certain As of the Government of Augustus Tiberius Herod Pilate Foelix Festus c. 2. There are other certain means known to us of which I must refer the Reader to what I have written in my Reasons of the Christian Religion Part 2. Cap. 7. specially pag. 335. to 340. 3. No man can doubt but that the Christians of that same age as till the year one hundred might easily and certainly know such a matter of publick fact as whether the Lords day was constantly set apart and observed by all the Christian Churches for holy Worship For 1. It is certain that they did know it by sight and sense and therefore had no need of History 2. It is certain that they knew it before the Scriptures were written which we now speak of For it is not possible that for all those years time before any of the New Testament was written the Christians who assembled to worship God should not know on what day they used to assemble And if they knew it in the year 100. they must needs know it as well in the year 101. 102. 103. and so on For those that were young Christians fifty years after Christ would be aged at an hundred And those that were young at an hundred would be aged at an hundred and fifty and so on So that an age of people not ending at the age of a single person Congregations and societies are like Rivers that keep the same channel and name while one part of water followeth another Nay some of the same men are there anno 100. who were there anno 50. some anno 150. who were there anno 100. and so on Ten thousand thousand men women and children can tell on what day the Congregations of England use to assemble whereas if an Apostle were among us and should write on what day we assemble fewer would know it by that means And they that knew it but by his writing would know it less confidently than they that knew it by sense and experience Yet forget not that I am far from ascribing a certainty or a credibility to all humane History Much more from equalling any with the credit of Divine History But only I say 1. That sense is more assuring as to the subject than any History whatever 2. And that some History besides Divine is certain 3. And that much History is credible 4. And that this instance of the Day on which all Churches in the world assembled for holy Worship is one of the most palpable for certainty that possibly could be imagined 4. And I add that if some humane History or Tradition be not certain there can be no certainty of much of the Divine History to any but the persons who were themselves inspired or that saw the Visions or Miracles that confirmed them For as internal sense or intuition must assure the Inspired persons themselves and external sense must assure those that saw the matters of fact so all the rest have no way to know them but either still by a succession of New Revelations from Heaven which God doth not give or else by Report And I can no otherwise know what was revealed to an Apostle nor what was done in those times Of which more anon Prop. 5. The first institution of Church Offices and Orders and so of the Lords day was not by Scripture The proof is undeniable Because the Old Testament did not contain the Institution e. g. of particular Churches Sacraments Presbyters Deacons Deaconesses and the Lords day c. And the New Testament was none of it written till anno 40. at soonest when some as Bucholtzer Bellarm c. think Matthews Gospel was written though others say many years after and it was not all written till ann 99. Now it is certain that the Church was not all these years without the Orders now in question nor without a day to meet on for publick Worship Even as Baptism and the Lords Supper were instituted by Christ himself long before the writing of any part of the New Testament and the Church was in long possession of them upon the bare verbal declaration of the Apostles Prop. 6. Therefore it is certain that no part of the New Testament was written to any such end as to institute Sacraments or Church Offices or standing Orders but to instruct men about those that were already instituted as to the use of those times For it could not be written to institute that which was instituted before so many years Prop. 7. No part of the New Testament was written to make known to the Churches of those times the said Sacraments Offices stated Orders and Time of Worship Still observe that by a part I mean any book And I except the Decree written in a Letter of the Apostles Elders and Brethren Act. 15. concerning Circumcision not to be imposed on the Gentiles which yet made no new institution nor declared any but only determined of the continued forbearance of some things forbidden before of God in the precepts called Noah's and Pauls Epistles which reduce the Churches to Orders before setled and urge them to duty and decide some doubts about particular cases of Conscience The proof is visible 1. In the Writings themselves 2. In that all the Churches were in the possession and use of all the things in question long before For mutable Orders and Circumstances are none of the things in question It would be vain to write a history now to tell English men of this present age that the Lords day is used in England as a day set apart for publike worship or that persons are Baptized or receive the Lords Supper in England For seeing it is the common usage of all the Christians almost of the Land it is needless to tell men among us by writing that it is so unless it be to inferr somewhat else from it Prop. 8. Yet those holy Scriptures which were written to men of those times were also intended for the instruction of all succeeding ages And so the foure Evangelists wrote the history of Christ and Luke wrote the history of Paul till his coming to Rome and longer and of some more of the Apostles And on the by in the Epistles extant the Churches Customes of those times are much intimated And all this together with the subordinate history and the universal tenure and practice of the Churches is that history by which we must know the matters of fact of those times Nor is there any room left for a rational pretense of Rome or any other Church to produce Divine Institutions which were committed only to them or entrusted to their particular keeping only and were not delivered in Scripture nor in Common to the whole Church Prop. 9. Thus according to the use of the writings of the New Testament the matter of fact in question of the Lords dayes separation is historically touched on and proved though but briefly and on the by as a thing as well known to the
