opportunities are delivered in reference to the periods and changing of Kingdomes and Monarchies as appeares by the argument of the Prophecy Reply 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 Church in case they should exercise this liberty what inconvenience would follow upon the exercising of a lawfull liberty But infinit inconvenience would follow hereupon for seeing this liberty is equally communicated to each particular Church it will follow that it is lawfull for our English Church to institute the Munday the French Church the Tuesday the Hollanders the Wednesday the Germans Thursday the Danes Friday the Swedes the Saturday and the Polonians the Sunday what an intolerable scandall were this amongst Christians Thus our liberty opens way to revive the Jewes Sabbath or to concurre with the Turks who make Friday their holy day nay what scandall also to all the Heathens throughout the world For suppose that as the Jewes keepe the Saturday and the Turks their Fryday so other heathenish nations according to their severall religions should divide the other daies of the weeke to be hallowed between them each religion keeping to their own day most exactly When they should find no agreement amongst Christians what an intolerable scandall were this unto them to harden them against the profession of the Gospel when they see so little agreement among the professors of it And what should move us to affect liberty in this which opens a way to such dissention and confusion and not rather rejoyce in this that to prevent such miserable inconveniences God himselfe hath marked out unto us the first day of the weeke to be the Lords Day in place of the Jewish Sabbath which was the Lords holy day unto them by the most wonderful and comfortable work that ever was wrought even the resurrection of our Lord and Saviour from the dead thereby manifesting him to be the Sonne of God and fulfilling that prophecie of old concerning the stone which the builders refused and making him the head of the corner on that day all power being given unto him both in heaven and in earth Matth. 28. thus drawing us in the Prophets language to professe and say first This is the Lords doing and it is marvellous in our eyes and secondly to conclude there-hence in the words immediately following This is the day which the Lord hath made let us be glad and rejoyce in it this undoubtedly is our Christian festivall this day of the weeke and not this day of the yeere which is remarkable being called by Saint Iohn The Lords Day the day wherein Christ appeared unto him and gave unto him the booke of Revelation concerning the secrets of his providence to be fulfilled upon the world for the time to come even till his second comming to destroy the world with fire and to blesse us with new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousnesse the metropolis of which new world shall be new Jerusalem And albeit Doctor Rivetus according to his pious ingenuity which crownes his learning and cathedrall sufficiencies professeth that what hitherto hath beene spoken by him of the choyce and possible change of that day he hath not to any such end ventilated as to favour their profanesse who on holy dayes and chiefely on that day which by so universall a consent even from the beginning of Christianity hath beene consecrated to such use neglecting Gods Service not onely refuse to omit one day in prosecuting workes tending to the use of life temporall but also by unnecessary actions as by pleasant sports stage playes by intemperance also and riot profane the day not without reason dedicated to the Lord. Yet what just occasion hereby may bee in all places and like enough is taken in most places by this doctrine of his who seeth not For albeit publike authority in some places hath by lawes countenanced the solemnization of the Lords Day for which wee of this land have cause to blesse God so as I thinke no Nation more in consideration of many Lawes one after another and by degrees made to restraine abuses on that day as tending to the manifest profanation thereof and by none more then by that act of Parliament in the first of King Charles wherein all men are forbidden to come out of their Parishes upon that day about any sports and pastime evidently manifesting hereby as formerly hath beene proved that all sports and pastimes are prophanations of our Christian Sabbath observed on that day and that in the judgement of the whole Parliament consisting of the Kings Majesty the head thereof with his Lords spirituall all the Bishops of the Kingdome and temporal together with the House of Commons yet if once it shall be receaved according to D. Rivets doctrine of the Sabbath that it
is in the power of each Church to set apart what proportion of time they thinke fit for Divine Service and what day they thinke fit who perceives not that they may if they will order it in such a manner as that twise a day they shall come to Church and the rest of the day spend as they thinke good either in the works of their calling or upon their pleasures And whence all this zeale so opposite to holinesse in the issue proceeds I know not save onely to uphold the credit of Calvin who professeth that he doth not so regard the number of seaven as that he would tie any to the servitude thereof and yet I have endeavored to shew that neither this nor other passages taken out of his institutions makes any thing for them And withall it is a wonder to behold how this of Calvin is taken up and obtruded upon us by them who otherwise hate both the name and memory of Calvin And as for Doctor Rivets honest and pious instructions as concerning the duties and out demeanors to bee performed on this day we may easily perceive how little worth they are and how easily they vanish into smoake after that hee hath in the doctrinall part of the Sabbath layd so unhappy a foundation and that by so poore reasons and meane cariage of himselfe that as I verily thinke throughout all his writings there is