Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	authority_n	new_a	testament_n	2,897	5	7.9529	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78427	Sabbatum redivivum: or The Christian sabbath vindicated; in a full discourse concerning the sabbath, and the Lords day. Wherein, whatsoever hath been written of late for, or against the Christian sabbath, is exactly, but modestly examined: and the perpetuity of a sabbath deduced, from grounds of nature, and religious reason. / By Daniel Cawdrey, and Herbert Palmer: members of the Assembly of Divines. Divided into foure parts. 1. Of the decalogue in generall, and other laws of God, together with the relation of time to religion. 2. Of the fourth commandement of the decalogue in speciall. 3. Of the old sabbath, 4. Of the Lords day, in particular. The first part.; Sabbatum redivivum. Part 1	Cawdrey, Daniel, 1588-1664.; Palmer, Herbert, 1601-1647.	1645 (1645)	Wing C1634; Thomason E280_3; ESTC R200035	350,191	408

be held up by any Christian State without reall and speciall inconveniences And whatsoever comes certainly under any of these Termes we esteem and reckon it repealed though not expresly named But whatsoever is without the limits of those Phrases and not particularly mentioned as abolished we account not repealed though possibly it may be expired for all that which therefore we adde 4. By a Lawes being Expired in the Nature of it wee meane when it was manifestly given and continued for some particular Reason which Reason is now manifestly ceased and so without any repealing of it it is of it selfe at an end in respect of Obligation though if it have no reall inconvenience in it now it may be freely continued still and if the reason of it should or could be revived so would the Law be in like sort And thus expired are sundry other of the Judiciall Lawes in the Old Testament and those forementioned in the New Testament III. Usually allowed And these Descriptions of a Law repealed or expired seem to be so sufficient as that it is the usuall practice of all conscientious Christians specially Divines that when they speak of any Law of the Old Testament as Ceremoniall or Judiciall and so no longer in force or any Precept of the New Testament not now binding us they presently propound either some expresse Text rejecting it now or at least some generall sentence including it among those that are now excluded because of some Typicall signification that it hath and the burdensomnesse and inconvenience of it if it should be still counted in force or at least the manifest ceasing of the reason for which they conceive it was at first given or after continued for a while and so that there is no reason now why it should be counted still a Law of God Which N. B. before we goe any further to adde any speciall Proofs of our Rule seems a tacite confession of it which we desire may be well noted in that none of them goes about absolutely or simply to plead exemption from any particular Law whether in the New or Old Testament but only so far forth as he goes about to prove it to come under the compasse either of such a Repeale or an Expiration But yet for all this we beleeve IV. Yet excepted against that this Rule doth already sound harshly in divers eares and particularly we are sure that our Ante-Sabbatarians will not let it passe without Exception for they proceed quite contrary as well in affirming B. of E. p. 171. That a Precept Evangelical is of necessary obligation which yet we cannot yield without the former Qualification nor yet do they themselves in other places As also specially in that they seem peremptory B. of E. p. 120. That no Precepts of the old Law meerly Positive are in force under the Gospel unlesse the same be ratified and confirmed by the Gospel where they suppose it is not enough to keep an old Law in force that it is not Repealed expresly but they require an expresse Ratification of it in the Gospel or New Testament otherwise they take it Without more adoe to be expired though not repealed which by their leaves we take to be an Errour and that upon these grounds following First from the Authority of the Lawgiver V. Proved by 4. Reasons 1. From the Lawgivers Authority which is the same under the Old Testament and under the New requiring the obedience of Christians now as well as of his People of old so that whatsoever Law is once delivered to the Church and accordingly recorded in the law-Law-book the holy Scriptures even of the Old Testament whosoever will claime exemption from it whether particular Person or Church must produce somewhat to prove that that Law is now under the Gospel repealed or at least expired more then bare saying that it is no longer in force It is so in the Statute-Law of our Kingdome and of all Kingdomes if a man can alleadge for himselfe in point of Right or Priviledge or the Kings Councell for the Kings Rights and Prerogatives any Statute that was once made it stands good for all purposes unlesse they who would gainsay it can alledge and prove that such a Statute is out of date by expiration or repeale So that the proof lyes originally upon the refuser of the Law and they that would maintain it and urge it need plead nothing more then the enacting of it once till the abrogation of it can be verified And if it be so in the Statutes of men and the Positive Lawes of Kingdomes much more in those of God whose Authority is unquestionably more absolute and whose Wisedome and Holinesse and Iustice and Goodnesse is infinitely beyond that of all Princes and States in the World This we take to be a point meriting exceeding much consideration though we find cause to doubt it is but little considered