their own Rule the effect cannot precede the cause and so by the same Reason Christs Resurrection in the morning could not operate à parte ante to change the beginning of that day which was actually past at Evening 4. Where they did â—ver read that occasions happening upon any dayes did alter or bound onâ— the beginning and end of dayes the dayes ever bounding out the occasions which we say happened upon such a day and houre not the occasions the dayes 5. How Christs Resurrection could change this dayes beginning when as it altered not its name nature or order it being still the first day of the week as it was at the Creation the week remaining yet the same and seeing it made no change in the course of the Sun and Moon of day and night which rule bound out and make up the naturall day 6. How that which hath no limits of its own but that which it had from the day on which it happened the first dayes morning being that which limited the Resurrection in point of time and reduced it to a certainty can possibly put bounds of time unto the day which bounds outit If they cannot resolve all these Queries they must then disclaim this main fundamentall Conclusion upon which they build their false grounded Error as I have formerly proved This is the first falshood The second is this That Christs Resurrection was the cause of the Lords-day This I say is both a falshood and a fallacy To make it more evidently so we must consider the Lords-day either as a naturall day consisting of 24 houres measured out by the Sunne or primum mrbile and made up of the night and artificiall day or as a Lords-day that is a day devoted and sequestred unto Gods immediate worship If we consider it materially or mâ—erly as a day it is clear that Christs Resurrection was no cause of the first day for that was instituted by God at the Creation Gen. 1. 5. who then appointed the Sunne Moon and Starres to rule limit govern both the day and night and to be the sole causes of them Gen. 1. 14. to 22. Psalm 74. 16 17. Psalm 136. 6 7 8. Psal. 104. 19. Jer. 31. 35 36. c. 33. 20. Neither could Christs Resurrection be the cause of that day on which he arose for it was begun before he rose again and it had been and continued a day though he had never risen on it therefore it was no cause of it as a day Besides all time is the measure of motion and so the motion of the Primum mobile the alone cause of it and of this day too Christs Resurrection thererefore being no cause of the Lords-day as a day could not alter the beginning of it in such manner as is prtended since the Lords-day hath no bounds or limits beginning or end neither is it properly a part of time but onely as it is a day not as a Lords-day Wherefore when you affirm that Christs Resurrection was the cause of the Lords-day therefore it changed the beginning of it your meaning is and must be that it was the cause of it and that it changed the beginning thereof as it was a naturall day the change here râ—lâ—â—ing onely to the time and limits of the day not simply to the quality as it is a Lords-day it having no limits at all as it is a Lords day but meerly as it is a naturall day which is a grosse a untruth as I have proved yea a fallacy too in applying that to this day as a day which is spoken onely and intended of it meerly as a Lords-day To illustrate this by an example The first day of the week is like to water in Baptisme to Bread and Wine in the Sacrament to a Church that is consecrated or to one abou to enter into Orders Now as we use to say thâ—t Baptisme doth change the water the Sacramentall consecration the bread and wine Consecration Canonicall the Church and ordination the man if we mean they change their very nature essence and substance the speech is meerly false for they continue in nature in substance the same they were before if we intend they onely alter their use which is true and yet apply this alteration to the substance as the Papists do in case of the Sacament arguing thus the Fathers say that the Bread and Wine are changed after Consecration to wit in their use onely Ergo they are transubstantiated and changed in their substance then it is but a fallacy or equivocation which being explained proves but a meere Non sequitur since the change in the use or quality onely infers no necessary alteration in the Substance So when the Objectors say that Christs Resurrection did change the first day of the week if they mean onely that it was the occasion why the use of it was altered from a common day to an holy day or when they affirm that Christs Resurrection was the cause of the Lords day that is the cause why the first day was and is solemnized as a Lords-day their words are true in this sense onely but then they neither prove nor imply any change at all in the limits beginning or end of the first day or in the day it self but in its use alone and so the day continues the same in all these respects as it was before But when they go thus far as to prove that Christs Resurrection on it did alter the very beginning and end and so the nature and limits of the day because it was the occasion of altering its use which is the thing they intend in both these Propositions then the Argumentation is sophisticall and the Conclusion this grosse inconsequent Christs Resurrection was the cause of turning the first day of the week into the Lords-day Ergo it translated the beginning of that day from morning to Evening An Argument so absurd that the Objectors may now do well to blush at it Again if we consider this day onely as it is a Lords-day that is as a time consecrated to Gods publick worship if the Objectors intend by this Proposition Christs Resurrection in the morning was the cause of the Lords-day that is it did actually consecrate that very first day whereon he arose and all others succeeding it for a Lords-day even that very morning on which he arose again as in truth they do then I say it seems to me an apparent untruth For though it be true that his Resurrection on that day was one generall originall occasion of solemnizing it for the Lords-day yet it is untrue that his bare Resurrection onely was the immediate efficient constitutive cause of sanctifying it for a Sabbath or Lords-day or that it did sanctifie that very day on which Christ arose for a Sabbath or Lords-day even at that very time of the morning when he arose For first Gods resting from his work of Creation on the seventh day is paralell in reason with Christs Resurrection
other times there is a necessity that dayes Gods Standard Royall to measure all temporary things occasions and solemn Festivals happening on them should limit both Festivals themselves and the causes of their institution and so that the Lords-day should be squared by the first day of the week to which it is confined not the first day or Lords-day by the time of our Saviours Resurrection on it And why should not the Lords-day be squared by the first day on which our Saviour arose Is it not celebrated principally in remembrance of his Resurrection on that day Is not the Lords-day the first day and the first day the Lords-day Is not all the fiâ—st day the Lords-day and no part of the 2d day would you not have it like that first day on which Christ arose not different from it If so then that first day must be the only measure of it and it must begin and end at Evening as that day did If otherwise you make the Lords-day different from that day whereon Christ rose you sanctifie but part not all the first day you piece up a Lords-day of half the first day and half the second day and make Christs Resurrection the measure of the day when as the day was the measure of it all and and either of which is grossâ—ly absurd You see therefore in the first place that the ground on which the Opposites build their opinion of the lords-Lords-dayes commencement at morning is but a châ—in of falshoods and notorious errours And so the objection meerely false in the sence that they intend it 2. I answer that â—hough Christs Resurrection was the principal cause of Christians celebrating the first day of the week for the Lords-day Christian weekly Sabbath yet it was not the sole cause or occasion of it there being many other causâ—s likewise alleadged for it by ancient and modern Divines and others as that it was the first day of all others whereon God created the light that God raineed Manna in the Wildernesse on it that Christ thereon rose again from the dead and that the Holy Ghost descâ—nded thereon upon the Apostles Thus expressed in the Excerptions of Egbert Archbishop of York about the year of Christ 750 c. 36. Spelmanni Concil. Tom. 1. p. 262. Dominica dies prima dies seculi est dies Resurrectionis Christi dies Pentecosten ideo SANCTA EST c. And thus in some ancient Saxon Canons some of uncertain date yet supposed to be 1000 years after Christ Ibidem p 600. c. 24. a Dies verò Dominica quia in eo Deus lucem condidit in eo Mannam eremo pluit in eo Redemptor humanigeneris spoute pro salute nostra mortuis resurrexit in eo Spiritum Sanctum super discipuâ—os infudit tanta debet esse observantia ut praeter Orationes Missarum solemnia ea quae ad vescendum pertinent nihil aliud fiat c. On which particulars many of our modern writers insist Now as it was the first day of the world whereon light was created it clearly began at Evening Gen. 1. 5. The Manna falling on it â—elâ— with the dew IN THE NIGHT Numb 11. 9 Exod 16 13 14. Christs Resurrection thereon was early in the Morning whiles it was yet dark John 20. 1. Luke 24. 1 2 6. Matth. 28. 1. 6. Mark 16. 1 2. The Descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles thereon was about nine of the clock in the Morning or the third houre of the day Acts 2. 1. to 16. To these Reasons of its sanctifiâ—ation most of our late Divines annex Christs apparition to his Disciples on this day after his Resurrection and that was AT EVENING a little before Sunset John 20. 19. Now if all these severall occurrents on the first day of the week concurring joyntly towards its sanctification as a Lords-day or Christian Sabbath should alter its Primitive beginning and end at the Creation as the first day of the world when it began and â—nded at Evening to the time and hour of these severall Occurrences thereon it should have as many severall beginnings and ends at severall times houres repugnant to each other which would make it five severall dayes in stead of one yea no day at all but a Monster of dayes and Sabbaths To reconcile which repugnances and avoid such confusion the Objectors must disclaim their confident objected mistake That Christs Resurrection being one cause of the Lords-dayes solemnization onely did actually change the beginning of the day from Evening to Morning and grant it still begins at Evening as before it did 3. I answer that this Objection is a meere Petitio principii a begging of the thing controverted as granted instead of proving it For they lay this for a foundation that Christs very Resurrection did change the beginning of the Lords-day or first day on which he arose from Evening to Morning which is the thing in truth they ought to prove Yea but they confirm it too as well as say it How I pray Christ rose again in the Morning Ergo he translated the beginning of the day to the Morning But how is this Consequent made good why thus Christs Resurrection was the cause of the Lords-day Therefore the day must begin when he arose and not before for the effect ought not to precede the cause I subioyn that in this Argumâ—nt is a treble sophisme Fiâ—st there is Fallacia dictiouis in the word cause which signifieth either an oâ—iginall impulsive cause And so it is true that Christs Resurrection was the cause of the Lords dayes solemnization to wit the cause why Christians afterwards did solemnize it or else an immediate efficient constiâ—utive cause Christs Resurrection was no such cause of the Lords day as I have proved Yet the Objectors in this Argument make it so for that is theiâ— meaning If they take cause here onely in the fiâ—st sence then the Argumâ—nt is a meere inconsequent for the original cause or occasion of a thing may in point of time precede the effect for many hundred years Adams fall wâ—s the cause or occâ—sion of Christs Incarnation Passion Resurrection and Ascension Rom. 56. to 20. yet these were many thousand yeaâ—s puny to it The three yâ—ars famine in Davids time was occasioned by Sauls slaughter of the Gibeonites many years before 2 Sam. 21. 1. Yea most Diviâ—â—s generally affirm that though Christs Resurrection was he occasion or impuâ—sive cause of the Lords-dayâ—s iâ—stiâ—ution yet the institution of it was some space after iâ— not contemporary with it This Argument therfore is buâ— a meer inconsâ—quâ—nt Christs Resurrection the originall occâ—sion of the Lords dayâ—s institution was in the mâ—â—niâ—g Ergo hâ— Lâ—â—ds day must then begin 2. Here is â—ikâ—wise â—â—â—lâ—acie in arguing that the Lords day mâ—st 〈◊〉 at Moâ—ning not Evening bâ—cause the effâ—ct cannoâ— pâ—â—â—edâ— the cause when as the Aâ—gument should be â—â—st contrary The â—ffect begins ever when