not to bee found the like For consider whether hee had any hope to set so much as a face and outward shew of probability upon his discourse unlesse first he had manifestly corrupted the adversaries tenet as appeares by his proposing it p. 119. Col. 1. By these saith he and other arguments drawn from Christian liberty it is sufficiently deduced that they who maintaine the Sabbath day not so much to be taken away as to be translated unto the Lords Day and so changed and doe indeed thinke it more holy then another day and that not onely in regard of ordination and use but in respect of signification and effect doe crosse some without Christian liberty which is most certaine of the Papists And indeed Walaeus makes it appeare that Calvin writes herein against the superstitious Papists And did Rivetus oppose them onely it were well but it is apparent that hee disputes not so much against Papists in this argument as against Protestants even such as himselfe But can hee shew of any of them that they account the Lords Day more holy then any other in respect of any mysterious signification for so Calvin speaks in this place or effect undoubtedly he cannot We observe a day in the weeke only for order and policy sake Ecclesiasticall mysterious significations in dayes were peculiar only to the Jewes Only we thinke it fit that to prevent dissension and confusion God should marke out that day unto us to be observed and not leave it unto us and so hee hath the Scripture calling the first day of the weeke the Lords Day and that upon such a ground as a greater was never knowne to ground a festivity thereupon consecrated to the exercises of piety even the day wherein the stone that was refused by the builders was made the head of the corner This was the Lords doing and it is and ever shall be marvellous in our eyes and gives us cause to say with the Psalmist thereupon This is the day which the Lord hath made we will reioyce and be glad in it So that all the passages in the Apostles writings against difference of dayes are no more against us then against Doctor Rivetus himselfe Now it is time to returne to our Prefacer I doe not finde that Suarez undertakes to defend the Doctrine of Calvin and Chemnitius such as here is pretended to bee their Doctrine but rather opposeth it If such were their doctrine as this Prefacer would faine obtrude upon us from the authority of the D. discourse which hee translateth For Suarez professeth Celebritatem Dominicae diei haberi ex communi usu sensu Ecclesiae in ipsa scriptura Novi Testamenti commendari that the celebrity of the day is had by the universall use and sense of the Church and is commended unto us in the very Scripture of the New Testament I have endeavoured to justifie it out of the Old Testament also and in expresse tearmes that it is to bee unchangeable Practicè moraliter practically and morally as Doctor Prideaux acknowledgeth and withall expoundeth after his understanding of it and Doctor Rivetus also affirming this kinde of unchangeablenesse to arise from hence that no sufficient cause can be given of the change and abrogation of it This Prefacer and such as are of his spirit may doe well to deale plainly and to professe that it is in the power of the Church to make the Lords Day to cease to be the Lords Day From their Doctrine pretended by him hee proceedes to their practise professing it to bee devoyd of any the least superstitious rigour esteeming it to be a day left arbitrary and therefore open to all lawfull and honest recreations by which the minde may be refreshed and the spirit quickened as in Geneva all honest exercises shooting in pieces long Bowes crosse Bowes are used in the Sabbath day and that both in the morning before and after the Sermon And truly I doe not finde my selfe prone to censure them for any superstition in this But this author takes liberty to censure them for superstitious who thinke these courses unlawfull on the Sabbath Day I make bold to call the Lords Day our Sabbath because our Saviour plainly gives us to understand that wee Christians should have one day in the weeke for our Sabbath Ma. 24.20 as wel as the Jewes had and secondly because the booke of Homilies professeth that Sunday is our Sabbath Nobis non licet esse tam disertis We may not be so elegant as to censure them for profaning the Lords Day by these and such like courses Yet the act of Parlament 1. Caroli forbids any man to come out of his Parish on the Lords Day about any sports and pastimes which restraint tending to this end namely to preserve the Sabbath from profanation doth manifestly give us to understand that to come out of a mans parish on that day about any sports or pastimes is to profane the Sabbath and seeing as before I have shewed that to come out of a mans parish on that day about such a worke as doth not profane the Sabbath is not to profane the Sabbath as to heare a sermon or to fetch a surgeon or Physitian to a sick person in ease of necessity but onely to come out of a mans owne Parish about such a worke as doth profane the Sabbath such a comming out of a mans own Parish on that day and such alone doth profane the Sabbath hence it followeth evidently that all manner of sports and pastimes on that day are so many profanations of the Sabbath in