even by many Christians and Divines VI. 2. The Old Test is part of the Canon Secondly we confirm our Rule therefore and this first proof of it by a second or further illustration of it in this manner Because the old Testament is a part of the Rule of our Lives as well as the New and Canonicall Scripture not only by way of Story or Doctrine but by way of precept and command and binds us Christians as well though not so much as it did the Iewes Our Divines when they handle the Doctrine If any say our Divines when they maintain the Law still to be in force as a Rule mean the Morall Law only We say the same too only we argue that all that are written are Morall to us till we have proved the contrary of any particular of Christs delivering from the written Law viz. In the old Testament of which the only questition is professe continually that he hath delivered us 1. From the curse of the Law 2. From the Lawes being a Covenant of works unto us whereby we should be Iustifyed But not from the obedience of it or obligation to it as a Rule of our Practise and that so it still remains in force and shall do to the worlds end And the contrary is generally condemned in the Anabaptists and Antinomists whose proper opinion it is that they make voyd all the Lawes of the old Testament unlesse in expresse words renewed and repeated in the New Testament and whosoever will not joyne with them must be forced to acknowledge our Rule to be good whether the Laws be Morall Naturall or meerly Positive as our adversaries themselves have confessed of some and they cannot but confesse who hold the Lawes particularly against incestuous Marriages to be perpetuall which yet are not so much as named except having a mans Fathers Wife in all the New Testament the reason of which silence we shall give a touch of by and by Meane time we find a learned Bishop of chiefest note in our Church after this manner

to undertake to prove Le● lata non irrita facta ian obligat Epis Win opusc pag. 148. that Tythes are due by divine right this Law saith he did sometimes oblige the Church as cannot be denyed but it is not now Abrogated therefore it binds still in which argumentation he must needs take our Rule for a ground A Law instituted in the old Testament not Abrogated in the New is of perpetuall obligation though it have no expresse ratification in the Gospel leaving therefore our adversaries at home to answer him we add yet a further proof of our Rule Thirdly otherwise the Church of God VII 3. Else no Canon till the New T. written immediately after the Death of Christ for many yeers together that is untill the New Testament was written had had no written Canon at all for their practice either toward God or toward men but were left meerly to the Law of Nature For the old Testament was it seemes quite disanulled at the Death of Christ at least in regard of all Positive Lawes that against Polygamie and all and as for the Morall they bound not the Christians as written in the old Testament or as some say as given by Moses but only as Lawes of Nature All which we conceive a great inconvenience in regard that Nature corrupted which is now to be the Judge as we said before is but a dimm Light in those in whom it is most clear And whereas it may be pretended that the Preaching of Christ and his Apostles might sufficiently supply the want of the written Law wee answer that though it might to the Gentiles who were strangers to the Scriptures of the old Testament yet not to the Iewes and those that conversed with them who could never have beene wrought upon to have embraced the Doctrine of the Gospel if it had not been grounded upon the Doctrine of the Law of the old Testament that is if they that Preached it had not called for Repentance for transgressions of the Law and urged still to the obedience of it as indeed both Christ and his Apostles do upon all occasions and without it also their Preaching would easily have been both forgotten and mistaken if there had been no grounds of Gods Law written by and upon which to settle the consciences of their hearers Fourthly VIII 4. Confirmed by Christ and his Apostles to all which we may in the last place adjoyne this consideration that if those places in the New Testament be observed some of them at least if not all where it is pretended that Christ or any of his Apostles do ratifie any of the Lawes of the Old Testament it will be found that they containe no such ratification as our adversaries pretend in this question For they will appear not to be spoken by way of such confirmation without which those Lawes ought to have been no longer accounted in force which in propriety of speech is a new imposition of them As when a King by his Proclamation confirms his former Proclamation which was voyd by the death of his Predecessor this is properly a new imposition of the same things by his Authority which after the former Kings death were not of any validity at all We say that the confirmation that the New Testament gives unto the Lawes of the Old Testament will not be found to be of this Nature but rather testifications of those Lawes standing in force and so alledging them to confirm their own Doctrine or to be a ground of it As our Saviour evidently Alledges a Text out of Gen. 2. to ground and confirm his Doctrine against divorce Mat. 19. and the Apostles in like manner as we shall give some other instances hereafter rather fetching their Authority in part at least from the books of the Old Testament in matters of practise as well as of Faith then lending strength to them by their owne Authority IX So that the very silence of the N. T. rather confirmes any Law then Abrogates it And so we