of History Mahomet and his followers more numerous than the Christians pretend that Mahomets name was in the Gospel of John as the Paraclet or Comforter promised by Christ and that the Christians have blotted it out and altered the Writings of the Gospel And how shall we disprove them but by Historical Evidence As the Arrians and Socinians pretend that we have added 1 John 5. 7. for the Trinity so others say of other Texts And how shall we confute them without Historical Evidence III. Therefore we cannot make good the Authority of any one single Verse or Text of Scripture which we shall alledge without historical evidence Because we are not certain of that particular text or words whether it have been altered or added or corrupted by the fraud of Hereticks or the partiality of some Christians or the oversight of Scribes For if a Custome of setting apart one day weekly even the first for publick Worship might creep into all the Churches in the World and no man know how nor when much more might one or a few corrupt Copies become the exemplar of those that follow For what day all the Churches meet men women and children know Learned and unlearned know the Orthodox and Hereticks know and they so know as that they cannot choose but know But the alterations of a Text may bâ— uâ—â—nown to all save the Learned and the observing â—iligent part of the learned only and 〈◊〉 that they tell it to And besides Origen 〈◊〉 a Heretick and Hierome alas how few of the Fathers were â—ble and diligent Examiners of such things Therefore in the case of various Reâ—dings such as Ludov. Capellus treats of in his 〈◊〉 Sacra contradicted in many things by Bishop Vsher and others who are those Divines that have hitherto appealed either to the Spirit or to the proper light of the words for a decision Who is it that doth not presently fly to historical evidence And what that cannot determine we all conâ—ess to be uncertain And if Copies and History had delivered to us as various Readings oâ— every Text as they have done of some every Text would have remained uncertain to us Let none say that this leaveth the Christian Religion or the Scriptures uncertain I have fully answered that elsewhere 1. Christian Religion that is The Material parts of the Scripture on which our salvation lyeth hath much fuller evidence than each particular Text or Canonical Book hath And we need not regard the perverse zeal for the Scriptures of those men that would make all our Christianity as uncertain as the authority of a particular Text or book is And therefore God in mercy hath so ordered it that a thousand Texts may be uncertain to us or not understood no not by any or many Divines and yet the Christian faith be not at all shaken or ever the more uncertain for this When as he that understandeth not or believeth not every essential Article of the faith is no Christian. 2. And those books and Texts of Scripture are fully certain by the subservient help of History and usage which would be uncertain without them Therefore it is the act of an enemy of the Scriptures to cast away and dispute against that History which is necessary to our knowledge of its certainty and afterwards to plead that they who take in those necessary helps do make it uncertain Even as if they should go about to prove that all writings are uncertain and therefore that they make Christs doctrine uncertain who rest upon the credit of writings that is the Sacred Scriptures IV. Without historical notice how should we know that these Books were written by any of the same men that bear their names As Matthew Mark Luke John Paul Peter c. Especially when the Hereticks did put forth the Gospel of Thomas Nicodemus the Itinerary of Peter and many Books under venerable names Or when the name of the Author is not notified to all Christians certainly either by the spirit within us or by the matter And though our salvation depend not on the notice of the Pen-man yet it is of great moment in the matter of faith V. And how should we be certain that no other Sacred Books are lost the knowledge of which would tell us of that which these contain not and would help us to the better understanding of these I know that a priore we may argue from Gods Goodness that he will not so forsake his Church As a Jew might have done before Christs incarnation that the Gospel should be written because it is best for the world or Church But when we consider how much of the world and Church God hath forsaken since the Creation and how dark we are in such Prognosticks and how little we know what the Churches sins may provoke God to we should be less confident of such reasonings than we are of Historical Evidence which tells us de facto what God hath done So much of the use of the History as to the Cause of the Scriptures themselves Next you may observe that the denyal of the certainty of humane History and usage doth disadvantage Christianity in many great particular concernments As 1. Without it we should not fully know whether de facto the Church and Ministry dyed or almost dyed with the Apostles And whether there have been any true Churches since then till our own dayes Christs promise indeed tells us much but if we had no History of the performance of it we should be ready to doubt that it might be yet unperformed as far as the promise to Adam Gen. 3. 15. and to Abraham in thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed were till the coming of Christ. Nor could we easily confute the Roman or any hereticall Usurpation which would pretend possession since the Apostles daies and that all that are since gone to Heaven have gone thither by their way and not by ours II. Nor could we much better tell de facto whether Baptism have been administred in the form appointed by Christ In the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Indeed we may well and truly argue a priore Christ commanded it Ergo the Apostles obeyed him But 1. That Argument would hold good as to none or few but the Apostles And 2. It would as to them be though true yet much more dark than now it is because 1. We read that Peter disobeyed his command in Gal. 2. And 2. That after he had commanded them to Preach the Gospel to every Creature and all the World Peter scrupled still going to the Gentiles Act. 10. And 3. That when he said to them Pray thus Our Father c. yet we never read that they after used that form of words so when he said to them Baptize in the name of the Father c. yet the Scripture never mentioneth that they or any other person ever used that form of words But yet usage and
