Creation and maintaine withall the rest on the Lords Day to bee as ceremoniall as the Jewes rest on the seventh Day was there is no colour why the Christian Sabbath on the Lords Day should bee as alterable now as the day of the Jewish Sabbath was As for the 3. conclusions which hee saith Calvin resolves upon the first whereof hee saith to be this that one day in seven is not the morall part of the fourth Commandement I say Calvin avoucheth no such thing and Wallaeus shewes that generally the friends of Calvin maintained the contrary between whom neverthelesse and Calvin it was never known that there was any contention herabouts And already I have shewed how unshamefastly this Prefacer abuseth Calvin in alledging one halfe of his sentence and leaving the other part quite out so making Calvin to deliver that absolutely which he affirmes onely conditionally The second resolution which he obtrudes upon Calvin is that the day was changed from the last day of the weeke to the first by the authority of the Church and not by any divine ordinance It is true Calvin sayth not that the day was changed by divine ordinance neither doth he say that it was changed by the authority of the Church but in plaine termes professeth that the Apostles changed it in one place and that admonition was given for the change of it by the consideration of the Day of Christs Resurrection in another to wit Institut lib. 2. cap. 8. Sect. 36. Now let every sober conscience consider whether that day which was first ordained by authority Divine the apostles would alter by lesse authority then authority Divine especially considering that Christs redemption of the World is the restauration of the World which is as a new Creation and as the Lord rested the seventh day from the workes of Creation so the day of Christs Resurrection was the day of his rest from the worke of redemption so that still the day of the Lords rest is the day of our rest not indeed the day of the Lord our Creators rest that ceasing as being ceremoniall as before hath beene shewed out of Doctor Andrewes but the day of the Lord our Redeemers rest which brought with it a new Creation is now the day of our rest And who was nearer or dearer unto Calvin then Beza whose words upon Revel 1 10. are to this effect He calls that the Lords Day which Paul calls the first of the Sabbaths 1 Cor. 16. 2. Acts 20. 7. on which day it appeares that even then were made the more frequent assemblies by Christians like as the Iewes came together in their Synagogues on the Sabbath Day wherby it may appeare that the fourth precept of sanctifying the seventh day as touching the day of the Sabbath and legall rites was ceremoniall but as touching the worship of God is of the morall Law unalterable and perpetually to continue in this life And that day of the Sabbath continued in force from the creation of the World to the day of Christs Resurrection which being as it were another Creation of another spirituall World as the Prophets speake then for the Sabbath of the former world or seventh day was assumed the first day of this new World the holy Ghost without doubt dictating thus much to the Apostles As for the third last resolutiō which he pins upon Calvins sleeve namely that the day of rest to be sanctified to the Lord is yet alterable by the church as at first it was neither that first alteration is by Calvin sayd to be made by the church but expressely by the apostles they admonished hereof by the day of Christs resurrection and Beza professeth that our Christian assemblies on the Lords Day are of Apostolicall and Divine tradition And observe I pray how Bishop Andrewes pleades for Episcopall authority as by Divine right in his answer to the first Epistle of Peter Moulin An est apostolicum factum aliquod jure non apostolico Apostolico autem id est ut ego interpretor Divino Nec enim aliquid ab apostolis factum non dictante hoe iis spiritu Sancto Divino Is there any fact of the Apostles by right not apostolicall But by apostolicall that is as I interpret it by Divine For neither was there any thing done by the Apostles which the holy and divine Spirit did not dictate unto them Shall this be of force for the institution of Bishops and shall it not be of force for the institution of the Lords Day as by Divine right But put the case it were so in every particular of Calvin as this Prefacer avoucheth how comes it about that our adversaries practise
to choake us with the authority of Calvin shall we beurged to yield to the authority of Calvin who are reproched usually as Calvinists and so nicknamed In my time of being in the University we heard by credible relation how in one of the Colleges questions were set up to be disputed Contrà Ioannem Calvinum and that disputations of that nature were sometimes concluded in this manner Relinquamus Calvinum in hisce faecibus and we commonly say there is no smoake without some fire No longer agoe then at the act in Oxford last save one Anno 1634. I heard Calvinists reckoned up amongst Papists Pelagians Arminians Puritans as sectaries at least if not as Heretiques by him that preached the act Sermon on the Lords Day in the afternoone and is it fit that we should be pregravated by the opinion of Calvin a man whose memory seemes to be hated by men of this Prefacers spirit so as few men more The fourth Section NEither was hee the onely one that hath so determined For for the first that to keepe holy one day of seven is not the morall part of the fourth Commandement our Doctor hath delivered in the third section that not Tostatus onely but even Aquinas and with him all the schoolemen have decreed upon it Nor was there any that opposed it in the schooles of Rome that I have met with till Catarinus tooke up Armes against Tostatus affirming but with ill successe that the Commandement of the Sabbath was imposed on Adam in the first cradle of the World there where the Lord is sayd to blesse the seventh Day and to sanctifie it 2 As for the Protestant schooles besides what is affirmed by Calvin and seconded by the Doctor in this following discourse this seemes to be the judgement of the Divines in the low Countries Franciscus Gomarus one knowne sufficiently for his undertakings against Arminians published An. 1628. a little treatise about the originall of the Sabbath and therein principally canvased these two questions First whether the Sabbath were ordained by God immediately upon the Creation of the World Then whether all Christians are obliged by the fourth Commandement alwayes to set a part one day in seven to Gods holy worship both which he determines negatively And Doctor Rivet one of the foure professors in Leyden although he differs in the first yet in the second which doth most concerne us Christians they agree together affirming also joyntly that the appointing of the Lords Day for Gods publique service was neither done by God himselfe nor by his Apostles but by the authority of the Church For seconds Gomarus brings in Vatablus and Wolfgangus Musculus and Rivet voucheth the authority of our Doctor here For so Gomarus in the assertion and defense of the first opinion against this Rivet De quibus etiam cl doctiss Doctor Prideaux in oratione de Sabbato consensionem extare eodem judicio by Rivets information libenter intelleximus I will adde one thing onely which is briefely this The Hollanders when they discovered Fretum le Morire An. 1615. though they observed a most exact accompt of their time at Sea yet at their comming home they found comparing their accompt with theirs in Holland that they had lost a day that which was Sunday to the one being Munday to the other Which of necessity must happen as it is calculated by Geographers to those that compasse the World from West to East as contrary they had got a day had they sayled it Eastward And what should these people doe when they were returned if they must sanctifie precisely one day in seven they must have sanctified a day a part from their to her Countreymen and had a Sabbath by themselves or to comply with with others must have broken the morall Law which must for no respects be violated See more hereof at large in Carpenters Geogr. p. 237. Exam. That Calvin hath any where so determined this Prefacer hath not prooved but shamefully dismembred him thereby to make him to deliver something absolutly which he delivers onely conditionally and that in opposition unto Papists who will have the Lords Day to be kept not onely for order and policy sake but by reason of some mystery and this Calvin professeth to be Jewish Aquinas his words are these Habere aliquod tempus deputatum ad vacandum Divinis cadit sub praecepto morali sed in quantum in hoc praecepto determinatur speciale tempus in signum creationis Mundi sic est praeceptum ceremoniale To have some time deputed wherein to rest for things Divine falls under the morall precept But for as much as in this precept is determined a speciall time in signe of the Creation of the World so it is a praecept ceremoniall Where I doe observe first that this ceremoniality is apparently ascribed to the seventh day and that considered as a signe of the Creation and not to one day in seven And this indeed may well be the concurrent opinion of Schole Divines As for Abulensis of what authority is he to preponderate any one of our Divines nay I appeale to every humane conscience whether no more be morall in this precept then to set some time apart for Gods service For what is it nothing materiall whether we set apart for divine Service one day in a weeke or one day in a month or one day in a yeare or one day in twenty yeares or one day throughout the whole course of a mans life what conscience can be found so cauteriate as to justifie this If so then let him proceed and say it is nothing materiall whether wee consecrate unto God one houre in a day or one houre in a weeke or one houre in a month or one houre in a yeare or but one houre throughout the whole course of a mans life So that I presume every sober man by the very light of nature will be driven to confesse that not only some time ought to be set apart for Gods worship as the Schoolemen commonly teach but that a convenient proportion of time ought to be destinated unto this Now let reason itselfe judge whether any more convenient proportion of time can be devised for this then the proportion of one day in seven And herein let us oppose Azorius to Tostatus if Tostatus doe oppose the morality of one day in seven which is more then I finde a Papist to confront a Papist who plainly affirmeth Rationi maximè consentaneum esse that it is most agreeable to reason that after six workedayes one day should bee consecrated to the service of God Especially since God hath discovered unto us that this is his good pleasure namely that one day in seven should be consecrated unto his service First that we might not be left at large to our own hearts to proportion out the time for Gods Service Secondly for the maintenance of uniformity herein amongst his people who being left unto themselves might and in all
by God himselfe in the second Commandement yea otherwise than he ordained in the first Creation when he sanctified precisely the Sabbath day and not the day following Such great power did Christ leave to his Church and for such causes gave he the Holy Ghost to be resident in it to guide it into all truthes even such as in the Scripture are not expressed And if the Church had authority and inspiration from God to make Sunday being a working day before an everlasting holy day and the Saturday that before was holy day now a common work-day why may not the same Church prescribe and appoint the other feasts of Easter Whitsontide Christmas and the rest for the same warrant she hath for the one as she hath for the other Now to this Doctor Fulk makes answer after this manner The Apostles did not abrogate the Jewish Sabbath but Christ himselfe by his death as he did all other ceremonies of the Law that were figures and shadowes of things to come whereof he was the body and they were fulfulled and accomplished in him and by him And this the Apostles knew both by the Scriptures and by the Word of Christ and his holy Spirit By the Scriptures also they knew that one day of seven was appointed to be observed for ever during the World as consecrated and hallowed to the publike exercise of the Religion of God Although the ceremoniall rest and prescript day according to the Law were abrogated by the death of Christ Now for the prescription of this day before any other of seven they had without doubt either the expresse commandement of Christ before his ascension when he gave them precepts concerning the Kingdome of God and the order and government of the Church Acts 1. 