not obliged to the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath by any Law of God The Minor I must prove by parts For I think none will deny the sufficient enumeration in the Major And 1. That the Law of Nature bindeth us not to the seventh or any one day of the seven more than other appeareth 1. In the nature and reason of the thing There is nothing in nature to evidence it to us to be Gods will 2. By every Christians experience No man findeth himself convinced of any such thing by meer nature 3. By all the Worlds experience No man can say that a man of that opinion can bring any cogent evidence or argument from nature alone to convince another that the seventh day must be the Sabbath Nor is it any where received as a Law of Nature but only as a Tradition among some few Heathens and as Law positive by the Jews and some few Christians I am not solicitous to prosecute this argument any further because I can consent that all they take the seventh day for the Sabbath who can prove it to be so by meer natural Evidence which will not be one II. That the Positive Law made to Adam before or after the fall or to Noah bindeth not us to keep the seventh day as a Sabbath is proved 1. Because we are under a more perfect subsequent Law which being in force the former more imperfect ceaseth As the force of the Promise of the Incarnation of Christ is ceased by his incarnation and so is the precept which bound men to believe that he should de future be incarnate and the Law of Sacrificing which Abel doubtless received from Adam though one of late would make it to be but will-worship so also is the Sabbath day as giving place to the day in which our Redemption is primarily commemorated as the imperfect is done away when that which is more perfect cometh 2. Because that the Law of Christ containeth an express revocation of the seventh day Sabbath as shall be shewed anon 3. Because God never required two dayes in seven to be kept as holy Therefore the first day being proved to be of Divine institution the cessation of the seventh is thereby proved For to keep two dayes is contrary to the command which they themselves do build upon which requireth us to sanctifie a Sabbath and labour six dayes 4. And when it is not probable that most or many Infidels are bound to Adams day for want of notice at least For no Law can bind without promulgation though I now pass by the question how far a promulgation of a positive to our first Parents may be said to bind their posterity that have no intermediate notice It seemeth leÃs probable that Christians should be bound by it who have a more perfect Law promulgate to them 5. Nor is it probable that Christ and his Apostles and all the following Pastors of the Churches would have passed by this Positive Law to Adam without any mention of it if our universal obligation had been thence to be collected Nay I never yet heard a Sabbatarian plead this Law any otherwise than as supposed to be implyed or exemplified in the fourth Commandment III. And that the fourth Commandment of Moses Law bindeth us not to the seventh day Sabbath is proved 1. Because that Moses Law never bound any to it but the Jews and those Proselites that made themselves inhabitants of their Land or voluntarily subjected themselves to their policy For Moses was Ruler of none but the Jews nor a Legislator or deputed officer from God to any other Nation The Decalogue was but part of the Jewish Law if you consider it not as it is written in Nature but in Tables of Stone And the Jewish Law was given as a Law to no other people but to them It was a National Law as they were a peculiar people and holy Nation So that even in Moses daies it bound no other Nations of the World Therefore it needed not any abrogation to the Gentiles but a declaration that it did not bind them 2. The whole Law of Moses formally as such is ceased or abrogated by Christ. I say As such Because Materialy the same things that are in that Law may be the matter of the Law of Nature and of the Law of Christ of which more anon That the whole Law of Moses as such is abrogated is most clearly proved 1. By the frequent arguings of Paul who ever speaketh of that Law as ceased without excepting any part And Christ saith Luke 16. 16. The Law and the Prophets were untill John that is were the chief doctrine of the Church till then Joh. 1. 17. The Law was given by Moses but grace and truth cometh by Jesus Christ. No Jew would have understood this if the word Law had not contained the Decalogue So Joh. 7. 19 23. Act. 15. 5 24. It was the whole Law of Moses as such which by Circumcision they would have bound men to Gal. 5. 3. The Gentiles are said to sin without Law even when they broke the Law of Nature meaning without the Law of Moses Rom. 2. 12 14 15 16. In all these following places its not part but the whole Law of Moses which Paul excludeth which I ever acknowledged to the Antinomians though they take me for their too great Adversary Rom. 3. 19 20 21 27 28 31 4. 13 14 15 16. 5. 13. 20. 7. 4 5 6 7 8 16. 9. 4 31 32. 10. 5. Gal. 2. 16 19 21. 3. 2 10 11 12 13 19 21 24. 4. 21. 5. 3 4 14 23. 6. 13. Eph. 2. 15. Phil. 3. 6 9. Heb. 7 11 12 19. 9. 19. 10. 28. 1 Cor. 9. 21. 2. More particularly there are some Texts which express the cessation of the Decalogue as it was Moses Law 2 Cor. 3. 3 7 11. Not in Tables of Stone but in fleshly tables of the heart But if the Ministration of death written and engraven in stones was glorious so that the Children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his Countenance which was to be done away or is done away They that say the Glory and not the Law is here said to be done away speak against the plain scope of the Text For the Glory of Moses face and the glorious manner of deliverance ceased in a few daies which is not the cessation here intended But as Dr. Hammond speaketh it that Glory and that Law so gloriously delivered is done away And this the eleventh verse fullyer expresseth For if that which is done away was glorious or by Glory much more that which remaineth is glorious or in glory so that as it is not only the Glory but the Glorious Law Gospel or Testament which is said to remain so it is not only the Glory but the Law which was delivered by Glory which is expresly said to be done away And this is
the Reasons of them 1. A Law of Clâ—tharius King of France forbidding servile labours on the Lords day Because the Law forbids it and the holy Scripture wholly contradicteth it 2. A Constitution of the Emperour Leo Philosophus to the same purpose Secundum quod Spiritui sancto ab ipsoque institutis Apostolis placuit As it pleased the Holy Ghost and the Apostles instructed by him You see that then Christian Princes judged the Lords day to be of Divine Institution Yea to these he addeth two more Princes of the same mind confessing that Leo was himself a Scholar and Charles the Great had as Learned men about him as the times then bred and yet were thus perswaded of the day yea and that many Miracles were pretended in confirmation of it yet he affirmeth that the Church and the most learned men in it were of another mind Let us hear his proofs 1. Saith he Isidore a Bishop of Sevil makes it an Apostolical Sanction only no Divine Commandment a day designed by the Apostles for Religious Exercises in honour of our Saviours resurrection and it was called the Lords day therefore to this end and purpose that resting in the same from all earthly acts and the temptations of the world we might intend Gods holy Worship giving this day due honour for the hope of the resurrection which we have therein The same verbatim is repeated by Beds l. de Offic. and by Raban Maurus l. de inst Chr. l. 2. c. 24. and by Alcuinus de Die Offic. c. 24. which plainly shews that all these took it only for an Apostolical usage c. Answ. Reader is not here a strange kind of proof This is but just the same that we assert and I am proving save that he most grosly puts an Apostolical usage and sanction sanxerunt as distinct from and exclusive of a Command which I have fully proved to be Christs own Act and Law to us by vertue of 1. Their Commission 2. And the infallible Spirit given them And having brought the History to so fair an account by our chief Adversaries own Citations and confessions I will not tire my self and the Reader with any more but only wish every Christian to consider whether they that thus distinguish between Apostolical Sanctions and Divine Institutions as this man doth do not teach men to deny all the holy Scriptures of the New Testament as being but Apostolical writings and go far to deny or subvert Christianity it self by denying the Divine Authority of these Commissioned Inspired men who are foundations of the Church and sealed their Doctrine by Miracles and from whom it is that our Christian Faith and Laws and Church constitutions which are Universal and Divine are received I only remember you of Pliny a Heathens testimony of the Christians practice stato die No man can question Pliny on the account of Partiality And therefore though a Heathen his Historical testimony as joyned with all the Christian Church History hath its credibility He telleth Trajan that it was the use of Christians on a stated day before it was light to meet together to sing a Hymn to Christ as to God secum invicem among themselves by turns and to bind themselves by a Sacrament not to do any wickedness but that they commit not Thefts Robberies Adulteries that they break not their word or trust that they deny not the pledge or pawn which being ended they used to depart and to come again together to take meat but promiscuous and harmless Epist. 97. p. 306 307. Where note 1. That by a stated day he can mean no other than the Lords day as the consent of all other History will prove 2. That this is much like the testimonies of Justin and Tertullian and supposing what they say of the use of Reading the Scripture and Instructing the Church it sheweth that their chief work on that day was the Praises of God for our Redemption by Christ and the celebration of the Lords Supper and the Disciplinary exercises of Covenanters thereto belonging 3. That they had at that time where Pliny was two meetings that day that is they went home and came again to their Feast of Love in the Evening Which no doubt was varied as several times and places and occasions required sometimes departing and coming again and sometimes staying together all day 4. That this Epistle of Pliny was written in Trajans dayes and it is supposed in his second year And Trajan was Emperour the year that St. John the Apostle died if not a year before so that it is the Churches custom in the end of the Apostles dayes which Pliny here writeth of 5. That he had the fullest testimony of what he wrote it being the consent of the Christians whom he as Judge examined even of the timorous that denyed their Religion as well as of the rest And many of them upon his prohibition forbore these meetings 6. And the number of them he telleth Trajan in City and Countrey was great of persons of all degrees and ranks So that when 1. Christian History 2. And Heathen acquaint us with the matter of fact that the day was kept in the Apostles time 3. Yea when no Hereticks or Sects of Christians are found contradicting it but the Churches then and after universally practised it without any controversie what fuller historical evidence can there be And to say that 1. The Apostles would not have reproved this if it had not been their own doing 2. Or that it could be done and they not know it 3. And that all Christians who acknowledged their authority would have consented in such a practice superstitiously before their faces and against their wills and no testimony be left us of one faithful Church or Christian that contradicted it and stuck to the Apostolical authority even where the Churches received their writings and publickly read them all this is such as is not by sober Christians to be believed But the great Objection will be That other things also were then taken for Apostolical Traditions and were customs of the universal Church as well as this which things we now renounce as superstitious Answ. Though I answered this briefly before I now give you this fuller answer I. It is but few things that come under this charge viz. the Unction white Garment with the taste of Milk and Honey at Baptism Adoration towards the East and that standing and not kneeling on the Lords dayes and the Anniversary Observation of Easter and Whitsuntide And the last is but the keeping of one or two Lords dayes in the year with some note of distinction from the rest so far as there was any agreement in it 2. That these are not usually by the Antients called Apostolical Traditions but Customs of the Vniversal Church 3. That when they are called Traditions from the Apostles it is not with any assertion that the Apostles instituted them but that they are supposed to be from their times because their