suppose we may upon just reason inferre that the silence of the New Testament concerning a Law expressely and cleare-livered in the Old Testament is a confirmation rather then an abrogation of it or an intimation that it is expired judicious Divines giving this for a reason of the silence of the New Testament in diverse points which are most vehemently urged in the old as against incestuous marriages fore noted and that others are but slightly and as it were occasionally mentioned as the Lawes about Tythes and usury c. because they are so clearly and importunately pressed in the old And therefore till we see better reasons to the contrary then any we have yet met with in all our disputers books we must needs hold that all the Lawes of the Old Testament are perpetuated to this day if there be nothing against them in the New Testament by way of repealing them or at least in reason which might plead for an expiration And if any one think that by this assertion sundry of the Lawes which are usually counted judaicall will prove to be in force still we answer that perhaps it may prove so indeed And if we may have Liberty to expresse our apprehension of the Case in generall we must needs confesse that as we beleeve it lies upon our Consciences in particular to prove any particular Law this or that which we hold to be Ceremoniall or Judaicall to be such or else we cannot justly nor safely plead it to be Repealed or Expired if it be not named among such expresly in the New Testament So we are afraid that many Divines not to say some Churches and States now adayes have been a little too bold in rejecting sundry Lawes as meerly Judaicall which upon further advisement might perhaps be found Morall and Perpetuall To which our next Rule will speak some what more fully But before we proceed to that X. The Text Act. 15.28 29. expounded we will as we intimated before a promise in our Margent speak a little of that place Act. 15. for 3 causes specially One is that The things there mentioned to be Necessary to be observed when all the rest of the Jewish Ceremonies were discharged are not all of one kinde but one of them is Morall the other three Ceremoniall 2. Because not only some persons are yet tender in the point of eating Blood but also the Greek Church generally hold that Prohibition in force Therefore we will say somewhat at least toward the clearing of both these as also why the Ceremonies mentioned were continued then if they be not now in force 3. For that some light also may perhaps from hence be afforded to judge of some other Lawes But all briefly that we may not be held too long in any Digression from the main Intendment We find in that place Act. 15. XI 1. Why Fornication forbidden there being Morall four Laws by name recommended to the Christian

by too frequent revolutions specially which again will redound to the prejudice of Religion as before 5. If they make the proportion too scanty in the whole they sin unquestionably against Religion Gods honour and the soules good 6. If they find a Determination made by others wisely they sin if they offer to alter it any way that is to the worse 7. If they find it unfitly made in any respect they sinne if they alter it not for the better And the reason is the like for those that are to obey the Determination they sinne if they ascribe Authority and yeeld obedience to those to whom God hath given none and they sinne on the other hand if they deny Authority unto those to whom God hath given it or if they deny their obedience specially in a matter so neerely concerning Gods honour and the good of their soules Besides what is to be said of the proportion or distribution appearing equall or notoriously unequall of which anon So that in all this there is nothing for the consciences of all sorts of men that meddle or meddle not with this Determination obey it or obey it not to rest upon but a certaine Authority to be pleaded from the law of nature or Scripture for those that offer to make it or obey it Or a certainty that men have no such Authority left them by God And that our minor expresses which we beleeve we shall sufficiently confirme 1. For the Law of Nature we have already noted 1. IV. Neither by the law of nature That originally God is unquestionably the Soveraigne and absolute Lord of all Time and so that it primarily belongs to Him to determine the chiefe and necessary Times of His owne Worship 2. That the Law and light of Nature doth not determine nor cannot helpe men to determine Conclusively the Continuance and Frequency joyntly and so not the chiefe solemne Time of Worship for all men 3. And this is both confessed and urged against the fourth Commandement being Morall-Naturall for a Seventh Day Sabbath by all our adversaries that dispute about these things From all which it plainly followes that the Law of Nature doth not nor cannot grant unto men the authority of determining this chiefe Time of Worship necessary for all men But rather denies it them As being a thing against the light of Nature that they should have the authority of determining that which they have no light in Nature for the porportion of 2. For the Scripture there is as little for this authority there V. Nor by the Scripture as in Nature for we challenge our adversaries or any for them to to produce the Booke Chapter or verse of the Bible that gives any so much as an intimation that God hath put off this authority to men which was originally a part of His owne Prerogative Royall Is it any where said in expresse Words or to any such effect That God though He determined the Times of His Worship to His Church of old yet He will not doe so to His Church now under the New