2. or else the certaine direction of his Spirit that it was his will and pleasure it should be so and that also according to the Scriptures And observe how in the words following he falls in upon the same reason of the change of the day which of old was mentioned by Athanasius formerly rehearsed herein by Beza Doctor Andrews D. Lake as I have already shewed Seeing there is the same reason of sanctifying the day in which our Saviour Christ accomplished our redemption and the restitution of the world by his resurrection from death that was of sanctifying the day in which the Lordrested from the creation of the world And after many lines nothing necessary to be recited he comes to the comparison made betweene the Lords Day and other Festivalls saying Although the Church in dayes or times which are indifferent may take order for some other dayes or times to be solemnized for the exercises of Religion or the remembrance of Christs nativity resurrection ascension or the comming of the holy Ghost may be celebrated either on the Lords Day or any other time yet there is great difference between the authority of the Church in this case and the prescription of the Lords Day by the Apostles for the speciall memory of those things are indifferent of their nature either to be kept on certaine daies or left to the discretion of the Governours of the Church But to change the Lords Day or to keepe it on Munday Tuesday or any other day the Church hath no authority For it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe delivered to us by his Apostles And againe in the next place The cause of this change it was not our estimation that either we have or ought to have of our redemption before our creation but the Ordinance of God who as first he sanctified the rest from creation for the glory of that weeke so now also he sanctifieth the day of the restitution of the world for his glory of the accomplishment of our redemption Thus wee have not onely authority Humane but authority Divine for the alteration of the Day and that by the testimony of more Bishops antient and late than this Prefacer makes shew of amongst farre meaner names Yet he doth immodestly abuse Doctor Prideaux in putting it upon him that in the fifth Section he maintaines the alteration of the day to be onely an humane and Ecclesiasticall institution For in that Section he onely opposeth them who would derive the Divine authority which they stand for of the alteration of the Day from the old Testament but as for those who derive the Divine authority thereof from the new they hee confesseth doe carry themselves herein more warily the other more weakly and them alone he disputes against in that Section In the sixth Section he comes to the deriving thereof from the new Testament and first he challengeth them who boast that they have found the institution of the Lords Day in the new Testament expressely to shew the place Then in the often disputations of our Saviour with the Pharisees about their superstitious observation of the Sabbath Day he demands where is the least suspicion of the abrogation of it or any mention that the Lords Day was instituted in the place thereof And indeed the time hereof was not yet come onely the death of Christ setting an end to ceremonies Then he demands whether the Apostles did not keepe the Jewish Sabbath now I doe not find they did although they tooke occasions of their meetings on that day to dispute with them and to instruct them in the Faith of Christ Then he demands whether the Primitive Church did not designe as well the Sabbath as the Lords Day to sacred meetings I find in Baronius that Orthodoxi Orientales did and the occasion also to wit in detestation of the Marcionites yet without any such respect it had been nothing strange considering that even now adayes Saturday is counted halfe holy day and that the Jewes had a preparation for the Sabbath in such sort that on their behalfe Augustus made a rescript that no Jewes should be compelled to make good their suretiships as much to say they should not be arrested either on the Sabbath dayes or after three a clocke of the day going before Hereupon which is yet a very weake ground in my judgement he saith that Papists inferre that the Lords Day is not of Divine institution he doth not make any such inference himselfe Yet notwithstanding he confesseth that even in the Church of Rome Anchoranus Panormitane Angelus and Sylvester all which this Prefacer conceals very judiciously for his owne advantage have stoutly set themselves against these luke-warme Advocates in affirmation of the Divine authority of the Lords Day And I find that Azorius in his institutions makes mention of them to the same purpose and addes that Sylvester professeth hanc esse opinionem communem that this is the common opinion And after this Doctor Prideaux in that Section disputes for the Divine institution thereof rather than against it After this he takes notice of Pauls fact Acts 20. 7. and disputes therehence for a custome to celebrate on
the first day of the weeke their publike meetings and confesseth that the Fathers and all Interpreters almost doe so conceive it though withall he professeth hee sees not how from a casuall fact so he calleth it upon what ground I know not a solemne institution may be justly grounded yet that which went before in some opposition whereunto this is delivered pleaded not for a solemne institution but for a custome onely although upon due consideration it may be found that such a custome if that be granted could not otherwise proceed originally than from a solemne institution It is enough if they ordained that on that day the Churches should be assembled for publique worship which Austin expressely professeth as formerly I have shewed neither doth it appeare in reason how it could be otherwise such assemblies being universall and so continuing to this day Is it credible such universall agreement should come to passe casually if it did yet their continuance of it without dislike doth manifest their joynt Apostolicall approbation who we know were guided by the Spirit of God and even in their time was the first day of the weeke called the Lords Day So that in all this I find no incoherence much lesse notable Indeed in the first of the Corinth chap. 16. 2. he doth not order that the first day should be set apart for Gods service but rather supposeth it and that not onely at Corinth but in the Churches of Galatia how improbable is it that this uniformity should be among them unlesse it proceeded from some authority superiour to the Churches themselves then comming to consider the denomination of the Lords Day and concluding it to be the first day of the weeke and therewithall concluding that sixth Section the seventh Section he begins thus what then Shall we affirme that the Lords Day is founded in Divine authority and answers the question thus For my part without prejudice to any mans opinion I assent unto it however the arguments like me not whereby the opinion is supported and so he proceeds in prosecuting of that which was affirmed by him in the last place concerning his private dislike of some particular courses taken to justifie it He opposeth I grant expresse institution but if by just consequence it may be deduced it serveth our turne both in the generall and in particular at this time and in this place to discover the immodest and unreasonable carriage of this Prefacer who would obtrude the contrary opinion upon Doctor Prideaux as it were in despite of him And indeed it is thought that hee owed him a spight and to pay that hee owed him hee came to this translation But herein the Doctors honour is easily preserved in the despight of this Prefacer yet see a greater degree of impudency in this Prefacer For he puts upon the Doctor as if hee had shewed the alteration of the day to be onely an humane and Ecclesiasticall institution by the generall consent of all sorts of Papists Jesuits Canonists and Schoole-men of some great Lutherans by name whereas it is plaine that he mentioneth more Papists maintaining the Lords Day to be of Divine institution then opposing it And amongst them that maintaine it one to wit Sylvester professeth it to be opinionem communem not one avouched as affirming the contrary And as for the great Lutherans this Author speaketh of loving to speake with a full mouth they are but one and that Brentius who is said to affirme it to be a civill ordinance and not a commandement of the Gospel a very strange phrase in my opinion to call it a civill ordinance the ordinance being in force many hundred yeeres before the Church of God had any civill government of their own and being in the Apostles dayes how could it be lesse than Apostolicall undoubtedly not so much civill as Ecclesiasticall Wee grant willingly we have no expresse precept for it yet Austin is bold to say as wee have heard that Apostoli sanxerunt yet Gomarus allegeth no passage out of Brentius to this purpose But Melancthon ever as I take it accounted of better authoritie than Brentius professeth as Walaeus reports him that consentaneum est Apostolos hanc ipsam ob causam mutasse diem in plaine termes ascribing the change of the day to the Apostles As for the Remonstrants what authority have they deserved to have with us who are so neere a kinne to the Socinians who uttterly professe against all observation of the Lords Day But the foure professors of Leiden have passed over this of theirs without note or opposition And was not Walaeus one of the foure yet what his opinion is himselfe hath manifested to the world yea and his collegue Thysius also yet no cause had they to oppose in this when the other professed it to be a laudable and good custome according to the patterne of the Primitive Church and can the Primitive Church exclude the Apostles and not rather include them And is it probable that the Primitive Church prescribed it to the Apostles and not rather the Apostles to the Church Tilenus calls it Ecclesiae consuetudinem not denying it to be instituted by the Apostles nay elsewhere hee affirmes this or rather that it was instituted by Christ himselfe So little cause had these professors to quarrell with this phrase of the Remonstrants having weightier matters in hand wherein to oppose them What if Bullenger call it Ecclesiae consuettudinem so doth Tilenus de praecept 4. Thes 29. yet Thes 24. he professed it to be not onely observed by the Apostles but that it may seeme also to be instituted by Christ himselfe Bullenger saith sponte receperunt to wit in opposition to an expresse Precept as appeares by that which immediately followeth Non legimus eam ullibi praeceptam we doe not reade it any where commanded Ursine alleged in the next place clearely professeth in the very place quoted by Gomarus that God it is who hath abrogated the observation of the seventh day but he addes that he left it free to the Church to choose other daies which Church upon a probable cause chose the first day which was the day of Christs resurrection Now what Church was it but Apostolica Ecclesia as Paraeus upon Ursinus Catechisme observes p. 665. Pro libertate sibi à Christo donatâ pro septima die elegit diem primum propter probabilem causam out of the liberty which Christ hath given them insteed of the seventh day chose the first day of the weeke by reason of a probable cause to wit because on that day Christ rose by whose resurrection the spirituall and eternall rest is inchoated in us and p. 666. Apostoli ipsi mutarunt Sabbatum septimi diei The Apostles themselves changed the Sabbath of the seventh day By the way touch we a little upon this that First this was done in reference to Christs resurrection so Calvin acknowledgeth in reference whereunto this day had some prerogative above
worke of the new Creation rested on this day from his worke of redemption Athanasius of old considers a first and a second Creation and so accordingly a first and a second Sabbath our Saviour himselfe speakes of a Christian Sabbath Math. 24. 20. and what should that bee but the Lords Day under the Gospell And Beza and Iunius and Bishop Andrewes worke upon the same And I wonder that men should thinke the Sabbath should bee altered and another brought into the place of it by any other authority then of him who is Lord of the Sabbath And as Bishop Lake observes in all feasts both Divine and humane that wee reade of in Scripture the worke of the day was the ground of hallowing the day And never was known to the World a more wonderfull worke in the way of grace and mercy then Christs Resurrection from the dead manifesting thereby the redemption of the World as then wrought by him How doth Christ take upon him to alter the Sacraments but as Lord of the Sacraments and apparently he shewes that upon the same ground hee takes upon him power to dispense or change the Sabbath as hee is Lord of the Sabbath But what is his ground to deny the parity of reason here meerely his owne prejudicate conceit that the obligation of the Lords Day is not so great as the observation of the Sabbath The contrary whereunto saith he omnes refugimus we all avoyd But who and how many are those all what one of the ancients can hee produce to have thought as hee thinks Hee may as well say according to the current of his private opinion that wee under the Gospell are not as much bound to the observation of one day in seaven as the Jewes were under the Law It is true that rigorous rest enjoyned to the Jewes wee utterly disclaime as well as hee againe the circumstance of the day wee make no part of Gods worship nor to have any mysterious signification as the Sabbath had to the Jewes Wee acknowledge no other use of this day then for order and policy sake in which case wee judge it farre better the Lord should prescribe it then wee unto our selves least if there were twenty dayes in the weeke there would bee twenty differences amongst Christians about the setting apart of one day in the weeke for Divine Service 2. Master Perkins his second argument is this The Church of Corinth every first day of the weeke made a collection for the poore 1 Cor. 16. 2. and this collection for the poore in the primitive Church followed the preaching of the Word Prayer and the Sacraments as a fruite thereof Acts 2. 42. and Paul commands the Corinths to doe this as he had ordained in the Churches of Galatia whereby he makes it to be an Apostolicall and therefore a Divine Ordinance Yea that very Text doth in some part manifest thus much that it is an ordinance and institution of Christ that the first day of the weeke should be the Lords Day For Paul commandes nothing but what he receaved from Christ To this Doctor Rivetus alledgeth the answer of Doctor Prideaux demanding how that we contend for his inferred herehence we answer the generall practise of the Church in the Apostles dayes argues it manifestly that this order was established by the joynt consent of the Apostles otherwise it is incredible it should have beene so universally receaved and persevered in as it hath beene to this day Secondly wheras the Jewes Sabbath was by divine authority the abrogation thereof and substituting another day in the place thereof could bee done by no lesse authority then Divine which also wee conceave to bee fairely represented by the denomination of our Christian Sabbath S. Iohn calling it the Lords Day Secondly he sheweth what Gomarus answereth hereunto but this answer himselfe taketh off in this very place in part and much more in his reply to Gomarus But these places being granted to denote the first day of the weeke in the Apostles dayes set apart to Divine Service hee sayth it followes not herehence that it is called the Lords Day as destinated to Gods Service much lesse that so it was by Divine ordination Yet Walaeus thinkes it his safest course to say t is called the Lords Day as destinated to Gods Service as before wee have heard so to avoyd as hee thinkes the implication of Divine Ordination But to him I have answered before And Doctor Rivetus in my opinion doth not wel consider that not the day of the yeare but the day of the weeke whereon Christ rose is called the Lords Day by S. Iohn Like as the Sabbath in the Old Testament is called the Lords Day which which if he had and withall considered how strange it were for us to set any day in the weeke apart for the exercises of Piety rather then the Lords Day I am perswaded hee would not have contented himselfe with this answer For certainly many other holy dayes have beene and are set apart for Divine Service yet never were called any one of them the Lords day He talkes of a bare custome of the Church for it a thing incredible that both Jewes and Gentiles throughout all Nations should so universally concurre without the guidance of some authorative constitution or some generally convincing evidence by the very light of common Christian evidence or both And as for liberty left to the Church hereabout it seemeth so unreasonable unto my poore judgement that if it were it should become us by earnest and hearty prayer to seeke unto God to take that liberty from us and bee pleased himselfe to guide us by some manifest ordinance to prevent dissension and confusion yet well fare Doctor Rivetus hee will not have this liberty extend any further then provided that some reason and necessity should urge the changing of the day for in the next columne hee professeth that a sufficient cause of the change and abrogation of the day cannot bee given The observation of other dayes and particularly of the Sabbath as well as the Lords Day by some in the Primitive Church is no evidence at all that it was indifferent unto them whether they would observe the Lords Day or no. The third argument Rivetus omits the fourth is this That which was prefigured in that it was prefigured was prescribed But the Lords Day was prefigured in the eighth day wherin the children of the Iewes were circumcised therefore it was prescribed to be kept the eighth day This the ancient Fathers by name Cyprian and Austin have reasoned and taught To this Doctor Rivetus answers by denying the assumption and saying that no probable reason can be brought to prove that day was prefigured by the eighth day wherein children were circumcised And indeed that day being the eighth day after birth doth not so conveniently denote the first day of the weeke But Master Perkins his argument hath another part farre more principall drawne from