certain As of the Government of Augustus Tiberius Herod Pilate Foelix Festus c. 2. There are other certain means known to us of which I must refer the Reader to what I have written in my Reasons of the Christian Religion Part 2. Cap. 7. specially pag. 335. to 340. 3. No man can doubt but that the Christians of that same age as till the year one hundred might easily and certainly know such a matter of publick fact as whether the Lords day was constantly set apart and observed by all the Christian Churches for holy Worship For 1. It is certain that they did know it by sight and sense and therefore had no need of History 2. It is certain that they knew it before the Scriptures were written which we now speak of For it is not possible that for all those years time before any of the New Testament was written the Christians who assembled to worship God should not know on what day they used to assemble And if they knew it in the year 100. they must needs know it as well in the year 101. 102. 103. and so on For those that were young Christians fifty years after Christ would be aged at an hundred And those that were young at an hundred would be aged at an hundred and fifty and so on So that an age of people not ending at the age of a single person Congregations and societies are like Rivers that keep the same channel and name while one part of water followeth another Nay some of the same men are there anno 100. who were there anno 50. some anno 150. who were there anno 100. and so on Ten thousand thousand men women and children can tell on what day the Congregations of England use to assemble whereas if an Apostle were among us and should write on what day we assemble fewer would know it by that means And they that knew it but by his writing would know it less confidently than they that knew it by sense and experience Yet forget not that I am far from ascribing a certainty or a credibility to all humane History Much more from equalling any with the credit of Divine History But only I say 1. That sense is more assuring as to the subject than any History whatever 2. And that some History besides Divine is certain 3. And that much History is credible 4. And that this instance of the Day on which all Churches in the world assembled for holy Worship is one of the most palpable for certainty that possibly could be imagined 4. And I add that if some humane History or Tradition be not certain there can be no certainty of much of the Divine History to any but the persons who were themselves inspired or that saw the Visions or Miracles that confirmed them For as internal sense or intuition must assure the Inspired persons themselves and external sense must assure those that saw the matters of fact so all the rest have no way to know them but either still by a succession of New Revelations from Heaven which God doth not give or else by Report And I can no otherwise know what was revealed to an Apostle nor what was done in those times Of which more anon Prop. 5. The first institution of Church Offices and Orders and so of the Lords day was not by Scripture The proof is undeniable Because the Old Testament did not contain the Institution e. g. of particular Churches Sacraments Presbyters Deacons Deaconesses and the Lords day c. And the New Testament was none of it written till anno 40. at soonest when some as Bucholtzer Bellarm c. think Matthews Gospel was written though others say many years after and it was not all written till ann 99. Now it is certain that the Church was not all these years without the Orders now in question nor without a day to meet on for publick Worship Even as Baptism and the Lords Supper were instituted by Christ himself long before the writing of any part of the New Testament and the Church was in long possession of them upon the bare verbal declaration of the Apostles Prop. 6. Therefore it is certain that no part of the New Testament was written to any such end as to institute Sacraments or Church Offices or standing Orders but to instruct men about those that were already instituted as to the use of those times For it could not be written to institute that which was instituted before so many years Prop. 7. No part of the New Testament was written to make known to the Churches of those times the said Sacraments Offices stated Orders and Time of Worship Still observe that by a part I mean any book And I except the Decree written in a Letter of the Apostles Elders and Brethren Act. 15. concerning Circumcision not to be imposed on the Gentiles which yet made no new institution nor declared any but only determined of the continued forbearance of some things forbidden before of God in the precepts called Noah's and Pauls Epistles which reduce the Churches to Orders before setled and urge them to duty and decide some doubts about particular cases of Conscience The proof is visible 1. In the Writings themselves 2. In that all the Churches were in the possession and use of all the things in question long before For mutable Orders and Circumstances are none of the things in question It would be vain to write a history now to tell English men of this present age that the Lords day is used in England as a day set apart for publike worship or that persons are Baptized or receive the Lords Supper in England For seeing it is the common usage of all the Christians almost of the Land it is needless to tell men among us by writing that it is so unless it be to inferr somewhat else from it Prop. 8. Yet those holy Scriptures which were written to men of those times were also intended for the instruction of all succeeding ages And so the foure Evangelists wrote the history of Christ and Luke wrote the history of Paul till his coming to Rome and longer and of some more of the Apostles And on the by in the Epistles extant the Churches Customes of those times are much intimated And all this together with the subordinate history and the universal tenure and practice of the Churches is that history by which we must know the matters of fact of those times Nor is there any room left for a rational pretense of Rome or any other Church to produce Divine Institutions which were committed only to them or entrusted to their particular keeping only and were not delivered in Scripture nor in Common to the whole Church Prop. 9. Thus according to the use of the writings of the New Testament the matter of fact in question of the Lords dayes separation is historically touched on and proved though but briefly and on the by as a thing as well known to the