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 Written for the satisfaction of some Religious Persons who are lately drawn into Error or doubting in both these Points By Richard Baxter Rev. 1. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Loras Day Col. 2. 16 17. Let no 〈◊〉 judge you in Meat or in Driak or in respect of an Holy day or Feast or of the New 〈◊〉 or Sabbaths which are a shadow of things to come but the Body is of Christ. LONDON Printed for Nevil Simmons at the three Crowns near Holborn Conduit 1671. THE PREFACE Reader IF thou think this Treatise both superfluous and Defective when so many larger have better done the work already I shall not at all gainsay the latter nor much the former The reason of my writing it was the necessity and request of some very upright Godly persons who are lately faln into doubt or Errour in point of the Sabbath day conceiving that because the fourth Commandment was Written in Stone it is wholly unchangeable and consequently the seventh day Sabbath in force and that the Lords day is not a Day separated by God to holy Worship I knew that there was enough written on this Subject long agoe But 1. Much of it is in Latine 2. Some Writings which prove the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath do withal treat so loosly of the Lords day as that they require a Confutation in the latter as well as a commendation for the former 3. Some are so large that the persons that I write for will hardly be brought to read them 4. Most go upon those grounds which I take to be less clear and build so much more than I can do on the fourth Commandment and on many passages of the old Testament and plead so much for the old Sabbatical notion and rest that I fear this is the chief occasion of many peoples Errours who when they find themselves in a wood of difficulties and nothing plain and convincing that is pleaded with them do therefore think it safest to stick to the old Jewish Sabbath The friends and acquaintance of some of these persons importuning me to take the plainest and nearest way to satisfie such honest doubters I have here done it according to my judgement not contending against any that go another way to work but thinking my self that this is very clear and satisfactory viz. to prove 1. That Christ did Commission his Apostles to Teach us all things which he commanded and to settle Orders in his Church 2. And that he gave them his spirit to enable them to do all this Infallibly by bringing all his words to their remembrance and by leading them into all truth 3. And that his Apostles by this spirit did de facto separate the Lords day for holy Worship especially in Church-Assemblies and declared the cessation of the Jewish Sabbaths 4. And that as this change had the very same Author as the Holy Scriptures the Holy Ghost in the Apostles so that fact hath the same kind of proof that we have of the Canon and the integrity and uncorruptness of the particular Scripture Books and Texts And that if so much Scripture as mencioneth the keeping of the Lords day expounded by the Concent and Practice of the Universal Church from the dayes of the Apostles all keeping this day as holy without the dissent of any one Sect or single person that I remember to have read of I say if all this History will not fully prove the point of fact that this day was kept in the Apostles times and consequently by their appointment then the same proof will not serve to evince that any text of Scripture is Canonical and uncorrupted nor can we think that any thing in the world that is past can have Historical proof I have been put to say somewhat particularly out of Antiquity for this evidence of the fact because it is that which I lay the greatest stress upon But I have not done it so largely as might be done 1. Because I would not lose the unlearned Reader in a Wood of History nor overwhelm him instead of edifying him 2. Because it is done already in Latine by Dr. Young in his Dies Dominica under the name of Theophilus Loncardiensis which I take to be the moderatest soundest and strongest Treatise on this subject that I have seen Though Mr. Cawdry and Palmer joyntly have done well and at greater length and Mr. Eaton Mr. Shephard Dr. Bound Wallaeus Rivet and my dear friend Mr. George Abbot against Broad have said very much And in their way Dr. White Dr. Heylin Bishop Ironside Mr. Brierwood c. 3. I chose most of the same Citations which Dr. Heylin himself produceth because he being the man that I am most put to defend my self against his confessions are my advantage 4. And if I had been willing I could not have been so full in this as the Subject will bespeak because I have almost eleven years been separated from my Library and long from the neighbourhood of any ones else I much pitty and wonder at those Godly men who are so much for stretching the words of Scripture to a sense that other men cannot find in them as that in the word Graven Images in the second Commandment they can find all set Formes of Prayer all composed studyed Sermons and all things about Worship of mans invention to be Images or Idolatry and yet they cannot find the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath in the express words of Col. 2. 16. nor the other Texts which I have cited nor can they find the Institution of the Lords day in all the Texts and Evidences produced for it But though Satan may somewhat disturbe our Concord and tempt some mens Charity to remissness by these differences he shall never keep them out of Heaven who worship God through Christ by the Spirit even in spirit and truth Nor shall he I hope ever draw me to think such holy persons as herein differ from me to be worse than my self though I think them in this to be unhappily mistaken much less to approve either of their own separation from others or of other mens condemning them as Hereticks and inflicting severities upon them for these their opinions sake THE CONTENTS CHAP. 1. THE state of the Question with the summary proof of the Divine separation of the Lords Day page 1. CHAP II. That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and to deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches p. 5. CHAP. III. Christ promised his Spirit to his Apostles 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 at his Churches Guides p. 9.