with holy duties what an inconvenience burthen would it be Again if it should begin and determine at morning so soon as day-light begins how many Christians are then up through the whole year on Lords-day mornings and the mornings following to commence and conclude it with holy duties yea what a vexation and trouble would it be especially to aged and sickly persons to rise every Lords day and Monday at day-dawning or some space before to begin and close it with meditations prayers praises devotions Certainly if the Lords-day should commence and end either at morning or midnight and Christians were tied in * point of conscience to begin and conclude it with holy exercises most men would grow weary of observing it and cast off the sanctification of it as an intollerable burthen But now if we begin and end it at Evening when every man is up and ends his labours and goes unto his private devotions and familiar duties of his * own accord and then enjoy this rest as on other Evenings how easily and conveniently without any toyl or inconvenience may all sorts of men begin and conclude it in an holy manner without any disturbance of their naâ—ural sleep or endangering their health and how sweetly how comfortably may they embrace the inception and take their farewel of the conclusion of it with what delight pleasure ease conuenience may they sanctifie it This beginning and ending therefore of the Sabbath and Lords-day being the easiest of all others the best for all Christians to take hold of without any pain or inconvenience the best for the true pious commencement and conclusion of these dayes with holinesse and devotion is undoubtedly that which Godhimself hath instituted and all Christians must retain this being one main cause why God commanded the Jews to sanctifie their Sabbath and keep their Festivalls from Evening to Evening Lev. 23. 32. Exod. 12. 18. because the Evening in all the foreuamed respects was most convenient and proper to begin and end all sacred dayes 5. The Lords-day as all of the contrary opinion acknowledge is substituted in the place of the seventh day Sabbath in memoriall of our Sauiours resurrection upon it But that Sabbath as the premises evidence began and concluded at Evening therefore the Lords-day should do so too it being but the ancient weekly Sabbath translâ—ted to another day and there being no preceptnor president in Scripture to begin the Sabbath or Lords-day at morning or midnight but both Precepts and examples to commence and end it at Evening as the foregoing Conclusions prove The rather because It is confessed by all my Opposites in opinion That the Lords-day succeedeth the seventh day Sabbath is to be weekly wholly intirely consecrated to Gods publick and private worship and that by the very Equity and Morality of the fourth Commandement Which is the received opinion not onely of most of our own Writers who have written of the Sabbath or Lords-day and commented on the fourth Commandement by learned Henry Bullinger Decad. 2. c. 4. Joannes Pappus enar in Isaiam c. 58. and very many of the Learnedest Protestant Writers in forreign parts quoted by learned Wallaeus in his Disputatio de Sabbato to which I refer the Reader for fuller satisfaction But likewise of the learnedest popish Schoolmen Commentators and writers of all sorts as namely of Peter Lombard lib. 3. sententiarum Distinctio 37. Richardus de media Villa Joannes Scotus Henricus de Veru-Maria Christopherus Silvestranus Gulielmus Estius and others in lib. 3. Sententiarum Distinct 37. Dionysius Carthusianus in lib 3. sententiarum Distinct 37. in Fxod Enarratio c. 20. where he thus writes Memento ut diem Sabbati sanctifices id est in sanctis operibus diem illum expendas divino cultui arplicas eum Per quod nunc DIEI DOMINICI JVBETVR CELLEBRITAS Bonaventura in lib. 3. sentent Distinct 37. Sermones de decem Praeceptis Sermon 4. operum Tom. 7. p. 8. speculum Animae c. 2. ibid. p. 35. where he determines thus Per hoc autem in Lege NOSTRA DOMINICA intelligitur Observatio siquidem DIEI DOMINICI Eâ—T DE JVRE DIVINO scilicet PRAECEPTUM DIVINVM ut habetur in Exodo Memento ut Diem Sabbati sanctifices c. sancti Raymundi Lumina lib. 1. Tit. de Feriis ac Festis p. 110. 111. acutè Thomas Aquinas in lib. 3. sentent Distinct 37. Artic. 5. 2. Quaest. 122. Artic. 4. with all his foâ—lowers on these places Hugo Cardinalis Comment in Exod. â—0 Tostatus Abulensis in Exod. 20. qu. 11 12 13. an excâ—llent pregnant Discourse to this purpose and in 1. Regum Tom. 1. p. 128. Joannes Gerson Compendium Theologiae in 3. Praeceptum Operum Tom 2. p. 56. Astensis summa lib. 1. Tit. 22. De observantia Sabbati Angâ—lus de Clavatio summa Angelica Tit. Praeceptum sect. 2 3 7. Bernardinus senensis Sermo 10. de Observantia Sabbati an excellent full pious Discourse Paulus de sancta Maâ—ia scâ—utiniun Scripturarum pars 1. Distinct 8. c. 14. Antonius Cadubiâ—nsis Quastionarii lib 1 qu 5. Jacobus de Valentia adversus Judaeos qu. 2. Soto de justitia jure lib. 2. qu. 3. Art 5 qu. 4 Domincus Bannes 2a secundae qu. 44. Artic. 1. Didacus stella Comment in Luc. c. 14. Couarruinas Resolutionum lib. 4. c 19. Conclus 4. 5. Joannis Nyder as also Michael Marspurgiensis in 3. Praeceptum Enchiridion Christianae institutionis set forth by the whole Council of Colen An. 1536 in 3. Praeceptum f. 270. to 276. Hector Pintus Comment. in Isaiam cap. 56. in Ezech. cap. 20. Ambrosius Catherinus Enar. in Genesis c. 2. p. 122 123. Petrus Binsfeldius Enchiridion Theologiae Pastoralis pars 3. c. 10. p. 320. Cardinal Bellarmin de cultu sanctorum lib. 3. c. 11. Azorius the Jesuit Instit. Moralium pars 2. lib. 1. c. 2. Lorinus Comment in Deut. c. 5 p. 222 223 224. Petrus Vincentius de Marzilla Annotatio in Exod. c. 20. Annot. 3. p. 249. Corneâ—ius à Lapide Comment. in Deut. 5. p. 975. Leonardus Marius Comment in Exod. c. 20. Num. 47. p. 504. Vincentius Filiucius Moralium Quaestionum Tom. 2 in 3. Praecepium Deoalogi c. 1. sect. 7. to 11 p. 250. c. 2. p. 251. Ludovicus Ystella Comment in Exod. 20. p. 124. To whom I shall annex our own irresragable English Doctors Alexander Alensis summa Theologie pars 3. qu. 32. Memb. 2. Nicholaus de Lyra a converted English Jew Comment in Exod. 20. John Peelham Archbishop of Canterbury and William Lyndwood Constit Provincialium lib. 1. de officio Archiepresbyteri f. 40. 41. Thomas Waldensis Doctrinale Fidei Tom. 3. Tit. 16. c. 140. De celebrando festivè DIEM DOMINICUM sine mundanis operibus The Flower of the Commandements of God on the third Commandement Dives Paurer on the third Commandement c. 11. f. 120. printed
100. 1 2 3 4. Psalm 148. Job 36. and 39. Eccles. 12. 1. 1. Isa. 37. 16. c. 40. 28. c. 43. 1. c. 44. 4. c. 45. 12. 18. c. 51. 13. Jer. 10. 11 12. c. 14. 22. c. 27. 5. c. 32. 17 18 19. c. 51. 15 16. Jonah 1. 9. John 1. 3. 10. Acts 2. 24. c. 14 15. c. 17. 24 25 26. Rom. 1. 19 20. Col. 1. 16 17 18. Heb. 1. 1 2. 1 Pet. 4. 19. Rev. 4. 11. cap. 10 6. and the fourth Commandement it self Exod. 20. 8 to 12. seem to prefer the work of Creation before the work of Redemption as most of all manifesting declaring magnifying the infinite power wisdome greatnesse glory majesy providence bounty soveraignty Deity of God and as the strongest motive and obligation to all his Creatures and redeemed Saints likewise to adore worship love fear serve reverence obey God as their Creator and to depend rest trust commit themselves to him alone 4. These reasons seem to advance the work of Creation before the work of Redemption First it is the First and most ancient of all Gods visible works Gen. 1. 1. Deut. 4. 32. Mark 13. 19. Rev. 3. 14. 2 Pet. 3. 4. far antienter than Christs Resurrection or work of Redemption And that which is Antientest is usually best and honourablest Psal. 77. 5. Isa. 3. 2. c. 9. 15. c. 44. 7. c. 24. 23. c. 51. 19. Jer. 18. 15. Dan. 7. 9. 13. 22. John 1. 2 3. 1 Kings 12. 6. Jer. 6. 16. Acts 22. 16. 1 Joh. 2. 7. Rev. 3 14. Secondly the work of a Creation is the very greatest of all Gods works and more universall generall extensive than the work of Redemption extending to all the Glorious angels Sun Moon Starres Heavens Aire Earth Sea with all the severall creatures in them whatsoever and to all mankind Gen. 1. and 2. Psalm 83. Psalm 104. Psalm 148. 4. 5 6. Isa. 40. 26. c. 42. 5 c. 45. 12 18. John 1. 3. Ephes. 3. 9. Col. 1. 14. Rev. 4. 11. c. 10. 6. yea to Jesus Christ himself stiled the beginning of the Creation of God Rev. 3. 14. Therefore more excellent greater glorious than the work of Redemption b peculiar onely to Gods elect the smallest part of men not universall to all Mankind much lesse to Angels and all other Creatures Now it is a received Maxime in Divinity Morality Policy Reason Bonum quo communius eo melius See Psalm 145. 9 10 14 15 16. whence Philo the Jew de Opificio Mundi stiles the Sabbath in memory of it Festum non unius populi Regionisve sed in universum omnium quae sola digna est ut dieatur Popularis Festivitas Thirdly God himself created all things at fiâ—st very good perfect pure excellent and man himself after his own image in Holinesse true Righteousnesse Integrity â—erfection without Sinne Corruption Imperfection or obliquity Gen. 1. 18. 25. to the end c. 5. 1. c. 9. 6. Eccles. 7. 27. 1 Cor. 11. 7. Ephef. 4. 24. Col. 3. 10. Man being depraved corrupted by Adams sin and fall which brought a c curse upon Mankind and all other creatures too Christs Redemption though it hath freed all his Elected called justified sanctified ones from Hell death and damnation the condemning ruling power of sin and curse of the Law yâ—t it hath not redeemed them much lesse the generality of mankind and other Creatures from the pollution corruption of Sinne lâ—st and â—ll those temporall miseries curses plagues Judgements imperfections in this life which sinne hath brought upon them nor yet restored them to such a glorious happy perfect condition here as that wherin man was first created the best of Saints on earth having many remainders of sinne corruptions defects and infirmities in them till they come to heaven 1 Kings 8. 46. Eccles. 7. 20. Rom. 7. 7. to the end James 3. 2. 1 John 1. 8 10. c. 2. 1. 