that they took their Authority for the highest and their judgement for infallible and therefore received their writings as Canonical and Divine 3. The Churches professed to observe the Lords day as an Apostolical Ordinance And they cannot be all supposed to have conspired in a lie yea to have belyed the Holy Ghost 4. The Apostles themselves would have controlled this course if it had not been by their own appointment For I have proved that the usage was in their own daies And they were not so careless of the preservation of Christs Ordinances and Churches as to let such things be done without contradiction when it is known how Paul strove to resist and retrench all the corruptions of Church-order in the Churches to which he wrote If the Apostles silently connived at such corruptions how could we rest on their authority Especially the Apostle John in an 99 would rather have written against it as the superstition of Usurpers as he checkt Diotrephes for contempt of him than have said that he was in the Spirit on the Lords day when he saw Christ and received his Revelation and message to the Churches 5. And if the Churches had taken up this practice universally without the Apostles it is utterly improbable that no Church writer would have committed to memory either that one Church that begun the custome or the Council or means used for a sudden Confederacy therein If it had begun with some one Church it would have been long before the rest would have been brought to an agreeing Consent It was many hundred years before they all agreed of the Time of Easter And it was till the middle of Chrysostomes time for he saith it was but ten years agoe when he wrote it that they agreed of the time of Christs Nativity But if it had been done by Confederacy at once the motion the Council called about it the debates and the dissenters and resistances would all have been matter of fact so notable as would have found a place in some Author or Church History Whereas there is not a Syllable of any such thing either of Council letter messenger debate resistance c. Therefore it is evident that the thing was done by the Apostles Prop. 12. They that will deny the validity of 〈◊〉 Historical evidence do by consequence betray the Christian faith or give away or deny the necessary means of proving the truth of it and of many great particulars of Religion I suppose that in my Book called The Reasons of the Christian Religion I have proved that Christianity is proved true by the SPIRIT as the great witness of Christ and of the Christian Verity But I have proved withall the necessity and certainty of historical means to bring the matters of fact to our notice as sense it self did bring them to the notice of the first receivers For instance I. Without such historical Evidence and Certainty we cannot be certain what 〈◊〉 of Scripture are truly Canonical and of Divine authority and what not This Protestants grant to Papists in the Controversie of Tradition Though the Canon be it self compleat and Tradition is no supplement to make up the Scriptures as if they were iâ— suâ— genere imperfect yet it is commonly granted that our Fathers and Teachers Tradition is the hand to deliver us this perfect Rule and to tell us what parts make up the Canon If any say that the Books do prove themselves to be Canonical or Divine I answer 1. What man alive could tell without historical proof that the Canticles or Esther are Canonical yea or Ecclesiastes or the Proverbs and not the Books of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus 2. How can any man know that the Scripture histories are Canonical The suitableness of them to a holy soul will do much to confirm one that is already holy of the truth of the Doctrines But if the spirit within us assure us immediately of the truth of the History it must be by Inspiration and Revelation which no Christians have that ever I was yet acquainted with For instance that the Books of Chronicles are Canonical or the Book of Either or the Books of the Kings or Samuel or Judges And how much doth the doctrine of Christianity depend on the history As of the Creation of the Israelites bondage and deliverance and the giving of the Law and Moses miracles and of Chronologie and Christs Genealogie and of the History of Christs own Nativity Miracles and Life and the History of the Apostles afterward To say that the very History so far proveth its own truth as that without subsequent History we can be sure of it and must be is to reduce all Christs Church of right believers into a narrow room when I never knew the man that as far as I could perceive did know the History to be Divine by its proper evidence without Tradition and subsequent History 3. And how can any man know the Ceremonial Law to be Divine by its proper evidence alone Who is he that readeth over Exodus Leviticus and Numbers that will say that without knowing by History that thâ—â— is a Divinâ— Record he could have certainly perceived by the Book it self that all these were indeed Divine institutions or Laws 4. And how can any meer Positive institutions oâ— the New Testament be known proprio lumine by their own evidence to be Divine As the institution of Sacraments Officers Orders c. What is there in them that can infallibly prove it to us 5. And how can any Prophecies be known by their own evidence to be Divine till they are fulfilled and that shall prove it I know that the whole frame together of the Christian Religion 〈◊〉 its sufficient Evidence but we must not be guilty of a peevish rejecting it The 〈◊〉 part 〈◊〉 its witness within us in that state of holiness which it imprinteth on the soul and the rest are witnessed to or proved partly by that and partly by Miracles and those and the records by historical evidence But when God hath made many things necessary to the full evidence and wranglers through partiality and Contention against each others will some throw away one part and some another they will all prove destroyers of the faith as all dividers be If the Papist will say It is Tradition and not inhaerent Evidence or if others will say that it is inhaerent evidence alone and not history or Tradition where God hath made both needful hereunto both will be found injurious to the faith II. Without this historical evidence we cannot prove that any of the books of Scripture are not maimed or depraved That they come to our hands as the Apostles and Evangelists wrote them uncorrupted It is certain by History that many Hereticks did deprave and câ—rrupt them and would have obtruded those Copies or Corruptions on the Churches And how we shall certainly prove that they did not prevail or that their copies are false and ours are true I know not without the help