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
Institution for holy Worship especially in Church-assemblies CHAP. II. Prop. I. That Christ Commissioned his Apostles or 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 This I prove 1. By their Commission it self 2. By their performance with its proper seal 3. By the Consent of all the Christian world 1. Luke 6. 13. He called to him his Disciples and of them he chose twelve whom also he named Apostles Their first Commission is recited Matth. 10. at large Matth. 28. 18 19 20. All Authority is given me in Heaven and in Earth Go ye therefore and disciple all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you And loe I am with you alway even unto the end of the world Amen John 20. 21. Then said Jesus to them again Peace be unto you As the Father hath sent me even so send I you And when he had said this he breathed on them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained Luke 10. 16. Even of the seventy it is said He that heareth you heareth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me And to the twelve Matth. 10. 40. He that receiveth you receiveth me c. Acts 26. 17. Delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles to whom now I send thee to open their eyes 1 Cor. 15. 3. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received c. 1 Cor. 11. 23. For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you 1 Cor. 4. 1 2. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God Gal. 1. 11 12. But I certifie you brethren that the Gospel which was preached of me is not after man For I neither received it of man neither was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. John 21. 15 16 17. Simon Son of Jonas lovest thou me Feed my Lambs Matth. 16. 19. I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven John 17. 18. As thou hast sent me into the world so have I also sent them into the world See John 13. 16 20. Acts 1. 24 25. Shew whether of these two thou hast chosen that he may take part of this Ministry and Apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell Gal. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father Acts 1. 2. After that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandment to the Apostles whom he had chosen to whom also he presented himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs being seen of them forty dayes and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God Acts 2. 42. They continued stedfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship c. Eph. 4. 11 12 13 14 15 16. He gave some Apostles some Prophets c. 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. First Apostles secondarily Prophets c. Are all Apostles c. Eph. 2. 20. Being built on the foundation of the Apostles c. 2. Pet. 3. 2. That ye may be mindfull of the words which were spoken before by the holy Prophets and of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Acts 10. 5. Send men to Joppa and call for Simon c. and be shall tell thee c. They that will not take all this plain evidence of Scripture for a proof of this first Proposition I suppose would not be ever the more moved by it if I should be so needlesly tedious as to stay to fetch Arguments from each Text. 2. The Apostles exercised such a power as the Proposition mentioneth and God sâ—t to it the seal of Miracles Therefore such a Power or Office was given them by Christ. The Consequence is undenyable The Antecedent of this Enthimeme is so plainly expressed in Scripture that I am loth to take up much of my own or the Readers time in proving so known a thing They founded the Churches they delivered them the Doctrine and Commands of Christ they setled the Churches as to Officers Orders and Discipline according to Christs Commands and the Spirits determinations Thus they ordained the new Office of Deacons and Deaconeffes or Widows and they ordained them Elders in every Church or City and they determined of Church Controversies and gave the Church Decrees and delivered the Will of Christ about the Sacrament Church-Assemblies Prophecyings c. Acts 2. 14. 23. Acts 6. 3 4 c. 1 Tim. 3. Titus 1. Acts 15. 1 Cor. 11. 1 Cor. 14 c. 3. That all Christians save Hereticks did acknowledge their power and acquiesce in their Decrees and Conduct being a matter of fact needs no other proof than the common History of former Ages and practice of this Which are so well known that I will not injure the Reader by proving it CHAP. III. Prop. 2. Christ promised his Spirit to his Apostles to enable them to do what be 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 In the Old Testament it is prophesied and promised Jer. 3. 15. And I will give you Pastors according to mine heart which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding See all the Texts that promise the pouring out of the Spirit Isa. 44. 3. Ezck. 36. 27. 37. 14. 39. 29. Joel 2. 28 29. Which were principally fulfilled on the Apostles Luke 24. 49. And behold I send the promise of my Father upon you But tarry ye in the City of Jerusalem untill ye be endued with power from on high John 15. 26 27. But when the Advocate is come whom I will send unto you from the Father he shall testifie of me and ye also shall bear witness because ye have been with me from the beginning John 16. 7 12 13 14 15. It is expedient for you that I go away for if I go not away the Advocate will not come unto you But if I depart I will send him unto you I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now Hoâ—beit when he the Spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all the truth For he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak And he shall shew you things to come He shall glorifie me for he shall receive of mine and shew it unto you All things that the Father hath are mine Therefore said I