2. Therefore in this respect the work of Creation excells that of Redemption in relation to all the creatures corrupted vitiated by mans fall and of the redeemed themselves whiles they continue on earth and have cause to celebrate Sabbaths and Lords-Dayes to sanctifie and make them holier 4. Some of the creatures as the Angels Christ himself as man and a creature if not the Sun Moon Stars heavens the works of Gods creation are more excellent and gloious than man or any Saints on earth the â—ubject of Christs Redemption Psalm 8. Heb. 1. Rev. 3. 14. 2 Thess. 1. 7. Psalm 103. 20. Mat. 25. 31. Heb. 2. 7 9. c. 12. 22. Rev. 14. 10. Luke 20. 36. compared together Therefore the work of Creation is more exellent than that of Redemption Fifthly without the work of Creation there could be no work of redemption the chief end whereof is to restore us to that felicity a Happinesse in the enjoyment of God and his creatures which man in his innocency had hâ— pâ—rsevered in that estate should have enjoyed by the work of creation Therefore the work of Creation is at least as excellent as glorious as the work of redemption if not more eminent than it Sixthly the excellency and glory of the work of redemption consists principally in this that it was wrought by Jesus Christ himself the onely beloved Sonne of God Luke 1. 6. 8. 99. Rev. 3. 24. Gal. 3. 17 Col. 1. 14. Heb. 9. 12 1 Pet. 1. 18 19. Rev. 5. 9. But this cannot advance it above the work of creation God created all things by Jesus Christ as well as redeemed his elect Ephes. 3. 9. Col. 1. 16. and that onely as he was God and the word Heb. 1. 2. John 1. 1 2 3. Gen. 1. 1 3 26. not as God and man Seventhly all accord that it is a work of b greater excellency omniâ—otâ—nâ—y power love to create and make all things out of nothing then to repair restore rectifie things already created when depravâ—d defiled capâ—ivated or impaired See Basil and Ambâ—ose in their Hexamerons most Commentators on Gen. 1. and Isa. 45. 5. to 20. c. 40. 48. Re. 4. 11. Acts 17. 24. Heb. 3. 4. Therefore I may safer concludâ— that the work of Creation is c greater and more excellent than the work of Redemption from these Texts and Reasons then my Antagonists averre the work of Redemption to transcend the work of Creation in excellency and greatnesse without Scriptures or solid reasons grounded on it 5. Admit the whole work of Redemption wrought by Christ to be better greater excellenter than the work of Creation Yet none can prove or demonstrate that Chrstsi Resurrection one part onely of his work of redemption on the first day of the week is greater than the whole work of Creation Therefore they cannot conclude from it alone that this his bare Resurrection should alter the beginning end limits nature of times and dayes settled by God at the very Creation as they here argue 6. Admit Christs Resurrection and work of Redemption to be greater
better excellenter than Gods work of Creation which I deny will it thence follow Ergo it altered the work of Creation the cause of Sunne Moon Starres Dayes weeks years the beginning and end of the Sabbath or first day of the week and by consequence of all other dayes and times setled by God himself at the Creation by an unalterable Law Gen. 1. 5. 8. to 20. 23. 21. c. 2. 2 3. Exod. 20. 8. to 12. Psalm 148. 5. 6. Eccl. 3. 14. Jer. 31. 35 36. c. 33. 20 21. 2 Pe. 3. 14. Certainly all these Texts wiâ—â— others forecited resolve and experience proves the contrary the dayes weeks months morning Evening course of Sunne Moon and Starres being still the same they were from the Creation till this present and every thing or action that is greater better than another not abrogating or altering their course or limits which God or men had formerly settled 7. The ends of Christs Resurrection and Redemption were meerly spirituall to redeem justifie raise up from sinne from the dead and avance to heaven at last all those whom Christ redeemed John 5. 29. c. 11. 25. Rom. 1. 4. Rom. 5. 5. to 16. 1 Cor. 15. throughout Phil. 3. 10. 11. 1 Pet. 1. 1. 3 c. 21. Rev. 20. 5. 6. Rom. 4. 24 25. c. 8. 11. 2 Cor. 4. 14. Ephes. 2. 6. Not to alter the beginning or ending of dayes times seasons not one of all these Texts nor any other speaking of Christs Resurrection and the ends or benefits thereof assâ—rtinâ— importing much lesse resolving any thing Therefore it did not could not alter the beginning or limits of the fiâ—st day â—iâ—her as a naturall or as his Resurrection day as these Writers averre 8. Christs Paâ—sion a bloodshed was the principall part of his Redemption yea his Nativity Ascention to omit his whole life on earth and perpetuall mediation in heaven for us were parts thereof the one the first part the other the last of all Bâ—t it is clear that our Saviours Passion and bloodshed in the Evening though it were the chiefâ—st part of his Redemption made no alteration in the bâ—ginning or end of dayes so as to change the beginning of Goodfriday fâ—om Evening before to three of the clock in the afternoon that his Nativity about Midnight or his Ascention about Noon or eleven of the clock in the morning as is most probable did not translite the beginning of those dayes or any other to Midnight Noon or Morning though they were the first and last parts of of his work of Redemption why then should his Resurrection onely in the Morning a lesse principall part of his work than his Passion or perchance than his Nativity or Ascention the one of which preceded the other followed his Resurrection make such a change in dayes beginnings when neither of these three other did so If it be because it was a part of Christs Redemption So were the other three and yet they produced no such mutation and why a part of Christs Redemption should cause such an alteration onely because it is a part or why one inferior part of it alone should do it and not the chiefest why the intermediate not the first or last part of it transcends my apprehension If it be because God ordained it should effect such a transmutation then shew me expresse Scripture for it as none can do or else reject it for a groundlesse fancy as in truth it is But more of this in the Answer to the next Objection The second Objection is this Christs Resurrection on the first day of the week in the morning did actually change the beginning of the day from Evening to morning and constitute the Lords-day to begin at morning Therfore it ought to begin at morning If we câ—st this into a sormall Argument it will be more perspicuous Christs Resurrection the cause of the Lords-day was not till the morning Ergo the Lords-day must not begin till morning because the effect must needs be with or subsequent to the cause and cannot precede it whereas the effect should over-reach â—â—e cause in point of time if the Lords-day should begin at Evening Christs Resurrection beginning not till the morning This reason and argument is the main foundation whereon the Opposites build their errour wherefore I shall be more copious in discovering the sandinesse falshood and fallaciousnesse of it First therefore I answer that this whole Argument is but a chain of severall grosse falshoods and mistakes contrary to the Scriptures I wonder therefore why so many grave judicious men should be ensnared by it 1. The first of them the ground work of all the rest and of this errour concerning the Lords-day beginning at morning is this That Christs Resurrection did alter the beginning of that first day of the week whereon be arose from Evening to Morning which I have manifested to be an apparent Errour contrary to the Scriptures which testifie that that day began at Evening and that Christs Resurrection did nothing alter it as the third and fifth preceding Conclusions prove at large Wherefore I shall here demand of the Objectors how it appears that Christs Resurrection made such a change as they pretend If by Scripture shew one Text that necessarily proves it this I am sure they cannot do If not by Scripture then it is a meere groundlesse conceit of their own forging Yea but though they want Scripture yet they have this sound reason to prove it Christ rose again upon the first morning therefore he translated the beginning of it from Evenig to morning To which I reply that this main Capitall reason is but a grosse in consequent and a circular Argumentation For if the Argument be denyed as justly it may be then they prove it by that very medium which was next before denied and they ought to make good that Christs Resurrection did chanâ—e the day from morning to Evening there being no other medium but this to confirm it therefore if he rose again upon it in the morning he made such a change as they pretend So that this their reason is but Idem per Idem a Petitio principii a Circular dispute a grosse Non sequitur and so to be rejected as false and idle But yet a little more to lay open the falshhood of this Proposition That Chists Resurrection made such an alteration of that first dayes beginning which hath neither Scripture nor Reason to back it I would first demand this Question of them Why Christs Resurrection should produce such a Change when as his Nativity Passion and Ascention parts of his Redemption too as beneficiall to Christians as his Resurrection had no such effect 2. How they come to know that such a Change was de Facto made when no Scripture revâ—als or intimates it 3. How was it possible for Christs Resurrection to call back and adnul that beginning of the day which was irrevocably past and gone before it happened since by
on the first day in point of constituting either of them for a Sabbath or Holy day as all acknowledge But Gods resting on the seventh day was onely the originall impulsive not the immediate efficient constitutive cause of the seventh day Sabbath for it was not a Sabbath as soon as God began to rest or only because he rested on it but because he blessed and consecrated it for a Sabbath and commanded Adam and his posterity to sanctifie it for a Sabbath as is clear by Gen 2. 2 3. Exod. 20. 7. to 12. for he sanctified it for a Sabbath because he had rested on it so that his rest was onely the occasion why this dâ—y was consecrated for a Sabbath rather than any of the other six but that which made it a Sabbath was Gods peculiar blessing consecration and institution of it for a Sabbath So Gods passing over the Isâ—aelites and slaving the Egyptians was the occasion why the 14. day of the first Moneth was solemnized â—or a Passâ—ovâ—r-day but that which constituted it to be such a day was not his passing over the Israelites but his expresse command to them to observe it throughout all their generations Exâ—d. 12 4. to 40. The Jews deliverance from Haman and thâ—iâ— other Enemies was the cause or reason why they * annually observed the fourteenth and fifteenth dayes of the Moneth Adar as solemn Festivals and the deliverance from the a Gunpowder-Treason the occasion why we observe the fifth of November as an annuall Festivall which Feast we generally begin at Evening since we then usually begin to ring our bells in memory of our deliverance the morning following but the immâ—diate efficient constituting cause of these dayes for Holy-dayes was neither the Jews deliverance nor ours but the Law and ordinance of the Jews Esth. 9. 