our Redemption Answ. No Our Redeemers work is to restore us to the acknowledgement and Love of our Creator And the Commemoration of our Redemption fitteth us to a holy acknowledgement of the Almighty Creator in his works These therefore are still to go together according to their several proper places Even as the Son is the way to the Father and we must never separate them in the exercise of our Faith obedience or Love A Christian is a sanctified Philosopher And no man knoweth or acknowledgeth Gods works of Creation and Providence aright in their true sense but he that seeth God the Creator and Redeemer the Beginning the Governour and the End of all Other Philosophers are but as those Children that play with the Book and Letters but understand not the matter contained in it or like one that teacheth boyes â—litide literas pingere to write a curious hand while he understands not what he writeth Obj. But to spend so much of the day in publick as you speak of will tire out the Minister by speaking so long Few men are able to endure it Answ. 1. How did the Christians in the Primitive Churches They met in the morning and often as far as I can gatâ—â—er parted not till night And when they did go home between the Morning and Evening Service it was but for a little time Obj. Then they made it a fast and not a festival Answ. It was not the use then to eat dinners in those hot Countreys much less three meals a day as we do now And they accounted it a sufficient feasting to feast once at Supper which they did at the first all together at their Church-meeting with the Sacrament But afterward finding the inconvenience of that they feasted at home and used only the Sacrament in the Church which change was not made without the allowance of the Apostles Paul saying 1. Cor. 11. Have ye not houses to eat and drink in or despise ye the Church of God 2. I further answer that the work of the day being done according to the primitive use it will be no excessive labour to the Minister Because in the Celebration of the Lords Supper he is not still in one continued speech but hath the intermission of Action and useth shorter Speeches which do not so much spend him And the people bear a considerable part to wit in Gods praises which were spoken then in their laudatory tone and are now uttered by the singing of Psalms which should not be the least part of the work And though their manner of singing was not like ours in Rithmes and Tunes melâ—diously as neither were the Hebrew Greek or Latine Poems so sung but as most think more like to our Cathedral singing or saying yet it followeth not that this is the best way for us seeing use hath made our Tunes and Meeter and way of singing more meet for the ends to which we use them that is for the chearful consent of all the Church Neither should any think that it is a humane unlawful invention and a sinful change to turn the old way of singing used in Scripture times and long after into ours For the old way of singing was not a Divine institution but a use and several Countreys had their several uses herein And God commandeth us but to Praise him and sing Psalmes but doth not tell us what meeter or tunes we shall use or manner of singing but leaveth this to the use and convenience of every Countrey And if our way and tunes be to us by custome more convenient than those of other Nations in Scripture times we have no reason to forsake them and return to the old Though yet the old way is not to be judged a thing forbidden And we see that custome hath so far prevailed with us that many thousand Religious people do cheerfully sing Psalmes in the Church in our Tunes and way who cannot endure to sing in the Cathedral or the ancient Scripture or primitive way nor to use so much as the Laudatory Responses 3. And I further answer that every Church should have more Ministers than one as the ancient Churches had besides their Readers and then one may in speaking ease another 4. But lastly I answer that These circumstances being alterable according to the state of Countreys Conveniences I do not discommend the custome of our Countrey and of most Christian Churches in our times in making an intermission and going home to dinner as being fittest to our condition And then there remaineth the less force in the objection as to the weariness of the Ministers or the people I 〈◊〉 to say more of the publick Church-performances having described them all in a small Book called Vniversal Concord and having exemplified all except Preaching in our Reformed Liturgie given in to the Bishops at the Savoy Only here I will answer them who object much that the Ancient Churches spent not the whole day in exercises of Religion nor farbad other exercises out of the time of publick worship because we read of little other observation of it by them but what was done in the publick Assemblies Answ. 1. We find that they took it to be a sanctified or separated day And they never distinguish and say that Part of the day only was separated and sanctified to such uses If they did which part is the sanctified part of the day what houres were they which they thought thus separated But there is no such distinction or limitation in the writings of the ancient Doctors 2. What need you find much mention what they did out of the time of publick Worship when they spent all the day frequently at first and almost all the day in after times with small intermission in publick Worship Do you stay but as long at Church as they did even almost from Morning till Night and then you will find little time to Dance or Play in But yet 3. There want not Testimonies that they thought it unlawful to spend any part of the day in unnecessary diversions from holy things as Dr. Young hath shewed III. So much of the day as can be spared from publick Church-worship and diversions of necessity should be next spent most in holy family-exercises And in those unhappy places where the publick worship is slenderly and negligently performed on some small part only of the day or not at all or not so as it is lawful to joyne in it as in Idolatrous Worship c. there Family worship must take up most of the day And in better places it must take up so much as the publick Worship spareth And here the summ of holy exercises in Families is this which having elsewhere directed you in I must but briefly name 1. To see that the Family rise as early on this day as on others and make it not a day of sleep and idleness And not to suffer them to violate prophane or neglect the day by any of the sins hereafter named 2.