keep all those things which I have commanded unto you On the Lords Day also John was in the spirit and in the spirit saw and heard the Revelation concerning the state of the Church that was to come Apoc. 1.10 whence we may gather that even then he rested to holy meditations such as became the Lords Day There is not a passage in all this but of great weight and very considerable 6. As for Doctor Fulk upon the Re. 1.10 I have represented him formerly at large that for the prescription of this day before any other of the seven they had without doubt ether the expresse Commandement of Christ before his Ascension when he gave them precepts concerning the Kingdom of God and the ordering and government of the Church Acts 1.2 or else the certaine direction of his spirit that it was his will and pleasure that it should so be and that also according to the Scriptures And observe how hee falls upon the same reason that Athanasius and the ancient Fathers insist upon Seeing there is the same reason of sanctifying that 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 Lord rested from the Creation of the World 7. Doctor Andrewes in like manner Bishop of Winchester in his Starre Chamber speech in the case of Traske hee not onely professeth that the Sabbath had reference to the old Creation but in Christ we are a new Creature a new Creation and so to have a new Sabbath and that this new Sabbath is the Lords Day declared unto us by the resurrection of Christ for which he alleageth Austin Ep. 119. ad Ianuarium But also for the confirmation of it saith it is deduced plainly by practise adding that these two onely the day of the weeke whereon Christ rose and the Supper are called the Lords to shew that the word Dominicum is taken alike in both Nay hee goes farther as namely to alleage not onely practise but precept also for it from the first of the Epistle to the Corin. cap. 16.2 For albeit the Apostle there doth expressely constitute onely an order for collections for the poore on the day of their meeting yet as Piscator 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 thereabouts 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 reâ—aved 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 that Bishop Andrewes would have opposed this Doctrine in the Starte 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 observatio nis but necessarily to be observed Doctor Fulks answer
making the observation of the day a part of Divine worship which never was but in the way of prefiguration of somewhat in Christ which kind of pedagogy is now quite out of date neither is there any place for it in the observation of the Lords day Doctor Walaeus his second argument is because those places of Scripture Rom. 14. Gal. 4. Coloss 2. in which the Apostle takes away all difference of dayes can hardly bee reconciled with this opinion or if Christ himselfe not by example onely but by an ordinance commanded unto his Disciples the observation of this day it cannot bee imagined as it seemes that any liberty should now remaine in the observation of this day for that which Christ hath determined is not left under Christian liberty any more then the observation of the seventh day from the Creation was left free to the Jewes when God not onely by his example but also by precept separated it from all other dayes to his service To this I answer 1. I finde no liberty at all left to the Church to change the day by the Doctors owne grounds for hee holds it to bee invariable p. 168. Secondly Hee professeth the change of the day cannot bee attempted without the greatest scandall of the Church p. 169. Now what sober Christian would affect liberty to bee scandalous 3. others who acknowledge the observation of the day by Apostolicall institution and withall to bee changeable and left to the liberty of the Church doe withall maintaine that the Apostles did not command it as extraordinary Ministers of Christ but Doctor Waleus p. 172. acknowledgeth the institution of it made by the Apostles as Ministers extraordinary 4. the Doctor professeth that the Apostles were entrusted by the Holy Ghost to give precepts concerning the good government of the Church and that in this particular case to make knowne to all Christians every where what day in the weeke ought to be kept holy and that by vertue and analogy of the fourth Commandement and withall to prevent dissension and confusion amongst the Churches thereabouts 5. and lastly hee joynes the precepts concerning this with precepts concerning faith and manners and this hee doth without specifying any the least difference nay the word precepts is once proposed as subservient indifferently as to faith and manners so also to the well ordering of the Church and that in this particular of notifying unto all what day of the weeke is it to bee sanctified to Gods Service As for the places Rom. 14. Gal. 2. Coloss 2. I answer that if wee made the observation of the day as it denotes a circumstance of time any part of Gods Service or for some mysterious signification contained therein then indeed wee should carry our selves in contradiction to the places mentioned but seeing we observe times onely out of respect to order and policy which is necessary for the edification of the Church and God having always required one day in seven to be set apart for this even when there was not so great need nor had God manifested his love to mankinde in such sort as in these latter dayes and of our selves wee are to seeke of the particularity of the day under a fit proportion of time from the beginning of the World rquired and hereupon were we left to our owne judgements a way would bee opened to miserable dissension and confusion what cause have wee to blesse the Lord for marking out a day to us with such notable characters to make it our Sabbath and to honour it by his appearance amongst his Apostles when they were assembled together both that day and that day senight after as also by his Apostles to commend it and establish it in such sort that for 1600. yeares the observation thereof hath continued unto this day which order of the Apostles doth carry pregnant presumption that it proceeded originally from the institution of Christ The necessity of the Church Christian requiring the specification of the day for the preventing of dissension and confusion as much as ever the necessity of the Jewish Church required the like and over and above by reason of the fourth Commandement wee have now better evidence to conclude therehence the observation of the Lords Day by the congruity that Christs Resurrection hath to the Lords rest from Creation better means I say to conclude ours then they without a Commandement to inferre the observation