that he shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you John 17. 8. I have given to them the words which thou gavest me and they have received them V. 17 18. 〈◊〉 then through thy truth thy word is truth As thou hast sent me into the world so have I also sent them into the world And for their sakes I 〈◊〉 my self that they also might be sanctified through the truth Matth. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and loe I am with you alwayes to the end of the world Acts 1. 4. And being assembled together with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem but wait for the promise of the Father which ye have heard of me For John truly baptized with water but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many dayes hence V. 8. But ye shall receive Power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you and ye shall be witnesses uitto me both in Jerusalem and to all Judaea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost parts of the earth By these Texts it is most evident that Christ promiseth the Apostles an extraordinary Spirit or measure of the Spirit so to enable them to deliver his Commands and execute their Commission as that he will own what they do by the guidance thereof and the Churches may rest upon it as the Infallible revelation of the Will of God CHAP. IV. Prop. 3. Christ performed all these promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them for all their commissioned work This is proved both from the fidelity of Christ and from the express assertions of the Scripture He is faithful that hath promised Heb. 10. 23. Titus 1. 2. God that cannot lye hath promised 2 Cor. 1. 18. As God is true Rev. 6. 10. H w long O Lord Holy and True Rev. 19. 11. He was called faithful and true Rom. 3. 4. Let God be true and every man a lyar 1 John 5. 10 He that believeth not God hath made him a lyar John 20. 22. He breathed on them and saith unto them Receive ye the Holy Ghost Acts 2. Containeth the Narrative of the comeing down of the Holy Ghost upon them at large Acts 15. 28. seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Heb. 2. 4. God also bearing them witness both with signs and wonders and with divers mighty works and distributions of the Holy Ghost according to his own will 1 Pet. 1. 12. The things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the Gospel unto you by the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven Rom. 15. 19 20. Through mighty signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit of God so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ. Read all the Texts in Acts and elsewhere that speak of all the Apostles Miracles and their giving of the Holy Ghost c. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. Acts 4. 8 31. Acts 5. 3. 6. 3. 7. 51 55. 8. 15 17 18 19. 9. 17. 10. 44 45 47. 11. 15 16 24. 13. 2 4 9 52. 16. 6. Rom. 5. 5. 9. 1. 1 Cor. 2. 13. 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Cor. 12. Eph. 4. 7 8 c. 3. 5. But this Proposition is confessed by all Christians CHAP. V. Prop. 4. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-Assemblies Here the Reader must remember that it is 〈◊〉 matter of fact that is to be proved in the proof of this Proposition and that all till this is clearly and undenyably proved so that the whole Controversie resteth upon the proof of the fact That indeed The Apostles did separate 〈◊〉 set apart this day for ordinary publick Worship And in order to the fuller proof of this I have these 〈◊〉 Propositions to prove Prop. 1. Matter of past fact is to be known to us by History Written Verbal or Practical This is evident in the nature of the thing History is the Narration of facts that are past We speak not of the fact of meer natural agents but of Moral or humane facts It may be known without History what Eclipses there have been of the Sun what changes of the Moon c. But not what in particular Morals have been done by man The necessity of other distinct wayes of knowledge are easily disproved 1. It need not be known by Divine supernatural Revelation Otherwise no men could know what is past but Prophets or inspired persons nor Prophets but in few things For it cannot be proved that God ever revealed to Prophets or inspired persons the general knowledge of things past but only some particulars of special use as the Creation to Moses c. so that if Revelation by Inspiration Voice or Visions were necessary Scripture it self could be understood by none but inspired persons or that had such revelation 2. It is not known by Natural Causes and by arguing from the Natural Cause to the Effects It is no more possible to know all things past this way by knowing the Causes than all things future Therefore it must be ordinarily known by Humane report which we call History or Tradition Prop. 2. Scripture History is not the only certain History much less the only credible Without Scripture History we may be certain that there was in 1666. a great Fire in London and a great plague in 1665. and that there were Wars in England 1642 1643 c. and that there have been Parliaments in England which have made the Statutes now in force and that there have been such Kings of England for many Ages as our Records and Histories mention c. Prop. 3. Scripture History is not the only certain History of the things of the Ages in which it was written or of former Ages much less the only credible History of them We may know by other History certainly that there were such persons as Cyrus Alexander c. That the Macedonians had a large extended Empire that the Romans after by many Victories obtained a spacious Empire that there were such persons as Julius Caesar Augustus Tiberius Nero Cicero Virgil Horace Ovid c. Prop. 4. Scripture History is not the only means appointed by God to help us to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical matters of fact transacted in Scripture times 1. For if Humane History be certain or credible in other cases it is certain or credible in these There being no reason why these things or much of them should not be as capable of a certain delivery to us by humane History as other matters As that there were Christians in those times may be known by what Tacitus Suetonius c. say And the antient Writers oft appeal in many cases to the Heathens own History And no man pretendeth as to the Civil matters mentioned in the Scriptures that no other History of the same is credible or
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