Christ manifested before his death that his Christian Churches should observe a Sabbath as well as the Jewes did this appeares Matth. 24. 20. Pray that your flight be not in the Winter nor on the Sabbath day and thus Bishop Andrewes accommodates that place in his patterne of Catecheticall doctrine It is as manifest that the day of Christs resurrection is called in the cripture the Lords Day as manifest that not the day of the yeere but the day of the week whereon Christ rose is called the Lords Day which few take notice of Likewise in the old Testament is manifest that the Jews Sabbath is called the Lords holy Day Then the congruity in reference to the reason of the originall institution is most exact For first Christ by his resurrection brought with him a new creation and this new creation as D. Andrewes expresseth it treading herein in the steps of the ancients requireth a new Sabbath and as the Lord rested on the seventh day from the worke of creation so our Saviour on the first day of the weeke from the worke of Redemption And lastly the day of Christs resurrection was the day whereon Christ the stone formerly refused by the builders was made the head of the corner and of this day the Prophet professeth of old saying This is the day which the Lord hath mad let us be glad and rejoyce in it which can have no other congruous meaning but this this is the day which the Lord hath made festivall especially considering the doctrine of Bishop Lake which is this that the worke of the day is the ground of hallowing the day as is to be seene in the institution of all festivalls both Humane and Divine And I have already shewed how absurd it is that wee should expect it should be left unto the Church her liberty to appoint it considering the great danger of dissention thereabouts and extreme confusion thereupon And it cannot be denyed but this day was established by the Apostles and that as of authority Divine as appeares generally by the ancients Athanasius professing that Dominus consecravit hunc diem Austin that Apostoli sanxerunt and Gregory that Antichrist when hee comes into an humour of imitating Christ should command the observation of the Lords Day and Eusebius hath as pregnant a testimony to the same purpose as any and Sedulius and that not one of the Ancients as I know alleged to the contrary So that to ascribe the institution of it to humane authority that every way were a scandalous doctrine and so would the practice be also according thereunto And consequently the Church hath no authority to change the day as Doctor Fulke professeth against the Rhemists And to say the contrary is to say that the Church hath authority to concurre with the Jewes in keeping with them the Saturday with the Turks in keeping with them the Friday yea that they have authority to divide the dayes of the weeke one nation taken one day to observe and another another which is as much as to say that the Church hath authority to be notoriously scandalous In the fifth he delivers more truth than in all his preface besides we make no question but that workes of necessity and workes of charity may be done on this day though the proper workes of the day are the workes of holinesse I know none that thinkes it unlawfull to dresse meat proportionable to a mans estate on this day some are of opinion that this was not forbidden unto the Jewes and that albeit to go abroad on that day to gather Manna was forbidden yet not the preparing or dressing of it though the most common opinion of our Divines is to the contrary Some thinke a greater strictnesse was enjoyned them in the wildernesse than afterward observed by them As in the story of Nehemiah it is said there was prepared for his table daily an Oxe and five chosen Sheepe and our Saviours entertainment by some on the Sabbath day doth seeme to them to intimate as much howsoever in after times it came to passe that they grew superstitious this way As Austin observes of them in his dayes that Iudaei neque occidunt neque coquunt Others who think it was both enjoyned to them and practised by them with greater strictnesse conceive that this was by reason of the mysterious signification to wit of some exact rest in Christ this was their ceremoniall rest we acknowledge no rest but morall which we understand in that sense which here is expressed in part and but in part after a halting manner For hee professeth that on the Lords Day we are to abstaine from such workes as are an hinderance to Gods service but he delivers this onely of the publique service as if to spend an houre and an halfe in the morning and an houre and an halfe in the afternoone in Gods service were enough for the sanctifying of the day yet Gerardus the Lutherane observes that God commands the day to be sanctified not a part of the day And let the law of this nation or of any nation of the world be judge between us whether in case one man owe another a dayes service I say let the world judge whether in common equity this be to be interpreted of an houre and an halfe in the morning and an houre and an halfe in the evening or onely of a part of the day and not rather the whole day And what vile courses are these that men should carry themselves so basely in dispensing unto God the proportion of his service In the sixth and last place we have that wherunto all the former discourse is consecrated namely to make way for such profane sports and pastimes which here are glosed with the cleanely stiles of recreations to refresh the spirits and for the increase of mutuall love and neighbourhood amongst us as if he were ashamed to speake our that all this tends to the countenance of May-games and morricing and dancing about May-poles on the Lords Day D Andrewes sometimes Bishop of Winchester spared not to professe that vacare choreis to be at leisure on that day for dancing is the Sabbath of the golden calfe and hee allegeth Austin for it though hee cannot justifie his quotation Doctor Downeham Bishop of Derry calls such like courses profane sports and pastimes which more distract and more hinder our workes than honest labours and he censures also such a Sabbath calling it the Sabbath of the calfe Exod. 23. 6. 18. 19. Bishop Babington on Exod. 16. puts a Christian soule upon this meditation Good Lord what doe I upon the Sabbath day This people of his might not gather Manna and may I safely gad to faires and markets to dancings and drinkings to wakes and wantons to Bearcbaitings and Bulbaitings with such like wicked profanations of the Lords Day Are these workes for the Sabbath Is this to keepe the holy day Can I answer this to my God that gives mee six dayes for
wearing Yea they had miracles in store pretended to to be wrought on such as had not yeelded to their doctrine thereby to countenance the superstitious and confound the weake And which was more than this for the authority of their device they had to shew a letter sent from God himselfe and left prodigiously over the Altar in Saint Simeons Church in Golgotha wherin the Sabbatarian dream was imposed forsooth upon all the world on paine of diverse plagues and terrible comminations if it were not punctually observed The letter is at large reported by Roger Hoveden and out of him as I suppose by Matthew Paris who doe withall repeat the miracles wherby this doctrine was confirmed I adde no more but this that could I either beleeve those miracles which are there related or saw I any now like those to countenance the reviving of this strange opinion for now it is received and published I might perhaps perswade my selfe to entertain it Exam. It seemes this Author is not of their opinion who thinke those times wherein Peter de Bruis lived about the yeare 1126. to have been darker times than the dayes of Gregory though some passe such censure on those times accompting them times of darknesse hee is more wise than to concurre in opinion with them and it is a part of his wisedome as it seemes to affect that the world should take notice of so much namely that he puts it upon some only to censure those times as times of darknesse Now who are those some not Papists I presume but Protestants rather and what true Protestant can he name that thinkes otherwise we have cause to feare that too many for their advantage can be content to veile themselves under the vizard of Protestants when in heart they are Papists neither is it possible I should thinke that any other but such should thinke any better of those times than as of times of darknesse It is very likely this Author is not of opinion that the man of sinne is yet revealed or any such time the Apostle prophecyeth of 2 Thess 2. of giving men over to illusions to beleeve lyes for not receiving the love of the truth I much doubt whether he beleeves that Rome is the whore of Babylon whereof Saint Iohn speaketh Revel 17. though he professeth of that whore of Babylon that it is that City which in his dayes did rule over the Kings of the earth yet in that which he accounts light he can be content to concurre with Calvin in denying the morality of the fourth Commandement as touching one day in seven to be sanctified unto the Lord. But whatsoever this Peter de Bruis was whom he professeth to have drawne too deepe on the lees of Judaisme hee avoucheth no testimony hereof but only D. Prideaux his joyning the Petrobrusians with the Ebionites Sect. 7. Now Hospinian professeth that which is directly contrary of the Petrobrusians as whom he joynes with the Anabaptists maintaining Festos dies omnes ad ceremonias Iudaeorum pertinere propterea nullos esse debere apud Christianos quum ceremoniae veteris Testamenti omnes Christi adventu sint impletae ideo sublatae Quorum etiam sententiae Anabaptistae hodie suffragari videntur That all Holidayes belong to the ceremonies of the Iewes and that therefore none such are to be observed by Christians seeing all the ceremonies of the old Testament are fulfilled and abrogated by the comming of Christ And the Anabaptists now adayes seeme to be of the same opinion In the third Tome of the Councels set forth by Binius and 2. part there is an enumeration of his opinions in five particulars and that as it seemes by the close out of Petrus Cluniacensis not one of them is any thing a kin to those Sabbatarian fancies which this Prefacer insists upon Petrus Cluniacensis as it seemes was the man that most opposed this Petrus de Bruis Against his errors he wrote a book in forme of an Epistle on these points 1. Of the Baptisme of children 2. Of the authority of the booke of the Acts of the Apostles 3. Of the authority of the Epistles of Saint Paul 4. Of the authority of the Church 5. Of the authority of the old Testament 6. Againe of the baptisme of children 7. Of Temples Churches and Altars 8. Of the veneration of the holy Crosse 9. Of the sacrifice of the Masse and of the truth of Transubstantiation 10. Of prayers for the deceased 11. Of praising God by Hymnes and musicall instruments Thus Bellarmine relates the heads of that discourse of his not any of which for ought I perceive savoureth of any such Sabbatarian fancie as this Author driveth it unto At length I got into my hands Bibliotheca Cluniacensis and therein the writing of Petrus Cluniacensis against the Petrobrusians Upon all which one Andreas Puercetanus Turonensis hath written certaine notes wherein upon these words in the Preface Contra haereses Petri de Bruis hee writes thus Of this Peter of Bruis who gave name to the Petrobrusian heretiques no mention is found neither in the historians who write the story of those times nor with them who then or a little after contrived the Indices of haeresies and heresiarches Alphonsus à Castro as I thinke was the first who after this our Author remembred him lib. 3. 5. Baptisma haeres 5. and writes that he was a French man of the province of Narbon Although Bernard the sonne of Guido writes that Pope Calixtus the second in the yeare 1128. on the eight of the Ides of Iune held a Councell at Tolouse with Cardinals Archbishops Bishops and Abbats of the Province of Gothia Gascony Spaine and hither Britany In which Councell amongst other things ordered there all those haeretiques were damned and driven out of the Church who counterfeiting a shew of religion did condemne the Sacrament of the Lords body and blood the Baptisme of children and all Ecclesiasticall Orders and the bands of lawfull marriages All which heresies as invented by Peter Bruis and propagated by Henry his successour our Peter in this Treatise of his doth pursue So that this whole story seemes very obscure and yet the two latter points mentioned by this Andreas I doe not find to be any of the opinions laid to the charge of Peter Bruis by those that were contemporary with him For Petrus Cluniacensis reduceth all his heresies as hee calls them but to these five heads 1. He denyes that children before they come to the age of understanding can be saved by the Sacrament of Baptisme and that anothers faith can profit him who cannot use his owne because by their opinion not another mans faith but his owne with Baptisme saveth him the Lord professing that whosoever shall beleeve and bee baptized hee shall be saved but whosoever will not beleeve shall be damned 2. That there ought not to be any fabricke of Temples or Churches that such as are made ought to be throwne downe that holy