Original is not known 4. That the Antients joyn not the Lords day with these but take the Lords day for an Apostolical institution written in Scripture though the universal practice of all Churches fullier deliver the certain History of it But the rest they take for unwritten Customs as distinct from Scripture Ordinances As Epiphanius fully sheweth 5. That most Christians are agreed that if these later could be proved Apostolical Institutions for the Church universal it would be our duty to use them though they were not in Scripture So that we reject them only for want of such proof But the proof of the Lords dayes separation being far better by concurrence of Scripture and all antient History it followeth not that we must doubt of that which hath full and certain proof because we must doubt of that which wants it 6. And if it were necessary that they stood or fell together as it is not it were necessary that we did receive those three or four Ceremonies for the sake of the Lords day which â—ath so great evidence rather than that we cast off the Lords day because of these Ceremonies Not only because there is more Good in the Lords dâ—y than there is evil to be any way suspected by a doubter in these Ceremonies but especially because the Evidence for the day is so great that if the said Ceremonies had but the same they were undoubtedly of Divine authority or institution In a word I have shewed you somewhat of the evidence for the Lords day Do you now shew me the like for them and then I will prove that both must be received But if you cannot do not pretend a parity 7. And the same Churches laying by the Customs aforesaid or most of them did shew that they â—â—ok them not indeed for Apostolical institutions as they did the Lords day which they continued to observe not as a Ceremony but as a necessary thing 8. And the ancient Churches did believe that even in the Apostles dayes some things were used as Indifferent which were mutable and were not Laws but temporary customs And some things were necessary setled by Law for perpetuity Of the former kind they thought were the greeting one another with a holy kiss the Womens praying covered with a Veil of which the Apostle saith that it was then and there so decent that the contrary would have been unseemly and the Churches of God had no such custom by which he answereth the contentious yet in other Countreys where custom altereth the signification it may be otherwise Also that a man wear not long hair and that they have a Love Feast on the Lords day which yet Paul seemeth to begin to alter in his rebuke of the abusers of it 1 Cor. 11. And if these ancient Churches thought the Milk and Honey and the white Garment and the Station and Adoration Eastwards to be also such like indifferent mutable customs as it is apparent they did this is nothing at all to invalidate our proof that the Lords day was used and consequently appointed in the dayes of the Apostles Obj. At least it will prove it mutable as they were Answ. No such matter Because the very nature of such Circumstances having no stated necessity or usefulness sheweth them to be mutable But the reason of the Lords dayes use is perpetual And it is founded partly in the Law of nature which telleth us that some stated dayes should be set apart for holy things and partly in the positive part of the fourth Commandment which telleth us that once God determined of one day in seven yea and this upon the ground of his own Cessation of his Creation-work that man on that day might observe a Holy Rest in the worshipping of the great Creator which is a Reason belonging not to the Jews only but to the whole world Yea and that Reason whatever Dr. Heylin say to the contrary from the meer silence of the former History in Genesis doth seem plainly to intimate that this is but the repetition of that Law of the Sabbath which was given to Adam For why should God begin two thousand years after to give men a Sabbath upon the reason of his rest from the Creation and for the Commemoration of it if he had never called man to that Commemoration before And it is certain that the Sabbath was observed at the falling of Manna before the giving of the Law And let any considerate Christian judge between Dr. Heylin and us in this 1. Whether the not falâ—ing of Manna or the Rest of God after the Creation was like to be the Original reason of the Sabbath 2. And whether if it had been the first it would not have been said Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day for on six dayes Manna fell and not on the seventh rather than For in six dayes God created Heaven and Earth c. and rested the seventh day And it is causally added Wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it Nay consider whether this annexed Reason intimate not that the day on this ground being hallowed before therefore it was that God sent not down the Manna on that day and that he prohibited the people from seeking it And he that considereth the brevity of the History in Genesis will think he is very bold that obtrudeth on the world his Negative Argument The Sabbath is not there mentioned therefore it was not then kept And if it was a Positive Law given to Adam on the reason of the Creation Rest it was then such a Positive as must be next to a Law of Nature and was given to all mankind in Adam and Adam must needs be obliged to deliver it down to the world So that though the Mosaical Law even as given in Stone be ceased yea and Adams Positives too formally as such yet this is sure that once God himself determined by a Law that one stated day in seven was the fittest proportion of time to be separated to holy Worship And if it was so once yea to all the world from the Creation it is so still Because there is still the same reason for it And we are bound to judge Gods determination of the proportion to be wiser than any that we can make And so by parity of Reason consequentially even those abrogated Laws do thus far bind us still not so far as abrogated but because the record and reason of them is still a signification of the due proportion of time and consequently of our duty Now the Lords day supposing one weekly day to be due and being but that day determined of and this upon the Reason of the Resurrection and for the Commemoration of our Redemption and that by such inspired and authorized persons it followeth clearly that this is no such mutable ceremony as a Love Feast or the Kiss of Love or the Veil or the washing of feet or the anointing of the sick which were mostly occasionall actions and
customs taken up upon reasons proper to those times and places Obj. But by the reason aforesaid you will prove the continuance of the seventh day Sabbath as grounded on the Creation rest Answ. This is anom to be answered in due place I only prove that it continued till a successive dispensation and Gods own change did put an end to it but no longer Obj. But to commemorate the Creation and praise the Creator is a Moral work and therefore ceaseth not Answ. True but that it be done on the seventh day is that which ceaseth For the same work is transferred to the Lords day and the Creator and Redeemer to be honoured together in our Commemoration For the Son is the only way to the Father who hath restored us to Peace with our Creator And as no man cometh to the Father but by the Son and as we must not now worship God as a Creator and Father never offended but as a Creator and Father reconciled by Christ so is it the appointment of Christ by the Holy Ghost that we commemorate the work of Creation now as repaired and restored by the work of Redemption on the Lords day which is now separated to these works That the Sabbath was appointed to Adam Wallaeus on the fourth Commandment cap. 3. and Rivet dissert de sab c. 1. have most copiously proved And Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 5. out of Homer Hesiod Callimachus and others proveth that the Heathens knew of it We may therefore summ up the prerogatives of the Lords day as Leo did Ep. 81. c. 1. On this day the world began on this day by Christs Resurrection Death did receive Death and Life its beginning on this day the Apostles take the trumpet of the Gospel to be preached to all Nations on this day the Holy Ghost came from the Lord to the Apostles c. See more in Athanas. de Sab. Circ August Serm. 154. de Tempore Therefore saith Isychius in Levit. l. 2. c. 9. The Church setteth apart the Lords day for holy Assemblies And in the times of Heathenish persecution when men were asked Whether they were Christians and kept the Lords dayes they answered that they were and kept the Lords day which Christians must not omit as you may see Act. Martyâ— apud Baron an 303. n. 37 38 39. They would die rather than not keep the holy assemblies and the Lords dayes For saith Ignatius After the Sabbath every lover of Christ celebrateth the Lordâ— day 〈◊〉 to or by the Lords resurrection the Queen and chief of 〈◊〉 dâ—yes as is afore cited For saith Augustine The Lords Resurrection hath promised us an eternal Day and consecrated to us the Lords day which is called the Lords and properly belongeth to the Lord Serm. 15. de Verb. Apost And saith Hilary Prâ—leg in Psalm Though the name and observance of a Sabbath was placed to the seventh day yet is it the eighth day which is also the first on which we rejoyce with the perfect festivity of the Sabbath Of the fâ—â—l keeping of the whole day and of the several Exercises in which it was spent and of the more numerous testimonies of Antiquity hereupon Dr. Yâ—ung in his Dies Dominica hath said so much with so much evidence and judgement 〈◊〉 I purposely omit abundance of such Testimonies because I will not do that which he hath already done The Learned Reader may there find unanswerable proof of the matter of fact that the Lords day was kept in the Apostles dayes and ever since as by their appointment And for the unlearned Reader I fear lest I have too much interrupted him with Citations already I only tell him in the Conclusion that If Scripture Hiâ—tory interpreted and seconded by fullest practice and History of all the Churches of Christ and by the consent of Heathens and Heretickâ— and not contradicted by any Sect in the world be to be believed then we must say that the Lords day was commonly kept by the Christians in and from the Apostles times Prop. 11. This evidence of the Churches universal constant usage is a full and sufficient proof of the matter of fact that it was a day set apart by the Apostles for holy Worship especially in the publick Church-assemblies 1. It is a full proof that such Assemblies were held on that day above others as a separated day For if it was the usage in Anno 100. in which the Apostle John dyed it must needs be the usage in the year 99. in which he wrote his Revelations where he calleth it the Lords day For all the Churches could not silently agree on a sudden to take up a new day without debate and publick notice which could not be concealed And if it was the universal usage in the dayes of Ignatius or Justin Martyr it was so also in the dayes of St. John and so before For the Churches were then so far dispersed over the world that it would have taken up much time to have had Councils and meetings or any other means for agreement on such things And it is utterly improbable that there would have been no dissenters For 1. Did no Christians in the world so neer to the Apostles daies make any scruple of superstition or of such an addition to Divine institutions 2. Was there no Countrey nor no persons whose interest would not better suit with another day or an uncertain day or at least their opinions when we find it now so hard a matter to bring men in one Countrey to be all of one opinion 3. And there was then no Magistrate to fâ—rce them to such an Union And therefore it mast be voluntary 4. And they had in the second age such Pastors as the Apostles themselves had ordained and as had conversed with them and been trained up by them and knew their mind and cannot soberly be thought likely to consent all on a sudden to such a new institution without and contrary to the Apostles sense and practice 5. Yea they had yet Ministers that had that extraordinary spirit which was given by the laying on of the Apostles hands For if the aged Apostles ordained young men it is to be supposed that most of those young men such as Timothy overlived them 6. Yea and the ordinary Christians in those times had those extraordinary gifts by the laying on of the Apostles hands as appeareth evidently in the case of Samaria Act. 8. and of the Corinthians 1 Cor. 12. 14. and of the Galathians Gal. 3. 1 2 3. And it is not to be suspected that all these inspired Ministers and people would consent to a superstitious innovation without and against the Apostles minds 2. Therefore this history is a full proof that these things were done by the consent and appointment of the Apostles For 1. As is said the inspired persons and Churches could not so suddenly be brought to forsake them universally in such a case 2. The Churches had all so high an esteem of the Apostles