20 to 29. and the Staâ—ute of 3 Jacâ—biâ—c 1. which ordained those dayes to be solemnized and kept holy So it is in all other dayes solemnities whatsoever not the occasion of their celebration but the authority and command to sanctifie them is that which b constitutes them Holy-dayes therefore by the self same reason Christs bare Resurrection was onely the occasion why the Lords-day was afterwards sanctified and observed but that which constituted and made it a Lords-day or Christian Sabbath was some Precept or Ordinance of Christ or his Apostles or of the Primitive Church without which it had not been actually a Lords-day or Sabbath in point of sanctification though Christ did rise upon it 2. If Christs bare Resurrection without more Ceremony did actually consecrate that very first day on which he arose and all others for a Sabbath or Lords-day what need then those many large Discourses of Divines concernning the time when the persons by whom or the Authority by which the Sabbath was translated from the seventh day to the first or this instituted for a Lords-day Certainly if the very Resurrection of Christ did actually perform all this that very morning on which he arose all these disputes were at an end But few or none have been so absurd as to make Christs bare Resurrection the immediate constituting cause of the first day for a Sabbath or Lords-day much lesse of that very day upon which Christ arose which all the a Evangelists stile the First day of the week Even as it was Christs Resurrection day which shews that it was not then actually constituted for a Sabbath or Lords-day but continued an ordinary week-day as before Therefore it is not probable that it made â—uch a change or consecration of that very day 3. None of the Evangelists in their Histories of Christs Resurrection make mention either in direct terms or by way of necessary inference that our Saviours bare Resurrection consecrated that very first day whereon he arose or any succeeding it for a Sabbath or Lords-day much lesse that it changed the beginning thereof from morn-ning to Evening Therefore certainly no such alteration as is suâ—mised was actually effected by it 4. Had Christs Resurrection actually constituted that day on which he arose and all other fiâ—st dayes ensuing for a Sabbath or Lords day without further Ceremony even on that day when he arose then that day had been consecrated for a Sabbath or Lords-day and the seventh day Sabbath hadbeen translated to it before any man did or could take notice oâ— this alteration before any knew this day was instituted for a Sabbath or â—ords-day yea before it was known or believed that Christ was risen again to or by his Disciples For the b Scripture is expresse that he appeared not unto them till towards the Evening of that day at which time Thomas was absent and some of them doubted whether he were risen again or whether it was he or no so that it is certain they observed not that first day as a Sabbath or Lords-day in memory of his Resurrection But it is altogether improbable that Christ would consecrate that day for a Sabbath or Lords-day before his Disciples or any other knew of it or that he would make an alteration of the Sabbath which so much concerned the Apostles and Church in private without their presence or pâ—ivity oâ— that he would consecâ—ate that day for a Sabbath or Lords-day in memory of his Resurrection before it was certainly known that he was risen or before he had shewed himself to his Disciples after he was risen or before any did know it to be a Lords-day or Sabbath it being made so only for man Mar. 2. 27. not for Christ himself or Angels who were onely present with him when he arose For Christ being onely wise did all things in b the fittest season and in a publick manner in the presence of his disciples who were to be witnesses of all his actions speeches Acts 1. 2 3 c. 2. 32. c. 10. 40 41 42 43. 1 Johnâ— 1 3. 2 Pet. 1. 16 17 18. Luke 1. 2. Therefore he would not he did not institute that very day whereon he arose for a Sabbath or Lords-day at the time when he arose which the Evangelists certainly would have mentioned being a matter of such moment to the Church and Christians had it been done in truth as pretended onely but not proved neither in truth can be If therefore the Objectors affirm that Christs Resurrection was the cause of the Lords-day as a Lords-day that is an immediate constituting cause of it and that at the very moment when he arose then it is a palpable untruth as the premises manifest If they mean by cause onely the impulsive cause or originall occasion of its future consecration or institution for a Sabbath or Lords-day then their Argument is but this Christs Resurrection the occasion of Christians solemnizing the Lords-day as a Lords-day or Sabbath was in the morning Ergo the Lords-day must being at morning which is but a meere Non sequitur because the occasions of sanctifying any dayes for Sabbaths or Holy-dayes do not
the 〈…〉 it doth and is ever coâ—tanâ—ous with it theâ—â—fâ—â—â— tâ—â— Lâ—â—ds day ought to bâ—gin in the Morning because â—â— Râ—suâ—â—â—ction the cause of it bâ—gan then The fiâ—st â—f thâ—â— Aâ—â—uments is a Non sequitur because thouâ—â— the efâ—â—â—t cannot precede the cause in naturall things as the Son cannot be before the Father was yet it followes not that the effect should ever be as ancient as or contemporany with the cause or the Son be as old as the Fathâ—r or born together with him So it follows not that because the Lords day as a Lords day could not begin to be observed hallowed as such a day before that Morning whereon Christ arose Ergo it must begin at Morning and could not be instituted to begin the Evening of the next or any other first day following it Again the Antecâ—dâ—nt of the latter Argument is falf for although the originall cause or occasion doth usually precede the effect in point of time as Christs Resurrection did the institution of the Lords day yet it follows not that the Lords day must begin at that very point of time when Christ arose So that there is a fallacy in this Argument in arguing from the effect to the Cause that it cannot precede it when as the Proposition ought to be that it is ever contemporary and must begin at the same time with it Thirdly There is a Transitio à genere ad Genus and that in two particulars 1. In making Christs Resurrection the cause of the Lords-day as it is a naiurall day when as it was no cause of it as a day but onely the reason why it was instituted for a Lords-day So that the Argument should be thus propounded Christs Resurrection was the cause why the first day was instituted for a Lords-day but that began at Morning Ergo the Lords-day must then begin because the day must then begin when the occasion of its institution for a Lords-day began which I have proved to be false 2. In applying that to the beginning of the day which is applycable onely to the beginning of its institution for a Lords-day in this maxime that the effect cannot precede the cause that is the Lords-day must not be instituted in memory of Christs Resurrection before Christ was actually risen which yet may be false since the Feast of the Passeover was instituted at Evening and solemnized in part before God actually passed over the Israelites and slew the Egyptians at Midnight following which was the cause of its institution Exod. 12. 3. to 40. and so might the Lords-day too be instituted in this manner before Christs Resurrection Therefore after his Resurrection past it could not be instituted to begin the Evening of that first day of the week on which he arose Which is a meere inconsequent For what though Christ did not rise till the Morning yet that day on which he arose began at Evening and therefore his Resurrection relating to the whole day as his Resurrection day this day of the week if not before yet after his Resurrection past might be well solemnized for a Lords-day even from Evening to Evening without any violation of the true meaning of this Maxime Since we solemnize not the day as the precise minute or houre but as the weekly day of his Resurrection every part whereof may be part of his Resurrection day though not part of that very hour of the day whereon he arofe If then these Fallacies be abandoned the whole summe and Force of the Objection is but this in honest Termes Christs Resurrection in the morning was the originall occasion why the first day of the week whereon he arose was afterwards instituted for the Lords-day and so solemnized Ergo the first day as the Lords-day must begin and end at morning at that moment when Christ arose not at Evening neither could it be instituted to begin at Even Which as all the premises manifest is a grosse inconsequent All that is or can be replied to help out this maimed reason is this That the first day whereon Christ arose had two beginnings One as a Lords day and that was at morning when he arose the other as a meer naturall day viz. at Evening and that Christs Resurrection gave it a new beginning as a Lords-day not as a naturall day To this I answer 1. That this distinction is but a meer Forgery warranted by no Scripture reason or convincing Authority and therefore it ought first to be proved ere received 2. It is but a begging of the Question disputed not an Answer of the Reasons objected 3. It is a meere falshood For 1. That very day whereon Christ arose was not consecrated at his Resurrection for a Lords-day as I have proved therefore it could not begin at morning as a Lords-day seeing it was no Lords-day 2. The Lords-day is nothing else but the first day of the week and the first day of the week is the Lords-day they being terntini convertibiles therefore they have but one and the self-same beginning and end 3. That first day on which Christ arose even as his Resurrection day began at Evening as I have proved therefore it began then as it was the Lords day it being the Lords-day onely as it is his Resurrection day 4. Had that first day as a day â—â—â—un at morning then it must needs be either an half-holy-day â—ut of 12 houres long the Evening and night preceding it being no part of it or else it must be a Lords-day patched up of a piece of the first day and a part of the second day to wit of the day light of the first and the night of second and not that intire first day whereon Christ arose Either of which is an absurdity to averre therefore as a Lords-day it must begin at Evening to avoid these absurdities By all which it is now most clearly evident that this Grand Objection is both false absurâ— and fallacious proving nothing at all against me and no ground to rely upon The third main Argument to prove that the Lords-day begins at morning not at Evening is that of John 20. 19. The same day at Evening being the first day of the Week when the doores were shut where the Disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews came Jesus and stood in the middest c. whence it may be objected That the same first day whereon Christ rose again ended not at Evening as the words The same day at Evening being the first day of the week import that Evening being part of the first day not of the second therefore it began not at Evening in Saint Johns accompt and our Saviours Resurrection in it translated its beginning from Evening to Morning To this I answer first that this Text makes nothing at all against me For the Scripture makes mention of two Evenings one of the artificiall day which we commonly call day beginning when the sund clines somewhatâ—efore sunset