Testament Or that He will not have any one of His Antient determinations to stand in force in any respect But though it be still as necessary as ever to have solemne Times determined for Religion unto all men specially a chiefe Time to be ordinarily sufficient yet He utterly refuses to meddle any more in determining or distributing the proportions of it but leaves it wholly to men they may and shall and must determine it Is there we say any the least intimation of Gods putting this authority out of His owne hands into mens in the New Testament Or any thing like it of His not meddling with determining any Times to mankind till He had brought Israel out of Egypt But that Adam notwithstanding the contrary intimation to say the least of it now which we shall particularly discusse hereafter Gen. 2. was wholly left without any determination from God for any solemne Times and so all the Patriarkes Noah and Abraham and the rest till Moses his Time and till the fall of Manna Is it any where said or any reason of it to be gathered from Nature or Scripture that these had the whole authority of determining this necessary chiefe solemne Time for all men or that any else had it of mankind Some must have it God still or men We referre it then unto any conscience to judge whether it is fit to say or beleeve without any Scripture or Reason that God to whom it originally belonged and whose Honour and Service it so mainly concerned besides His care of mens soules did put it over to men we knew not to whom nor why All that can be pretended is that some of our adversaries say that there is no mention of Adam or the Patriarkes keeping the Seventh Day Sabbath No more say we is there of their keeping any sufficient Time any such chiefe Time as is proved and confessed to be necessary to be determined and observed for Religion We now argue not of the proportion but who determined it determined it was being so necessary to Religion for all men And it originally belonged to God Let them then that list or dare beleeve without the Scripture and against the light of Nature that He put it over to men We dare not And this may suffice for our first and generall Argument For as for that which is alledged for the Churches Authority now under the New Testment We shall come to consider it in the prosecution of our second Argument which is this If God have given to men this Authority to determine the chiefe solemne Time of Worship for all men VI. 2. Argum. this Authority is given necessary and ordinarily sufficient for the chiefe Time Then either He hath given it to every man single or to some speciall men for all the rest But He hath not given this Authority to every man single nor to some speciall men for all the rest Ergo He hath not given this Authority to men at all The Consequence of this Argument is most cleare and cannot be denied The Antecedent hath divers branches in sight and more that will appeare anon we must consider them severally and distinctly 1. For this Authority to be given to every man single 1. Neither to every man single to determine the chiefe solemne Time necessary and ordinarily sufficient for Himselfe It will we doubt not sound so unreasonable in every eare at the first that sundry Readers will be ready to blame us as wasting of Time unnecessarily in the very mention of it and much more in going about to disprove it Yet for all that we cannot but take notice that some of our disputers though we verily beleeve they mean no such thing as to assert it but reserve the Authority to the Church the Governours of it as they abundantly proclaime Yet sometimes speake very suspiciously towards it Thus speakes one of them The equity of

as Mahomet the veriest villaine one of them that ever lived in the world If they shall say that this day of Mahomets invention is to be abhorred indeed in token of detestation of his impiety but some other day might be yeelded to We reply 1. That still then Christians must suffer for that nicety of a day 2. That it is scarcely imaginable that any Pagan Governour would allow any other day then what they observed themselves for the first would be double against their profit in that 1. they could not have their servants labour when they were at leisure to joyne with them and over look them and when they were absent they would feare their work would be done but untowardly 2. Besides that whosoever observe a day doth it in some reference to their own Religion and so would rather tye them to that then let them have another specially 3. When they might be able to tell them out of our adversaries suppositions that their Religion their Scriptures did not determine them to any particular day but left it to their Governours to determine And so still they must observe a day invented by wicked men 3. However what day soever they took up a sober conscience would we think shrinke to throw away the Lords day at a Pagans command Let this we say be considered We on the other side being perswaded that God hath not only determined us to one day in seven by the fourth Commandement but to the Lords day for the particular day by those designations of His word as also that in this day this only the number was exactly preserved of one Day a Sabbath six Dayes worke even at the very Time of the change of the Day as we shewed in the former Chapter and that by this meanes God may have the same Day all the World over des other Arguments of which in their due Place We we say upon this perswasion can answer the question readily that we must hold to this particular Day the first Day of the weeke the Lords day and no other whoever commands or forbids offers or threatens For that Gods will must stand