CHAP. IV. Christ performed all these Promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them to all their commissioned work p. 11 CHAP. V. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for Holy Worship especially in Church Assemblies Which is explained in several subordinate Propositions And proved 1. By Scripture 2. By unquestionable History And the validity of this proof evinced and the denyers of it proved to subvert the Churches certainty of greater matters p. 12 CHAP. VI. This act of the Apostles appointing the Lords Day for holy Worship was done by the especial inspiration and guidance of the Holy Ghost p. 69 CHAP. VII Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. proved Where is shewed how far the fourth Commandment is abrogated and all the Law of Moses p. 71 CHAP. VIII Of the Beginning of the Day p. 91 CHAP. IX How the Lords Day should be kept Of the length of the time and the Objection about weariness p. 93 CHAP. X. How the Lords Day should not be spent or what is unlawful on it Of worldly business Of recreations of Idleness c. p. 108 CHAP. XI What things should not be scrupled as un lawful on the Lords Day p. 129 CHAP. XII Of what importance the due observing of the Lords Day is Many great Reasons for it p. 139 CHAP. XIII What other Church Festivals or separated Dayes are lawful p. 148 THE CONTENTS OF THE Appendix CHAP. I. An Answer to certain Objections against the Lords Day p. 157 CHAP. II. An Answer to more Arguments for the seventh day Sabbath p. 180 CHAP. III. Whether the seventh day Sabbath be part of the Law of Nature or only a Positive Law p. 202 CHAP. IV. Whether every word in the Decalogue be of the Law of Nature and of perpetual obligation And whether all that was of the Law of Nature was in the Decalogue p. 214 CHAP. V. Whether the truest Antiquity be for the seventh day Sabbath as kept by the Churches of Christ p. 220 The Divine Appointment of the LORDS DAY proved as a separated Day for holy Worship especially in the Church-Assemblies And consequently the Cessation of the Seventh-day-Sabbath CHAP. I. Though the principal thing desired by the Enquirers is That I would prove to them the Cessation of the Seventh-day Sabbath yet because they cast off the Lords day which I take to be a far greater error and sin than the observation of both dayes and because that when I have proved the Institution of the Lords Day I shall the more easily take them off the other by proving that there are not two weekly dayes set apart by God for holy Worship Therefore I will begin with the first Question Whether the Lords day or first day of the week be separated by Gods Institution for holy Worship especially in publick Church-conventions Aff. And here for the right stating of the Question let it be noted 1. That it is not the Name of a Sabbath that we now meddle with or stand upon Let us agree in the Thing and we shall easily bear a difference about the name Grant that it is A day separated by Gods Institution for holy Assemblies and Worship and then call it a Sabbath or the Lords day as you please Though for my self I add That the Lords day is the name that the Holy Ghost hath set upon it and the name which the first Churches principally used and that they call it also sometimes by the name of the Christian Sabbath but that is only Analogically as it is resembled to the Jewish Sabbath and as they used the names Sacrifice and Altar at the same time for the Christians Commemoration of Christs Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and for the Table or as Dr. Young saith pag. 23. As in Scripture Baptism is called Circumcision And that very rarely too 2. That the Question of the manner of observing the Lords day and what exercises of Worship it must be spent in and what Diversions are lawful or unlawful as also when the day beginneth are not to be here medled with in the beginning but afterwards when the Divine Institution of the Day it self is first sufficiently proved Which is done as followeth Arg. That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son The Minor only needeth proof among Christians That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost The Minor which only needeth proof is thus proved That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles who had the Holy Ghost promised them by Christ and given them to lead them into all truth and to bring all his Doctrines to their remembrance and to teach the Churches to do all his Commands and to feed and guide and order them as his principal commissioned Church-Minister was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost But such is the first day of the Week Therefore the first day of the Week is separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost I have five Propositions now distinctly to be proved four for the proof of the Major and one for the proof of the Minor The first Proposition is That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches The second Proposition is That Christ promised them his Spirit to enable them to do what he had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them as his Churches Guides The third Proposition is That Christ performed this promise and gave his Spirit accordingly to his Apostles to enable them to all their commissioned work The fourth Proposition is That the Apostles did actually separate or appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-assemblies The fifth Proposition is That this act of theirs was done by the Guidance or inspiration of the Holy Ghost which was given them And when I have distinctly proved these five things no sober understanding Christian can expect that I should prove any more towards the proof of the Question in hand Whether the first day of the Week be separated by Gods
Church before as what day goeth over their head The Historical hints of the New Testament must be taken together and not a part only that they may prove a usage And 1. That Christ rose on that day is past doubt among Christians Joh. 20. 1. Luk. 24. 1. Mar. 16. 2. Matth. 28. 1. 2. On that same day he taught the two disciples Luk. 24. 13. And the same day he appeared to the Disciples and instructed them and did eate with them Luk. 24. 33 36. Theâ— the Disciples were assembled and theâ— he blessed them gave them their Commission and the Holy Ghost Joh. 20. 19 20 21 22. 3. The next first day of the week Christ chose to appear to them again when Thomas was with them and convinced him Joh. 20. 26. 4. In Act. 20. 7. It is mentioned as the day of their Assembling to break bread which though they did oft on other daies yet no day else was peculiarly appointed for it As for the dissenters cavil about the Translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza hath given them Reason enough against it And Grotius and almost all expositors are against them And most that translate it literally una Sabbatorum take Vna and Prima here to be all one And Calvin with others noteth that the same phrase being used of the day of the Resurrection Matth. 26. 1. Luk. 24. 1. Joh. 20. 1. will direct us to expound this unless you mean also to deny the Resurrection to have been on the first day And 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needs have the same signification And Mark 26. 9. compared with the other Evangelists so expounds them as Beza noteth who also telleth us that in one old Copy he found added the Lords day and citeth Hierome adv Vigilant saying Per unam Sabbati hoc est in die Dominico c. And Dr. Hammond well noteth that it plainly relateth to the Christian assemblies to which they were not to come empty but to deposite what they brought into the treasury of the Church or if it were in their private repositories it doth not much difference the case Calvins exception against Chrysostome here is groundless as the reasons before evince So that by this Text the custome of holding Church meetings on the Lords day as a peculiar day is intimated though but on the by as most Expositors agree And the denomination of the Lords day Joh. 1. 10. being the same which the Christian Churches ever used of the First day puts it yet further out of doubt As for his conjecture who doubteth whether it may be meant of the Anniversary day of Christs Resurrection when as the constant use of the name by all the Churches sheweth that it was taken ever since for the weekly day it deserveth no other refutation Now though all this set together shew that Scripture is not silent of the matter of fact yet it is the full and unquestionable expository evidence of the practice of all Churches in the world since the very daies of the Apostles which beyond all doubt assureth us that de facto the Lords day was by the Apostles separated for holy Worship especially in publick Church-assemblies But these several intimations being seconded with so full an Exposition tell us that the Scripture is not silent in the case nor doth pass it by I was loth to name the day of the sending down of the Holy Ghost as a proof Because that some do controvert it But it seemeth to me a very considerable thing 1. That the day that year 〈…〉 of Pentecost on which the Holy Ghost was given was indeed the first day of the week even Dr. Heylin granteth without any question or stop And the Churches observation of Whitsunday as the day and that so very early as Epiphanius and many others say from the Apostles doth seem a very credible history or tradition of it 2. It s agreed on that the Passoever that year fell on the Sabboth day and that Pentecost was fifty daies after the Passover which falleth out on the Lords day And Grotius noteth from Exod. 19. 1. that it was the day that the Law was given on and so on which the Spirit was given for the new Law 3. And considering that this great gift of the Holy Ghost which was to make the Apostles Infallible and to enable them for their commission-work and bring all Christs Doctrines and Commands to their remembrance was so memorable a thing that it was as it were the Beginning of the full Gospel-state of the Church and Kingdom of Christ which through all Christs abode on Earth was as the Infant existent indeed but in the womb and on this day was as it were Born before the world and brought into the open light the Lords day also seemeth to me to be as it were Conceived on the day of Christs Resurrection but Born on this day of the Holy Ghosts descent But Dr. Heylin hath one poor reason against it viz. Because it was but an accidental thing that the day fell out that year on the first day Answ. 1. Was it not according to the course of Nature How then can that be called Accidental 2. But however it was no contingent accidental thing in his sense that the Holy Ghost was sent down on that day rather than another If a sparrow fall not to the ground without Gods providence did God choose that day He knew not why Or did it fall out hap hazard or by chance I need not insist on the confutation of his Caviâ—s about the other Texts forecited Note only 1. That as to his exception about Christs travel on his Resurrection day I have after answered it 2. That he freely granteth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifiâ—th The first day of the week both in Act. 20. 7. and 1 Cor. 16. 2. 3. That he himself citeth afterward many testimonies that oblations and contributions were in the Churches a usual Lords dayes work 4. That he confesseth that Rev. 10. 1. is meant of the Lords day as by that time grown into reputation 5. That he thinketh it was in small reputation before because Paul chose the Sabbath so often to Preach on to the Jews and Hellenists or Greeks whereas he himself is forced to confess that it was not for the days sake but the Assemblies to do them good 6. That he vainly conceiteth that Because the Lords day was kept on the account of Christs Resurrection it implyeth that it was not kept by Gods command which needeth no confutation 7. That his labour to prove that Paul meant the Jewish Sabbath as abrogated is vain for we deny it not 8. That he cannot deny that Christians had all that time of the Apostles a stated day as Pliny himself witnesseth for solemn worship above other daies 9. That he vainly snatcheth a little countenance from Calvin and Beza c. when as no man since Cochlaeus writeth more detestably of them 10. That after he