our Sunday nights though of many on our Saturday night as I have proved besides this alone if on it As therefore one Swallow makes no Summer so this one singular example makes no President for the usuall beginning and concluding of the Lords-day at Morning or Midnight Thirdly It is abare example but of one Apostle without any precept to back it therefore it can be no conclusive proof that the Lords-day ought to begin at morning or midnight and heâ— to â—â—d Fourthly The beginning or ending of a Sâ—â—mâ—n or one publick meeting â—ay the coâ—stâ—â— practisâ— of all Churches and places from the beginning and ending their publick Lords day exerâ—iâ—â—â— which is much more is no concluding Argument of it self 〈◊〉 to pâ—â—vâ— the true beginning and end of the Sabbath 〈◊〉 Lords-day For the Jews themselves 〈◊〉 Christ himâ—â—â—â—â—nd the Apostles began their publick Sâ—â—mâ—ns and 〈◊〉 on the Sabbath day about eight or nine of the clock in the morning and concluded them â—â—out four or five in the afternoon as we and all other Churches â—ow use to begin and end our publick Lords-dâ—â—es solemnities can or will any man therâ—foâ—e hence 〈…〉 Eâ—go the seventh days Sabbath and our Lords-day begin not till nine in the morning and conclude at five in the Evening because the publick Assâ—mâ—lâ—s on 〈◊〉 do then usually begin and determine Nâ—â— vâ—â—ily â—or this were to make the Seventh day Sabbath and Lords-day consisting each of them of a naturall day of 24 houres length not above eight or nine hours long and scarce so much as half holy dayes and to abandon all private Sabbath and lords-Lords-dayes duties in allowing no time at all for them If then the customary constant cause of our beginning and concluding publick Sermons with other solemn exercises and Assemblies on the Sabbath or Lords-day are no sufficient Argument that the Sabbath or Lords-day commence or determine when these publick Sermons Exercises and Assemblies do much lesse can this extraordinary singular Sermon of Saint Paul continued untill Midnight or the prorogation of this Assembly at Troas till the morning of themselves alone inferre this Conclusion that the Lords-day begins or ends at Midnight or morning Fifthly it appears not by the Text that Saint Paul preached untill Midnight and continued this Assembly till day breaking for this very reason because the Lords-day ended not till then There is no such thing as this insinuated by Saint Luke but the reason of it is plainly expressed to be Pauls departure from thence the ensuing morning never to see their faces more and Saint Lukes drift in recording this Story is not to signifie when the Lords-day properly begins and determines but onely as an Historian truly to relate the Apostles Actions and to record Pauls industry in preaching upon all occasions with his love to the disciples at Troas and their respects to him and his miraculous restoring Eutychus to life who fell down dead from the third Lâ—ft whiles he was preaching Therefore it can be no infallible Argument to prove that the Lords-day begins or ends at Morning much lesse at Midnight since they brake brend and did eat and communicate together till the morning Sixthly I would demand of the Objectors when this Assembâ—y at Troas began If at Morning or Midnight before that is improbable since we cannot imagine that Paul made a Sermon at that time of 18 or 20 hours long half of which would have tyred both himself and his Auditors If not before our Sunday at Evening as they pretend then it is a stronger Argument to prove that the Lordsday begins not till Sunday evening because St. Paul and the Disciples at Troas met not together to solemnize it till then then that it ends and so by consequence begins at morning or midnight because this Assembly dissolved not till morning and Paul continued his preaching untill midnight Seventhly If this example conclude any thing positively for the Objectors it is onely this That they should continue their ordinary Lordsday Evening Sermons untill Midnight and their Assemblies till day breaking as St. Paul and the Disciples did here This inference following directly from this example without any straining far better then theirs from it doth that the Lordsday begins and ends at Midnight or Morning But this inference I suppose they will all disclaim in words as they do in practice as being a Nonsequitur because this example was but singular and extraordinary upon a speciall occasion Therefore by the self same reason they must disclaim their present Objections too or else subscribe to this my inference which they cannot avoid unlesse they quite renounce their own Lastly its clear St. Paul used to preach both in season and out of season exhorting Timothy and other Ministers to do the like 2 Tim. 4. 2. that is as most interpret it to preach both upon Lordsdayes and all other daies and nights too as he saw occasion Why then might not his Sermon at Troas begin upon the Lordsday at Evening about our Evening Sermon time and yet continue till the Lordsday was past Certainly there is no impossibility nor improbability but it might so Since therefore this text of St. Luke informs us onely that this Meeting and Sermon began upon the First day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread that the Sermon lasted till midnight and the Assembly till day break following without any expression that the Firstday was then continuing or ended admitting this Assembly and Sermon to be on our Sunday night which I absolutly deny yet it follows not that the First day ended not in St. Lukes accompt and theirs at Troas before the Sermon or Assembly concluded So that this example proves nothing at all for the Opponents Thesis nor any thing against mine for which it is a concluding evidence if rightly understood as I have formerly manifested The 5. Objection for the Lordsdayes beginning at morning and against its Evening commencement is this That the beginning of it at Evening would open a wide gap to all licentiousnes Pastimes Disorders on Lordsday after-noons and likewise to secular imployments unsuitable to the day which the beginning of it at morning would prevent To this I answer First that this Objection is a meer Cavill For we see by wofull experience that the Doctrine of the Lordsdays beginning in the Morning which is and hath been generally received of late years in most places of the Kingdome hath no wayes prevented remedied any of the Abuses objected on Lordsday Evenings which dissolute persons who make no consciâ—nce of sanctifying all the day will alike prophane and all godly people equally sanctifie let the day begin and end at Evening at Sunset or Starshining And there are none who out of Conscience sanctifie and forebear to prophane them now but would equally sanctifie those Evenings too did they believe the day to conclude at Evening since they would be sure to sanctifie all the day This objected
29. Luke 24. 1. John 20. 1. 19. the very name that was given it at the Creation Gen. 1. 5. which was still retained after our Saviours Resurrection and Ascension Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. having no other title at all imposed on it but this in Scripture that of Revel. 1. 10. to wit the title of Lords-day being applyed by some to the seventh day Sabbath by others â—o d Easter day onely yet by * most to the Lords-day for ought that certainly appears Which name implies that it continued the same after Christs Resurrection as before the First day of the Week for number order beginning the week as afore and so by consequence commencing at Evening as before it being the same in name in order in nature though not in use and observation amongst Christians as it was at the Creation Therefore the same in its inception too and so not altered from Evening to morning Seventhly that very first day on which Christ arose in Scripture and divine account began and ended at Evening not at morning or midnight as I have undeniably proved at large in the third Conclusion Christs Resurrection therefore did no wayes alter or translate the beginning of it from morning to Evening as some fâ—lsely affirm but never prove And if it made no such muâ—ation of the beginning and end of that same First day on which he arose much lesse then of any other that succeeded it or of the other week dayes on which he did not rise again Christs Resurrection did not actually translate the beginning of that first day on which he arosegain from Evening to Morning For had that day begun at Morning just at or from the time which he arose 〈◊〉 some pretend then he had not risen again upon the third but on the second day from his Passion which directly oppugnes the e Scripture and the Article of our Creed that he rose again the third day from the dead not the second To make this reason evident The Morning of this first day began not till day breaking or day-light and if this first day began then too Christ certainly did not could not rise upon it but before it and so on the second day For the women came to the Sepulchre when it was yet dark before day-light appeared or the f day began in this accompt and yet Christ was then risen John 20. 1 2. therefore before the day began in this computation And if they will begin it from the time that Christ arose since Christs resurrection was the cause as they sayd of this its new inception or the Terminus à qâ—o from whence it began they still stiâ—k fast in the same mirâ— For if Christs Resurrection changed the commencement of this day he must be actually risen ere this change could be made since the cause must necessarily precede the effect which must begin from and after it not before or with it and if the moment of Christs Resurrection was the Terminus whence this day began as they affirm his Resurrection must needs precede the day that point of time from whence the day begins being exclusive as precedent to it not inclusive as any part or parcell of it and so Christ must necessarily rise before this first day to wit upon the Sabbath or second day not upon or g after it began and so not upon the third or first day of the week as the Scripture affirms and by consequence not upon that Lords-day which they solemnize from morning to morning in memory of his Resurrection on it which by their own reasoning â—nd computation was before it not upon it All which considered I may undoubtedly conclude that Christs Resurrection did no wayâ—s alter the beginning or end of dayes no not of that first day on which he arose from morning to Evening So that this last Conclusion is infaâ—libâ— These five Conclusions being thus premised and I hope undeniably proved I shall now deduce five unanswerable Arguments from them to prove that the Lords-day doth and ought of right to begin and end at Evening not at morning or midnight 1. If all dayes in Scripture and divine account do alwayes begin and end at Evening not at morning or midnight then the Lords-day being the first day of the week and included in the universality of dayes must do so too But all dayes in Scripture and divine computation do alwayes begin and end at Evening not morning or midnight as the first Conclusion maniâ—ests Therefore the Lords-day doth so too 2. If the seventh day Sabbath in Scripture account did alway commence and determine at Evening and the Jews did ever solemnise it from Evening to Evening then the Lords-day which succeeds it and begins when the Sabbath ends must then begin and conclude seeing all the week-dayes are of the self-same length and must have the same inception and Conclusion since this Sabbath was thus solemnized long after our Saviours Resurrection by the Apostles Jews and Christians too Matth. 24. 20. Acts 13 14 27. 42. c. 14. 1. c. 15. 20 21 c. 17. 1 2 10. c. 18. 4. But the seventh day Sabbath in Scripture calculation did alwayes commence and determine at Evening and the h Jews did ever solemnize it from Evening to Evening as the second Conclusion testifies Therefore the Lords day must then begin and conclude 3. If that very first day of the week whereon our Saviour rose again began and ended at Evening in divine accompt even as it was his Resurrection day then the Lords day kept in memory of his Resurrection on that day being the self same day of the week and having the self same limits as that day had must then begin and end likewise But that very first day of the week whereon our Saviour rose again began and ended at Evening in divine compute even as it was his Resurrection day Therefore the Lords day in respect of its weekly observation and solemnization in memory of our Savlours Resurrection on it must commence â—nd detemine at Evening too The sâ—quel is uâ—deniable the minor is fully proved in the third Conclusion so the Argument is unanswerable 4. This beginning and determination of dayes at Evening be naturall and immutable therefore the Lords day must have can have no other inception or conclusion but at Evening 5. I Christs Resurrection in the morning did no ways alter the beginning or end of dayes nor yet translate the beginning of that day whereon he arose from Evening to morning then we ought to make no such alteration for that were to be wiser than Christ yea to usurp Gods speciall Prerogative to alter times Dan. 2. 20 21. c. 7. 25. so must keep the Lords-day from Evening to Evening not from morning to morning or from midnight to midnight But Christs Resurrection in the morning did no wayes alter the beginning and end of dayes nor yet translate the