as of a cake bak't on the hearth on Saturday after three a clocke in the afternoone and how that part of it reserved to the morning and being then broken blood came out of it and another of the like nature and two more I say these are of Roger Hovedens relation not of Eustachius his preaching whom the Monke relates to have been in great esteeme of the Clergie in those dayes and to have prevailed much with many of the people though for the generall he could not bring them off from their marketing on the Lords day Yet what are these to be talkt of in comparison to those which are comprised in two bookes of miracles written by Cluniacensis and albeit those times may be accounted times of darknesse in comparison of ages fore-going yet this Prefacer is ready to make answer that that is but the opinion of some But whereas hee saith That this strange opinion is now revived and published first I desire to know his meaning For as for a preparation to the Sabbath and that to begin from about three a clock in the afternoone the whole Kingdome observes it as for the strict observation thereof here mentioned I have shewed that Eustachius speakes of no such thing If hee did what is that to those who suffer for standing for the strict observation of the Sabbath against those who would have the Lords day at least in part to be a day of sports and pastimes Can he shew this to be their opinion If he can why doth he not And if from three a clock on Saturday in the afternoone people doe prepare for the Lords day and abstaine from such workes dispatching both their baking bread and other works in the morning what danger or detriment is hereby likely to arise either to our faith or manners What danger either to Prince Church or State The third Section BUt to proceed Immediately upon the Reformation of Religion in these Westerne parts the Controversie brake out a fresh though in another manner than before it did For there were some of whom Calvin speakes who would have had all dayes alike all equally to be regarded he means the Anabaptists as I take it and reckoned that the Lords day as the Church continued it was a Jewish ceremony Affirming it to crosse the doctrine of Saint Paul who in the text before remembred and in the fourteenth to the Romans did seeme to them to cry downe all such difference of dayes and times as the Church retained To meet which vaine and peccant humour Calvin was faine to bend his forces declaring how the Church might lawfully retaine set times for Gods service without infringing any of Saint Pauls commandements But on the other side as commonly the excesse is more exorbitant than the defect there wanted not some others who thought they could not honour the Lords day sufficiently unlesse they did affix as great a sanctitie unto it as the Jewes did unto their Sabbath So that the change seemed to be onely of the day the superstition still remaining no lesse Jewish than before it was These taught as now some doe moralem esse unius diei observationem in hebdomada the keeping holy to the Lord one day in seven to bee the morall part of the fourth Commandement which doctrine what else is it so he proceeds as here the Doctor so repeats it in his third section then in contempt of the Jews to change the day and to affix a greater sanctity to the day than those ever did As for himselfe so farre was he from favouring any such wayward fancie that as Iohn Barklay makes report he had a consultation once de transferenda solennitate Dominica in feriam quintam to alter the Lords day from Sunday to Thursday How true this is I cannot say But sure it is that Calvin tooke the Lords day to be an ecclesiasticall and humane constitution only Quem veteres in locum Sabbati subrogarunt appointed by our Ancestors to supply the place of the Jewish Sabbath and as our Doctor tells us from him in his seventh section as alterable by the Church at this present time as first it was when from Saturday they translated it unto the Sunday So that we see that Calvin here resolves upon three Conclusions First that the keeping holy one day in seven is not the morall part of the fourth Commandement Secondly that the day was changed from the last day of the weeke unto the first by this authority of the Church and not by any divine Ordinance And thirdly that the day is yet alterable by the Church as at first it was Exam. Thus at length this Prefacer observes that look upon what Scripture passages some did contend the Jewish Sabbath to be ceremoniall and accordingly to be abrogated by the Death and Resurrection of Christ Upon the very same grounds others contended against the observation of all Holy dayes even of the Lords day also as if that were Jewish This is the course of the Anabaptists unto whom Wallaeus addes the Socinians and Hospinian the Petrobrusians By what authoritie the Lords day was introduced Calvin disputes not He saith Dominicum diem veteres in locum Sabbati substituerunt The Ancients brought the Lords day into the place of the Sabbath and that the day the Apostle prescribed to the Corinthians wherein they should lay apart something for the relieving of the Saints at Ierusalem was the day quo sacros conventus agebant whereon they kept their holy meetings And that which moved the Apostles to change the Sabbath to the Lords day he shewes both in his institutions thus for seeing in the Lords Resurrection is found the end and fulfilling of the true rest which the old Sabbath shadowed by that very day which set an end to those shadowes Christians are admonished not to stick to the shadowing ceremony and upon the Epistle to the Corinthians in these words Electus autem potissimum dies Dominicus quod Resurrectio domini finem legis umbris attulit The Lords Day was chiefely chosen because the Lords Resurrection did set an end to the shadowes of the Law And in the words immediately preceding he expressely professeth that this change was made by the Apostles though not so soone in his opinion as Chrysostome thought who interprets that the first day of the weeke of the Lords Day And Cyrill long agoe upon consideration of our Saviours apparitions on that day and then againe the eighth day after makes bold to conclude that Iure igitur sanctae congregationes die octavo in Ecclesiis fiunt By right therefore holy assemblies on the eighth day are made in the Churches 2 Observe by the way this authors spirit he accompts it more exorbitant to thinke that the observation of the Lords Day is prescribed unto us by Divine authority or the religious observation of one day in seven then to maintaine that none at all is to be set apart to religious
wherein besides these peccant fancies before remembred some have so farre proceeded as not alone to make the Lords Day subject to the Jewish rigour but to bring in against the Jewish Sabbath and abrogate the Lords Day altogether I will no longer detaine the reader from the benefit hee shall reape thereby Onely I will crave leave for his greater benefit to repeat the summe thereof which is briefely this First that the Sabbath was not instituted in the first Creation of the World nor ever kept by any of the ancient patriarchs who lived before the Law of Moses therefore no morall and perpetuall precept as the other are Sect. 2. Secondly that the sanctifying of one day in seven is ceremoniall onely and obliged the Jewes not morall to oblige us Christians to the like observance Sect. 3. and 4. Thirdly that the Lords Day is founded onely on the authority of the Church guided therein by the practice of the Apostles not on the fourth Commandement which hee calls a scandalous doctrine Sect. 7. nor any other expresse authority in holy Scripture Sect. 6. and 7. Then fourthly that the Church hath still authority to change the day though such authority be not fit to be put in practice Sect. 7. Fifthly that in the celebration of it there is no such cessation from works of labour required from us as was exacted of the Jewes but that we may lawfully dresse meat proportionable to every mans estate and doe such other things as are no hindrance to the publique service appointed for the day Sect. 8. Sixthly that on the Lords Day all recreations whatsoever are to be allowed which honestly may refresh the spirits and increase mutuall love and neighbour-hood amongst us and that the names whereby the Jewes were wont to call their festivalls whereof the Sabbath was the chiefe were borrowed from an Hebrew word which signifieth to dance and to be merry or make glad the countenance If so if all such ceremonies as do increase good neighbor-hood then wakes and feasts and other meetings of that nature If such as honestly may refresh the spirits then dancing wrestling shooting and all other pastimes not by law prohibited which either exercise the body or revive the mind And lastly that it appertaines to the Christian Magistrate to order and appoint what pastimes are to be permitted and what are not obedience unto whose commands is better farre than sacrifice to the Idols of our owne inventions not unto every private person or as the Doctors owne words are not unto every mans rash zeale who out of a schismaticall Stoicisme debarring men from lawfull pastimes doth incline to Judaisme Sect. 8. Adde for the close of all how doubtingly our Author speakes of the name of Sabbath which now is growne so rife amongst us Sect. 8. Concerning which take here that notable dilemma of Iohn Barkley the better to encounter those who still retaine the name and impose the rigor Cur porrò illum diem plerique Sectariorum Sabbatum appellatis What is the cause saith he that many of our Sectaries call this day the Sabbath If they observe it as a Sabbath they must observe it because God rested on the day and then they ought to keepe that day whereon God rested and not the first as now they doe whereon the Lord began his labours If they observe it as the day of our Saviours resurrection why doe they call it still the Sabbath seeing especially that Christ did not altogether rest the day but valiantly overcame the powers of death This is the summe of all and this is all that I have to say unto thee good Christian reader in this present businesse God give thee a right understanding in all things and a good will to doe thereafter Exam. This Prefacer accounts the opinions opposite to his to be fancies D. Willet on the contrary as wee have heard accounts this Prefacers opinion maintained by M. Rogers no better than fantasies which shall vanish however now for a time they flourish Sure wee are every plant that our heavenly Father hath not planted shall be rooted out This Prefacer professeth those whom hee opposeth be opposite to the tendries of our Church and indeed the Author whom D. Willet intimateth intitled his booke audaciously enough The Catholique doctrine of the Church of England but D. Willet on the other side wondred that any professing the Gospel should gain-say and impugne the positions maintained by D. Bownde And sure I am Bishop Babington Bishop Andrewes Bishop Lake agreed with them And it is well knowne to some what the former Archbishop of Canterbury professed to the face of M. Broade when he came to move for the printing of a second book concerning the Sabbath What Bishop can our opposites name of this Church whose praise is among the writers of these times that hath manifested his opinion in opposition to these As for the judgements of all kinde of writers which he boasts of I thinke never came a Divine to take pen in hand to vaunt so much and performe so little As for the unsafe condition of our Tenets which he suggests excepting those monstrous and wild Tenets mentioned by M. Rogers for which I know no better evidence than his word and that in very odde manner delivered I know nothing unsafe nothing dangerous in any Tenet of ours who now seeme to walke as upon the pinacles of the Temple and indeed in this respect they are like to prove very dangerous to us yet I would it were not more dangerous to the Church of God to be bereaved of so many faithfull Pastors For certainly it shall be honourable unto them they cannot suffer in a more honorable cause than this in standing for the sanctifying of the Lords Day in memory of his resurrection who that day being formerly a stone refused of the builders was made the head of the corner For what danger is it to maintaine that from the Creation the Lord blessed the seventh day and sanctified it and what a shamefull course is it so to expound it as in reference to a time 2000. and 4. or 500. yeeres after and that in spight of the ancient Fathers And manifest reason as appeares by division of time into weekes even from the creation and so continuing to the time of the Law delivered on the mount Sinai as appeares by the story of falling of Manna and the Jewes gathering of it on sixe dayes none fallingnow being gathered on the seventh as the day on the week whereon God rested after he had made the world in six What danger in maintaining that God required from the beginning and afterwards specified so much in the Law that one day in seven is to be consecrated unto Gods service and hence to inferre that if God required so much of the Jews under the Law it were most unreasonable and unconscionable we should not afford unto him and his service as good a proportion of time under the Gospel Thirdly what danger is