places for them that doubt of it Now let us peruse the particular Testimonies 1. I begin with Ignatius though Dallaeus have said so much to prove the best Copy of him of latter date and spurious because others think otherwise and that Copy is by him thought to be written Cent. 3. who saith Let us not keep the Sabbath in a Jewish manner in sloth and idleness but after a spiritual manner not in bodily ease but in the study of the Law not eating meat drest yesterday or drinking warm drinks and walking out a limited space but in the contemplation of the works of God And after the Sabbath let every one that loveth Christ keep the Lords day Festival the Resurrection day the Queen and Empress of all daies in which our life was raised again and death was overcome by our Lord and Saviour Either these Epist. of Ignatius ad Philip. c. are genuine or spurious If genuine than note how clearly it is asserted that the Lords day was to be observed as the Queen of all daies by all that were lovers of Christ. And that the seventh day Sabbath was kept with it then and there in Asia so near the Apostles daies no wonder when it was but the honourable gradual receding from the Mosaical Ceremonies with an avoiding the scandalous hinderance of the Jews Conversion And Dr. Heylin well noteth that it was only the Eastern Churches next the Jews that for a time kept both daies but not the Western who rather turned the Sabbath to a fast But if Ignatius Ep. be spurious written Cent. 3. then as Dallaeus would prove they were written by some heretical or heterodox person And so it will be no wonder that holy dayes are pleaded for when as Dr. Heylin observeth Cerinthus and his followers in the Apostles times stood up for the Jewish Sabbath and Ceremonies and so were for both daies But it will be our Confirmation that even the Hereticks held with the universal Church for the Lords day 2. The great Controversie about the Day of Easter which spread so early through all the Churches is a full Confirmation of our matter of fact For when the Western Churches were for the Passover day the better to content the Jews saith Heylin the Eastern thought it intollerable that it should not be kept on a Lords day because that was the weekly day observed on the same account of the Resurrection The Eastern Churches never questioned their supposition of the Lords day And the Western after Victors rash excommunicating the Asian Bishops never rested till they brought them to keep it on the Lords day Pius Anicetus Victor c. prosecuting the cause 3. The Book though perished which Melito wrote of the Lords day Euseb. l. 4. c. 25. by the title may be well supposed to confirm at least the matter of fact or usage 4. All those little Councils mentioned by Heylin p. 48. held at Osroena Corinth in Gaul in Pontus in Rome prove this The Canons of them all saith Heylin being extant in Eusebius ' s time and in all which it was concluded for the Sunday But saith Heylin by this You see that the Sunday and the Sabbath were long in striving for the Victory p. 49. Answ. I see that some men can out-face the clearest light Here was no striving at all which day should be the weekly day set apart for holy worship but only whether Easter should follow the time of 〈◊〉 or be confined to the Lords day 5. Justin Martyrs Testimony is so express and so commonly cited that I need not recite the words at large Vpon the Sunday all of us assemble in the Congregation Vpon the day called Sunday all within be Cities or in the Countrey do meet together in some place where c. He proceedeth to shew the worship there performed Now 1. Here being mention of no other day no man can question but that this day was set apart for these holy assemblies in a peculiar manner as the other week dayes were not 2. This being the writing of one of the most Learned and antient of all the Christian Writers 3. And being purposely written to one of the wisest of all the Emperours as an Apologie for all the Christians 4. And being written at Rome where the matter of fact was easily known deserveth as much credit as any Christian History or Writing since the Apostles can deserve Nor hath Heylin any thing to say against it 6. The next remembred by Heylin is Dionysius Corinth who lived 175. cited out of Eusebius Hist. l. 4. c. 22. To day we keep the Holy Lords day wherein we read the Epistle you wrote to us c. Against this Heylin saith not a word 7. The next is Clemens Alexander who expresly asserteth the matter of fact that the Lords day was then kept by Christians Yea Heylin derideth him for fetching it as far as Plato Strom. l. 7. But Heylin thinks he was against keeping any dayes But he that will examine his words shall find that he speaketh only against them that would be Ceremonious observers of the day more than of the work of the day and would be religious on that day alone And therefore he saith that He that leadeth his life according to the Ordinances of the Gospel doth keep the Lords Day when he casteth away every evil thought and doing things with knowledge and understanding doth glorifie the Lord in his Resurrection This is not to speak against the Day but to shew how it ought to be sincerely kept But if he had been against it it s all one to my cause who only prove that de facto all Christian Churches kept it 8. The next witness is Tertullian who oft asserteth this to be the holy day of the Christians Church-Assemblies and holy Worship His testimony in Apolog. cap. 16. is so commonly known that I need not recite it It is the same in sense with Justin Martyrs and written in an Apology for the Christians purposely describing their custom of meeting and worshipping on the Sunday as he calls it there as Justin did And that it was not an hours work only he shews in saying that The day was kept as a day of rejoicing and then describeth the work And de Idolol c. 14. he saith that every eighth day was the Christians festival And de Coron Mil. c. 3. and oft he calleth it the Lords day and saith it was a crime to fast upon it And the work of the day described by Justin and by him Apolog. c. 39. is just the same that we desire now the day to be spent in we plead for no other But most grosly saith Heylin pag. 55. But sure it is that their assemblies held no longer than our Morning Service that they met only before noon for Justin saith that when they met they used to receive the Sacrament and that the service being done every man went again to his daily labours Answ. Is this a proof to conclude a