places for them that doubt of it Now let us peruse the particular Testimonies 1. I begin with Ignatius though Dallaeus have said so much to prove the best Copy of him of latter date and spurious because others think otherwise and that Copy is by him thought to be written Cent. 3. who saith Let us not keep the Sabbath in a Jewish manner in sloth and idleness but after a spiritual manner not in bodily ease but in the study of the Law not eating meat drest yesterday or drinking warm drinks and walking out a limited space but in the contemplation of the works of God And after the Sabbath let every one that loveth Christ keep the Lords day Festival the Resurrection day the Queen and Empress of all daies in which our life was raised again and death was overcome by our Lord and Saviour Either these Epist. of Ignatius ad Philip. c. are genuine or spurious If genuine than note how clearly it is asserted that the Lords day was to be observed as the Queen of all daies by all that were lovers of Christ. And that the seventh day Sabbath was kept with it then and there in Asia so near the Apostles daies no wonder when it was but the honourable gradual receding from the Mosaical Ceremonies with an avoiding the scandalous hinderance of the Jews Conversion And Dr. Heylin well noteth that it was only the Eastern Churches next the Jews that for a time kept both daies but not the Western who rather turned the Sabbath to a fast But if Ignatius Ep. be spurious written Cent. 3. then as Dallaeus would prove they were written by some heretical or heterodox person And so it will be no wonder that holy dayes are pleaded for when as Dr. Heylin observeth Cerinthus and his followers in the Apostles times stood up for the Jewish Sabbath and Ceremonies and so were for both daies But it will be our Confirmation that even the Hereticks held with the universal Church for the Lords day 2. The great Controversie about the Day of Easter which spread so early through all the Churches is a full Confirmation of our matter of fact For when the Western Churches were for the Passover day the better to content the Jews saith Heylin the Eastern thought it intollerable that it should not be kept on a Lords day because that was the weekly day observed on the same account of the Resurrection The Eastern Churches never questioned their supposition of the Lords day And the Western after Victors rash excommunicating the Asian Bishops never rested till they brought them to keep it on the Lords day Pius Anicetus Victor c. prosecuting the cause 3. The Book though perished which Melito wrote of the Lords day Euseb. l. 4. c. 25. by the title may be well supposed to confirm at least the matter of fact or usage 4. All those little Councils mentioned by Heylin p. 48. held at Osroena Corinth in Gaul in Pontus in Rome prove this The Canons of them all saith Heylin being extant in Eusebius ' s time and in all which it was concluded for the Sunday But saith Heylin by this You see that the Sunday and the Sabbath were long in striving for the Victory p. 49. Answ. I see that some men can out-face the clearest light Here was no striving at all which day should be the weekly day set apart for holy worship but only whether Easter should follow the time of 〈◊〉 or be confined to the Lords day 5. Justin Martyrs Testimony is so express and so commonly cited that I need not recite the words at large Vpon the Sunday all of us assemble in the Congregation Vpon the day called Sunday all within be Cities or in the Countrey do meet together in some place where c. He proceedeth to shew the worship there performed Now 1. Here being mention of no other day no man can question but that this day was set apart for these holy assemblies in a peculiar manner as the other week dayes were not 2. This being the writing of one of the most Learned and antient of all the Christian Writers 3. And being purposely written to one of the wisest of all the Emperours as an Apologie for all the Christians 4. And being written at Rome where the matter of fact was easily known deserveth as much credit as any Christian History or Writing since the Apostles can deserve Nor hath Heylin any thing to say against it 6. The next remembred by Heylin is Dionysius Corinth who lived 175. cited out of Eusebius Hist. l. 4. c. 22. To day we keep the Holy Lords day wherein we read the Epistle you wrote to us c. Against this Heylin saith not a word 7. The next is Clemens Alexander who expresly asserteth the matter of fact that the Lords day was then kept by Christians Yea Heylin derideth him for fetching it as far as Plato Strom. l. 7. But Heylin thinks he was against keeping any dayes But he that will examine his words shall find that he speaketh only against them that would be Ceremonious observers of the day more than of the work of the day and would be religious on that day alone And therefore he saith that He that leadeth his life according to the Ordinances of the Gospel doth keep the Lords Day when he casteth away every evil thought and doing things with knowledge and understanding doth glorifie the Lord in his Resurrection This is not to speak against the Day but to shew how it ought to be sincerely kept But if he had been against it it s all one to my cause who only prove that de facto all Christian Churches kept it 8. The next witness is Tertullian who oft asserteth this to be the holy day of the Christians Church-Assemblies and holy Worship His testimony in Apolog. cap. 16. is so commonly known that I need not recite it It is the same in sense with Justin Martyrs and written in an Apology for the Christians purposely describing their custom of meeting and worshipping on the Sunday as he calls it there as Justin did And that it was not an hours work only he shews in saying that The day was kept as a day of rejoicing and then describeth the work And de Idolol c. 14. he saith that every eighth day was the Christians festival And de Coron Mil. c. 3. and oft he calleth it the Lords day and saith it was a crime to fast upon it And the work of the day described by Justin and by him Apolog. c. 39. is just the same that we desire now the day to be spent in we plead for no other But most grosly saith Heylin pag. 55. But sure it is that their assemblies held no longer than our Morning Service that they met only before noon for Justin saith that when they met they used to receive the Sacrament and that the service being done every man went again to his daily labours Answ. Is this a proof to conclude a
and the unwritten Vniversal Traditions to be somewhat lower which there was no Scripture for at all Among which the white Garment and the Milk and Honey to the Baptized and the Adoration toward the East are numbred For he that is appointed to worship on the Lords dayes standing or toward the East is supposed to know that on that day he is to worship If the Mode on that day be of Universal Tradition as a Ceremony the day is supposed to be somewhat more than of unwritten Tradition 15. I add here also though in the fourth Century because it looks back to the Institution the words of Athanasius cited by Heylin himself Homil. de Semente though Nannius question it That our Lord transferred the Sabbath to the Lords day But saith Dr. Heylin This must be understood not as if done by his Commandment but on his occasion the Resurrection of our Lord on that day being the principal Motive which did influence his Church to make choice thereof for the Assemblies For otherwise it would cross what formerly had been said by Athanasius in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Answ. It expresseth the common judgement of the Church that Christ himself made the Change by these degrees 1. Fundamentally and as an Exemplar by his own Resurrection on that day giving the first cause of it as the Creation-rest did of the seventh day 2. Secretly commanding it to his Apostles 3. Commissioning them to promulgate all his Commands 4. Sending down the Spirit on that very day 5. And by that Spirit determining them by promulgation to determine publickly of the day and settle all the Churches in long possession of it before their death That which is thus done may well be said to be done by Christ 2. And what shew of Contradiction hath his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to this It was commanded at first that the Sabbath day should be observed in memory of the accomplishment of the World so do we celebrate the Lords day as a Memorial of the beginning of a new Creation Had not he a Creating head here that out of these words could gather that we celebrate the Lords day without a command Voluntarily One would think so should signifie the contrary But ib. pag. 8. he citeth Socrates for the same saying that The designe of the Apostles was not to busie themselves in prescribing festival daies but to instruct the people in the wayes of Godliness Answ. Socrates plainly rebuketh the busie Ceremonious arrogancy of after Ages for making new holy dayes and doth not at all mean the Lords day but saith that to make festivals that is other and more as since they did was none of the Apostles business Nor is this any thing at all to the matter of fact which none denyed 16. I will add that as another Testimony which p. 9. he citeth against it The Council at Paris An. 829. c. 50. which as he speaketh ascribeth the keeping of the Lords day to Apostolical Tradition confirmed by the Authority of the Church The words are ut creditur Apostolorum traditione immo Ecclesiae authoritate descendu c. Now I have proved that if the Apostles did it they did it by the Holy Ghost and by Authority from Christ But he citeth p. 7 8. the words of Athanasius Maximus Taurinensis and Augustine saying that We honour the Lords day for the Resurrection and because Christ rose and Aug. The Lords day was declared to Christians by the Resurrection of our Lord and from that or from him rather began to have its festivity From whence he gathereth that it was only done by the authority of the Church and not by any precept of our Saviour Answ. As if Christs Resurrection could not be the fundamental occasion and yet Christs Law the obliging cause Would any else have thus argued The Jews observed the seventh day Sabbath because the Creator rested the seventh day Therefore they had no command from God for it Woe to the Churches that have such expositors of Gods commands Or as if Christ who both Commissioned and Inspired the Apostles by the Holy Ghost to teach all his commands and settle Church Orders were not thus the chief Author of what they did by his Commission and Spirit What Church can shew the like Commission or the like Miraculous and Infallible Spirit as they had See further August de Civitat Dei l. 22. c. 30. Serm. 15. de Verb. Apostol But saith he Christ and two of his Disciples travelled on the day of his Resurrection from Jerusalem to Emaus seven miles and back again which they would not have done if it had been a Sabbath Answ. 1. They would not have done it if it had been a Jewish Sabbath of Ceremonial Rest But those that you count too precise will go as far now in Case of need to hear a Sermon And remember that they spent the time in Christs preaching and their Hearing and Conferring after of it 2. But we grant that though the Foundation was laid by Christs Resurrection yet it was not a Law fully promulgate to and understood by the Apostles till the Coming down of the Holy Ghost nor many greater matters neither who was promised and given to teach them all things c. And it is worth the noting how Heylin beginneth his Chap. 3. l. 2. The Lords day taken up by the common consent of the Church not instituted or established by any Text of Scripture or Edict of Emperour or Decree of Council save that some few Councils did reflect upon it In that which follows we shall find both Emperours and Councils very frequent in ordering things about this day and the Service of it Answ. Note Reader What could possibly besides Christ and the Holy Ghost in the Apostles be the Instituter of a day which neither Emperour nor Council instituted and yet was received by the common consent of all Churches in the World even from and in the Apostles dayes Yea as this man confesseth by their Approbation and Authority But hence forward in the fourth Century I am prevented from bringing in my most numerous witnesses by Heylins Confession that now Emperours Councils and all were for it But yet let the Reader remember 1. How few and small Records be left of the second Century and not many of the third 2. And that Historical copious Testimonies of the fourth Century that is Emperours Councils and the most pious and learned Fathers attesting that the Universal Church received it from the Apostles is not vain or a small Evidence when as the fourth Century began but 200 years after St. Johns death or within less than a year And that the first Christian Emperour finding all Christians unanimous in the possession of the day should make a Law as our Kings do for the due observing of it And that the first General Council should establish uniformity in the very Gesture of Worship on that day are strong Confirmations of the matter of fact that the