confesseth that its no doubt but the Religious observation of the day began in the Apostles age with their approbation and Authority and hath since continued in the same respect And what needs he more for confutation And as to his allegations of the Judgement of the Reformed Lutheran and Roman Church 1. We take none of them for our Rule so impartial are we But 2. He himself citeth Beza Mercer Paraeus Cuchlinus Simler Hospinian Zanchius c. as holding that It was an Apostolical and Truly Divine Tradition that the Apostles turned the Sabbath into the Lords day that it was an Apostolical custome or a custome received in the Apostles times c. And whereas afterward he would perswade us that they spent but a little of the day in holy worship he himself cited Mr. George Sandys Travels saying of the Copties that On Saturday presently after midnight they repair unto their Churches where they remain well nigh till Sunday at noon of the Evening he speaketh not but of their first meeting during which time they neither sit nor kneel but support themselves on Crutches And they sing over the most part of Davids Psalms at every meeting with divers parcels of the New Testament This is like the old way And such a Liturgie we do not contradict nor scruple Sandys also informeth us of the ArmenianChristians that coming into the place of the Assembly on Sunday in the afternoon no doubt they had been there in the Morning be found one sitting in the midst of the Congregation in habit not differing from the rest reading on a Bible in the Chaldaean tongue That anon after came the Bishop in a hood or Vest of black with a staffe in his hand That first he prayed and then sung certain Psalms assisted by two or three After all of them singing joyntly at interims praying to themselves the Bishop all this while with his bands erected and his face towards the Altar That Service being ended they all kissed his hand and bestowed their Almes he laying his other hand on their heads and blessing them c. And of the Abaffines he reciteth out of Brierwood and he from Damianus a Goes that they honour the Lords day as the Christian Sabbath and the Saturday as the Jews Sabbath because they receive the Canons called the Apostles which speak for both And King Edgar in England ordained that the Sabbath should begin ou Saturday at three a Clock Afternoon and continue till break a Day on Munday These Laws for the Sabbath of Alfred Edgar c. were confirmed by Etheldred and more fully by Canutus But of these things I shall say more anon under the Proposition following In the mean time only remembring you 1. That it is well that we are required after the fourth Commandment to pray Lord have Mercy upon us and encline our hearts to keep this Law And we accept his Concession that this includeth all of that Commandment which is the Law of Nature Though I have told you that it reacheth somewhat further 2. That we approve of the plain Doctrine of the English Homilies on this point and stand to the Exposition of sober impartiality Prop. 10. It hath been the constant practice of all Christs Churches in the whole world ever since the daies of the Apostles to this day to assemble for publick worship on the Lords day as a day set apart thereunts by the Apostles Yea so universal was this judgement and practice that there is no one Church no one writer or one heretick that I remember to have read of that can be proved ever to have dissented or gainsaid it till of late times The proof of this is needless to any one that is versed in the writings of the ancients And others cannot try what we shall produce I have been these ten years separated from my Library and am therefore less furnished for this task than is requisite But I will desire no man to receive more than the Testimonies produced by Dr. Pet. Heylin himself which with pittiful weakness he would pervert And he being the Grand Adversary with whom I do now contend I shall only premise these few Observations as sufficient to confute all his Cavils and Evasions 1. When his great work is to prove that the Lords day was not called the Sabbath unless by allusion we grant it him as to a Jewish Sabbath as nothing to the purpose 2. Whereas he strenuously proveth that the Lords day was not taken for a Sabbath de re we grant it him also taking the word in the primitive Jewish sense 3. When he laboureth to prove that Christians met on other daies of the week besides the Lords day though not for the Lords Supper we grant it him as nothing to the purpose So Calvin Preached or Lectured daily at Geneva and yet kept not every day as a holy day separated to Gods worship as they did the Lords day though too remisly So we do still keep Week-day Lectures and the Church of England requireth the Reading of Common Prayer on Wednesdayes and Fridays and holy day Evens Do they therefore keep them Holy as the Lords day 4. When he tells us that Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen plead against them that would hear and pray on that day only we grant it him and we are ready to say as they do that we should not confine Gods Service to one day only as if we might be profane and worldly on all other daies but should take all fit opportunities for religious helps and should all the week keep our minds as near as we can in a holy frame and temper Of the rest of his Objections I shall say more in due place 5. But I must note in the beginning that he granteth the main cause which I plead for acknowledging Hist. Sab. l. 2. page 30. it thus So that the Religious observation of this day beginning in the age of the Apostles no doubt but with their Approbation and Authority and since continuing in the same respect for so many ages may be very well accounted amongst those Apostolical Traditions which have been universally received in the Church of God And what need we more than the Religious Observation in the Apostles time by the Apostles Approbation and Authority and this delivered to us by the universal Church as an Apostolical Tradition But yet he saith that the Apostles made it not a Sabbath Answ. Give us the Religious observation and call it by what name you please We are not fond of the name of the Sabbath 6 And therefore we grant all that he laboriously proveth of the abolition of the Jewish Sabbath and that the Ancients commonly consent that by the abolished Sabbath Col. 2. 16. is meant inclusively the weekly Jewish Sabbath Epiphan l. 1. haeres 33. n. 11. Ambros. in loc Hieron Epist. ad Algus qu. 10. Chrysost. Hom. 13. in Haebr 7. August cont Jud. cap. 2. cont Faust. Manich. l. 16. c. 28. I recite the
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
