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
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
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
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 our 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 opposethem onely it were well but it is apparant that hee disputes not so much against Papists in this argument as against Protestants even such as himselfe But can hee
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
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
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 7 th 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 should bee so whether manifested by Christs particular charge unto them or by comparing Christs Resurrection with the Lords rest from the workes of Creation Otherwise in my judgement they had never called that day the Lords Day Fourthly he excepts against the argument drawne from Christs Resurrection denying that therehence it followes that that day was to bee consecrated to God But herein hee opposeth all the ancients neither doe I thinke hee can alleage any one that doth not hereon build the observation of the Lords Day which nuiversall concurrence doth manifestly argue to be more then probable Austin as Waleus alleadgeth him professeth not as his peculiar opinion but as he took it generally received without contradiction that Dies Dominicus Christianis resurrectione Domini declaratus est and that resuscitatio Domini consecravit nobis diem Dominicum And Athanasius plainly takes notice of the analogy it hath to the fourth Commandement and analogy Doctor Walaeus grants and I wonder hee takes no notice of it here by comparing the second Creation with the first Creation and so Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester professeth that the new Creation requires a new Sabbath especially seeing the old must bee abrogated as ceremoniall But the analogy I confesse may be differently shaped Athanasius shapes it thus that the Jewes Sabbath was the end of the first Creation and that the Lords Day is a beginning of the second Creature to wit as the day of Christs resurrection in reference whereunto the Apostle saith Old things are passed behold all things are become new And I conceive reason to justifie Athanasius in making the beginning of the new creature to be our Sabbath answerable to the end of the first creation to wit because the second creation hath no end in this world Againe Adam and Eve were made but the immediate day before the seventh and the seventh he was to spend in rejoycing in Gods works so Christs death was the worlds redemption and immediately after to wit with Christs rising it was as fit we should Sabbatize with God for joy of our Redemption Otherwise the analogie which Doctor Walaeus grants but doth not explicate may be conceived thus The seventh day of the weeke was the Lords rest from the worke
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
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
of fire was forbidden onely for the works to be done about making the Tabernacle This being delivered as a preface Exod. 35. 2. when the free will offerings were now to be receaved for the promoting of the workemanship of that which formerly was commanded And that dressing of meate was not forbidden them no not in the gathering of Manna as some thinke if then yet not as a generall course to be observed for ever And as touching the Table that Nehemiah kept thus we reade Moreover there were at my Table an 150. of the Iewes and rulers which came unto us from among the Heathen that are about us And there was prepared daily an Oxe and six chosen Sheepe and Birds were prepared for me and hee was so farre from consciousnesse of profaning the Lords Sabbath herein that hee concludes thus Remember me O my God in goodnesse according to all that I have done for this people But suppose they were tied so strictly to such a rest as from workes not servile onely in seeking againe as Zanchy instanceth the condition of a worke servile but even from such as tended to the refreshing of their natures yet the reason hereof depended upon the mysterious signification of this rest as formerly I have represented out of Lyra from which ceremoniality wee are absolved and consequently freed from that rigorous rest depending thereupon and rest onely from works so farre forth as they are avocations from Sacred Studies and meditations as Calvin expresseth it and this wee accompt a morall rest distinguished from ceremoniall And whereas the Doctor tells us that such a like distinction is infirme being content to say nothing to confirme it save that the Text as hee saith affords it not I had thought the very light of nature had beene sufficient to embolden us to conclude that where the sanctification of the day is commanded therewithall is commanded abstinence from all such things as would hinder the sanctification of it And as for the text it selfe it is apparent that neither the kindling of the fire nor dressing of meate is particularly forbidden in the fourth Commandement Neither doth hee so much as obtrude upon his adversaries that they derive the sanctification of their christian Sabbath from ought in the old Testament save from Gen. 2. 3. and from the fourth Commandement In neither of which doth he deale fairely but is content to confound things that differ as if in this particular he affected to fish in troubled waters and we have better evidence and indeed it is our only evidence therence out of the old Testament for the festivity of the Lords day then he is willing to take notice of namely out of the Psal 118. 24. Neither is it possible he should be ignorant thereof howsoever hee doth dissemble his knowledge of it Yet I hope it is enough for us to finde evidence for it in the Sunshine of the Gospell and indeed here alone we have the originall observation of it though that it should be observed is as evidently prophecied in the old Testament as that Christ is the stone which was first refused of the builders and after made the head of the corner adding only this unto it that the day wherein the Lord did this and made so glorious a worke marvellous in the eyes of men was the day of the resurrection which I suppose no intelligent Christian will deny I come unto the 6. Section 6 Who they be that make their boast that they have found the institution of the Lords day in the new Testament expressely J willingly professe I know not neither doe I thinke the Doctor knowes It is true our Saviour oftentimes disputed with the Pharisees about their superstitious observation of the Sabbath day which at length degenerated into voluptuous living on that day in so much that Austin tells the Jewes plainly It is better to goe to plough then to dance but if hereupon you aske where is any the least suspicion of the abrogating of it I answer every one knowes The time was not yet come for the abrogating of it Nay he discourseth so as if 40. yeares after his death the observation of the Sabbath should continue as when he 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 musling 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 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