grant the Sabbath day was observed together with the Lords day by some Christians Baronius imputes it to the Orientales and gives the reason why formerly represented If any man inferre herehence that the celebration of the Lords day is grounded upon the constitution of the Church onely let him make it good for there is no reason that words should carry it much lesse the voyce of one Papist who here is quoted I am sure Dominicus Bannes and Sixtus Senensis are of another opinion formerly produced and hereafter follow many Canonists that maintaine the contrary by the relation of Azorius and one of them Sylvester by name professeth that it is Communis opinio that it is of Divine authoritie If Brentius thinkes otherwise yet Gerardus refuseth to tread in his steps though both are Lutherans And if the Remonstrants concurre with Brentius it is nothing strange they are so neer a kin to the Socinians and Anabaptists who renounce altogether the observation of the Lords day I have formerly reckoned up and produced no lesse then eleven of our Protestant Divines maintaining the ordinance thereof to be Divine and Apostolicall Besides the Ancients who are many and they expresse for the same and not one that I know avouched to the contrary Precept indeed we have not for this in the new Testament but that w ch is better then a precept For had the Apostles commanded it and the Churches not practised it their commandement had beene obnoxious to various interpretations but they tooke order to establish it as appeares de facto And D. Lake tels us that where divine precept is wanting practise guides the Church and that the worke of the day is the ground of hallowing the day and the worke of redemption is nothing inferiour to the worke of creation and I appeale to every Christian conscience whether upon suspition that we Christians must have a Sabbath to observe as the Jewes had for which we have the expresse words of our Saviour Matth. 24. 20. D. Andrewes concurring with us in this and that this Sabbath must be some one day in the weeke which from the ordinance of God immediately from the creation that God himselfe hath declared unto us as Chrysostome observeth and reason concludeth as much for this and that from consideration of the proportion of time which the Lord required of the Jewes under the law for undoubtedly we should sinne if we should allow God a worse proportion under the Gospell and it is evident that no ceremoniality can be found in the sanctification of one day in seven or in the rest of one day in seven I say let every one judge whether in Christian reason any day in the weeke be to be preferred for this before the Lords day that being the day of Christs resurrection the day wherein The Stone which the Builders refused was made the head of the corner and this day not of the yeere but of the weeke being in Scripture-phrase called the Lords day like as the Jewish Sabbath was formerly called the Lords holy day Es 58. Adde unto this that D. Prideaux here justifieth their observation who maintaine the celebration of the Lords day to be by authority divine consisting in these particulars 1. That it seemed a dangerous thing to the whole Fabricke of religion should humane ordinances limit the necessity of Gods worship Or that the Church should not assemble but at the pleasure of the Clergie and they perhaps not well at one among themselves For what would men busied about their Farms their yokes of Oxen and domesticke troubles as the invited guests in the holy Gospell would they not easily set at naught an humane ordinance would not prophane men easily dispense with their absenting themselves from prayers and preaching and give themselves free leave of doing or neglecting any thing were there not something found in Scripture which more then any humane ordinance or institution should binde the conscience yet it is easie to conjecture what would be answered to all this for excommunication upon disobedience to the Church may be a bond strong enough to oblige them hereunto Or if men be not so sensible hereof yet the lawes of the land and penall statutes may provide for such restraints by such punishments as whereof every naturall man will be sensible enough we have other considerations to propose as 1. Touching the proportion of time to be allowed to Gods service which concerneth the quantity of the service it selfe 1. This is a thing very considerable and of moment 2. We have no example that the quantity of service to be performed to the master was left unto the conscience or pleasure of the servant but rather is to be prescribed by the Master especially by such a Master as God is 1. Who hath made us 2. Who will infinitely reward us 3. To serve whom is our most perfect freedome and happinesse 4. And who is able to give us strength to performe it 5. And who is tenderly sensible of our weaknesses as he is most privy to them 6. And after God hath discovered this unto us and required the proportion of one day in seven to be consecrated to him and that under the Law surely reason doth suggest that we cannot performe lesse unto him under the Gospell 2. As touching the particularity of the day under this proportion 1. We read that there is one that is Lord of the Sabbath Now in reason who shall appoint this day but he that is Lord of it especially considering that it is his holy day Es 58. and such festivalls were said to be of his making Psalme 118. 24. This is the day which the Lord hath made not of mans making secondly but it may be said he may leave unto man the appointing of it if it please him I answer that in this case it stands them upon to shew their Charter for this Thirdly for my part I see no cause we should desire any such liberty but rather pray unto God to blesse us from it 1. For as I am flesh I shall bee sure to put it off to the end of the weeke and I may be gone out of the world ere that day comes and when that day comes I shall be as loath to come to the service that day requires as ever and assoone weary of it and say when will the Sabbath be gone that I may returne to my former courses secondly as I am spirit I have cause to make choyce of the first day for à Iove principium and Adam and Eve being after the beasts of the field made on the sixt day and planted in Paradise the seventh day was the first entire day to him 4. Doctor Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells observes that festivalls dayes have ever beene commended unto us by some notable worke done on that day Now what worke like unto the resurrection of Christ on the first day of the weeke 5. Bishop Andrewes observes in his Starre Chamber speech that this
nor any that I know that in this sense all or any are bound to keep the seventh or a seventh day holy but onely by vertue of Gods command Yet this wee professe that seeing it is generally confessed that by the very light of nature some time is to be set apart for Gods service Wee cannot devise in reason any better course then to set one day in seaven apart for this considering the first division of dayes is into weekes and if a seventh part of our time be in reason to be consecrated unto God wee thinke it more convenient to set one intire day in seven apart for this then the seventh part of every day because the other businesses of every day are apt to cause distraction from the Lords service And as I have but erst discoursed it is more fit the Master should appoint unto the servant what proportion of service hee shall performe unto him then that this should be left to the discretion or liberty of the servant 1. both the honour of the Master requiring this 2. and the good of the servant for hereby hee shall be assured of the better acceptance at the hands of his master And so for the particular day it is fit the Master should marke out that also unto him by some prerogative set upon the day as hee did the seventh day by finishing the worke of Creation and by his rest thereon from his workes to call man to an holy rest from his so to be more free for the service of his Creator In which cases both touching the proportion of the time and particularity of the day the Law being made it shall continue immutable and unalterable by the will of the Creature but mutable and alterable according to the will of the Creator so that things being well distinguished and rightly considered and stated I see no bug-beare of inconvenience in all this Neyther doe I see any reason why the spending of one day in Gods holy worship as a morall and perpetuall duty should seeme distastfull to any Since it is apparant that God commanded it unto his people of the Jewes and for 1600 yeares it hath beene continually observed by Christian Churches unto this day and I make no doubt but it shall hold till Christs comming though from the beginning of the World it was never found to be so hotly opposed as at this day And why should any man stick in acknowledging it to be morall when never any man busied himselfe to finde out any ceremoniality in reference to the proportion of one day in seven Neither doe I thinke ever any man called it judiciall but Azorius professeth it to be rationi maximè consontaneum most agreeable to reason and no man that I know hath at any time set himselfe to devise a proportion of time to be spent in Gods service more agreeable to reason then this And as for the third offence taken for I know not any that give it The fourth Commandement is brought by none that I know to prove that the Lords Day is now become our Christian Sabbath but supposing it to be our Sabbath as the booke of Homilies sayth it is and our Saviour signified that Christians should have their Sabbath as well as the Jewes had theirs Math. 24. 20. wee produce the fourth Commandement to prove that wee ought to sanctifie it and that we may the better sanctifie it to rest from all workes that hinder the sanctification thereof And indeed the Commandedement is so drawen as to command one day in seaven to be observed and whatsoever is that seventh prescribed by lawfull authority to sanctifie it and abstaine from all works whereby the hallowing of it is disturbed and all this we take to be morall namely the worshipping of God in a certaine proportion of time prescribed by him and to that purpose to rest from workes not for any mysterious signification sake as did the Jewes wee thinke the practise of the Church in the Apostles dayes is sufficient to inferre the apostolicall and divine institution thereof from hence Athanasius Cyrill Austin and the Fathers generally for I know not one alleaged to the contrary so take it And the Lords Day hath no other notion in Scripture language then a day of the Lords institution and this is confirmed in that it comes in the place of the Jewes Sabbath which is called in Scripture the Lords holy day Esay 58. and Psal 118. 24. of the day wherein Christ was made the head of the corner having beene formerly refused of the builders it is expresly said that it is the day that the Lord hath made and thereupon wee are called to rejoyce and be glad in it And it hath this congruity in the cause of its institution to the first Sabbath that as on the seventh day the Lord rested from his worke of Creation so on the first day of the weeke the Lord Christ rising from the dead then rested from his worke of redemption And lastly Christ bringing with him a new Creation is it strange that he should bring with him a new Sabbath and no day so fit for this as the day of his Resurrection And lastly whosoever doth not rest satisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church must hee not be driven to acknowledge an ordination more then humane requirable thereunto Of the necessity of my consequences and evidence of expresse Scripture formerly mentioned I leave it to the indifferent to judge and to none sooner then to Doctor Prideaux himselfe none being more able to judge of consequences then hee being so versed therein and I am well persuaded of the indifferency of his affections and had those writings in the canvassing of this point beene extant before this Lecture of his which hath since come to the light of the presse I am apt to conceave that either hee would have given way to that which seemes in my judgement to be the truth or represented good reason of his dissenting from it The Apostles example nor so onely but drawing the Churches generally to the same practise doth argue a constitution yet more is brought for the confirmation of the authority of the Lords Day then example That of searching into the veyles and shadowes of the old Testament to finde this institution is a mystery unto mee and so farre am I from that course that I know none guilty of it The ancient Fathers sometimes doe expatiate this way for the setting forth of the honorable condition of the Lords Day but they build not doctrines thereupon which if they had done in some particular case advantageous to our adversaries it had beene enough to have cryed us downe As for Judaisme I have often shewed how little colour there is for any such imputation to be cast upon us but rather upon our adversaries I see no cause to range the Petrobusian with the Ebionite but were they yoake-fellowes whereof I finde not the least evidence yet should not wee draw with them under the
same yoake Chemnitius his discourse I have formerly examined somewhat at large The voluntary consecration of it by Christians no man hath cause to embrace who professeth himselfe not satisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church as but erst the Doctor did Of Brentius I have spoken enough yet well fare him that professeth the authority of the day to be so farre divine that he who shall neglect it or rashly breake it doth forthwith become worse then the Jew or Infidell As for the Arminians what respect soever they pretend to the patterne of the primitive Church like enough they could be very well content with the Socinians to make all dayes equall in use as well as they are in nature or in respect of any mysterious signification I leave Azorius to refresh himselfe with the juyce of his owne distinction It is well that Suarez comes so farre as to professe that practically it is not alterable by the Church As for Calvin Bucer Chemnitius and the rest who are onely sayd to affirme that still the Church hath power to change the Lords day to some other I finde no such thing in Calvin and Bucer as for what Chemnitius delivers hereupon in my judgement hee sayth no more then Calvin though some particulars in him I have found to be weake enough upon discussion in the 6 Section of my answer to the Preface having there met with the same names named to the same purpose It is not credible to mee they should give power to the Church to bring us backe to the Jewish Sabbath in that case who should savour most of Judaisme or preferre us to the Turkes festivall day which is the Friday To be instituted in memory of our redemption admits an ambiguous signification That bringing with it a new Creation and so requiring a new Sabbath as Bishop Andrewes discourseth and Athanasius 1200 yeares before him No day had a better marke for this to be preferred into the place of the Jewes Sabbath then the day of Christs Resurrection yet considering that not that day of the yeare but that day of the weeke is called in Scripture the Lords Day this maketh it evidently to savour of Divine institution yet it is well that here it is acknowledged to be expresly of traditions Apostolicall Beza addeth vere Divinae on Revel 1. 