Certainty from Most certainly abundance of testimonies might be produced to prove that they came together early in the Morning and stayed till Evening if not till within Night The former Pliny and many others witness And the later many accusations of the Heathens that censured them for night-crimes at their meetings And all that report it almost tell us of the Sacrament administred and Tertullian and others of their feasting together their Love Feasts as a Supper before they parted Now let but the time be measured by the work By that time the Scriptures of the Old Testament and New were read and all the prayers then made and all the Preaching and Exhortations and then all the Prayers and Praises at the Celebration of the Lords Supper especially if they were half as long as the Liturgies ascribed to Basil Chrysostom and the rest in the Biblioth Patrum and by that time the Sacrament it self was administred with all the action and singing of Psalms and all the Oblations and Collections made and besides this all the Church Discipline on particular persons exercised where Questions and Answers and Proofs must take up a great deal of time sure one day would be at an end or very near it And after when the Love Feasts were left off and the Church met twice and made an intermission they did as we do now And the very Custom of Preaching all the Morning to the Audientes and Catechumens till almost Noon when they were dismist with a Missa est and spending the rest of the day in Teaching the Church and Celebrating the Sacrament with all the larger Eucharistical acts do fully shew how the day was spent Which I would quickly prove by particular Testimonies but that I am separated from my Library and Dr. Young hath fully done it to my hand The very Context of these testimonies with what Albaspinaeus hath of their Catechizing and Church order will soon satisfie the impartial searcher As for what he saith out of Justin of returning to their labours I can find no such word in him nor do I believe there is any such to be found unless of returning to their six dayes weekly labour when the Religious work was ended with the day And I imagine the Reader will find no more if so much 9. The next proof is universal even the consent of all the Christian Churches without one contradicting Vote that ever I read of that the Lords dayes worship was to be performed standing and that it was not allowed them to pray or worship kneeling upon any Lords day in the year or any week day between Easter and Whitsontide And the difficulty of these stations is expressed see Albaspinaeus of it which sheweth that it was for a long time Whatever they did in Hearing its like they sate for Justin saith We rise to pray but it is certain they stood in worshipping acts as prayer and praise This Justin Martyr hath before mentioned Tertullian hath it expresly and Heylin himself citeth him de Coron Mil. Basil l. de Spir. S. c. 27. Hieron advers Luciferian August Epist. 118. Hilar. Praef. in Psal. Ambros. Serm. 62. To which he may add Epiphanius and divers Councils especially Nic. 1. Trul. of which after I once pleaded this ancient custom with them that would have all excluded from the Sacrament that kneel not to prove that kneeling at the Sacrament on the Lords dayes could not be in the Church of many hundred years after the Apostles when the universal Church condemned kneeling on all Lords dayes worship And Dr. Heylin himself saith What time this custom was laid by I can hardly say but sure I am it was not laid aside in a long time after not till the time of Pope Alexander the third who lived about the year 1160. c. Now from all this it is most evident that the Lords day was then observed 10. In this place though by anticipation I add the two General Councils now named The first great General Council at Nice Can. 20. which reneweth and confirmeth this antient custom of not kneeling in prayer on the Lords dayes that there might be an uniformity kept in the Churches And the Canoâ— Conâ—â—â— Trul. have the same again which proveth what we seek the matter of fact of the dayes general observation 11. The next is Origen who is not denyed to witness to the matter of fact but Heylin thinks he was against the Right of it But his mistake is the same as about Clemens Alex. Origen did but desire that other dayes might be kept also as profitably as they could as our Lecture dayes are 12. Cyprian is the next whose testimonies for matter of fact are full and Heylin hath nothing to say against him but that it is his private opinion that the Lords day was prefigured in the eighth day destined to Circumcision Which is nothing at all to our business in hand 13. And he himself cites Pope Fabians Decretal Anno 237. a testimony therefore that he is not to refuse for every man and woman on the Lords dayes to bring a quantity of bread and wine to be first offered on the Altar and then distributed in the Sacrament The Canon of Clem. before mentioned I now pretermit But saith Dr. Heylin 1. All days between Easter and Whitsunday had adoration by genuflection also prohibited on them 2. And the Church had other Festivals also Answ. 1. The Reason of Station was to signifie Christs Resurrection and ours Therefore it continued for these dayes But that was for the short occasional meetings of those dayes which he himself will not say were separated to worship 2. And the other Festivals of the Church make nothing against us For 1. Some of them as Easter and Whitsunday were but the same Lords day 2. And some of them were but Anniversary and not weekly Holy dayes as the Nativity c. 3. And he confesseth even these were brought in long after the Apostles dayes and therefore can lay no claim to Apostolical institution Pag. 62. he himself saith that The Feast of Christs Nativity was ordained or instituted in the second Century and that of his Incarnation in the third And besides Easter and Whitsunday which are the Lords day Christmas is all that he nameth out of Beda so long after as the Majora Solennia The Eves were but hours for preparation 14. To these though in the fourth Century I may add Epiphanius who recordeth the Station and Adoration to the East on the Lords dayes as those Traditions received by the Universal Church And here I would have it specially noted that when Tertullian Epiphanius and others note standing on the Lords dayes to be an unwritten Tradition received by the whole Church they do not say the same of the Lords day it self though the Antients oft say that we received it from the Apostles Now by this it is plain that they took the Lords day to be of Apostolick Institution past all question
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
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
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
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