of their seventh forstill the day of the Lords rest is made the day of our rest Thirdly that which is alleadged in the third place that both ancient and late writers doe maintaine that wee celebrate the Lords Day not as any part of Divine worship nor as absolutely necessary For the first of these wee willingly grant for as much as wee conceave the observation of the 7th by the Jewes was no otherwise a part of Divine worship then as it was a ceremony and shadow the body whereof was Christ prefigured thereby and it is well knowne that no Christians observe it in any such Notion But the observation thereof wee hold to bee absolutely necessary and so doth Doctor Walaeus in holding it to bee invariable and that it cannot bee altered without the greatest scandall And Doctor Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells professeth it to bee not liberae observationis but necessariae And if it were free then not to use this freedome at all doth manifestly give way to superstition in taking that for a thing necessary which is not though not as touching the substance of Gods worship and service yet as touching a circumstance thereof such as is the circumstance of time As for expresse precept if hee meanes a precept expressely written no man I trow ever stood for that but if hee meanes a precept given by Christs expresse charge to his Apostles no man that I have met with saith more hereupon then Doctor Walaeus seemes to affirme himselfe in saying that they were entrusted by the Holy Ghost as extraordinary Ministers that they should bee faithfull ad tradenda praecepta to give praecepts of faith and manners and of the good government of the Church and right order and particularly in this that might be known to all what day in the weeke was to be set apart for Gods service both by vertue and analogy of the fourth Commandement and to praevent dissension and confusion among the Churches Neither doe we acknowledge any other celebrity of the day then this and therefore doe no more affront Hierome then Doctor Walaeus himselfe As for festivall dayes in Socrates and Nicephorus I see no cause why as touching that they speake thereof the Lords Day should bee comprehended under them and as for apostolicall precept concerning this Doctor VValaeus is as expresse as any And it is not credible to mee that the Apostles should make such an invariable ordinance to the Church and not bee verily perswaded that it was the Will of God the Father and of God the Sonne it
in the seventh Section where he joynes the Petrobrusian with the Ebionites who indeed were Jewish in this point 2. And possibly from the remainders of this doctrine Fulco a French Priest and a notable hypocrite as our King Richard compted him lighted upon a new Sabbatarian speculation which afterwards Eustachius one of his associates dispersed in England I call it new as well I may For whereas Moses gave commandement to the Jewes that they should sanctifie one day only in the week viz. that seventh whereon God rested They taught the people that the Christian Sabbath was to begin on Saturday at three of the clocke and to continue till Sun-rising upon the Munday morning During which latitude of time it was not lawfull to doe any kind of worke what ever no not so much as bake bread on Saturday for the Sundayes eating to wash or dry linnen for the morrowes 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 Anno 1201. 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 lies 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 Pâ—trobrusians 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 heresies 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
Jewes kept themselves as to the distinction of times by weekes so to call the dayes by their order the first the second and that the Pythagoreans did the like and called the first day of the weeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 like as the Hellenists called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the yeare 1627. There was set forth a book at Venice as the same Doctor Rivet writes intitled Thesaurus praeceptorum Isaaci Atiae Iudaei in the first part whereof and 157. praecept touching the Sabbath he writes to this effect that the holinesse of that sacred day is so well known that it were superfluous to use many words in the explication thereof seeing it is found to have impression in the very hearts of the Heathens themselves becaase there is none that knoweth not that when his highnesse to whom none can approch built this wonderfull frame he rested on the seventh day 2. And thus ere I am aware I am fallen upon the holinesse of the day acknowledged generally by the Heathens themselves as this Jewish writer conceaved Theophilus Antiochenus an antient Father in his second booke written to Autolycus acknowledgeth the celebrity of this day amongst all men though the reason thereof was not so well known to most to wit as drawn from Gods rest on that day after he had created the World Tertullian also acknowledged the Heathens to solemnize the seventh much after the same manner that the Jewes did confirmed by the learned observation of Iacobus Godefridus notwithstanding some exceptions made against it And that this was the practise of the Romans he proves farther out of Tibullus and Ovid namely that they did feriari rest on the Saturday as the Jewes did And Manasses Ben Israel in his 35. question upon Exodus writes thus Ne Agareni quidem Veneris diem religiosissimè colentes quem Algama vocant Sabbato nomen suum eripuerunt hauddubiè ita providente Deo ut omnium animis aeternitas ejus imprimeretur The very Agarenes most religiously observing the Friday which they call Algama have taken from the Sabbath its name doubtlesse God so providing that the eternity thereof should be imprinted in the minds of all men Belike as a testimony of Gods rest from his workes in the Creation therewithall to maintaine an acknowledgement of God the Creator More then this Salmasius acquainted Rivetus