and be obeyed before mens against mens and He must be trusted to maintaine us our soules at least which is enough and the most we can be assured of in a hundred other cases in maintaining His Ordinances and appointments XX. 3. They know of no such authoritie We have yet one Argument more to urge against this Authority of Infidell and Pagan-governours for the sufficient Time for Religion and the particular Dayes for it If Pagan-governours have this Authority put into their hands by God Then it is reasonable they should know that this Authority is committed to them But Pagan-governours so farre as we remember in any story never knew of any such Authority committed to them Ergo It is not probable that any such Authority is put over to them The consequence of this Argument may be confirmed by the necessity of a determination to be made proved and confessed to be Morall Naturall And that it cannot be imagined such Princes should take this upon them and exercise this Authority unlesse they have some knowledge or perswasion that this Authority belongs to them The Antecedent may also be fairely argued from the silence of all bookes in this point For though we know that Pagan Princes and states did appoint some dayes extraordinarily yet we find not that they did so ordinarily nor ever thought they might doe so But what was done in this kind was from Oracles or pretences of Oracles of their gods by their priests or otherwise And the greatest flatterers of Pagan Princes never did that we remember ascribe this Authority to them as given them by their gods It were wonderfull then that we Christians should find out this Authority given by God to Pagan Princes of which as we said before there is not the least word nor intimation nor shadow of any such thing in Scripture and the Law of Nature also is sufficiently cleare against it We conclude then here the Authority is not and yet upon divers suppositions of our Adversaries touched already and to be toucht hereafter here it must be or no where among men for those that live in Pagan Countries For to come to the other sort of men That is the Church of God Of which we say as before XXI 2. Not to the Church for all mankind God hath not given to it the Authority of determining the chiefe solemne Time necessary and ordinarily sufficient for the chiefe Time unto all mankind Mankind in referrence to the Church is againe distinguishable into Pagans and Members of the Church Of the latter fort we shall dispute more at large of the former a few words may suffice which yet added to the former discourses will carry the Cause clearly and undeniably That it being Morall Naturall to all men to have and observe a sufficient Time determined for Religion This determination doth not nor cannot belong to men but to God himselfe Thus we reason concerning Pagans If the Church universall hath no Authority but ever her owne Members Then the Authority of determining the necessary and sufficient Time for Religion unto all men belongs not to the Church But the Church universall hath no Authority but over her owne Members Ergo The Authority of determining this Time unto all men belongs not to the Church The Consequence of this Argument cannot be denied Unlesse any would offer to say that all mankind are Members of the Church universall which is most absurd The Antecedent is easily proved As well 1. The Apostle denies any such Authority to be in the Church of Iudging those that are without 1 Cor. 5. And if they cannot judge them then not determine any thing to them For this and that Authority goe together in things determinable by the Church Though the Church may judge in things wherein it may not determine in the sence we now take determination that is the Church may censure which is the judging there meant offenders against Gods Law as the incestuous Person spoken of But it may not determine that to be incest which God hath not made so nor determine any to be lawfull or dispence with it when God hath forbidden it however presumptuous the Church of Rome hath been in both It is lesse then to determine and make Lawes then to judge and censure offenders The Church therefore having no power of censure of those without those that are not her Members can have no power to determine any thing unto them They who are out of the Church are already in as bad a condition as the Churches censure can make them that can but deliver them to Satan and Satan undeniably hath them already The Churches Authority is apparantly but the Authority of a mother now a mother as a mother hath no Authority over children not her owne 2. As also because it is and would be extremly

prove it and then the fourth Commandement which they like not because it would tie them to a whole Daies continuance would be their only sufficient refuge Therefore also their Reasons are very doubtfully and waveringly propounded And so we esteeme that such an Answer is over ambiguous to be sufficient to satisfie either of our Arguments And if they will hereafter or any for them offer to make an answer definitely and clearely either to the necessitie or sufficiencie of the proportion Let them have but one Day of ten or twenty as necessary and two houres of that Day or nominate those or any other proportions of Frequencie and Continuance as sufficient Whatever they instance in and whether it be well or ill yet will it suffice for our Arguments to justifie them and confirm that the Church hath no absolute or legislative authoritie to determine this chiefe Time necessary and sufficient to Religion But that Nature and Reason or Scripture some or all of these doe before-hand determine the necessitie and sufficiencie of it And that