10. I trust we shall ever give due respect both to Law and Gospell and the better concurrence wee finde of them for the maintenance of any doctrine of ours the more cause wee shall have to rejoyce therein without feare of censure for the mixing of them or framing any Sabbaticall Idoll out of them It is not the first time I have read of some such aspersion in Rogers his preface to his Analysis of the Articles of the Church of England And the next yeere was printed D. Willet upon Genesis dedicated to King Iames where on the. 2. ch 3. v. he concludes his discourse on this argument after this manner But these allegations are here superfluous seeing there is a learned treatise of the Sabbath already published of this argument meaning D. Bownds discourse thereon Which containeth a most sound doctrine of the Sabbath as is layd downe in the former positions which shal be able to abide the triall of the Word of God and stand warranted thereby when other humane fantasies shall vanish howsoever some in their heate and intemperance are not afraid to call them Sabbatarian errors yea hereticall assertions a new Iubily Saint Sabbath more then either Iewish or Popish institution much lesse doe wee feare the story of the Jew of Teukesbury Solomon hath taught us that the righteous spareth his beast and in our Saviours dayes the Jewes themselves though very superstitious in the observation of their Sabbath yet shewed mercy towards their beasts in leading to them to water and helping them out of the ditch on their Sabbath day But God can give men over into a minde voyd of all judgement as to the destruction of their soules so to the temporall destruction of their bodies also and that as in the way of profanenes wherof we have manifold experience so in the way of superstition Now such stories are pretty flourishes and pleasing to the judicious provided they are to purpose and sound argument hath not beene wanting to justifie the doctrine they maintaine but when they are out of season or supply the want of better argument they want their grace and are pleasing only to the ignorant or partialist At length I am come unto the last Section For the one halfe of this Section there is little or nothing controverted betweene us But here we have a faire distinction as good as confessed betweene a ceremoniall rest and another rest which is described by a rest from workes as it is an impediment to the performance of such duties as are then commanded this I can a rest morall the rather that the distinction may not flye with one wing That of Saint Hierome is a quick passage on Act. 18. affirming that Saint Paul when hee had none to whom to preach in the congregation did on the Lords day use the workes of his occupation I will not answer as the outlandish Priests fashion was as Sir Thomas More reports the story Domine novi locum verum respondeo sumitur dupliciter so gratifying his adversaries argument with one member of his distinction and his owne in providing for escape out of the briers by the other least I might be served as Sir Thomas More served the Priest pretending to quote such a chapter of Saint Matthew or Marke when there were not so many in the whole Gospell or such a verse in a certaine Chapter when there were not so many verses at all Therefore I desire to consult Hierome but Hierome hath not at all written upon the Acts and where else to seeke it I know not Yet I deny not but that Dietericus the Lutheran upon the 17. Dominicall after Trinity Sunday hath such a passage Hieronymus ex Act. 18. v. 2. 4. colligit quod die etiam Dominica quando quibus in publico concionaretur Paulus non habebat manibus suis laboravit But where it is that Hierome doth collect this he doth not specifie our Saviour was borne under the Law and knew full well it became him to fulfill all righteousnesse and therefore undoubtedly he never did transgresse the fourth commandement indeed some there are who distaste the name of Sabbath now a dayes and truly the Ancients doe usually speake of the Lords day in distinction from the Sabbath because that denomination doth denote the Saturday but I doubt that in these dayes it is distasted in another respect even for the rest of it which I no where finde distasted amongst the Ancients nor any libertie given by them for sports and pastimes on the Lords day But our booke of Homilies speakes plainly in saying The Sunday is our Sabbath day And Proclamations that come forth in
OF THE MORALITY OF THE Fourth Commandement AS STILL IN FORCE TO BINDE CHRISTIANS Delivered by way of Answer to the Translator of Doctor Prideaux his Lecture concerning the Doctrine of the Sabbath Divided into two parts 1. An answer to the Prefacer 2. A consideration of D. Prideaux his Lecture Written by William Twisse D. D. and Pastor of Newbury Exod. 20. 8. Remember the Sabbath Day to keepe it holy Mat. 5. 17. Thinke not that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfill verse 18 For verily I say unto you Till Heaven and Earth passe one jot or one tittle shall in no wise passe from the Law till all be fulfilled verse 19 Whosoever therefore shall breake one of these least Commandements and shall teach men so he shall be called the least in the kingdome of Heaven LONDON Printed by E. G. for Iohn Rothwell and are to be sold at his shop at the signe of the Sunne in Pauls-Church-yard 1641. The Contents of the chiefe matters handled herein IN the answer to the Prefacer Section 1. 1. The ancients are alleadged in vaine to oppose the Institution of the Sabbath as from the beginning Section 2. 2. The untruth of the Praefacers legends concerning Peter Bruis Fulco and Eustathius and others discovered Section 3. 3. Calvin abused by the Prefacer and misconstrued 2. What credite Barclay deserves relating a consultation of Calvin about transferring the Sabbath to the Thursday 3. Of the force of Apostolicall example Section 4. 4. The vanity of the Prefacers pretence in saying Catarinus opposed Tostatus with ill successe while he maintained the Institution of the Sabbath from the Creation It is made apparant that his successe was far beyond that of Tostatus 2. Whether Adam fell the first day wherein he was created 1. Pererius his arguments for the negative Sect. 4. 2. Doctor Willet his arguments for the affirmative Sect. 4. 3. Pererius his reasons against the institution of the Sabbath from the Creation answered 4. Two Digressions in answer to Rivetus in two particular 1. By way of reply upon his answer to Walaeus his arguments justifying the moraltty of one day in seven 2. To his arguments opposing the morality of one day in seven to be consecrated to the Lord. Section 5. 5. A consideration of Walaeus his discourse in answer to those who conceave the institution of the Lords Day to have beene ordered by Christ himselfe 2. An examination of that phrase of some of our Davines affirming the ancients to have changed the Iewes Sabbath unto the Lords Day for a probable cause wherein it is shewed that the cause hereof was more then probable Section 6. 6. An examination of Chemnitius his discourse concerning the authority of the Lords Day 2. A reply upon Doctor Rivets answer to Master Perkins his arguments standing for the Divine authority of the Lords Day 3. That the Lords Day and the Lords Supper are so called in the same notion 1. affirmed by Doctor Andrewes Perkins Thysius 2. justified by good reason Section 7. 7. A briefe of the arguments on each side for every point 1. As touching the originall institution of the Sabbath 2. As touching the Morality of one day in seven to be consecrated to Gods solemne worship 3. As touching the authority of the celebration of the Lords Day and the immutability thereof 8. The Prefacer and M. Rogers opposing D. Bownde are shewed in every particular to oppose D. Andrewes IN the consideration of D. Prideaux his Lecture 1. How far light of nature doth direct as touching the time which ought to be set apart for Gods solemne service Section 2. 2. Reasons why the Creator should prescribe the proportion of time to be consecrated unto himselfe Section 2. 6. 3. How far light of nature doth direct as touching the particularity of the day under the proportion of one in seven Sect. the same Section 2. 6. 4. That Enosh with his holy company apparting themselves from others had a set time for divine worship Section 3. 5. That it becomes not us to affect liberty to designe the day for the Sabbath Section 6. 6 The danger of leaving it to man to make choyse of the day Section 6. 7. That the clebration of the Lords Day is of divine institution and how far justified by the old Testament and particularly by the fourth Commandement Section 7. 8. That it is nothing strange the Lords Day should be called by the name of the Sabbath Section 8. 2. Sensuall pleasures are cleanly caried under the title of recreation Section 8. The Preface I Have now a long time taken notice of much difference and contention about the morality of the fourth Commandement but I never gave my selfe to looke into the bottome of it till now I ever conceived it for the substance to be Morall otherwise what should it make among the ten Commandements which all account the Law morall in distinction both from the law judiciall and the law ceremoniall given by Moses unto the Jewes These ten Commandements the Lord spake from the top of mount Sina in the hearing of all the people and by way of preparation to so notable a service as to meet with God and to heare him speake unto them two dayes were given them to sanctifie themselves and to wash their cloathes that they might be ready on the third day for the third day the Lord would come downe on mount Sina And so it came to passe For when Moses brought forth the people out of the Campe to meet with God and they stood at the nether part of the Mount Mount Sina was altogether on a smoake because the Lord descended upon it in fire and the smoake thereof ascended as the smoake of a furnace and the whole mount quaked greatly And all the people saw the thundrings and the lightnings and the noise of the trumpet and the mountaine smoaking and when the people saw it they removed and stood a farre off In such heavenly state was this Law delivered and remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy amongst the rest without all example of the like in all the generations that went before And the Lord thought it sit to mind them hereof by his servant Moses Aske now of the dayes that are past which were before thee since the day that God created man upon the earth and aske from the one side of heaven unto the other whether there hath been any such thing as this great thing is or hath been heard like it Did ever people heare the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire as thou hast heard and live Out of heaven he made thee to heare his voice that he might instruct thee and upon the earth he shewed thee his great fire and thou heardst his words out of the midst of the fire And because he loved thy Fathers therefore he chose their seed
observes it cannot bee denied but that undoubtedly as touching the time of their meeting they were therein ordered also by S. Paul as they were about the manner of celebrating the Lords Supper And accordingly Paraeus in the very passage alleaged by Gomarus doth take that place of 1 Cor. 16. 2. to notifie that the very time of their meeting there specified was by the ordinance of S. Paul Doctor Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells in his Theses de Sabbato Thes 34. The Apostles directed by Christs not only example but spirit also observed the same witnesse in the Acts S. Paul S. John in the Revelation 38. And from the Apostles the Catholique Church uniformly receaved it witnesse all Ecclesiasticall writers 39. And the Church hath receaved it not to be liberae observationis as if men might at their pleasure accept or refuse it 40. but to be perpetually observed to the Worlds end For as God only hath power to apportion his time so hath he power to set out the day that he will take for his portion For he is Lord of the Sabbath 8. Master Fox upon the Rev. 1. v. 10. professeth that the observation of the Lords Day doth Niti authoritate institutionis Apostolicae depend upon the authority of Apostolicall institution 9. Walaeus dissert de Sab. p. 172. we conclude saith hee this first day of the weeke was by the Apostles put in the place of the Sabbath and commended to the Church not only by a power ordinary competent to all pastors for the ordering of indifferent rites in their Churches but by a singular power also as who had the oversight of the whole Churches and who as extraordinary Ministers of Christ were by the holy Ghost put in trust that they might be faithfull not only for the delivering of certaine precepts concerning faith and manners but also as touching upright ordering of the Church that so it might be made known to all Christians every where what day in the weeke was to be kept by vertue and Analogy of the fourth Commandement least dissension there abouts and consequently confusion might arise in the Church of God and to this purpose hee alleageth Beza before mentioned and Gallesius Calvins Collegue on Exod. 31. This ordinance to wit that the Lords Day should be substituted in the place of the Sabbath we have receaved saith hee not from men but from the Apostles that is from the Spirit of God whereby they were governed and after he had proved this out of three places of Scripture Acts 20 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. Re. 1. 10. in the end hee addes For although we are not tied to the observation of dayes yet this necessary order must be observed least confusion should be bred in the Church 10. Fayus Calvins successor alleaged also by Walaeus disput 47. in q. praecept Iustly therefore may we say that the Apostles by the leading of the Holy Ghost for the seventh day of the Law substituted the first day of the week which was the first in the Creation of the first World 11. Hyperius in 1. Cor. 16. 