with some collections made by the forementioned Georgius Symellus out of certaine apocryphall bookes one whereof is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the litle generation the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the life of Adam in which the author observes through many weeks that the seventh day was a day of rest and that he conceaved the author of that booke to have been a Jew translated by some Hellenist who makes mention of the Lords Day And Doctor Willet alleageth Philo calling the seventh day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a festivall of all Nations So little neede have wee to sticke upon that in Hesiod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the seventh is an holy day which some observe to have beene spoken not of the seventh day of the weeke but of the seventh day of the moneth rather wherein Apollo was borne which yet is alleaged by Clement and Eusebius as for the seventh day of the weeke what is wanting herein being so plentifully supplyed other wayes And whereas Gomarus being convicted of the evidence of this truth betakes himselfe to a new course as to say that this practise of Heathens was taken from the Jewes and not from the ancient Patriarchs Doctor Rivetus brings a manifest place out of Iosephus to refute that conceite of his As who professeth that this custome of the Gentiles had beene 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 long agoe And how unlikely is it that either the Egyptians or the Nations bordering upon the Jewes should take this from the Jewes when we consider Solitum inter accolas odium as Tacitus observes the accustomed hatred between borderers Hist lib. 1. especially between the seed of the Woman and the seed of the Serpent * 1 Cor. 2.14 and how distastfull the things of God are unto naturall men even folishnesse unto them neither can they know them because they are spiritually discerned And Homer and Linus and Callimachus fetch the seventh day from the very Creation as whereon the making of all things was finished I come at length to the fourth Argument If the Patriarches had observed the Sabbath Moses would have mentioned the religious observation thereof by their ancestors to encourage them I answer 1. it is not likely they were ignorant of the practise of their ancestors The Chaldee paraphrase upon the Psal 92. supposeth Adam to have beene the author of the Psalm that is intitled for the Sabbath 2. If for Gods sake who delivered them out of Egypt they would not observe it neither would they observe it for their ancestors sake 3. Moses makes no mention of their ancestors practise in setting apart any time for the service of God shall we therefore deny that by the suggestion of light naturall some time is to be set apart for this The Fathers professe that no other positive precept was given to Adam then to abstein from the Fruit of a certaine Tree I answer Chrysostome professeth expressely that from the beginning God hath shewed that one day in the circle of the weeke is to bee set apart for spirituall operation Likewise the testimonies of Athanasius and Epiphanius are expresse for the acknowledgment of the institution of the Sabbath immediately from the Creation as before hath beene shewed Indeede both as touching the setting apart of some time in generall for Gods service and the proportion of one day in seven in speciall is more then positive Divines teach that before Christs comming the Gentiles might obtaine salvation by observing the morall Law and the Law of nature with some light of Divine faith and supernaturall assistance of God I answer 1. of what reputation those Divines hee speaks of deserve to bee with us let every Protestant judge 2. yet wee know that the Gentiles might have evidence enough of the holinesse of the seventh day and that God left not himselfe without witnesse in this even to Heathens is so notorious that we may justly wonder to observe how the monuments of the dignity of the seventh day were so strangely preserved among them 3. Yet where testimony sufficient was wanting not onely for the particularity of the day but for the proportion of time wee doe not hold these to be morall so absolutely and in such a degree as to say that failing in this alone in such a case should prejudice any mans salvation though we say with Chrysostome that God by the story of the Creation hath sufficiently manifested that one day in the weeke ought to be set apart for Gods Service and with Azorius the Jesuite that it is most agreeable to reason that after six worke dayes one day intire and whole should bee consecrated
equity of bringing our Lords Day into the place of the Jewish Sabbath In his speech in the Starre Chamber against Traske The Sabbath saith hee had reference to the old Creation but in Christ we are a new Creature a new Creation and so to have a new Sabbath And againe It hath ever beene the Churches doctrine that Christ made an end of all Sabbaths by his Sabbath in the Grave That Sabbath was the last of them And that the Lords Day presently came in place of it And for the confirmation hereof brings in that of Austin Ep. 119 ad Ianuarium The Lords Day by Christs Resurrection hath beene declared unto Christians and from that time began to have its festivity These Theses of his were written as it seemes in opposition to Broade Doctor Lakes Bishop of Wells maintaines the same Doctrine after the same manner in his Theses de Sabbato thes 27. Man having sinned and so by sinne abolished the first Creation De jure though not de facto God was pleased by Christ to make a new instauration of the World 28. He as the Scripture speakes of Christs redemptions made a new Heaven and a new Earth Old things passed then away and so all things were made new 29. Yea every man in Christ is a new Creature 30. As God then when he ended the first Creation made a day of rest and sanctified it 31. So did Christ when he ended his worke made a day of rest and sanctified it 32. Not altering the proportion of time which is eternall but taking the first day of seven for his portion because sin had made the seventh alterable But a man may easily perceive whither this Prefacer tends and such as are of his Spirit The Rhemists upon the first of the Revel and 10. verse doe observe that the Apostles and the faithfull abrogated the Sabbath which was the seventh day and made holy day for it the next day following being the eighth day in compt from the Creation and that without all Scriptures and Commandements of Christ that we read of yea which is more not only otherwise then was by the Law observed but plainly otherwise than was prescribed 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 Lord rested 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 insti ution 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 Baron tom 1. pag. 517. 