in times of Popery all of them resolving the fourth Commandement to be Morall still in force obliging all Christians under the Gospel to the weekly observation and sanctification of the intire Lords-day That TOTVS ILLE DIES TVTALITER DIVINO CVLTVI APPLICANDVS EST NIHIL ALIUD AGENDUM NISI DEO VACANDUM and that because DIES INTEGER SABBATUM TOTUM cultui divino SACRATUR not two or three hours of it onely devoted to the publick exercise of Gods worship in the Church as some new * Doctors assent who allot the rest to Sports Pastimes and wordly labours or affairs being more licâ—ntious and prophane than Papists in this point who are generally as strict as the greatest Puritane writers in their Doctrines for their intire sanctification of the Lords day and against the use of all ordinary labours sports pastimes dancing enterludes and carnall pleasures on it or any part thereof even from Evening to Evening when they begin and end it Now if the Lords-day it self be thus to be sanctified and solemnized by Christiaans even by the equity and Morality of the fourth Commaudement it self literally commencing onely the sanctification of the seuenth day Sabbath which began and ended alwayes at Evening Then it must by the very equity and morality of the sourth Commandement be sanctified and solemnized by Christians from Evening to Evening as the seventh dae Sabbath was both by Jews and Christians heretofore by vertue of this Precept which Reason our Opposites can no wayes evade 6. Our opposites themselves apply all Texts and precepts in the Old Testament for the sanctification of the seuenth day Sabbath unto the Lords-day Sabbath as being all one with it in substance Why then should they or any other reject that Text of Levit. 23. 32. From Even to Even ye shall celebrate your Sabbath refuse the usuall Scripture computation of the beginning and ending all dayes all Festivalls at Evening and affix a new incepâ—ion or â—nd to the Lord-day and all other dayes too at Morning or midnight which the sacred Writ doth no wayes warrant As therefore they apply most other things concerning the seventh day Sabbath to the Lords day so must they now the time and Texts for its beginning too unlesse they can give good Scripture reasons for it which no man can do 7. The beginning of the Lords-day and Sabbath at Evening as soon as the Sun sets or the Evening-star begins to shine as it is most certain whereas the beginning of it from the hour or moment of Christs Resurrection which is not certainly known nor expressed by the Evangelists is arbitrary and uncertain and so not to be embraced so is it mâ—st consonant to that rest or Sabbath in heaven of which these Sabbaths are a reall type Heb. 4. to 11. For our heavenly Sabbath ever begins in the very Evening and Sunset of our dayes when death puts a period to them Rev 14. 13. Job 3. 17 18. or at least at the Evening and period of this world when dayes shal be no longer Rev. 10. 6 7. Therefore by the analogy of the type to the substance those Sabbaths should begin at Evening too when the day-light ends the rather because the Evening usually puts an end to our Labours and begins our ordinary rest as death the Evening of our dayes concludes our earthly toyls and travels and commenceth our heavenly rest Rev. 14. 13. 8. This beginning of the Sabbath and Lords day at Evening doth best prepare men for the sanctification and duties of it and most of all prevent the profanation of it For first it makes men to put a timely period to their weekly labours on Saturday Evening and then to begin the sanctification of it with private meditations prayer singing of Psalms reading the Scriptures catcchifing of their children and families examination of their own hearts and wayes and such like holy duties where as the Doctrines of its beginning at midnight or morning light as wofull evperience witnesseth makes many spend a great part of the Satturday Evening and night when the Sabbath and Lords-day begin in true calculation especially in Cities and market Towns in buying selling drinking gaming whoâ—ing and such like worldly or carnall imployments which this Doctrine of its commencement at Evening would easily redresse 2. It causeth men to go to bed and take their rest In due season to rise the more early in the morning to come to the publick duties of Gods Worship with greater chearfulnesse and better Preparation and so to receive more profit by them to resort more timely to the Church to dispatch their own private devotions before they go to the publick Assemblies and to be every way more holy and active wheras the other Midnight or morning inception of it makes Trades men others to set up Saturday nights as we erroneously both call and repute them very late about secular or viâ—ious sinfull imployments there being more sinnes for the most part and disordrs committed that Evening and night then on any or all the other six to lie long in bed the Lords day morning to come very late to Church or not at all to repair to publick duties without any or at least with small preparation bringing along with them heads and hearts full of worldly cares of sinfull thoughts of unlamented iniquities and as full of deadnesse and drowsinesse which makes them either to sleep out prayers and Sermons too or not to observe and mind them as they ought all which the Evening beginning thereof would readily best prevent Wherfore I may safely conclude that the Sabbath and Lords-day ought of right to bâ—gin at Evening since God being * only wise would certainly institute such an inchoation of them as might best prepare and enable men to their Sanctification and most anticipate their prophanation the cause why he prescribed the celebration of the Sabbath from Even to Even Levit. 23. 32. if I righly conjecture 9. It is confessed by all that in the Scripture and Israelites account all dayes began at Evening as I have proved at large before It is likewise most certain that Christ and his Apostles being Israelites did ever constantly observe the Scripture and their own nationall computation of the beginning and end of dayes it being that which Christ himself and all the Evangelists follow as I have evidenced at large in the third and fifth Conclusions neither is it any way probable that Christ and his Apostles or the Primitive-Church and Christians who were in all things guided by them did or would alter this their Nationall and divine beginning or concluding of dayes there being no ground or reason for it for ought that yet appeares If therefore the Lords-day were instituted and consecrated for a Sabbath by Christ himself as many or by his Apostles as most or by the Primitive Church Christians onely soon after the Apostles time as others affirm one of which three opinions is and
must be granted by them for undoubted truth then it is most certain that it must and did at its very first institution and observation begin and end at Evening not at morning or Midnight or bâ—cause Christ himself his Apostles and the Primitive Church did ever constantly observe this computation Therfore they would not did not institute any other beginning of it but this alone which reason in my poore weak apprehension is so solid that it admits of no evasion or reply Lastly That beginning and end of the Lords-day which the Church people of God in all ages from the first institution of the Lords-day to this present age have constantly observed and the Church and learned in those ages pofitively in expresse terms resolved to be most true and genuine is * questionless the proper infallible inception conclusion thereof This no man I presume either will or can deny But this beginning and ending of the Lords-day at Evening which I here plâ—ad for is that which the Church and people of God in all ages from the first in stitution of the Lords-day to this present age have constantly observed and the Church and learned in those age have positively in expresse termes resolved to be most true and genuine none â—ver oppngning iâ— till q Wolphius about some sixty years since the first I find or hear of that broached â—â— is new opinion of its beginning at morning because our Saviour did then rise again whose authority and sophisticall reason a meere Non sequitur as I shall prove anon hath sâ—duced and drawn over many unto his opinion both in their judgements and practise too Therefore it is questionlesse the proper infallible inception and Conclusion thereof The Minor which is onely liable to exception and may seem a Paradox to some who over-rashly stile this Position of the Lords-dayes beginning at Evening an upstart novelty never heard of in the Church of God till this present age in truth because thâ—mselves are ignorant in Antiquities and versed onely in late modern writers who fomeâ—t the contrary Error which I daâ—e affirm to be the late sigment of some modern Authâ—â—uâ—s not once so much as heard of in any former ages which I here challenge them to disprove I shall make good by unanswerable Reasons and Authorities as I conceit them even from the very Apostles time to this present Century and that in a Chronologicall method beginning with the Primitive times and so descending in order to this present age It is a Querie not yet resolved amongst Divines when and by whom the observation of the Lords-day for a Sabbath was instituted Some hold it was instituted by Christ himself between his Resurrection and Ascension Others that it was instituted by the Apostles after Christe the Ascention but at what certain time they do not accord A third sort affirm that it was ordained onely by the Primitive Church and Christians a little after the Apostles times or as the * Council of Paris and others affirm by the Council of Laodicea about 360 yeares after Christ but not by Christ or his Apostles For my own part as I shall not peremptorily resolve in this place which of these opinions is the truest it being not the scope of this present discourse â—eferring you to Mr. Sprint Dr. Bownd Mr. Widly Mr. Dod Mr. Cleaver Mr. Bernard Dr. Twisse Bishop Andrews the Practise of Piety Mr. Elten and others who have written of this subject on the fourth Commandement for satisfaction herein which requires a particular Tract. So I shall on the other side positively affirm that let the Lords-day be instituted either by Christ himself or the Apostles or the Primitive Church and Christians succeeding next after the Apostles about the end of the first Century after Christ at which tiâ—e it is clear by the testimonies of Ignatius Clemens Alexandrinus Justin Martyr Tertullian Irenaeus Plinie and others that the Lords day was usally solemnized by Christians yet the fiâ—st Institutors of it and the Primitive Christians who first observed it did ever begin and end it at Evening which I shall make good by these reasons there being no direct convincing authority â—â—â—ant either when the Lords-day was first instituted or â—t what time it was first appointed to begin 1. If Christ or the Apostles constituted it for a Sabbath it is more then probable if not certain that they ordained it to begin and end at Evening 1. Because they being all Jews and ever exactly following the Scripture and their own Nationall account of commencing the day at Evening as I haue formerly euidenced we cannot conceive that they should institute any new beginning of the Lorde-day at Midnight or Moruing contrary to the Scripture and their received Countâ—ey account but that they still observed this usuall and divine computation even in the Institution and Solemnization of this day 2. Because this beginning of this day being immutable and in * God the Fathers power onely to alter not in theirs it had been a presumption in them to change it without a speciall Commission from him the times being still in his power even at Christs Ascension not in Christs or his Apostles Acts 1. 