History assureth us that they did III. Nor have we any fuller Scripture proof that the Apostles used to require of those that were to be Baptized any more than a general Profession of the substance of the Christian faith in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Or of the ancient use of the Christian Creed either in the words now used or any of the same importance From whence many would inferr that any one is to be Baptized who will but say that I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God with the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. or that Christ is come in the flesh 1 Joh. 4. 2 3. But Historical evidence assureth us that it was usual in those times to require of men a more explicite understanding profession of the Christian faith before they were admitted to Baptisme And that they had a summary or Symbole fitted to that use commonly called The Apostles Creed at least as to the constant tenour of the matter though some words might be left to the speakers will and some little subordinate Articles may be since added And that it was long after the use to keep men in the state of Catechised persons till they understood that Creed And it is in it self exceeding probable that though among the intelligent Jews who had long expected the Messiah the Apostles did Baptize thousands in a day Act. 2. Yet where the Miraculous communication of the Spirit did not antecede as it did Act. 10. they would make poor Heathens who had been bred in ignorance to understand what they did first and would require of them an understanding profession of their Belief in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost which could not possibly if understanding contain much less than the Symbolum fidâ—i the Apostles Creed IV. Nor have we any Scripture proof except by inferring obedience from the precept that ever the Lords Prayer was used in words after Christ commanded or delivered it Whence some inferr that it should not be so used But Church History putteth that past doubt Other such instances I pretermit I think now that I have fully proved to sober considerate Christians that the matter of fact that the Lords day was appointed by the Apostles peculiarly for Church-Worship is certain to us by historical Evidence added to the historical intimations in Scripture as a full exposition and confirmation of it And that this is a proof that no Christian can deny without unsufferable injury to the Scriptures and the Christian cause CHAP. VI. Prop. 5. This Act of the Apostles appointing the Lords day for Christian Worship was done by the special inspiration or guidance of the Holy Ghost THis is proved 1. Because it is one of those Acts or works of their Office to which the Holy Ghost was promised them 2. Because that such like or smaller things are by them ascribed to the Holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. Iâ— seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us when they did but declare an antecedent duty and decide a Controversie thereabout See also Act. 4. 8. Act. 5. 3. 6. 3. with 7. 55. Act. 13. 2 4. 16. 6 7. 20. 23 28. 21. 11. 2 Tim. 1. 14. Jud. 20. Act. 11. 12 28. 19. 21. 20. 22. 1 Cor. 5. 3 4. 14. 2 15 16. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. When Paul doth but counsel to a single life he ascribeth it to the Spirit of God 3. And if any will presume to say that men purposely indued with the Spirit for the works of their commission did notwithstanding do such great things as this without the conduct of that Spirit they may by the same way of proceeding pretend it to be as uncertain of every particular Book and Chapter in the New Testament whether or no they wrote it by the Spirit For if it be a sound inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly leave in writing to the Churches the doctrines and precepts of Christ Ergo whatever they have left in Writing to the Churches as the doctrine and precepts of Christ is Infallibly done by the Guidance of that Spirit Then it will be as good an inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly settle Church-orders for all the Churches universalâ—y ergo Whatever Church-orders they setled for all the Churches universally they setled them by the infallible guidance of that Spirit But this few Christians will deny except some Papists who would bring down Apostolical Constitutions to a lower rank and rate that the Pope and his General Council may be capable of â—â—ying claim to the like themselves and so may make as many more Laws for the Church as they please and pretend such an authority for it as the Apostles had for theirs By which preâ—ense many would make too little distinction between Gods Laws given by his Spirit and the Laws 〈◊〉 a Pope and Popish Council and call then all but The Laws of the Church Whereas there is no Universal Head of the Church but Christ who hath reserved Universal Legislation to Himself alone to be performed by himself personally and by his Advocate the Holy Ghost in his Authorized and Infallibly-inspired Apostles who were the Promulgators and Recorders of them All following Pastors being but as the Jewish Priests were to Moses and the Prophets the preservers the expositers and the applyers of that Law CHAP. VII Qu. 2. Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. I Shall here premise That as some superstition is less dangerous than prophaneness though it be troublesome and have ill consequents so the Errour of them who keep both daies as of Divine appointment is much less dangerous than theirs that keep none yea and less dangerous I think than theirs who reject the Lords day and keep the seventh day only Because these latter are guilty of two sins the rejecting of the right day and the keeping of the wrong but the other are guilty but of one the keeping of the wrong day Besides that if it were not done with a superstitious conceit that it is Gods Law in some cases a day may be voluntarily set apart for holy duties as daies of Thanksgiving and Humiliation now are But yet though the rejecting of the Lords day be the greater fault and I have no uncharitable censures of them that through weakness keep both daies I must conclude it as the truth that We are not obliged to the observation of the Saturday or seventh day as a Sabbath or separated day of holy Worship Arg. 1. That dayes observation which we are not obliged to either by the Law of Nature the Positive Law given to Adam the Positive Law given to Noah the Law of Moses nor the Law of Christ incarnate we are not obliged to by any Law of God as distinct from humane Laws But such is the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath Ergo we are
as he nailed the hand-writing of Ordinances to his Cross so he buried the Sabbath in his Grave by lying buried on that day And therefore the Western Churches who had fewer Jews among them did fast on the Sabbath day to shew the change that Christs burial intimated Though the Eastern Churches did not lest they should offend the Jews And that the ancient Christians were not for sabbatizing on the seventh day is visible in the writings of most save the Eastern ones before mentioned Tertull. cont Marcion li. 1. cap. 20. Chrysost. Theodoret Primasius c. on Gal. 4. expound that Text as that by Dayes is meant the Jewish Sabbath and by Moneths the New Moons c. Cyprian 59. Epist. ad Hidum saith that the eighth day is to Christians what the Sabbath was to the Jews and calleth the Sabbath the Image of the Lords day Athanasius de Sab. Circumcis is full and plain on it See Tertullian Advers Judae c. 4. Ambros. in Eph. 2. August Ep. 118. Châ—ysâ—st in Gal. 1. Hâ—m 12. ad pop Hilary before cited Prolog in Psalm Origen Hom. 23. in Num. Item Tertull. de Idol c. 14. Epipban l. 1. num 30. noting the Nazaraei and Ebionaei Hereticks that they kept the Jews Sabbath In a word The Council of Laodiâ—aea doth Anathematize them that did Judaize by forbearing their Labours on the Sabbath or seventh day And as Sozomen tells us that at Alexandria and Rome they used no Assemblies on the Sabbath so where they did in most Churches they communicated not in the Sacrament Yea that Ignatius himself true or false who saith as aforecited After the Sabbath let every lover of Christ celebrate the Lords day doth yet in the same Epistle ad Magnes before say Old things are passed away behold all things are made new For if we yet live after the Jewish Law and the Circumcision of the flesh we deny that we have received Grace Let us not therefore keep the Sabbath or sabbatize Jewishly as delighting in Idleness or Rest from labour For be that will not labour let him not eat In the sweat if thy brows thou shalt cat thy bread I confess I take the cited Texts to have been added since the body of the Epistle was written but though the Writer favour of the Eastern custom yet he sheweth they did not sabbatize on the account of the fourth Commandment or supposed continuation of the Jewish Sabbath as a Sabbath For bodily labour was strictly forbidden in the fourth Commandment Dionysius Alexandr hath an Epistle to Basilides a Bishop on the Question When the Sabbath Fast must end and the observation of the Lords day begin Biblioth Patr. Graec. Lat. Vol. 1. p. 306. In which he is against them that end their Fast too soon And plainly intimateth that the seventh day was to be kept but as a preparatory Fast being the day that Christ lay in the grave and not as a Sabbath or as the Lords day I cite not any of these as a humane authority to be set against the authority of the fourth Commandment But as the certain History of the change of the day which the Apostles made Qu. How far then is the fourth Commandment Moral you seem to subvert the old foundation which most others build the Lords day upon Answ. Let us not entangle our selves with the ambiguities of the word Moral which most properly signifieth Ethical as distinct from Physical c. By Moral here is meant that which is on what ground soever of perpetual or continued obligation And so it is all one as to ask how far it is still obligatory or in force To which I answer 1. It is a part of the Law of Nature that God be solemnly worshipped in families and in holy assemblies 2. It is a part of the Law of Nature that where greater things do not forbid it a stated time be appointed for this service and that it be not left at Randome to every mans will 3. It is of the Law of Nature that where greater matters do not hinder it this day be one and the same in the same Countreys yea if it may be through the world 4. It is of the Law of Nature that this day be not so rarely as to hinder the ends of the day nor yet so frequently as to deprive us of opportunity for our necessary corporal labour 5. It is of the Law of Nature that the holy duties of this day be nâ—t hindered by any corporal work or fleshly pleasure or any unnecessary thing which contradiâ—teth the holy ends of the day 6. It is of the Law of Nature that Rulers and in special Masters of families do take care that their inferiours thus observe it In all these points the fourth Commandment being but a transcript of the Law of Nature which we can yet prove from the nature of the reason of the thing the matter of it continueth not as Jewish but as Natural 7. Besides all this when no man of himself could tell whether one day in six or seven or eight were his duty to observe God hath come in and 1. By Doctrine or History told us that he made the world in six dayes and rested the seventh 2. By Law and bath commanded one day in seven to the Jews by which he hath made known consequentialâ—y to all men that one day in seven is the fittest proportion of time And the case being thus determined by God by a Law to others doth consequentially become a Law to us because it is the determination of Divine Wisdom unless it were done upon some reasons in which their condition differeth from ours And thus the Doctrine and Reasons of an abrogated Law continuing may induce on us an obligation to duty And in this sense the fourth Commandment may be said still to bind us to one day in seven But in two points the obligation even as to the Matter ceaseth 1. We are not bound to the seventh day because God our Redeemer who is Lord of the Sabbath hath made a change 2. We are not bound to a Sabbath in the old notion that is to a day of Ceremonial Rest for it self required but to a day to be spent in Evangelical Worship And though I am not of their mind who say that the seventh day is not commanded in the fourth Commandment but a Sabbath only yet I think that it is evident in the words that the Ratio Sabbati and the Ratio diei septimi are distinguishable And that the Sabbath as a Sabbath is first in the precept and the particular day is there but secondarily and so mutably as if God had said I will have a particular day set apart for a holy Rest and for my Worship And that day shall be one in seven and the seventh also on which I rested from my works And thus I have said as much as I think needful to satisfie the considerate about the day Again professing 1. That I believe that