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 Baron tom 1. pag. 148. 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 Pride aux 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 Azorius institut Part. 2. l. 1. c. 2. 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 commâ—nâ—m 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
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 plainly to import A manifest argument in my judgement that the observation of that day as in place of the Jewes Sabbath in the very days of the Apostles doth even convince their consciences that it can savour of nothing lesse than Apostolicall institution which because they doe impugne therefore they desire to impugne the use thereof as nothing so antient as to be received of the Apostles themselves For consider I pray how should the converted Jewes come to change their Sabbath if not by order from the Apostles themselves whose doctrine it was that Christ came to set an end to all ceremonies And as for the substitution of a day in the place of it that all did joyntly concurre herein without any dependance of some upon the judgement of others what strange strength of convicting evidence must there needs be in the resurrection of Christ to draw them hereunto farre beyond Almighty Gods resting on the seventh day from his worke of creation What could be devised to inferre greater morality by the very light of nature than this which should be so forcible to move all to concurre herein and that with the first But if they received it some from others how improbable it is that the Apostles should receive it from the Churches and not rather the Churches from the Apostles Then consider we no where reade of any difference here-abouts among the Apostles counting Paul amongst rhem who received from the Lord after his ascension into heaven what he delivered unto others How then came it to passe that they all so throughly and at the first agreed herein If as having received it from the Lord then the case is cleare that it is of most Divine institution But if onely as drawne hereunto by the consideration of Christs resurrection on that day being guided by the Spirit of God infallibly to order as other things so the time of Divine service to prevent the danger of division and confusion upon just ground even this is enough to manifest the strength of evidence which the Lords resurrection carrieth with it as to convince them so to appoint and to convince others of the reasonablenesse thereof seeing all Churches did so universally and so earely yeeld thereunto and since that time so constantly persevered therein The resurrection therefore of Christ is nothing inferiour to the Lords rest on the seventh to draw us to the sanctifying thereof And the Apostles ordering it in this manner especially as his extraordinary Ministers is answerable to the Lords Commandement for the sanctifying of the seventh especially that very commandement by just analogie having force also in this And albeit Walaeus saith no more pag. 174. of those three places Acts 20.7 1 Cor. 16.2 Ap c. 1.10 than that the whole Church reformed hath constantly gathered therehence Diei Dominicae usum the use of the Lords Day yet both pag. 183. he doth manifestly imply the Apostles to have instituted it where he saith that quae ab ipsis Apostolis instituta non sunt such things as have not beene ordained by the Apostles were never in that manner observed in all Christian Churches throughout the world as the observation of the Lords Day And before pag. 172. he concludes that the first day of the weeke was by the Apostles substituted in the place of the seventh and commended to the Church and that potestate singulari by singular power and as they were extraordinary Ministers of Christ put in trust by his Spirit to be faithfull in giving Precepts marke this well not onely touching faith and manners but also de Ecclesiae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 recto ordino for the well ordering of the Church and that in this particular what day of the weeke is to be observed by force and analogie of the fourth Commandement to prevent dissention and confusion among the Churches And I am verily perswaded that as many as stand for the Divine institution of the Lords Day would rest fully satisfied with this Austin I am sure who is alleged by Walaeus in the first place as maintaining it to be of Christs institution writes thus of it Serm. de temp 251. Dominicum ergo diem Apostoli Apostolici viri ideo religiosa solennitate habendum sanxerunt quia in eadem Redempter noster à mortuis resurrexit this being premised let us come to the consideration of that which he delivers about the justification hereof from pag. 152. where he acknowledgeth that among the ancient Writers and Doctors of the reformed Church there have beene some who have referred the celebritie of this day to the fact and institution of Christ At the first by Christs fact in this place I understood Christ apparitions to the Apostles as they were assembled