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 Law which was written in Stone Nothing but partial violence can evade the force of this Text. So Heb. 7. 11 12. Vnder it the Levitical Priesthood the people received the Law And the Priesthood being changed there is made of necessity a change also of the Law 18. For there is verily a disanulling of the Commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof For the Law made nothing perfect but the bringing in of a better hope 22. By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better Testament In all this it is plain that it is the whole frame of the Mosaical Law that is changed and the New Testament set up in its stead Heb. 9. 18 19. Neither was the first Dedicated without blood For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the Law c. Here the Law which is before said to be changed is said to contain Every Precept And Eph. 2. 15. It is the Law of Commandments contained in Ordinances which Christ abolished in his flesh which cannot be exclusive of the chief part of that Law Obj. This is the Doctrine of the Antinomians that the Law is abrogated even the Moral Law Ans. It is the Doctrine of the true Antinomians that we are under no Divine Law neither of Nature nor of Christ But it is the Doctrine of Paul and all Christians that the Jewish Mosaical Law as such is abolished Obj. But do not all Divines say that the Moral Law is of perpetual obligation Ans. Yes Because it is Gods Law of Nature and also the Law of Christ. Obj. But do not most say that the Decalogue written in stone is the Moral Law and of perpetual obligation Answ. Yes for by the word Moral they mean Natural and so take Moral not in the large sense as it signifieth a Law de moribus as all Laws are whatsoever but in a narrower sense as signifying that which by Nature is of Vniversal and perpetual obligation So that they mean not that it is perpetual as it is Moses Law and written in Stone formally but as it is Moral that is Natural And they mean that Materially the Decalogue containeth the same Law which is the Law of Nature and therefore is materially still in force But they still except certain points and circumstances in it as the prefatory reason I am the Lord that brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt c. And especially this of the seventh day Sabbath Q 1. How far then are we bound by the Decalogue Answ. 1. As it is the Law of Nature 2. As it is owned by Christ and made part of his Law Therefore no more of it bindeth directly than we can prove to be either the Law of Nature or the Law of Christ. 3. As it was once a Law of God to the Jews and was given them upon aâ— reason common to them with us or all mankind we must still judge that it was once a Divine determination of what is most meet and an exposition of a Law of Nature and therefore consequentially and as that which intimateth by what God once commanded what we should take for his will and is most meet it obligeth still And so when the Law of Nature forbiddeth Incest or too near marriages and God once told the Jews what degrees were to be accounted too near this being once a Law to them directly is a Doctrine and Exposition of the Law of Nature still to us and so is consequentially a Law by parity of reason And so we shall shew anon that it is by the fourth Commandment IV. The Law of Christ bindeth us not to the observation of the seventh day Sabbath Proved 1. Because it is proved that Christ abrogated Moses Law as such and it is no where proved that he reassumed this as a part of his own Law For it is no part of the Law of Nature as is proved which we confess now to be part of his Law Object Christ saith that he came not to destroy the Law and Prophets but to fulfill them and that a jot or tittle shall not pass till all be fulfilled Answ. He is the end of the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth Rom. 10. 4. The Law was a Schoolmaster to bring us to Christ Gal. 3. 24. He hath therefore fulfilled the Law according to his word by his incarnation life death and resurrection It is past away but not unfulfilled And fulfilling it is not destroying it The ends of it are all attained by him 2. And though having attained its end it ceaseth formally as Moses Law yet materially all that is of natural obligation continueth under another form that is as part of his perfect Law Therefore as our childish knowledge is said as knowledge to be increased and not done away when we come to maturity but as childish to be done away so the Mosaical Jewish Law as Gods Law in general is perfected by the cessation of the parts which were fitted to the state of bondage and by addition of more perfect parts The natural part of it is made a part of a better Covenant or frame But yet as Mosaical and imperfect it is abolished Briefly this much sufficeth for the answer of all the allegations by which any would prove the continuation of Moses Law or any part of it formally as such I only add That all Moses Law even the Decalogue was Political even Gods Law for the Government of that particular Theocrcratical Policy as a Political body Therefore when the Kingdom or Policy ceased the Law as Political could not continue 2. It is proved that Christ by his Spirit in his Apostles did institute another day And seeing the Spirit was given them to bring his words to remembrance and to enable them to teach the Churches all things whatsoever he commanded them it is most probable that this was at first one of Christs own personal Precepts 3. And to put all out of doubt that neither the Law of Nature nor any Positive Law to Adam Noah or Moses or by Christ doth oblige us to the seventh day Sabbath it is expresly repealed by the Holy Ghost Col. 2. 16. Let no man therefore judge you in meats or in drink or in respect of an Holy day or Feast or of the New Moon or of the Sabbaths which are a shadow of things to came but the body is of Christ. I know many of late say that by Sabbaths here is not meant the weekly Sabbath but only other Holy dayes as Monethly or Jubilee rests But 1. This is to limit without any proof from the word of God When God speaks of Sabbaths in general without exception what is man that he should put in exceptions without any proof of Authority from God By such boldness we may pervert all his Laws Read Dr. Young upon this Text. 2. Yea when it was the weekly Sabbath which then was principally known by the Name of a Sabbath above all