History assureth us that they did III. Nor have we any fuller Scripture proof that the Apostles used to require of those that were to be Baptized any more than a general Profession of the substance of the Christian faith in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Or of the ancient use of the Christian Creed either in the words now used or any of the same importance From whence many would inferr that any one is to be Baptized who will but say that I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God with the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. or that Christ is come in the flesh 1 Joh. 4. 2 3. But Historical evidence assureth us that it was usual in those times to require of men a more explicite understanding profession of the Christian faith before they were admitted to Baptisme And that they had a summary or Symbole fitted to that use commonly called The Apostles Creed at least as to the constant tenour of the matter though some words might be left to the speakers will and some little subordinate Articles may be since added And that it was long after the use to keep men in the state of Catechised persons till they understood that Creed And it is in it self exceeding probable that though among the intelligent Jews who had long expected the Messiah the Apostles did Baptize thousands in a day Act. 2. Yet where the Miraculous communication of the Spirit did not antecede as it did Act. 10. they would make poor Heathens who had been bred in ignorance to understand what they did first and would require of them an understanding profession of their Belief in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost which could not possibly if understanding contain much less than the Symbolum fidâ—i the Apostles Creed IV. Nor have we any Scripture proof except by inferring obedience from the precept that ever the Lords Prayer was used in words after Christ commanded or delivered it Whence some inferr that it should not be so used But Church History putteth that past doubt Other such instances I pretermit I think now that I have fully proved to sober considerate Christians that the matter of fact that the Lords day was appointed by the Apostles peculiarly for Church-Worship is certain to us by historical Evidence added to the historical intimations in Scripture as a full exposition and confirmation of it And that this is a proof that no Christian can deny without unsufferable injury to the Scriptures and the Christian cause CHAP. VI. Prop. 5. This Act of the Apostles appointing the Lords day for Christian Worship was done by the special inspiration or guidance of the Holy Ghost THis is proved 1. Because it is one of those Acts or works of their Office to which the Holy Ghost was promised them 2. Because that such like or smaller things are by them ascribed to the Holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. Iâ— seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us when they did but declare an antecedent duty and decide a Controversie thereabout See also Act. 4. 8. Act. 5. 3. 6. 3. with 7. 55. Act. 13. 2 4. 16. 6 7. 20. 23 28. 21. 11. 2 Tim. 1. 14. Jud. 20. Act. 11. 12 28. 19. 21. 20. 22. 1 Cor. 5. 3 4. 14. 2 15 16. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. When Paul doth but counsel to a single life he ascribeth it to the Spirit of God 3. And if any will presume to say that men purposely indued with the Spirit for the works of their commission did notwithstanding do such great things as this without the conduct of that Spirit they may by the same way of proceeding pretend it to be as uncertain of every particular Book and Chapter in the New Testament whether or no they wrote it by the Spirit For if it be a sound inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly leave in writing to the Churches the doctrines and precepts of Christ Ergo whatever they have left in Writing to the Churches as the doctrine and precepts of Christ is Infallibly done by the Guidance of that Spirit Then it will be as good an inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly settle Church-orders for all the Churches universalâ—y ergo Whatever Church-orders they setled for all the Churches universally they setled them by the infallible guidance of that Spirit But this few Christians will deny except some Papists who would bring down Apostolical Constitutions to a lower rank and rate that the Pope and his General Council may be capable of â—â—ying claim to the like themselves and so may make as many more Laws for the Church as they please and pretend such an authority for it as the Apostles had for theirs By which preâ—ense many would make too little distinction between Gods Laws given by his Spirit and the Laws 〈◊〉 a Pope and Popish Council and call then all but The Laws of the Church Whereas there is no Universal Head of the Church but Christ who hath reserved Universal Legislation to Himself alone to be performed by himself personally and by his Advocate the Holy Ghost in his Authorized and Infallibly-inspired Apostles who were the Promulgators and Recorders of them All following Pastors being but as the Jewish Priests were to Moses and the Prophets the preservers the expositers and the applyers of that Law CHAP. VII Qu. 2. Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. I Shall here premise That as some superstition is less dangerous than prophaneness though it be troublesome and have ill consequents so the Errour of them who keep both daies as of Divine appointment is much less dangerous than theirs that keep none yea and less dangerous I think than theirs who reject the Lords day and keep the seventh day only Because these latter are guilty of two sins the rejecting of the right day and the keeping of the wrong but the other are guilty but of one the keeping of the wrong day Besides that if it were not done with a superstitious conceit that it is Gods Law in some cases a day may be voluntarily set apart for holy duties as daies of Thanksgiving and Humiliation now are But yet though the rejecting of the Lords day be the greater fault and I have no uncharitable censures of them that through weakness keep both daies I must conclude it as the truth that We are not obliged to the observation of the Saturday or seventh day as a Sabbath or separated day of holy Worship Arg. 1. That dayes observation which we are not obliged to either by the Law of Nature the Positive Law given to Adam the Positive Law given to Noah the Law of Moses nor the Law of Christ incarnate we are not obliged to by any Law of God as distinct from humane Laws But such is the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath Ergo we are
which he would have man chiefly study for the knowledge of his Maker and his Will But sin having introduced disorder confusion and a curse upon part of the Creation for mans sake God purposed at once both to notifie to man what he had done by sin in bringing disorder and a curse upon the Creature and blotting the Book of Nature which he should have chiefly used and also that it was his good pleasure to set up a clearer Glass even Christ Incarnate in which man might see his Makers face in a representation suitable to our need not now as smileing upon an Innocent man nor as frowning on a guilty man but as reconciled to Redeemed man and to Write a Book in which his will should be more plainly read than in the blotted Book of Nature Yea in which he that in the Creature appeared most eminently in Power might now appear most eminently in LOVE even redeeming reconciling adopting justifying and saving Love So that though God did not change the day till the Person of the Incarnate Mediator with his perfect last edition of the Covenant was exhibited and set up as this clearer Glass and Book yet then as the seasonable time of Reformation Heb. 9 10 11. he did it To teach man that though still he must honour God as the Creator and know him in the Glass and Book of the Creature yet that must be now but his secondary study for he must primarily study God in Christ where he is revealed in Love even most conspicuous wonderous Love And how suitable this is to man after sin and curâ—e and wrath may thus evidently appear 1. We were so Dead in sin and utterly deprived of the spiritual Life that the Book of the Creatures was not a sufficient means of our reviving But as we must have the QUICKNING SPIRIT of Jesus the Mediator so we must have a suitable means for that Spirit to work by which that the cursed mortified Creature is not appeareth in the experience of the case of Heathens 2. We were so Dark in sin that the Creature was not a sufficient means of our Illumination But as we must have the ILLUMINATING SPIRIT of Jesus so we must have a Glass and Book that was suited to that illuminating work 3. We were so alienated from God by Enmity and malignity and loss of LOVE that as it must be the spirit of Jesus which must regenerate us unto LOVE so it must be a clearer demonstration of LOVE than the Creature maketh in its cursed state which must be the fit means for the spirit to work by in the restitution of our LOVE Where further note 1. That LOVE is Holiness and Happiness it self and the operations of Divine Love are his Perfective operations and so fit for the last perfective act 2. That man had many wayes fallen from LOVE As he had actually and habitually turned away his own heart from God and as he had fallen under Gods wrath and so lost those fullest emanations of Gods Love which should cherish his own Love to God and as he had forfeited the assistance of the spirit which should repair it and as he was fallen in Love with the accursed Creature and lastly as he was under the Curse or threatning himself and the penalties begun It being impossible to Humane Nature to Love a God who we think will damn us and feel doth punish us in order thereunto So that nothing could be more suitable to Lapsed man or more perfective of the Appearance and Operations of God than this demonstration of Reconciling saving Love in our Incarnate Crucified Raised Glorified Interceding Redeemer All which sheweth that Gods removal of the sanctified day from the seventh to the first of the Week and his preferring the Commemoration of Redemption and our use of the Glass and Book of an Incarnate Saviour before that of the now accursed Creature is a work of the admirable wisdom of God and exceeding suitable to the nature of the things II. Now I come to consider of what you say against all this You Cite the numbers of many Chapters and Verses contrary to your grand principles these divisions being Humane Inventions in all which there is nothing about the Controversie in hand The Texts speak not of the Decalogue only but of the Law and of Gods Commandments and Christs Commandments Now I must tell you before-hand that I will take no mans word for the Word of God nor believe any thing that you say God speaketh without proof Prove it or it goeth for nothing with me For as I know that adding to Gods Word is Cursed Rev. 22. 