of the Lords supper the Lords Day and that for two reasons first because we have a manifest institution thereof and Christs Precept for the observing of it Not so of the Lords Day Secondly if there were a Precept for keeping the Lords Day yet were it Ecclesiasticall and so mutable For men may choose daies for the worship of God as touching the particularity of this day or that But the institution of the Sacraments is of Divine authority by the consent of all To this I replie that Doctor Rivetus corrupts Master Perkins his answer in the proposing of it Repl. for he sayth not the same is the reason of the Lords Supper and of the day which wee call the Lords Day but supposeth and that most modestly that either of them being called the Lords they are called so in the same Notion That like as the Lords Supper is so called because he instituted it so the first day of the weeke is called the Lords Day because hee instituted the observation of it And this Doctor Thysius collegue to Doctor Rivetus maintaines as well as Master Perkins and Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester in his speech against Traske saying that both these to wit the first day of the weeke and Christ last Supper are called the Lords to shew that Dominicum the Lords is alike to bee taken in both For what reason can bee given why the day of Christs Resurrection not according to the day of the yeare wherein hee arose but according to the day of the weeke wherein hee arose should bee called the Lords Day but to signifie First that it was to succeed in the place of the Lords Dayunder the law which was the Jewish Sabbath 2. And that it was the good pleasure of God and not of man onely that it should bee consecrate to his service For consider wee have many other dayes consecrated by the Church unto Divine service which yet were never called the Lords Dayes And the Lords Day and the Lords feasts in the Old Testament and in the language of the Holy Ghost are no other then such that are of the Lords institution Secondly Doctor Rivetus omits the maine force of Master Perkins his argument or at least slightly passeth it over which is this As God rested the seventh day after the Creation so Christ having ended the 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 wâ—â—t 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 Perkins 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 due 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 Rivets Ans Reply 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.
exhorts them at such a time to pray that their flight be not in the Winter nor on the Sabbath day Matth. 24.20 what will you conclude herence therefore the observation of the Jewish Sabbath was still to continue among Christians if you doe who shall more deservedly be obnoxious to the censure of Judaisme you or wee yet when he tells them that the Sonne of man is Lord of the Sabbath how few interpreters writing hereupon doe not take notice of his power to abrogat it But is it not enough that Paul cryeth downe the ceremonies of the Jewes and in speciall their holy dayes and particularly Sabbaths to wit so far forth as they are found to be shadowes the body whereof was Christ such was the rest on the seventh day as prefiguring Christs rest in the grave But no sober man I trow will herence conclude that herewithall hee cryeth downe the setting apart of any time for Gods service that having no colour of ceremony or rest from such workes as hinder us in the service of God this being as little ceremoniall as the former I make bold to goe one step farther and conclude by the same reason that neither doth he cry downe the proportion of time to wit of one day in seven to be set a part for the exercises of piety because in this particular there is no more ceremonialitie to be found then in any one of the former But to proceed what indifferent man would once expect that in our Saviours disputations with the Pharisees about the Sabbath mention should bee made of the Lords day instituted in the place thereof It is enough wee find it instituted after our Saviours resurrection and sufficient I trowe it is to prove that it was instituted and that in the best manner namely by establishing it de facto in practise amongst the Churches I say this is sufficiently proved by the observation of it which undoubtedly neither was nor could be by chance A Sowe mufling in the earth may make something like the letter A. but not Ennius his Andromacha saith Cicero In like sort the concurrence of the Churches in the observation hereof from the Apostles and continuance therein unto this day could not be by chance but by order and that from the Apostles When you aske Did not the Apostles keepe the Iewish Sabbath I answer I doe not finde they did yet I finde revelations were made unto them of what was to be done by degrees Peter was challenged Acts 11. by the rest of the Apostles for preaching the Gospell unto the Gentiles They tooke indeed advantage of the Jewes Sabbath to preach the Gospell unto them congregated together Act. 13. so did they to the same end take the oppotunity of the feast of Pentecost Acts 18.21 I 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 which 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 Sect. 6. 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