1. The first day of the weeke in memory of the Lords Resurrection was called the Lords Day the observation of the Sabbath being translated thereunto through the command of the Holy Ghost by the Apostles 12. Adde unto these Master Perkins maintaining the same That which he delivers of the Parliament in the dayes of King Edward the sixt in that preamble of theirs concerning holy dayes as left by the authority of Gods Word to the authority of Christs Church by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers therof as they shall judge most expedient to the true setting forth of Gods Glory and edification of the people I say that this should bee understood not of holy dayes onely but of the Lords Day also is a thing most incredible neither doth hee offer to cite any parcell thereof to justifie this so bold an affirmation onely hee sayth that by the body of the act it doth appeare but what that is in the body of that act whereby this doth appeare hee very judiciously conceales How improbable is it t hat Bishop Andrewes would have opposed this Doctrine in the Starre Chamber if a Parliament of Prelates and that in the dayes of King Edward the sixt had maintained it For hee professeth that these two onely the Lords Day and the Lords Supper are called the Lords to shew that Dominicum is alike to bee taken in both and takes upon him to shew that in the very Scripture there is found a precept for observation of the Lords Day And Bishop Lake in like manner professeth that it is not Liberae observationis but necessarily to be observed Doctor Fulks answer to the Rhemish Testament was set forth in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth and dedicated to her Majesty therein on Re. 1. v. 16. hath hee delivered that to change the Lords Day and to keepe it on Munday Tuesday or any other day the Church hath none authority For it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe delivered to us by his Apostles Was hee ever questioned for this or was it ever knowne that the state of this Land excepted against it for crossing the Doctrine of the Church manifested in a preamble to one of the Acts of Parliament which I presume was never yet repealed but leave we him to live on his own juice and to please himselfe in his holinesse A THIRD DIGRESSION CONTAINING A CONFERENCE With D. Walaeus about the Divine authority of the Lords Day I Come to consider somewhat in Walaeus whose dissertation of the Sabbath from the first hath liked mee so well and the spirit which it breathes throughout that I doe not affect to differ from him but rather heartily desire there may bee little or no difference betweene us and I hope in the end there will be found little or no difference of importance betweene us especially in this point of the institution of the Lord Day whether it be divine or humane and as for the originall institution of the Sabbath namely as from the beginning of the World and as touching the morality of one day in seven therein I concurre with him really and affectionately And as touching the quality of the institution I approve his learned paines in vindicating those three places of the new Testament Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. and Re. 1. 10. from the interpretation that some give of them to quash the evidence which they import for the observation of the first day of the weeke commonly called the Lords Day even in those primitive and Apostolicall dayes of the Christian Church And I joyne with him pag. 167. in admiring that after so many accurate prejudices of the reformed Churches concurring in the same translation interpretation of those places which we embrace yet some should be found to take so unhappy paines as to quash the evidence of them which they seem to us
antiquity did afterwards retaine and use yet notwithstanding saith he we doe not read that the Apostles did impose upon mens consciences in the new Testament the observation of that day by any Law or Precept but the observation was free for order sake Let us duly weigh and consider this together with the reasons following Calvine distinguisheth the observation of a day for order sake and the observation of a day for some mysterious signification sake had Chemnitius thus distinguished we would have subscribed thereunto and confessed that now adayes wee observe no day for any mysterious signification sake but onely for order sake And thus under the Gospel wee are freed from observation of daies for mysteries sake not free from observation of one certaine day in the weeke for order sake As for his phrase of imposing the observation of the Lords day upon mens consciences this phrase is most improper and unseasonable in this case it is onely proper and seasonable in case the thing imposed be of a burthensome nature like unto that Saint Peter speakes of Acts 15. 10. saying Now therefore why tempt yee God to lay a yoke on the Disciples neckes which neither our Fathers nor we were able to beare Such indeed was the yoke of circumcision which provoked Zippora according to common opinion driven to circumcise her sonne to save her husbands life to throw the fore-skin at her husbands feet calling him a bloody husband for urging her thereunto But what burthen is it save unto the flesh to rejoyce in the Lord to sabbatize with him to walke with him in holy meditation Was it no burthen to the godly Jewes to consecrate one day in seaven to the exercises of Piety under the Law and shall it bee a burthen to us in the time of the Gospell Or can it bee conceaved to bee a greater burthen unto us to keepe our Christian Sabbath on the Lords Day then on any other day of the weeke was there ever any day of the weeke markt out unto us with a more honourable or more wonderfull worke to draw us to rejoyce in the Lord thereon then the first day of the weeke whereon our Saviour rose by his Resurrection to bring life and immortality to light yet we confesse we reade of no Law nor Precept for this in the new Testament but we reade that ever under the Gospell wee must have a Sabbath to observe Math. 24. 20. And wee know and Chemnitius knew full well that it belongs to the Lord of the Sabbath to change it and consequently to ordaine it and that it was changed and the Lords Day observed generally in the Apostles dayes none that I know makes question of and how could this bee but by the Apostles ordinance and is it likely they would take upon them this authority without a calling And why should that day of the weeke and not that day of the yeare bee called the Lords Day if not for the same use under the Gospell that the Lords Day was of under the Law especially that day under the Law which was the Jewes Sabbath being now abrogated and lastly wee finde it manifestly spoken of the day of Christs Resurrection Psal 118. 24. This is the day that the Lord hath made let us rejoyce and be glad in it yet lastly wheras Chemnitius will have it free and hee hath already manifested that hee speakes of it in this sense as not to be so tied to this day but that we may observe other dayes wee willingly grant that in this sense it is free Now let us consider his reason following For saith hee if we are freed from the Elements which by God himselfe in the old Testament were ordained and commanded how should we be tyed by the decrees of men But alas this reason of his hath no proportion the Elements hee speakes of were but shaddowes the body whereof is Christ and now Christ is revealed they were wont to bee called not onely Mortua but mortifera Yet the observation of one day in seven still continues to bee the Commandement of God delivered not to Moses as ceremonies were but by word of mouth proclaimed on mount Sina and naturall reason suggests unto us that wee must allow unto Gods service as good a proportion of time under the Gospell as hee required of the Jewes under the Law Now if one day in seven must bee set apart in common reason what day is to bee preferred for this before the Lords Day the day of Christs rest from the worke of redemption in suffering the sorrows of death as the day of the Lords rest from the Creation was appointed to the Jewes for their Sabbath And this Resurrection of Christ bringing with it a new Creation Shall wee preferre the Saturday the Jewes festivall before it shall wee preferre the Friday the day of the Turkes festivall before it shall wee affect power and liberty to make any other day in the weeke the Lords holy day rather then that the Word of God commends unto us for the Lords Day in the time of the Gospell This I suppose may suffice for answering the rest also whensoever their suffrages shall bee brought to light for I presume none of them hath sayd more then Chemnitius hath done Azorius the Jesuite professeth of two things in this argument that they are most agreeable to reason First that after six worke dayes one entire day should bee consecrated to God 2. that the Lords Day should bee it Doctor Fulke in answer to the Remish Testament professeth that to change the Lords Day and keepe it on Munday Tuesday or any other day the Church hath no authority For it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe delivered to us by his Apostles This was printed in the dayes of Queen Elizabeth and dedicated unto her Majesty what Bishop as gouernour in this Church of England hath ever beene known to take exception against this Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester in his starre Chamber speech in the Case of Traske professeth that the Sabbath to wit of the Iewes had reference to the old Creation but in Christ we are new Creatures As the Apostle S. Paul speakes a new Creation and so to have a new Sabbath And this he saith is deduced plainly 1. by practise 2. by precept that these two onely the first day of the weeke and the Sacrament of the Supper are called the Lords to shew that Dominicum the Lords is alike to be taken in both So that give power to the Church to alter the one and you may as well give power to the Church to alter the other He shewes also it was an usuall question put to Christians Dominicum servasti Hast thou kept the Lords Day And their answer was this Christianus sum intermittere non possum I am a Christian and I cannot intermit it Lastly he allegeth the Synod of Laodicea Can. 29. acknowledged in that of Chalcedon 133. that Christian men
Psal 118. 22. 23. 24. Which Doctor Rivetus relates after this menner The day of the Resurrection was prefigured by that day wherein the Stone which the builders refused was made the head of the Corner But that day was the Sabbath Day therefore by the Sabbath was prefigured the Lords Day To this he answers by denying that the Sabbath day was the day wherein the builders refused that stone For the Scribes Pharises and rulers of the people did alwayes reject Christ and not the Sabbath day onely And if Austin and Cyprian before him apprehended any such figure that was by way of accommodation onely not that herein they acknowledged any proper figure For answer whereunto I say first that Master Perkins delivers not this simply of the Sabbath day but of the Sabbath of the new Testament as much as to say the first day of the weeke whereon Christ rose For this was the day wherein the stone which the builders refused was made the head of the corner and of this day the Prophet speakes when he saith This is the day which the Lord hath made let us be glad and rejoyce in it That like as the Jewes had cause to make that day festivall and to rejoyce therein wherein God advanced David to the kingdome who was as a stone refused before by the builders in like sort Christians had as great cause nay farre greater to keepe that day festivall and to rejoyce therein when God raised Christ from the dead and gave all power unto him and making him the head of his Church as being now manifested to be the sonne of God who was before as a stone despised and refused of the builders but as on this day was made the head of the corner And not Cyprian and Austin onely but Ambrose upon the Psalmes so understands it and Arnobius also upon the Psalmes as Heresh bachius observeth And Doctor Rivetus is too blame in construing Perkins in such manner as if he should confine the builders rejection of Christ to the Sabbath day whereof there is no colour in Master Perkins but that which he insists upon is this that the day wherein Christ formerly rejected by the builders was made head of the corner was the day of Christs resurrection and of this day it is said by the Psalmist This is the day which the Lord hath made let us rejoyce and be glad in it Which is most remarkable for the justification of our celebration of the Lords Day as by Divine authority Especially considering what Bishop Lake that learned and pious and most rationall Divine hath observed that alwayes the worke of the day is the ground of hallowing the day and for proofe hereof hee appeales to the due consideration of all festivalls in the observation thereof whether Divine or humane Master Perkins his words are these but I know not how Doctor Rivetus might be deceived by a mis-translation of them The day of Christs resurrection was prefigured by that day wherein the stone which the builders refused was made the head of the corner Psal 118. 24. and in that it was prefigured it was appointed by God For then it appeared to be true which Peter said of Christ that God had made him both Lord and Christ Act. 2. 36. And whereas he saith the Fathers doe so construe the place by way of accommodation that hath place onely when the Text it selfe doth not so accommodate it But the Text it selfe in this place doth manifestly evince that this is spoken in reference to the day of Christs resurrection The last reason of Master Perkins is this God is Lord of times and seasons and therefore in all equity the altering and disposing thereof is in his hands and belongs to him alone Act. 1. 10. Times and seasons the Father hath kept in his own hands Againe Christ is called the Lord of the Sabbath And Antiochus Epiphanes is condemned by the Holy Ghost because hee tooke upon him to alter times Besides that Daniel saith it is God alone that changeth times and seasons Dan. 2. 4. Now if it be proper unto God as to create so to determine and dispose of times then he hath not left the same to the power of any creature And therefore as the knowledge thereof so the appointment and alteration of the same either in generall or particular belongs not to the Church but is reserved to him The Church then neither may nor can alter the Sabbath Day To this D. Rivetus answereth that the words of Daniel touching the change of times and opportunities are delivered in reference to the periods and changing of Kingdomes and Monarchies as appeares by the argument of the Prophecy And no more doth D. Rivetus deliver in excepting against his annotations for as he acknowledgeth M. Perkins scriptorem modestissimum a most modest writer so he carryeth himselfe most modestly towards him But I hope without any breach of modesty I may professe that I find no accuratenesse in each of his allegations save one namely that wherein Christ professeth himself Lord of the Sabbath and it is enough for the present that God reserves to himself power of ordering times for his service yet it cannot be denied but God hath left power to his Church upon good occasion to set some time apart for exercise of piety But whereas it is apparant that God himselfe tooke upon him the ordering of the time for the Sabbath and accordingly Christ calls himselfe The Lord of the Sabbath as he constituted it so none but he can abrogate it and ordaine another in the place of it Now whereas D. Rivetus saith that hee hath left this power unto his Church it stands him upon to prove it We find our Saviour supposeth us Christians to have a Sabbath after his resurrection Matth. 24. 20. as well as the Jewes had before wee find that in the Apostles dayes the first day of the weeke was set apart for this which could not be but by the joynt consent of the Apostles we find that the day of the weeke not the day of the yeere wherein Christ rose by Saint Iohn himselfe called the Lords Day an evident argument that in his time it was so generally received We find that never any worke of God did give better cause to professe that The day thereof was the day that the Lord had made let us be glad and rejoyce therein then the day wherein Christ rose from the dead and thereby was declared to be the Sonne of God even that stone which the builders refused to be made the head of the corner And how strange is it that the Church for 1500. yeeres space should no where offer to alter it if in no other respect yet in this to manifest that the Church is indued with such liberty and power and to prevent the superstitious observation of the day as a thing necessary if it be not necessary Lastly if this liberty be still in the