he is in the right that maketh Conscience of the Lords day only 2. But yet I will not break Charity with any Brother that shall in tenderness of Conscience keep both dayes especially in times of prophaness when few will be brought to the true observation of one 3. But I think him that keepeth the seventh day only and neglecteth the Lords day to sin against very evident light with many aggravations 4. But I think him that keepeth no day whether professedly or practising contrary to his profession whether on pretence of avoiding Superstition or on pretence of keeping every day as a Sabbath to be far the worst of all I shall now add somewhat to some appendant Questions CHAP. VIII Of the beginning of the Day Quest. 1. When doth the Lords day begin Answ. 1. If we can tell when any day beginneth we may know when that beginneth If we cannot the necessity of our ignorance will shorten the trouble of our scruples by excusing us 2. Because the Lords day is not to be kept as a Jewish Sabbath ceremoniously but the Time and the Rest are here commanded subserviently for the work sake therefore we have not so much reason to be scrupulous about the hours of beginning and ending as the Jews had about their Sabbath 3. I think he that judgeth of the beginning and ending of the day according to the common estimation of the Countrey where he liveth will best answer the ends of the Institution For he will still keep the same proportion of time and so much as is ordinarily allowed on other dayes for work he will spend this day in holy works and so much in rest as is used to be spent in rest on other dayes which may ordinarily satisfie a well informed Conscience And if any extraordinary occasions as journeying or the like require him to doubt of any hours of the night whether they be part of the Lords day or not 1. It will be but his sleeping time and not his worshipping time which he will be in doubt of and 2. He will avoid all scandal and tempting others to break the day if he measure the day by the common estimate whereas if the Countrey where he liveth do esteem the day to begin at Sun-setting and he suppose it to begin at Midnight he may be scandalous by doing that which in the common opinion is a violation of the day If I thought that this short kind of solution were not the fittest to afford just quietness to the minds of sober Christians in this point I would take the pains to scan the Controversie about the true beginning of dayes But left it more puzzle and perplex than edifie or resolve and quiet the Conscience I save my self and the Reader that trouble CHAP. IX Quest. 2. HOw should the Lords day be kept or used Answ. The Practical Directions I have given in another Treatise I shall now give you but these generals I. The day being separated or set apart for Holy Worship must accordingly be spent therein To sanctifie it is to spend it in holy exercises How else should it be used as a Holy Day I was in the Spirit on the Lords day saith St. John Rev. 1. 10. II. The principal work of the day is the Communion of Christians in the publick exercises of Gods worship It is principally to be spent in holy assemblies And this is the use that the Scripture expresly mentioneth Acts 20. 7. and intimateth 1 Coâ— 16. 1 2. And as most Expotors think John 21. when the Disciples were gathered together with the door shut for fear of the Jews And all Church History assureth us that in these holy Assemblies principally the day was spent by the ancient Christians They spent almost all the day together 3. It is not only to be spent in holy exercises but also in such special holy exercises as are suitable to the purposes of the day That is it is a day of Commemorating the whole woâ—â— of our Redemption but especially the Resurrection of Christ. Therefore it is a day of Thanksgiving and Praise and the special services 〈◊〉 it must be Laudatory and Joyful exercises 4. But yet because it is sinners that are called to their work who are not yet fully delivered from their sin and misery these praises must be mixed with penitent Confessions and with earnest Petitions and with diligent Learning the will of God More particularly the publick exercises of the day are 1. Humble and penitent Confessions of sin 2. The faithful and fervent prayers of the Church 3. The Reading Preaching and Hearing of the Word of God 4. The Communion of the Church in the Lords Supper 5. The Laudatory Exhortations which attend it And the singing and speaking of the praises of our Creator and Redeemer and Sanctifier with joyful Thanksgiving for his wonderful benefits 6. The seasonable exercise of holy Discipline on particular persons for comforting the weak reforming the scandalous casting out the obstinately impenitent and absolving and receiving the penitent 7. The Pastors blessing the people in the name of the Lord. 8. And as an appurtenance in due season Oblations or Contributions for holy and Charitable uses even for the Church and Poor which yet may be put off to other dayes when it is more convenient so to do Qu. But who is it that must be present in all these exercises Answ. Where there is no Church yet called the whole day may be spent in Preaching to and teaching the unconverted Infidels But where there is a Church and no other persons mixt the whole exercises of the day must be such as are fitted to the state of the Church But where there is a Church and other persons Infidels or impenitent ones with them the day must be spent proportionably in exercises suitable to the good of both yet so that Church-exercises should be the principal work of the day And the ancient laudable practice of the Churches was to Preach to the Infidel auditors and Catechumens in the morning on such Subjects as were most suitable to them and then to dismiss them and retain the faithful or baptized only And to Teach them all the Commands of Christ To stir them up to the Joyful commemoration of Christ and his Resurrection and to sing Gods praises and celebrate the Lords Supper with Eucharistical acknowledgments and joy And they never kept a Lords day in the Church without the Lords Supper In which the bare administration of the signes was not their whole work but all their Thanksgiving and Praising exercises were principally then used and connexed to the Lords Supper which the Liturgies yet extant do at large express And I know no reason but thus it should be still or at least but that this course should be the ordinary celebration of the day Qu. But seeing the Sabbath was instituted in the beginning to commemorate the work of the Creation must that be laid by now because of our commemoration of the work of
labour was not like the Plowmans Masons Carpenters Carryers c. to take up their thoughts but they could lay a Book before them and read or meditate or Discourse to Edification whilest they were working But this is not the case of the Multitude And let any sober man but consider whether with people so ignorant and averse as the most are should he be never so diligent on the Lords day the six dayes intermission be not a great cooling of affection and a great delayer of their growth in knowledge when they are like by the weeks end to forget all that they had learned on the Lords day What then would these poor people come to if the Lords day it self must be alsoloitered or played away VI. The tyranny of many Masters maketh the Lords day a great mercy to the world For if God had not made a Law for their Rest and Liberty abundance of worldly impious persons would have allowed them little Rest for their bodies and less opportunity for the good of their souls Therefore they have cause with great thankfulness to improve the holy liberty which God hath given them and not cast it away on play or idleness VII The full improvement of the Lords dayes doth tend to breed and keep up an able faithful Ministry in the Churches on which the preservation and glory of Religion much dependeth When there is a necessity of full Ecclesiastical performances imposed on Ministers they are also necessitated to prepare themselves with answerable abilities and fitness But when no more is required of them but to read the Liturgie or to say a short and dry Discourse they that know no more is necessary to their ends are so strongly tempted to get ability and preparations for no more that few will overcome the temptation And therefore the World knoweth that in Moscovy Abassia and for the most part of the Greek and Armenian Churches as nothing or little more than Reading is required so little more ability than to Read is laboured after And the Ministers are ordinarily so ignorant and weak as is the scorn and decay of the Christian Religion VIII Yea it will strongly encline Masters of Families to labour more for abilities to instruct and Catechise their Families and pray with them and guide them in the fear of God when they know that the whole day must be improved to the spiritual good of their Families And so knowledge abilities and family-holiness will increase Whereas those that think themselves under no such obligations what ignorant profane and ungodly families have they because for the most part they are such themselves IX A multitude of gross sins will be prevented by the due observation of the Lords day Nothing more usual than for the sports riots idleness and sensuality of that day to be nurseries of Oathes Curses Ribaldry Fornication Gluttony Drunkenness Frayes and Bloodshed And is not Gods Service better work than these X. Lastly This holy order and prosperity of the Churches and this knowledge and piety in individual Subjects will become the safety beauty order and felicity of Kingdomes and all Civil societies of men For when the people are fit but duly to use and sanctifie the Lords day they are fit to use all things in a sanctified manner and to be an honour to their Countrey and an ease and comfort to their Governours and a common blessing to all about them CHAP. XIII What other Church Festivals or separated daies are lawful I Shall conclude this Discourse with the brief answer of this Question I. No sober Christian doubteth but that some part of every day is to be spent in Religious exercises And that even our earthly business must be done with a spiritual intent and mind And that every day must be kept as like to the Lords day as our weakness and our other duties which God hath laid upon us will allow II. Few make any question but the whole dayes of Humiliation and of Thanksgiving may and must be kept upon great and extraordinary occasions of Judgements or of mercies And that many Churches may agree in these And I know no just reason why the Magistrate may not with Charity and Moderation to the weak impose them and command such an agreement among his Subjects III. Few doubt but the Commemoration of great Merâ—ies or Judgements may be made anniversary and of long continuance As the Powder-plot day Nov. 5. is now made among us to preserve the memorial of that deliverance And why may it not be continued whilest the great sense of the benefit should be continued And so the second of Sept. is set apart for the Anniversary humbling remembrance of the Firing of London And so in divers other cases IV. The great blessing of an Apostolick Ministry and of the stability of the Martyrs in their sufferings for Christ being so rare and notable a Mercy to the Church I confess I know no reason why the Churches of all succeeding ages may not keep an Anniversary day of Thanksgiving to God for Peter or Paul or Stephen as well as for the Powder plot-deliverance I know not where God hath forbidden it directly or indirectly If his instituting the Lords day were a virtual prohibition for man to separate any more or if the prohibition of adding to Gods Word were against it they would be against other daies of Humiliation and Thanksgiving especially Anniversarily which we confess they are not If the reason be scandal lest the Men should have the honour instead of God I Answer 1. An honour is due to Apostles and Martyrs in their places in meet subordination to God 2. Where the case of scandal is notorious it may become by that accident unlawful and yet not be so in other times and places V. The Devil hâ—th here been a great Vndoer by Overdoing When he knew not how else to cast out the holy observation of the Lords day with zealous people he found out the trick of devising so many dayes called Holy dayes to set up by it that the people might perceive that the observation of them all as holy was never to be expected And so the Lords day was jumbled in the heap of holy dayes and all turned into Ceremony by the Papists and too many other Churches in the World Which became Calvins temptation as his own words make plain to think too meanly of the Lords day with the rest VI. In the lawful observation of daies it is most orderly to do as the Churches do which we live among and are to joine with VII But if Church tyranny would overwhelm any place with over-numerous daies or Ceremonies which are singly considered lawful we should do nothing needlesly to countenance and encourage such usurpation VIII Yet is it lawful to hear a Sermon which shall be Preached on a humane Holy day which is imposed by Usurpation Seeing such a a Moral duty may be done and so great a benefit received without any approbation of the inconvenient season