18. as well as taking away so it I must once come to believe that God saith this or that without proof I shall never know whom to believe For twenty men may tell me twenty several tales and say that God saith them all I expect your proof then of one of these two assertions for which it is that you hold no man can gather by your own words or citations 1. That all the Law which was in being at Christs Incarnation was confirmed and continued by him which yet I do not Imagine you to hold 〈◊〉 all Pauls Epistles and especially the Ep. to the Heb. do so fully plead against it 2. Or else that by the Law in all those Texts is meant all the Decalogue and the Decalogue alone The Texts cited by you prove no more than what we hold as confidently as you viz 1. That all the Law of Nature where the Matter or Nature of the things continue is continued by Christ and is his principal Law 2. That the Decalogue as to that matter of it is continued as it is the Law of Nature which is almost all that is in it but not as the Jewish Law given by Moses hands to the Political body 3. That the Natural part of all the rest of Moses Law is continued as well as the Decalogue 4. That all Moses Law as well as the Decalogue shall be fullfilled and Heaven and Earth shall sooner pass away than one jot or tittle of it shall pass till it be fulfilled 5. That the Elements Shadows Predictions Preparations c. are all fulfilled by the coming of Christ and by a more perfect Administration For Christ fulfilled all Righteousness Mat. 3. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is sometimes put materially for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 6. That a change may be two waies made 1. By destroying a thing 2. By perfecting it And that by the Law in Matth. 5. 17 c. Christ meaneth the whole body of Gods Law then in force to the Jews considered as one frame consisting of Natural and Positive parts Of which he saith that he came not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dissolve pull in pieces or destroy the Law as a licentious Teacher that would take off Gods obligations and leave the Wills and Lusts of men to a Lawless liberty which was it that the Pharises imputed to such as were
part of the Mosaical Covenant And if the Form cease which denominateth the Being and denomination ceaseeth and all the parts as parts of that which ceaseth So that if the Covenant of Works made with the Jews cease which Camero calleth a third or middle Covenant and several men do variously denominate but the Scripture calleth the old or former Covenant or Testament or Disposition then all the Law as part of that Covenant ceaseth And that is as much as to say also that it ceaseth as meerly Mosaical or Political to the Jews And then the Argument is vain This or that word was written in the Tables of Stone Therefore it is of perpetual obligation For as it was written in Stone it was Mosaical and is done away and under the New Covenant all that is Natural and Continued shall by the Spirit be written upon the Heart whence sin at first did obliterate it 7. That as the Rest of God in the Creation is described by a Cessation from his work with a complacency in the goodness of it but Christs Rest is described more by Vital Activity and Operation than by Cessation from work even his Triumphant Resurrection as the Conquest of Death and beginning of a New Life so I think the Old Sabbath is more described by such Corporeal Rest or Cessation from work which was partly Ceremonial or a signifying shadow and that the word Sabbath is never used in the Scripture but for such a day of Ceremonial Rest though including holy Worship But that the Lords day and its due observation is more described by spiritual Activity and Operation in the spiritual Resurrection of the soul and its new Life to God And that the Bodily Rest is no longer Ceremonial or shadowy but fitted to the promoting and subserving of the spiritual Activity and Complacency in God and holy exercises of the mind as the body it self is to the service of the soul. 8. That I am not ignorant that many of the English Divines long ago expound Matth. 24. 20. of the Christian Sabbath and Col. 2. 16. as exclusive of the Jewish Weekly Sabbath But so do not most Expositors for which I think they give very good reasons which I will not stand here to repeat 9. That I intended not a full and elaborate Treatise of the Lords Day but a brief Explication of that Method of proof which I conceive most easie and convincing and fittest for the use of doubting Christians who are many of them lost in doubts in the multitude and obscurity of arguments from the Old Testament when I think that the speedy and satisfactory dispatch of the Controversie is best made by a plain proof of the Institution of Christ by the Holy Ghost in the Apostles which I thought to have shewed in two or three Sheets but that the necessity of producing some evidence of the fact and answering other mens Objections drew it out to greater length And my method required me to say more of the practice of Antiquity than some other mens But again I must give notice that Dr. T. Ysoungs Dies Dominica is the Book which I agree with in the Method and Middle way of determining this Controversie and which I take to be the strongest written of it And that I omit most which he hath as taking mine but as an Appendix to his and desire him that will write against mine to answer both together or else I shall suppose his work to be undone ERRATA PAge 19 Line 23 and 24 for there put theâ— p 21 l 20 Bloâ—t out of the Conclusion p 30 l 10 for Pentecost r Passovâ—â— p 35 l. 4 r Canon Council Trul. p 181 l 13 r George Walker And in my Defence of the Principles of Love the Errata being not gathered the Reader is desired Part 2. page 92 line 3 for the Verb to read the Word FINIS * * I speak only de facto how the Antients used these words