by Gomarus on the first point onely as touching the originall institution of the Sabbath Now Rivet is opposed herein by his two Collegues Walaeus and Thysius and whereas he takes upon him to answer Walaeus his reasons to the contrary and represent his owne reasons for his opinion herein I have taken into consideration both the one and the other and I trust have represented the weaknesse of his discourse throughout though otherwise a very learned and worthy Divine Now Waleus hath not onely alleadged amongst the Fathers Chrysostome Clemens Alexandrinus Eusebius Augustine Theodoret but a multitude of Protestant writers maintaining the morality of one day in seaven as Luther Melancthon Calvin Beza Bucer Peter Martyr Zanchius Junius Viretus Danaeus Fayus Martinius Ursinus Alstedius Lornsegius Festus Hommius besides English and Scottish writers whom he might have produced more then enough yea of Bishops in this Kingdome as Bishop Babington Bishop Andrewes Bishop Lake yea and Master Hooker in his Ecclesiasticall policy Now let the readers judge by this of the modesty of this Prefacer in this particular also and whether the miracle as he phraseth it be on our side in dissenting from others unreasonably or on his rather The third particular is touching the celebration of the Lords Day as whether it bee by authority humane or divine rather wee say it is of divine hee will have it to be left arbitrary yet was it never knowne that any earthly Master did leave the proportion of service to bee performed unto him to the pleasure of his servant neither did God leave it thus from the beginning of the World-untill Christ as hath beene proved Yet this Prefacer will have it thus left unto us in these latter dayes of which the Apostle hath prophecied that Men should be lovers of pleasure more then lovers of God For this he boasts of all sorts of Papists this he begins withall which was not wont to bee the course of English Divines yet hee belies Doctor Prideaux in this who alleageth more Papists standing for the divine right hereof then for the contrary and one of them as formerly I sayd professeth that it is the common opinion And Azorius the Jesuite professeth that it is most agreeable to reason that as after six dayes worke one should bee consecrate unto the Lord so the Lords Day should be it That many of our Protestants Divines call the observation of the Lords Day Ecclesiae consuetudinem and that it was left free unto the Church to choose another after the Iewes Sabbath was abrogated I have shewed how little all this makes for him answering to every passage punctually as they are alleaged by him For it is confessed that the Church they spake of was the apostolicall Church and the cause moving them to choose this day was the Resurrection of Christ and whereas some two of them call this Causam probabilem I have discussed that and prooved it to be more then probable I have shewed withall how the ancient fathers have acknowledged it some expressely divine some equivalently and expressely apostolicall constitution or sanction as Athanasius whose reason drawne from the congruity betweene the first creation and the second Creation by vertue of Christs death is remarkeable and followed by many both English and outlandish Divines Austin Sedulius Gregory and others And with them the concurrence of our Protestant divines Bucer Calvin Beza Junius Piscator Wolsius Fulke against the Remish Doctor Andrewes bishop of Winchester Doctor Lake bishop of Bath and Wells in expessing it to be observationis not liberae but necessariae Master Fox Walaeus Fayus Hyperius Perkins Brownde By this let the reader judge of the modesty of the Praefacer in this particular also and whether the miracle bee on our side in dissenting from others in an unreasonable manner and not on his rather The fourth and last particular is the mutability of the day which this Prefacer stands for we on the contrary professing it to be unchangeable Now the resolution of this followeth upon the resolution of the former for this onely names are produced both by the Prefacer and Doctor Prideaux Yet I have endeavored to finde out Chemnitius his discourse thereon and enter upon a discussion thereof Bucer I am sure alleaged by Rivet is nothing for this purpose Doctor Fulke directly opposeth it Doctor Andrewes Doctor Lake above mentioned Doctor Brownde Doctor Willet Master Perkins The Christian Church anciently being demanded whether they had kept the Lords Day were wont to answer I am a Christian I cannot intermit it Besides I have shewed in reason the unreasonablenesse both of changing theday and the intollerable scandall that would follow upon it and the unreasonablenesse of not changing it if it be not of divine institution considering how prone wee are through the continuall observation thereof to conceave that to be a necessary duty and so to be plunged into superstition ere we are aware if it prove to be no necessary duty In the next place hee tells us how that some amongst us have revived againe the Iewish Sabbath though not the day it selfe yet the name and thing Teaching that the Commandement of sanctifying every seaventh day as in the Mosaicall Decalogue is naturall morall and perpetuall that whereas all things else in the Ieuish were so changed that they were cleane to be done away this day meaning the Sabbath was so changed that it still remaineth and lastly that the Sabbath was not any of those ceremonies which were only abrogated at Christs comming All which positions are condemned for contrary to the Articles of the Church of England as in a comment on those Articles perused and by the lawfull authority of the Church allowed to be publique is most cleare and manifest Here wee have a distinction of a Jewish Sabbath brought in yet not the day a distinction contrived with such wisedome and perspicacity as it seemes to exceed all humane discretion For I verily thinke that from the beginning of the Primitive Church there was never heard of a Jewish Sabbath to be kept any other then upon their day The materialls are first that the name Sabbath is retained and well may it be in my judgement though some entertaine sublime reaches to the contrary if our Saviour have any authority with us who adviseth his Disciples to pray that their flight be not in the Winter nor on the Sabbath day which is spoken by him in reference to the time about the destruction of Ierusalem at what time the Lords Day was come in place of the Jewes Sabbath among the Christian congregations and that by apostolicall substitution And in the very booke of our Homilies it is expressely sayd that the Sunday is now our Sabbath And his Majesties briefes for collection so stile it And in the conference at Hampton Court it was so stiled by Doctor Raynolds and the motion he made thereabout generally yeelded unto so that the State hitherto seemes to be censured by this bold Prefacer
worship by Divine authority And to this purpose he premiseth a generall rule that commonly the excesse is more exorbitant then the defect yet I never heard that prodigality was censured as worse then covetousnesse in opposition to liberality or rashnesse accompted worse then cowardlinesse in opposition to fortitude or superstition worse then prophanenesse in opposition to true Religion As for the sanctity of the day in Calvins phrase which this Author calls Sanctity affixed to the day shall I say this Prefacer understands it not it is incredible more likely he is to pervert Calvins plaine meaning not out of excesse in the way of superstition but out of a lesse exorbitant defect For the sanctity of the day in Calvins language is when Religione quadam feriando mysteria olim comcommendata recolere se somniabant by resting in a religious manner they thought as it were dreaming that they observed certaine mysteries of old recommended unto them As appeares in his sect 33. Of the 8. Chap. Of his second booke of institutions and such indeed was the sanctity of the day in the Jewish observation thereof This religion this holinesse Calvin will have to be at an end and that the Apostle Gal. 1. and Coloss 2. disputed against them who would have that holinesse that religion to continue still not against them who will have one day in the weeke set apart thereon to rest from manuall workes as they are avocations from holy studies and meditations And in the former case he doth not say as this author in a mincing manner feynes him to say to wit that So the change seemed to be only of the day but in plaine termes that this were no other then to change the day and that in contumely of the Iewes siquidem manet nobis etiamnum par mysterii in diebus significatio quae apud Iudaeos locum habebat if so be there yet remaines with us a mysterious signification equally in the daies such as had place amongst the Iewes Now this caution nothing concernes any of our protestant Divines who mainteine the observation of one day in seven as necessary in resting from manuall workes onely as they are impediments to the service of God Nay that one day in seven was observed by the Jewes for any mysterious signification conteyned therein or by the Patriarchs either or by Adam himselfe in whose dayes even from the first the seventh day was sanctified that is set apart for the service of God in the opinion of Calvin to this day I never heard or read This latter clause in Calvin which containes the condition whereupon this censure of his passeth upon those that so stand for the observation of one day in seven this Prefacer slily concealeth though Calvins censure be not passed absolutely but merely upon this condition Thus indeed to stand for the necessary observation of one day in seven namely as conteyning some mysterious signification were to exceede the Iewes in a grosse and carnall superstition of a Sabbatisme As touching the observation of some time set a part for Gods holy worship and service Calvin professeth that the same necessity lieth upon us Christians for reliefe whereof the Lord appointed the Sabbath to the Iewes and that it pleased our most provident and tender Father to provide for our necessity no lesse then for the necessity of the Iewes Now it is apparent that God commanded the Jewes to set one day in seven apart for the service of God and doth it not manifestly follow herehence that the Lord would have us also set apart one day of the weeke for his service And Calvin concludes that Section thus Why then doe we not obey that reason which we see to be imposed upon us by the will of God And therefore Wallaeus saith that Calvin delivered not these words whereupon this Prefacer grateth so much against his own Colleagues or fellowes in the reformation with whom he never contended in this argument but against certaine Papists schoolemen who thought they had provided sufficiently for themselves for Christian liberty and for the edification of the Church by teaching that the taxation of the seventh day as ceremoniall was abolished yet that one day in seven and by name the Lords Day was to be observed after such a manner and to such an end as the Jewes observed their Sabbath by which Doctrine way was opened to superstition in this dayes observation His words are plainely directed against such when he saith Thus vanish the toyes of false Prophets who possessed the people in former times with a Iewish opinion And againe But that is no other thing then in contempt of the Jewes to change the day and in mind to retaine the same sanctity of the day if so be there remaines unto us to wit by their opinion an equall mysterious signification of dayes to that which had place among the Jewes Now saith Wallaeus This agrees not to be spoken of any of the reformed but of Sophisters and Papists who urge new mysteries and new significations and holinesses in their holy daies as it is well known Bellarmine lib. 3. cap. 10. of the veneration of Saints writes against our Divines that the feasts of Christians are kept not only in respect of order and policy but also by reason of a mystery and that holydays are truly more holy and sacred then other dayes and a certaine part of Divine worship This Prefacer is content to make use of Iohn Barclayes report concerning Calvin namely that he had a consultation once de transferenda solennitate dominica in feriam quintam of translating the dominicall solemnity unto the Thursday Had it beene unto Friday which is the Turkes festivall then it would have wondrously well served Raynolds his turne in his Calvinoturcismus For it concerned that author to inquire diligently of all Calvins courses that stood any way in conformity with the courses of the Turkes neither doe I thinke there could be devised any more remarkable then this How true this is this Prefacer cannot say but whether he doth not licke his lips at it I know not But it is apparent he would have the Church endued with such authority as to change the solemnity of the Lords Day to any day in the weeke and consequently even to Friday and I doe not doubt but pretence of reason might be devised for it by politique heads as namely to hold the Turkes in better correspondency unto Christianity Now if Calvin had at any time a consultation hereabouts which cannot be understood of Calvins single and proper consultation with himselfe for then how could the relator be privy to it without revelation and we commonly say that three may keepe counsaile when two be away surely there were many that could give testimony hereof to wit as many as whose heads he used in this consultation And who would not expect that some one of these at least should be produced to testifie so much either by word or