Text Though I know some say otherwise to the injury of their own cause 8. How many years together the Churches had been in possession and consequently in the undoubted knowledge of the true established day of holy Worship before a word of the New Testament was Written And therefore that it was not written to be the first enacting of this day or change but for other uses 9. And yet how much evidence of the fact there is in the Scripture it self that really such a day was used for the ordinary Church-assemblies as a peculiar separated day even by the Common order of the Apostles in the Churches as 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. speaks 10. And how impossible it is that all the Churches in the World should from their beginning keep this as the separated day even by the Apostles and from their times if it had not been so ordered by them indeed And whether it be possible that in no age neer the original hereof no Pastor no Christian no Heretick no Enemy would have detected the fraud or common Errour or once have written that this day was not separated or used by the Apostles or Apostolical Churches no nor any one that I know of that denyed not the Resurrection ever to have scrupled or opposed the day 11. Whether they that can reject such Historical evidence as this is do not unwittingly cast away the holy Scriptures what zeal soever they pretend or have for their honour and perfection 12. Whether they that can reject all this evidence and yet can find in the second Commandment the prohibition of all formes of Prayer Sermons Catechismes all modal inventions of men as Images if not Idols are without partiality or do not walk as men by very different measures and partial conceptions I would on my knees intreat some most dear and worthy friends on their knees to ponder these twelve particulars But because by their preterition of the Text Act. 2. 1 2. I perceive they observe not that the Holy Ghost came down on the Lords day Let them consider that the Passeover was on the Sabbath day that year and therefore it must needs be just fifty dayes to that Lords day and it must be the day of Pentecost And it is not a trifle that the first Sermon to 〈◊〉 people was Preached by Peter on that day and â—000 Converted by it and Baptized Dr. Heyliâ—s own words are these Part. 2. p. 13. The first particular passage which did occâ—â—â— in holy Scripturâ— touching the first day of the week is that upon that day the Holy Ghost did first come down on the Apostles and that on the same day St. Peter Preached his first Sermon to the Jews and Baptized such as believed there being added to the Church that day 3000 souls And to prove the day he saith p. 14. The rule being this that on what day soever the second of the Passover did fall on that also fell the great Feast of Pentecost as Scaliger de Emend Temp. l. 2. So that as often as the Passover did fall on the Sabbath as this year it did then Pentecost fell on the Sunday The last part of our Objections are from History and it is said Obj. Qu. Whether the observation of the first day was not brought into this Island by Antichrist about 408 or 409 years agoe Roger Hoveden about an 1202 above 1200 years after Christ mentioneth a Council held in Scotland for the initiation or first bringing in that which he calls the Dominical day see this testimony mentioned by Binius in his Councils and somewhat enlarged by Matth. Paris the old impression fol. 192 193. and the last Edition fol. 200 and 201 And how the King of England and the Nobility would not then receive this alteration I conceive that in the first Centuries the great Controversie relating to this was about translating the keeping the Passover which they now call Easter from the fourteenth day of the first Moon c. under the colour of honouring Christ to the first day of the Week as the Dominical day which the Popes first set themselves with great vehemency to introduce And as the Pope obtained his purpose for one day in a year so by degrees in some places came in one day in a week the first day to be observed and the seventh day by one of the Popes turned from a Festival 〈◊〉 Fast whilest many of the Eastern and some of the Western Churches did still retain withall the observation of the seventh-day Sabbath together with the first day and others of the Churches in the East and West kept only to the seventh day as the Christian Sabbath c. Answ. How much more desirable an Adversary is Heylin by his acquaintance with History 1. Were any of the Authors I before cited either Antichristian or 1200 years after Christ Ignatius if genuine was about an 102. If not as Dalaeus thinks then he was about 300. The Canons called the Apostles and the Constitutions called the Apostles very ancient Justin Martyr wrote his Apol an 150. about 50 years after St. Johns death where his testimony is as plain as can be spoken To which Plinyes who wrote about 107. some seven years after St. Johns death may be joyned that he may be understood of the day Clemens Alexand. about 94 years after St. John an 194. Tertullian who is most express and full and frequent about 198 that is 98 years after St. John Origen about 206 began his Teaching Cyprian about an 250. Athanasius who wrote largely of it about an 330. To what purpose should I mention again Eusebius Greg. Nazianzen Nyssen and all the rest It was but about an 309 that Constantine began his raign who made Laws for the Lords day which other Christian Emperours enlarged But how much earlier were all those Synods which Eusebius mentioned which in the determination of Easter owned the Lords day And that of Nice was but about an 327. The Council of Laodicea but about an 314 or 320. The Council of Eliberis about an 307. Can. 21. saith If any that live in the Cities shall stay from Church three Lords daies let him be so long suspended from the Sacrament till he be sensible of his punishment After this how many Councils and how many Imperial Laws take care of the Lords dayes It is tedious to cite them To these may be added 1. The common agreement that it is founded in the Resurrection and was from that time 2. The early contest for keeping Easter only on that day which you note as being a day by all Christians received 3. The common detestation of Fasting on that day 4. And the universal custome of not kneeling in adoration on that day which all shew that the day was specially observed Athanasius saith de sab Circ Even as at the first it was commanded that the Sabbath should be observed in memory of the finishing of the World so do we celebrate the Lords day as the commemoration
g. If the second Command say Thou shalt perform all Gods instituted Worship Or Thou shalt Worship me as I appoint thee This bindeth no man to Baptism the Lords Supper c. till another Law appoint them Therefore there is not so much in the general Law alone as is in that and the particular also 2. All that is presupposed in a particular Law is not part of that Law 3. It is not so much to inferr a duty indirectly and by far fetcht Consequences as to command it directly Now I prove the assertion by instances All these following are Natural duties and commanded also in other parts of Scripture and yet are not in the Law of Moses as Written in Stone 1. To believe that the soul is Immortal 2. To believe that there is a Heaven where we shall be perfectly blessed in the Knowledge Love and Fruition of God 3. To believe that there is a Hell or life of future punishment for all the impenitent 4. To Love ourselves with a just and necessary Love as such 5. To take greatest care to save our souls above our bodies 6. To tame and mortifie all our fleshly lusts in order to our own Salvation 7. To deny all bodily pleasure profit honour liberty and life for the securing of our salvation 8. To forbear all outward acts of Gluttony Drunkenness Sloth c. as they tend to our own damnation 9. To rejoice in persecution because of our great reward in Heaven 10. To pray constantly and servently for Heaven as the means of our obtaining it Let none say that many of these same things are commanded in order to God and our neighbour For I grant that the same material acts be so as they are expressions of Love to God and Man But to do them in Love to our selves and for our own Salvation is another principle and end not contrary to but necessarily conjunct with the former two And indeed all the duties of self-love as such are past by as supposed in Moses Decalogue because they are deeply written in mans Nature and because the Law was Written as Political for another use Obj. But these are all supposed in the first Command of Loving God and in the second Table Thou shalt Love thy Neighbour as thy self Answ. 1. These last are not the words of the Decalogue but a part of the summary of all the Law 2. Both Tables indeed suppose the Love of our selves but that which is supposed is not a part of them Obj. But it is the Socinians that say the Old Testament speaketh of no reward or punishment but in this life Answ. True But Camero de tripl faed and others that rightly understand the matter affirm that 1. The Law of Nature containeth future rewards and punishments in another life 2. And so doth the Covenant of Grace made with Adam and all mankind in him and renewed to Noah Abraham and the Israelites which by Paul is called The Promise as distinct from the Law 3. But the Law of Moses in its own proper Nature as such was only Political and spake but of Temporal Rewards and Punishments 4. Though yet all the faithful were bound to take the Law and Promise together and so to have respect both to Temporal and Eternal things For the Law it self connoted and supposed things Eternal as our great concernment III. There is more of the Law of Nature in other parts of Moses Law conjunct with the Decalogue than is in the Decalogue alone I will stay no longer in the proof of this than to cite the places as you do Exod. 23. 13 32. 22. 18 20. Lev. 20. 1 4 6. Deut. 13. 17. Exod. 23. 24. Deut. 12. 23. Lev. 24. 23. 3. Exod. 12. 16. Deut. 23. 18. Exod. 22. 28. 23. 20. 21. 15 17. Lev. 19. 32. Deut. 21. 1. 16. 6. 11. Exod. 21. 12 13 18 20 22 c. 22. 2 3. Lev. 13. 14. 17. Deut. 21. Exod. 22. 19. Lev. 18. 19. 29. 20. Deut. 22. Exod. 21. 16 21 32 35. 22. 1. 4. to 17. Lev. 19. 30 35. Deut. 24. 29. 14. 21. 25. Exod. 23. 1. to 9. Deut. 23. 24. Lev. 19. 11 15. Exod. 22. 21 22. 25. 26. 23. 4. Lev. 19. 14 16 18 c. By all this I shew you why 1. I allow not of your making the word Law in the New Testament to signifie the Decalogue only or taking them for equipollent terms 2. Why I take not the Decalogue and the Law of Nature for equipollent termes or their matter to be of the same extent And consequently why I take it for no proof that all things in the Decalogue are perpetual because all things in the Law of Nature are so CHAP. V. Whether the truest Antiquity be for the seventh day Sabbath as kept by the Churches of Christ IT is here further objected that the seventh day Sabbath hath the truest testimonies of Antiquity that it is controvertible when and how the Lords day came in but the Antiquity of the seventh day Sabbath is past Controversie that the Eastern Christians long observed it and Antichrist in the West did turn it into a Fast that the Empire of Abassia keepeth it to this day Answ. There is enough said of this before were it not that some Objectors causlesly look for more I answer therefore 1. That it is true that the Sabbath is more ancient than the Lords day And so is Moses more ancient than Christ Incarnate and his Law than the Gospel as delivered by Christ and his Apostles and Circumcision than Baptism and the Passover than the Lords Supper And so every mans Conception Nativity Infancie and Ignorance was before his Maturity and Knowledge And what can you gather from all this Thus the Papists say that their way of Religion was in England before ours and that the reliques of it in our Monuments Orate pro animabus c. is their standing witness which we cannot totally deface And its true if by our way they mean the Reformation of theirs as such For the Cure is ever after the disease Though its false if they speak of our Religion it self which was here before their errours as Health is before sickness But they should consider that by this prerogative the Heathens excell us both And that they may say you have yet many Monuments of our more ancient Religion which you have not been able to obliterate You still call your Week dayes by our ancient names Sunday Munday c. Your adoration towards the East was fetcht from us and so were abundance of your Customes Which we hope may recover the reputation of our Religion 2. I have shewed you already how and why the Eastern Christians kept the Sabbath 1. They kept it not as a Sabbath but only met on that day as they did on the fourth and the sixth dayes Wednesdayes and Fridayes as it is used in England to this