the Churches office herein is no more but of a Cryer or Preacher as our Divines urge against the Papists in point of the Churches authority to determine what Bookes are the Word of God to declare and pronounce and then consequently to use her authority over her members to urge them to the observation of it as much as may be and not at all of a Lawgiver to determine it And thus much we verily beleeve these Arguments have evinced undeniably Which therefore we againe desire our Readers to observe that so the Churches absolute and unlimited authority may be no more urged in this controversie no not in generall and so deceivable termes And then we doubt not but many Readers will soone see a necessity to have recourse to the fourth Commandement as Gods own determination of this necessary and sufficient chiefe Time for Continuance a whole Day for Frequencie one in seven as the only sure ground for consciences to rest upon in so important a matter And that many more not to say all that are not swallowed up with prejudices will be of the same mind when we have expresly discussed whether the Churches wisdome will or can suffice to determine from Nature and Reason and any thing in Scripture besides the precise determination of one Day in seven according to that fourth Commandement the just proportion of necessarie and sufficient Time for Religion Which we shall take to taske ere we make an end of this question in this Chapter In the meane Time we goe on to a fourth Argument If the Church have Authority to determine the chiefe Time for all its Members XXVIII Argument 4. The Church cannot determine Time for family or solitary Worship then it hath Authority to determine the Continuance so laregly to extend beyond the Publike Worship even to take in both domestick Worship where it may be had and specially solitary Worship by every Christian apart before and after the Publike Worship But the Church hath no Authority to determine of Continuance so largely as to extend beyond the publike Worship even to take in both family Worship where it may be had and specially solitary Worship by every Christian apart before and after the publike Worship Ergo The Church hath no Authority to determine the chiefe Time for all its Members The consequence hath beene proved before at large in the former Chapter that the Continuance of the chiefe Time must be so large as not only to allow but to necessitate before and after the publike Worship family Worship also where it may be had and however to necessitate as well as to afford liberty for solitary Worship by every one apart The Antecedent may be thus strengthned 1. It is usually said That the sword nor the keyes meddle not within doores that is Neither the Civill Magistrate nor the Church-governours take upon them to make affirmative Lawes for private families for negative they doe in reference to what they doe among themselves not directly concerning the service of the Church or State And least of all do they meddle with their Time of which every governour of a family is counted Lord and Master or Lady and Mistris for themselves and all under their authority Even when a man is bound by Indentures to teach his apprentise his trade yet not at this Time or that Time or so long together Therefore we find not that any Church or Christian Magistrate though forbidding worke to all even within doores upon such and such Dayes hath yet commanded Parents or Masters to catechise their children and servants within doores on those Dayes precisely or pray with them or examine them what they have learned in publike or any such like Duties of Religion 2. But specially in reference to solitary Worship secret prayers secret thanksgivings secret meditations of the word heard or of any other heavenly and divine matter concerning God and the soule The Church hath no authority to determine any Time which necessarily must be spent in any of these Duties or any other in secret Of which we conceive a double reason 1. Because no authority of man is supposed to reach to that which neither themselves nor any other man living can ever come to know whether it be observed or not Which is the case plainly here No man can know nor all the men in World when I retire my selfe any Day and shut my selfe up in my chamber whether I pray or meditate or performe any other solitary Worship to God or not Unlesse I tell them afterward or speake so loud as that they over-hear me which I am not bound to doe or rather am bound not to doe It is altogether vaine to say no more to determine and command that which no account can be taken of by those that command it or by any man else whether it be obeyed or not 2. But further secret Duties and so Time to be necessarily imployed in them are immediately Duties of conscience even the most inward and spirituall that can be Now no authority of man of the Church or any other reaches immediately to the conscience and the inward and spirituall part of Duties But only the Authority of God alone Here againe the Church or any superiour may give Counsell or declare the will of God about such Duties or such Time to be so imployed But cannot command or determine it Whereas we are speaking of a Time that must be determined of which therefore the Church hath no Authority If it be objected that the Christian Magistrate XXIX An Exception answered or the Church hath authority to appoint a publike Day of Fasting and Humiliation and this to be spent in Religious Duties as well private as publike till the end of the Day and if so why not for the ordinary chiefe solemne Time We Answer in a word Sol. that the Continuance of a publike Fast is before hand determined by God in Scripture