that doth not let Gods Word be the guide directing to sanctifie a Festivall day I thinke hee squareth not his opinion according to truth neither hath he any president from Gods Word FINIS Defensio Thesium de Sabbato 13 I Take notice of Tertull. Iustin Martyr Thes 1. true but they alter not my judgement And why I finde in them onely a bare assertion and that of a thing so remote from their times that they could not know it otherwise then by relation From the Scripture they had none happily they had it from some Jewes Galatinus alleadgeth some But I oppose Jewes to Jewes Philo Iudaeus de opificio Mundi not onely is of a contrary opinion but holdeth also that it was a feast common to all Nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And peradventure some such thing is meant by Hesiod his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And it is not unlikely that God made the observation of the day a memoriall of the Creation But I will not enlarge that discourse It shall suffice that Philo Iudaeus In Decalog and Aben Ezra also and others thinke otherwise whose judgement our Orthodox Divines doe if not all yet for the most part follow Read them upon the second of Genesis 14 What the Patriarks did in point of religion 2. I thinke they did it by Divine direction Yee know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did never please God wherefore the Mosaicall Lawes other then those that had reference to the Church as nationall and delivered out of the Egyptian bondage are to be thought not introductory but declaratory Out of question those that concerned the substance of the service which stood in sacrifices and I thinke concerning the circumstance of time and place The place for there where God appeared there did they erect their altars yea and in the story of Rebecca it is plaine that shee went to a set place to consult the Lord. Gen. 25. And why shall not the time come under the same condition 15 The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must receive an answer from that which is added in confirmation of the 13 Thesis It is but an ungrounded conjecture 16 Where had Rhenanus that opinion his varying from those whom I answered on the 13 Thesis sheweth that hee was not of Iustin Martyr or Tertullian his opinion and yet giveth no reason that may move to credit him or countervaile what I have alleadged for my opinion 18 Yes there is more if you compare Deut. c. 5. with Exodus c. 20. but I meant not onely that but other passages which make the Sabbath a signe of Gods residence sanctifying the Jewes c. which I expressed in the next thesis 19 Bedes conceipt may passe for an allegory built upon a witty accommodation of the literall sense which other fathers observed before him But that cannot be the literall sense of the Commandement You will not deny it if you grant that the Sabbath was instituted before the fall which I thinke more then probable though the Broughtonists hasten the fall before the Sabbath And I cannot without good reason yield that the patriarchs had no set time for divine service I meane a weekely time 31 True it is that Christ did rest from suffering upon the seventh but the last enemy death was not apparently overthrowne untill the reunion of his soule and body till he rose againe for our justification c. Therefore did the apostles make that the consummation of redemption in Christs Person 35 You cannot finde in all the 14. to the Romans that the Apostle is positive in the doctrine of dayes he expresseth a mutuall indulgence untill men had attained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the liberty from Moses Law Neither doth he beare out the Gentiles against the Jewes but qualifie rather the destempered zeale of the Gentiles that were too hot against the Jewes Sensus dictorum sumendus est ex causis dicendorum It is plaine that there was a questiō whether the Christian gentile should be pressed to observe the ceremonies whereunto the christian Jewes were pertinaciously addicted but never was there for ought I read a question whether the Jewes should keepe the Lords day for I think they never refused it Had there been such a quarrell I would enlarge the sense of that Chapter as you doe to our question but seeing there was not I see not how it should be reasonably done 36 I say not that the Apostles imprinted any holinesse upon the first day of the weeke It was Christs resurrection that honoured that day which I say the Apostles were to respect not arbitrarily but necessarily You may perceive the reason in my Theses You cannot observe from the beginning of the world any other inducement to the institution of feasts but Gods worke done on the day If it were not a continued worke as the dwelling in Tabernacles But you thinke the Apostles did not prescribe the observation of that day No you confesse they made choice of it and were moved so to doe by the reason which I alleage And were they not scattered over all the world where they came did they not all give the same order for the sacred assemblies And shall we thinke that this could be done without an apostolicall prescript 37. 43. I conjoyne them because one answer will cleare both Let us then first agree what it is for a thing to be Liberae observationis The Questonist in his interpretation which commonly is received leaveth a possibility for an alteration by humane auctority if any reason shall perswade a conveniency so to doe though so long as publike auctority commandeth it he will have it dutifully observed Whereupon will follow a Consectary or two First that this Law doth not immediately bind the conscience because Merè humani Iuris positivi Secondly that Extra scandalum a man may transgresse it For example a Tradesman may worke in his Chamber if no body bee privy to it If this be the Commentary upon Libera observatio and if it be well inquired into you will finde that I doe not mistake the meaning then I prof sse I cannot like of such a Libera observatio For I am perswaded that if all Christendome should meete and have never so plausible a ground they cannot alter the day de jure though de facto they may but it is worse then previshnesse so to doe And why they cannot alter the first ground Christs rising upon that day Secondly they cannot alter the uniforme order that upon that undenyable ground was set down by the Apostles themselves which were infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost And out of these grounds I deduce that the Law doth immediately bind their conscience And that it is to be observed even where it may be transgressed without any scandall Christ and the Apostles were not absolutely bound to lay such a foundation of the Lords Day and so it was Liberae institutionis but they having layd it I deny that it is now Liberae