7. But we never read of any such Commission granted them to alter this day from Evening to morning therefore it is presumption yea folly to believe or assirm it 3. Because the Lords-day as all sides accord was instituted in memory of Christs resurrection on the first day of the week Now the first day as I have manifested began and ended at Evening in divine Evangelicall account even as our Saviours Resurrection day neither did his Resurrection on it alter its beginning from Evening to morning Therefore the Lords-day being but the first day of the week and having the same beginning and setting as Christs very resurrection day had must begin and end at Even at its Primitive Institution and observation neither did or could the Institution of the first day of the week for a Sabbath in memory of Christs Resurrection change the beginning of the day since Christs resurrection it self in the morning the supposed cause of this alteration did it not 4. Because Christ or his Apostles would never consecrate a day in memory of the Resurrection on it within the compasse of which day Christ did not rise again for that were a great absurdiâ—y But had they consecrated a Lords-day to begin at Morning from day-breaking or from the very time that Christ arâ—se which is uncertain unknown and so this Lordsdayes beginning too they had instituted such a Lords-day within the compasse of which Christ did not rise he being risen before day-break whiles it was dark Matth. 28. 2. John 20. 1. and his Resurrection being but the point from which the day begins and so not within it on it but before it Therefore they instituted it to begin at Evening not at morning 5. It is certain that Christ himself his
bound out the beginning or end of the dayes for then these days must begin and conclude when the occasiâ—ns of their solemnization do But on the contrary tâ—e dayes do ever limit the occasions and Fâ—stivalls which must begin and end with the dayes to which they are confined This I shall make maniâ—est by examples and make good by unanswerable reasons For Examples we have all the Festivalls in Scripture which together with their occasions are restrained to the bounds of dayes not the limits of dayes to them To instance in particulars When God himself instituted the seventh day for a Sabbath because on it he had rested from all his works of Creation he confined the Sabbath and his rest to the seventh day not the seventh day to it blessing the seventh day and hallowing it not changing the beginning ending limits or order of it in the week but the use Gen. 2. 2 3. Exod. 20. 7. to 12. When God instituted the fourteenth day of the Moneth Abib for a Passeover day in memory of his passing over the Israelites and slâ—ying the Egyptians at Midnight he ordained that Feast to begin at Evening because the day to which this Festivall was confined did then begin not at Midnight whâ—n the occasion of its solâ—mnization happened Exod. 11. 4. c. 12. 3 6. 12. 10 40. Lev. 23 5. Numb. 9. 11. Deut. 16. 4. Josh. 5 10. So all the other Jewish Feasts * began and ended at Evening as the dayes on whiâ—h they were solemnized did the limits of the day being the bounds of the Festivalls not the Festivalls or their occasions the boundaries of the day a Festivall or Holy day being none other but a common day set apart and dedicated to Gods speciall honour and service Therefore being but a common day consecrated must needs begin and end â—s the day doth This is manifest by Exod. 12. 18. c. 13. 3 4. c. 14. 30. c. 35. 2. Levit. 23 3 to 43. Numb. 29. 1. Josh. 10. 12 13 14. Judges 5. 1. 1 Sam. 14. 23. Neh 8 9 10 11. Esth. 8. 12. c 9. 17 18 19 22. Psalm 81. 3. Psal. 118. 24. Isa. 22. 12. Matth. 28. 1. Mark 16. 1. Luke 23. 56. c. 21. 1. Wherâ— all Festivalls Fasts and memorable occasions are regulated by dayes not dayes by them the Festivalls and Feasts ever beginning and ending with the dayes to which they are appropriated not the dayes or Festivalls or Fasts with the occasions of their solemnization So in all annual or weekly Holy-dayes Feasts or Fasts instituted by men let the occasions of their institution happen what houre or time of the day they will at morning noon or afternoon yet we still begin the solemnization of them when the day begins For Example our Saviours Passion on the Crosse was not till about three of the clock in the afternoon John 9. 14 Mark 15. 34. Yet we solemnise our Goodfriday in memory of his Passion from the time the day begins So our Saviours Ascension as is probable by Acts 1. 9 10 11 12. 13. Luk. 24. 50 51 52. was about Noon or after yet we begin the Festivall of his Ascension with the dayes inception whereon it was So the descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles in cloven tongues ' was about nine of the clock in the monring Acts 2. 15. Yet we solemnize our Whitsonday in memory thereof from that dayes inception Our deliverance from the a Gunpowder Treason on the fifth of November was about nine or ten in the morning or after when the King Queen Prince Lords and Commons should have mâ—t together in the Lords-house though suspected and in part discovered ten dayes before and actually detected at Midnight yet we begin the solemnization of it from the foregoing Evening with ringing of Bells and the like The Birth of many of our Princes hath been about noon or after and their Coronations about that time yet we solemnize their Birth-dayes and Coronation-dayes from those dayes beginnings The Crown descended to our present Soveraign King Charls in the afternoon yet we solemnize not that day from Noon to Noon but from Evening to Evening because the day doth then commence and end and so the solemnity confined onely to that day that whole day not to part of it and part of the ensuing day If then all Festivalls whatsoever begin and end with the dayes beginning and end on which they are kept not at the very time of those dayes when the occasions of their solemnization happened as these and other infinite other examples testifie Why should not the Lords-day begin at Evening though Christs Resurrection the chief cause of its sanctification was not till morning because that day as a day doth then begin and determine Certainly whatever the Opposites conceipt it must needs do so and that for these unanswerable Reasons First because God himself at the very Creation hath set inviolable bounds for the beginning and end of daves and weeks appointing them to be as so many Royall Standards for the limiting or measuring out of all Festivall occasions happening on them and reducing them to a certainty as I have manifested at large in the fourth Conclusion wherefore no event or Festivalls happening on those dayes can alter the limits or beginning of them nor make them longer or shorter no more than the Corn to be measured by the peck or bushell or the cloth to be measured by the yard can alter limit or measure out the quantity of the peck bushell or length of the yard Secondly because every occasion that may cause a subsequent consecration of a day for a Sabbath or Holy day and so Christs Resurrection doth only dedicate that day yea all that day on which it falls not part of that day and part of the day ensuing on which it did not happen therefore consecrating onely that very day all that day and no other day but that it must needs begin and end when that day doth Now that very day on which our Saviour arose began and ended at Evening as I have proved his Resurrection therefore being the cause of consecrating all that day not part of it and part of the following day for the Lords-day this day as a Lords-day must necessarily begin and conclude at Evening Thirdly because no occasion of consecrating the day on which it falls extends in point of Consecration further than that very day which is set as the utmost limits of it But should the Lords-day begin and end at morning or Midnight not at Evening Christs Resurrection the cause of its consecration should extend beyond the bounds of the day to consecrate half or at least a quarter of the second day for a Lords-day on which he arose and besides it should not consecrate all that day on which it happened but that part onely which ensued not that which preceded it since that day began at Evening as I have proved Both which were absurd to affirm Therefore it must
needs begin at Evening The Lords day being onely the first day on which Christ arose and all the first day not part of it and part of the second day as it is and must be in the Opposites computation Fourthly that day on which Christ arose both as a week day and as a day was precedent to his Resurrection both in time nature and in the sanctification of it for a Lords-day For there must be fiâ—st a day of the week bâ—fore Christ could rise upon it or any consecrate it for a Sabbath or Lords-day therefore his Resurrection on it and the consecration of it for a Lords-day did not could not alter the limits or nature of that day but both of them must be regulated squared by its former bounds Fifthly Christs Resurrection and the Lords-day solemnization have no set limits of time of their own being no parts of time but onely measured out by time therefore they can give or proportion out no limits of time to the first day but the first day being a part of time must set limits of time to them And to make Festivalls or their occasions measurers out of the length bâ—ginning or end of days which the Objectors do is as grosse an absurdity as to measure the bushâ—ll by the corn or the yard by the cloth not the corn anâ— cloth by the bushell or yard or as to square the Rule by the tree measure the quart pot by the wine weigh pounds and weights by the wool flesh bread fruits not the tree wine wool c. by the rule quart pound weights Sixthly every memorable accident happening upon any day and so by consequence our Saviours Resurrection on the first day of the week cannot possibly alter the beginning of that day For if it falls out just at the dayes beginning it is a reason that the day and Festivall solemnized in memoriall of it should then begin because both the day and the occasion of its