that they took their Authority for the highest and their judgement for infallible and therefore received their writings as Canonical and Divine 3. The Churches professed to observe the Lords day as an Apostolical Ordinance And they cannot be all supposed to have conspired in a lie yea to have belyed the Holy Ghost 4. The Apostles themselves would have controlled this course if it had not been by their own appointment For I have proved that the usage was in their own daies And they were not so careless of the preservation of Christs Ordinances and Churches as to let such things be done without contradiction when it is known how Paul strove to resist and retrench all the corruptions of Church-order in the Churches to which he wrote If the Apostles silently connived at such corruptions how could we rest on their authority Especially the Apostle John in an 99 would rather have written against it as the superstition of Usurpers as he checkt Diotrephes for contempt of him than have said that he was in the Spirit on the Lords day when he saw Christ and received his Revelation and message to the Churches 5. And if the Churches had taken up this practice universally without the Apostles it is utterly improbable that no Church writer would have committed to memory either that one Church that begun the custome or the Council or means used for a sudden Confederacy therein If it had begun with some one Church it would have been long before the rest would have been brought to an agreeing Consent It was many hundred years before they all agreed of the Time of Easter And it was till the middle of Chrysostomes time for he saith it was but ten years agoe when he wrote it that they agreed of the time of Christs Nativity But if it had been done by Confederacy at once the motion the Council called about it the debates and the dissenters and resistances would all have been matter of fact so notable as would have found a place in some Author or Church History Whereas there is not a Syllable of any such thing either of Council letter messenger debate resistance c. Therefore it is evident that the thing was done by the Apostles Prop. 12. They that will deny the validity of 〈◊〉 Historical evidence do by consequence betray the Christian faith or give away or deny the necessary means of proving the truth of it and of many great particulars of Religion I suppose that in my Book called The Reasons of the Christian Religion I have proved that Christianity is proved true by the SPIRIT as the great witness of Christ and of the Christian Verity But I have proved withall the necessity and certainty of historical means to bring the matters of fact to our notice as sense it self did bring them to the notice of the first receivers For instance I. Without such historical Evidence and Certainty we cannot be certain what 〈◊〉 of Scripture are truly Canonical and of Divine authority and what not This Protestants grant to Papists in the Controversie of Tradition Though the Canon be it self compleat and Tradition is no supplement to make up the Scriptures as if they were iâ— suâ— genere imperfect yet it is commonly granted that our Fathers and Teachers Tradition is the hand to deliver us this perfect Rule and to tell us what parts make up the Canon If any say that the Books do prove themselves to be Canonical or Divine I answer 1. What man alive could tell without historical proof that the Canticles or Esther are Canonical yea or Ecclesiastes or the Proverbs and not the Books of Wisdome and Ecclesiasticus 2. How can any man know that the Scripture histories are Canonical The suitableness of them to a holy soul will do much to confirm one that is already holy of the truth of the Doctrines But if the spirit within us assure us immediately of the truth of the History it must be by Inspiration and Revelation which no Christians have that ever I was yet acquainted with For instance that the Books of Chronicles are Canonical or the Book of Either or the Books of the Kings or Samuel or Judges And how much doth the doctrine of Christianity depend on the history As of the Creation of the Israelites bondage and deliverance and the giving of the Law and Moses miracles and of Chronologie and Christs Genealogie and of the History of Christs own Nativity Miracles and Life and the History of the Apostles afterward To say that the very History so far proveth its own truth as that without subsequent History we can be sure of it and must be is to reduce all Christs Church of right believers into a narrow room when I never knew the man that as far as I could perceive did know the History to be Divine by its proper evidence without Tradition and subsequent History 3. And how can any man know the Ceremonial Law to be Divine by its proper evidence alone Who is he that readeth over Exodus Leviticus and Numbers that will say that without knowing by History that thâ—â— is a Divinâ— Record he could have certainly perceived by the Book it self that all these were indeed Divine institutions or Laws 4. And how can any meer Positive institutions oâ— the New Testament be known proprio lumine by their own evidence to be Divine As the institution of Sacraments Officers Orders c. What is there in them that can infallibly prove it to us 5. And how can any Prophecies be known by their own evidence to be Divine till they are fulfilled and that shall prove it I know that the whole frame together of the Christian Religion 〈◊〉 its sufficient Evidence but we must not be guilty of a peevish rejecting it The 〈◊〉 part 〈◊〉 its witness within us in that state of holiness which it imprinteth on the soul and the rest are witnessed to or proved partly by that and partly by Miracles and those and the records by historical evidence But when God hath made many things necessary to the full evidence and wranglers through partiality and Contention against each others will some throw away one part and some another they will all prove destroyers of the faith as all dividers be If the Papist will say It is Tradition and not inhaerent Evidence or if others will say that it is inhaerent evidence alone and not history or Tradition where God hath made both needful hereunto both will be found injurious to the faith II. Without this historical evidence we cannot prove that any of the books of Scripture are not maimed or depraved That they come to our hands as the Apostles and Evangelists wrote them uncorrupted It is certain by History that many Hereticks did deprave and câ—rrupt them and would have obtruded those Copies or Corruptions on the Churches And how we shall certainly prove that they did not prevail or that their copies are false and ours are true I know not without the help
of History Mahomet and his followers more numerous than the Christians pretend that Mahomets name was in the Gospel of John as the Paraclet or Comforter promised by Christ and that the Christians have blotted it out and altered the Writings of the Gospel And how shall we disprove them but by Historical Evidence As the Arrians and Socinians pretend that we have added 1 John 5. 7. for the Trinity so others say of other Texts And how shall we confute them without Historical Evidence III. Therefore we cannot make good the Authority of any one single Verse or Text of Scripture which we shall alledge without historical evidence Because we are not certain of that particular text or words whether it have been altered or added or corrupted by the fraud of Hereticks or the partiality of some Christians or the oversight of Scribes For if a Custome of setting apart one day weekly even the first for publick Worship might creep into all the Churches in the World and no man know how nor when much more might one or a few corrupt Copies become the exemplar of those that follow For what day all the Churches meet men women and children know Learned and unlearned know the Orthodox and Hereticks know and they so know as that they cannot choose but know But the alterations of a Text may bâ— uâ—â—nown to all save the Learned and the observing â—iligent part of the learned only and 〈◊〉 that they tell it to And besides Origen 〈◊〉 a Heretick and Hierome alas how few of the Fathers were â—ble and diligent Examiners of such things Therefore in the case of various Reâ—dings such as Ludov. Capellus treats of in his 〈◊〉 Sacra contradicted in many things by Bishop Vsher and others who are those Divines that have hitherto appealed either to the Spirit or to the proper light of the words for a decision Who is it that doth not presently fly to historical evidence And what that cannot determine we all conâ—ess to be uncertain And if Copies and History had delivered to us as various Readings oâ— every Text as they have done of some every Text would have remained uncertain to us Let none say that this leaveth the Christian Religion or the Scriptures uncertain I have fully answered that elsewhere 1. Christian Religion that is The Material parts of the Scripture on which our salvation lyeth hath much fuller evidence than each particular Text or Canonical Book hath And we need not regard the perverse zeal for the Scriptures of those men that would make all our Christianity as uncertain as the authority of a particular Text or book is And therefore God in mercy hath so ordered it that a thousand Texts may be uncertain to us or not understood no not by any or many Divines and yet the Christian faith be not at all shaken or ever the more uncertain for this When as he that understandeth not or believeth not every essential Article of the faith is no Christian. 2. And those books and Texts of Scripture are fully certain by the subservient help of History and usage which would be uncertain without them Therefore it is the act of an enemy of the Scriptures to cast away and dispute against that History which is necessary to our knowledge of its certainty and afterwards to plead that they who take in those necessary helps do make it uncertain Even as if they should go about to prove that all writings are uncertain and therefore that they make Christs doctrine uncertain who rest upon the credit of writings that is the Sacred Scriptures IV. Without historical notice how should we know that these Books were written by any of the same men that bear their names As Matthew Mark Luke John Paul Peter c. Especially when the Hereticks did put forth the Gospel of Thomas Nicodemus the Itinerary of Peter and many Books under venerable names Or when the name of the Author is not notified to all Christians certainly either by the spirit within us or by the matter And though our salvation depend not on the notice of the Pen-man yet it is of great moment in the matter of faith V. And how should we be certain that no other Sacred Books are lost the knowledge of which would tell us of that which these contain not and would help us to the better understanding of these I know that a priore we may argue from Gods Goodness that he will not so forsake his Church As a Jew might have done before Christs incarnation that the Gospel should be written because it is best for the world or Church But when we consider how much of the world and Church God hath forsaken since the Creation and how dark we are in such Prognosticks and how little we know what the Churches sins may provoke God to we should be less confident of such reasonings than we are of Historical Evidence which tells us de facto what God hath done So much of the use of the History as to the Cause of the Scriptures themselves Next you may observe that the denyal of the certainty of humane History and usage doth disadvantage Christianity in many great particular concernments As 1. Without it we should not fully know whether de facto the Church and Ministry dyed or almost dyed with the Apostles And whether there have been any true Churches since then till our own dayes Christs promise indeed tells us much but if we had no History of the performance of it we should be ready to doubt that it might be yet unperformed as far as the promise to Adam Gen. 3. 15. and to Abraham in thy seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed were till the coming of Christ. Nor could we easily confute the Roman or any hereticall Usurpation which would pretend possession since the Apostles daies and that all that are since gone to Heaven have gone thither by their way and not by ours II. Nor could we much better tell de facto whether Baptism have been administred in the form appointed by Christ In the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Indeed we may well and truly argue a priore Christ commanded it Ergo the Apostles obeyed him But 1. That Argument would hold good as to none or few but the Apostles And 2. It would as to them be though true yet much more dark than now it is because 1. We read that Peter disobeyed his command in Gal. 2. And 2. That after he had commanded them to Preach the Gospel to every Creature and all the World Peter scrupled still going to the Gentiles Act. 10. And 3. That when he said to them Pray thus Our Father c. yet we never read that they after used that form of words so when he said to them Baptize in the name of the Father c. yet the Scripture never mentioneth that they or any other person ever used that form of words But yet usage and