celebration commence together if it happen after the day begins as Christs Resurrection did it cannot nullifie or change its beginning because it was irrevocably past and gone before Et quod factum quod praeteritum est infectum reddi non potest no not by God himfelf much lesse by any accidentall occasion which cannot possibly operate to nullifie or alter that which was past and gone before it was in being Since therefore no occasion happening either with or after the beginning of any day can possibly alter the time of its inception the Festivity instituted in memory of that occasion on that day must inevitably begin and end when the day doth in its naturall and usuall course and so the Lords-day too which must begin and end at Evening because that day on which Christ rose again did so Seventhly Christs Resurrection and so any other memorable accident upon any dayes was but a meere transient act done past almost in a moment or minutes space wherefore it could properly of it self consecrate onely that space of that day which it took up and no more for the forepart of the day being past the following part of it to come and neither of them in being but that space thereof in which he rose again Christs Resurrection could not properly operate to consecrate either the antecedent or subsequent part of that day of it self much lesse any dayes ensuing If therefore the Lords-day or first day should be limited or bounded out by the time on which Christ rose which is the Opposites Doctrine we must either observe no Lords-day at all or else a Lords-day of a minutes length and that minute uncertain when to begin or end because the hour or minute of Christs rising again is unknown Since therefore there is both an expediency and necessity that Christians should observe a day a Festivall of a greater length than the very moment in which Christ rose in memory of Christs Resurrection the instituters of the Lords day considering that God himself did ever bound out all Festivalls by dayes not minutes hours or half dayes stretching the limits of them farther than the bounds of their occasions reached which were commonly short and transitory partly in imitation of Gods own former proceedings in such cases and partlâ— out of necessity did extend the bounds of the Lords-day beyond the space in which he was rising even to the intire day whereon he arose and so to that part of the day preceding as well as to that succeeding it the very act of Christs Resurrection being but momentany and not so large as the whole dayes extent Whence we may clearly see an absolute necessity of limiting Festivalls by the days limits not by their occasions of beginning the Lords-day at Evening though the Resurrection the cause of its future solemnization was not till morning and of making such occasions and the Resurrection to relate à parte ante as well as à parte post to consecrate the precedent as well as the subsâ—quent part of the dayes on which they happen without any violation of the objected Logick Rule That the effect cannot precede the cause which is true onely in this sense that the Lords-day could not be actually observed as a Lords-day in memory of Christs Resurrection on it befâ—re he actually rose again else Festivalls and the Lords day should be scarce half-holy-dayes sometimes not above a minutes or hours length which would be dishonourable to God to Christ to the Church and disadvantagious unto Christians Eightly if Festivalls or their occasions and so Christs Resurrection and the Lords-day should alter the beginning and end of dayes as the Objectors pretend it would bring in an absolute confusion of all timâ—s and dayes For then every last occasion of solemnizing any day must change the beginning of all other dayes and reduce them to the time that that occasion happened and so every punie Festivall should alter the limits of all dayes and Festivalls formerly settled which were injurious yea absurd and would cause so many alterations in day as would render all days weeks years uâ—certain or else every day or Festival should have severall beginnings and ends answerable to the hours of the severall remarkable accidents happening on them some beginning at one hour some at another some being long others short some beginning at one time in one Country and at another time in another Countrey which would bring such a perplexity intricacy into all computations of time and all Chronologie as neither God nor man could suffer breed much confusion both in Contracts Festivals all divine and humane affairs overturn Religion Lawes Dayes Weeks Moneths years and reduce all things to a meere incertainty in regard of time which hath continued the same in all ages and places from the Creation to this present without any variation the week consisting of seven dayes and each of those dayes of 24. hours onely as they did at the Creation Wherefore to prevent this generall confusion incertainty disorder in dayes and
l. 4. Tit. 10. c. 1. p. 596. Reasons * Dam. 2. 21. * Dies Sabbati being the Latin name for Saturday Å¿ Surius Concil. Tom. 1. p. 436. t Athanasius de interp Psalmi 302. A. Homilia De semente p. 365. Ignatius Epist. 6. Bibl. Patr. Tom. 1. p 81. Epist. 8. p. 84. E. Clemens Romanus Constit Apost. l. 2. c. 63. l. 7. c. 36. l. 8. c. 39 Surius Concil Tom. 1. p. 68. 105 110. a. Primasius Comment in Retor 83. Sozomenus Histor. Ecclesiast l. 7. c. 19 Tom. Bibl. Pat. 5. pars 2. p. 435. F. 6. Socrates Scholasticus Ecclesiast hist. lib 5. c. 21. p. 35. 3. Nice phorus callist Eccles. Hist. lib. 12. c. 34 p. 357. Centur. Magdeburg Centur 1. pars 2. cap. 6 col 493. l. 50. 503. De Festis Centur. 4. c 6. col 410 c. 15. col 1466. Centur. 5. c. 6. col 648. Centur. 8. c. 6. Col. 342. l. 40. Beda in Lucae Evangelium l. 2. cap 4. Tom. 5. Col. 263. Apost. Canon Can. 65. Surius Concil. Tom. 1. p. 30 Chrysost. Hom. 11. in Gen. 2. Tom. 1. Col. 58 B. C. Synodus Parisiensis Anno 1557. apud Bochellum Decret. Eccles. Gal. p. 598. Concilium Laodicense Diem Sabbathi in diem Dominicum mutavit ne Judaismum imicare videremur writes this Councel of Paris * See Breutius in Levit. 23. 2. and 25 8. About Ann. Christi 56. u See Centur. Magd. 2. l. 2. c. 6. Col. 493. accordingly cent 2. c. 6. col 120. Augustinus de tempore Sâ—r 25 1. Tertullians Apology c. 39. * See Acts 20. 31. y Epist. l. 10. Epist. 97. z Apolog. c. 39. a Epist. l. 10. Epist. 97. Objection Answer a Mat. 12. 1. to 13. Luke 14 3. to 6. John 7. 22 23. b See Mat. 6. 34. Luke 13. 32 33. 1 Sam. 9 16 19. â— 5. 3 4. Jan. 4. 13. 14. a Epist. l. 10. 96. Epist. Ann. Dom. 106. b See Centuriae Magd 4. c 6. Col. 140. Theodoret Eccles. Hist. l. 2. c. 13. Socrates Scholasticus Hist. l. 6. c. 8. Sozomenus Hist. Eccles. l. 8. c. 21 Victor de Vandalica persecutione l. 2. Cent. Magd. 5 c. 2. Col. 647 648. c See Tertulliani Apologia Justine Martyrs Apologies Anaxagoras Oratio pro Christianis Anno 200. b Ad exam. lib. 2. cap. 3. See Augustinus de tâ—mpore Sermo 251. Anno 340. Anno 360. Anno 400. * See Rabanus Maurus Opevum Tom. 5. p. 604. Anno 450. a Presbyteri verò ad vesperam quae magis ad Dominicam pertinet consecrantur Honorius Augustodanensis de antiquâ— ritâ—â— Miss. l. c. 19. Patr. Tom 12. pars 1. p. 1043. b See Bishop Vshers Treatise of the Religion professed by the ancient Irish c. 4. p. 34. Edit. 1631. Anno 610. Anno 620. Anno 640. Anno 670. * See Tertullian and others Aâ—no 697. Anno 720. Anno 793. Anno 80 Anno 800. Anno 806. Annoâ—13 Anno 840. Annoâ—60 Anno 920. Anno 96â— * Bishop Alley mad◠〈◊〉 9. of the clock in his poore mans Library Anno 1203. Anno 1020. Anno 1120. Anno 121â— Anno 1273. Anno 1280. Anno 1320. Anno 1496. Anno 1521. From Anno 1â—00 to 1620. a See Histriomastix p. 643 644. and the Table Objection 1. * See Wolphius Chronolog l. 2. c. 1. Dr. Bound of the Sabbath l. 2 p. â—6 with others a Heneâ— Aquinas prima secundae Quaest 100. Artic. 5. ad sâ—cun concludes Inter omnia benefi cia Dei commemoranda PRIMUM ET PRAECIPUUM EST BENEFICIUM CREATIONIS quod commemeratur in sanctificatione Sabbati unde Exod. 20 11. PRO RATIONE QUARTI PRAECEPTI PONITUR with which 3 Synod Parisiensis Anno 1557. apud Boshellum Decret. Eccles. Gall p. 589. concurres and Chrysostome Hom. 4. super Matthaeum a Sabbatum inter caetera Festa tantum praescribitur in Dâ—calogo quia figurabat GENERALIA BENEFICIA DEI scilicet CREATIONIS beatitudinis Aquinas prima secundae quaest. 100. Artic. 5. secund. Qu. 102. Art 4. 10m secunda secundae qu. Artic 4. ad 2m Alensis Sum. Theol. Tom. 3. qu. 32. m. 1 2. 3 Bernardinus Senensis Sum. 10. Artic. 1. c. 1. 2. Bonaventura Media villa in l. 3. Sent. Dist. 37. b Ephes. 1. 4. â—0 15. Col. 1 2 14 Rev. 5. 9. 1 Pet 1. 2. 19. Heb. 2. 16. Jude 6. c Gen. 3. 17 18. 19. Levit. 26. 14. to 40. Deut. 28. 14. to 68. Psal. 107. 33 34. Mal. 3. 9. 11. c. 2. 2. Rom. 8. 19. 20. 21 22. a See Philo Judaeus de op sicio mundi b Magis praecipitur observatio Sabbati quam alâ—arum solâ—mnitatum quia bâ—neficium Creationis in hoc commemoraâ—ur QVOD EST PRAECIPIUM INTER PRAEâ—ERITA Angelus de Clavasio in summa Argelica Tit. Pâ—aecepâ—um sest 6. â— 194. c See Zanchius de operibus Creationis lib. a Isa. 53. throughout Rom. 3 25. c 3. 9. c. 4. 25. Eph. 1. 5. c. 2. 13. col 1. 20 21 22 Heb 9 7. to 26. c. 10. 10 c. 12. 24 c. 13 c. 13. 11 12. 1 Pet. 1. 2 18 19. John 17. Rom. 5. 9. Objection 2. Answer 1. a Christs Resurrestion is no more the cause of the Lords-day as a day then Baptisme is 〈◊〉 cause of the Sacâ—amâ—ntal water as water or Christs consecration of the Sacramentall Bread and wine the cause of thâ—m as they are bread and wine or the Oâ—dination of Mâ—nisters the cause of them as they are men * Esth. 9. 20 21 c. a See 3 Jac. c. 1 b See 5 6. Eâ— 6 c. 3. All Lawes and Canons touching Lords-days Holy-dayes Feast-dayes and Thanksgiving dayes and the Canonists Tit Feriâ— dies Fâ—sti a See Mat. 28. 1. Mak 16. 2 9. Luk. 29. 1. Joh. 20. 1. 19. b Mat. 28. 17. Maâ— 16 11 13 14. Luk 24. 21 22 25 26. 37. to 41. John 20 19 24 25. 26. 1 Cor. 15. 4. to 9. b John 2. 4. c. 12. 23. c. 13. 1. c. 17. 1. 1 Tim. 6. 15. Rom. 56. Gal. 2. 4. 2. 4. * Exod. 12. 18. Deut. 16. 3 4 1. Sam. 30. 17. a See 3. Jac. c. 1. 2 3. The arraignment of Traytors Speeds History p. 1254 See Augustine de tempore sermo 251. and 154 D. Bound of the Sabbath p. 44. a Taken out of Theodulphus his Epistle An. 83â— apud Bochellum Decreta Ecclesiae Gald 4. Tu. â—0 c. 19. p. 5. 96. Objection Answerâ— Argum. 3. Objection 3. Answer 1. a Sâ—e Mat. 14. 15. 25. Mark 2 6. 35 36 47 48. Joh. 6. 16 17 comâ—ared 〈◊〉 â— b The Evening Sacrifices we read of in Scripture and our Vespers or Evening prayers are oâ— this Evening of the day a little before Sun-setting c Prov. 7. 9. 1 Sam 30 17. 2 Kings 7. 5 7. Job 24. 15. Ezechch 12. 6. 12. d See Neh. 4. 21 Job 3. 9. Jer. 31. 35. Gen. 1. 1 14. 10 19. compared together e Isiodor Hispalensis originum l 3. c. 40. Calâ—piâ—e Rabbanus Maurus de universo l. 10. c. 70. Christianus Grammaticus Pascaâ—ius Rathbâ—rtus in Matt. 28. v. 1. Honorius Augâ—stodunensâ—s de imagine mundi l. 2. c. 32 a Acts 20. 8. Makes relation when they had lights of those lights thereâ—oâ—e the Evanâ—elists likewise would have done so had â—â—ere been any as is most prâ—bable * See Psal. 28 7. to 16. 17. Objection 4. Answer 1. Objectionâ— Answer Objection 6. Answer 1. * Sâ—cut autem Sabbathi veteris initium suit à vespâ—re quia creaâ—io incipiebat à vespcre quoniam Massa communis creata fuit ante lucem cessatio diei ab opere creationis incipicbat etiaÌ„ à vespere sic Diei Dominicae initium incipere videtur ab illius diei mune quia resuriâ—ctio Christi suit in primo mane Mar. 16. 9. John 20. 1. Exception Reply 1. â—Cor. 13. 8.