other Festivals whatsoever it is yet greater boldness without proof to exclude the principal part from whence the rest did receive the name 3. Besides the Feasts and New Moons being here named as distinct from the Sabbath are like to include so much of the other separated dayes as will leave it still more unmeet to exclude the weekly Sabbath in the Explication of that word Sabbaths when so many Feasts are first distinguished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incuit Grotius hic sunt Azyma dies omer scenopegia dies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Obj. But the Sabbath mentioned in the Decalogue could not be included Answ. This is spoken without proof and the contrary is before proved Obj. By this you will make the Christian Sabbath also to be excluded Is not the Lords day a Sabbath Answ. I am here to speak but of the name of which I say that the common sense of the word Sabbath was a Day so appointed to Rest as that the bodily Rest of it was a primary part of its observation to be kept for it self and such the Jewish Sabbaths were Though spiritual Worship was then also commanded yet the corporal Rest was more expresly or frequently urged in the Law and this not only subordinately as an advantage to the spiritual worship but for it self as an immediate and most visible and notable part of Sabbatizing Even as other Ceremonies under the Law were commanded not only as doctrinal Types of things spiritual but as external Acts of Ceremonious operous obedience suited to the Jews Minority which is after called the yoke which they and their Fathers were unable to bear Acts 15. Whereas the Lords day is appointed but as a seasonable time subserviently to the spiritual work of the day And the bodily Rest not required as primary obedience for it self but only for the spiritual work sake and therefore no bodily labour is now unlawful but such as 〈◊〉 hinderance to the spiritual work of the day 〈◊〉 or accidentally a scandal and temptation to others whereas the breach of the outward Rest of the Jews Sabbath was a sin directly of it self without hinderance of or respect to the spiritual Worship So that the first notion and sense of a Sabbath in those dayes being in common use A day of such Ceremonial Corporal Rest as the Jewish Sabbath was the Lords day is never in Scripture called by that name but the proper name is The Lords day And the ancient Churches called it constantly by that name and never called it the Sabbath but when they spake Analogically by allusion to the Jews Sabbath even as they called the holy Table the Altar and the Bread and Wine the Sacrifice Therefore it is plain that Paul is to be understood of all proper Sabbaths and not of the Lords day which was then and long after distinguished from the Sabbath And this Ceremonial Sabbatizing of the Jews was so strict that the Ceremonicusness made them the scorn of the Heathens as appeareth by the derisions of Horat. li. 1. sat 9. Persius sat 5. Juvenal sat 6. Martial lib. 4. and others whereas they derided not the Christians for the Ceremonious Rest but for their Worship on that day The Lords day being not called a Sabbath in the old sense then only in use but distinguished from the Sabbath cannot be meant by the Apostle in his exclusion of the Sabbath Obj. But the Apostles then met in the Synagogues with the Jews on the Sabbaths Therefore it is not those dayes that he meaneth here Col. 2. 16. Answ 1. You might as well say that therefore he is not for the cessation of the Jewish manner of Worship or Communion with them in it because he met with them 2. And you may as well say that he was for the continuance of Circumcision and Purification because he purified himself and circumcised Timothy 3. Or that he was for the continuance of their other Feasts in which also he refused not to joyn with them 4. But Paul did not keep their Sabbaths formally as Sabbaths but only take the advantage of their Assemblies to teach them and convince them and to keep an interest in them And not scandalize them by an unseasonable violation and contradiction 5. And you must note also that the Text saith not Observe not Sabbath dayes but Let no man judge you that is Let none take it for your sin that you observe them not nor do you receive any such Doctrine of the necessity of keeping the Law of Moses The case seemeth like that of things strangled and blood which were to be forborn among the Jews while they were offensive and the use of them hindred their conversion Obj. But the ancient Christians did observe both dayes Answ. 1. In the first Ages they did as the Apostles did that is 1. They observed no day strictly as a Sabbath in the notion then in use 2. They observed the Lords day as a day set apart by the Holy Ghost for Christian Worship 3. They so far observed the Jews Sabbath materialy as to avoid their scandal and to take opportunity to win them 2. But those that lived far from all Jews and those that lived after the Law was sufficiently taken down did keep but one day even the Lords day as separated to holy uses except some Christians who differed from the rest as the followers of Papias did in the Millenary point 3. And note that even these dissenters did still make no question of keeping the Lords day which sheweth that it was on foot from the times of the Apostles 〈◊〉 whoever it was and whenever he wrote saith that After the Sabbath we keep the Lords day And Pseudo-Clemens Can. 33. saith Servants work five dayes but on the Sabbath and Lords day they keep holy day in the Church for the Doctrine or Learning of Godliness The Text of Gal. 4. 10. is of the same sense with Col. 2. 16. against the Jews Sabbath and therefore needeth no other defence And I would have you consider whether as Christs Resurrection was the foundation of the Lords day so Christs lying dead and buried in a Grave on the seventh day Sabbath was not a fundamental abrogation of it I say not the Actual and plenary abrogation For it was the Command of Christ by his Word Spirit or both to the Apostles before proved which fully made the change But as the Resurrection was the Ground of the new day so his Burial seemeth to intimate that the day with all the Jewish Law which it was the symbolical profession of lay dead and buried with him Sure I am that he saith when the Bridegroom is taken from them then shall they fast and mourn but he was most notably taken from them when he lay dead in the Grave And if they must fast and mourn that day they could not keep it as a Sabbath which was a day of joy Therefore as by death he overcame him that had the power of death Heb. 2. 14. and
our Redemption Answ. No Our Redeemers work is to restore us to the acknowledgement and Love of our Creator And the Commemoration of our Redemption fitteth us to a holy acknowledgement of the Almighty Creator in his works These therefore are still to go together according to their several proper places Even as the Son is the way to the Father and we must never separate them in the exercise of our Faith obedience or Love A Christian is a sanctified Philosopher And no man knoweth or acknowledgeth Gods works of Creation and Providence aright in their true sense but he that seeth God the Creator and Redeemer the Beginning the Governour and the End of all Other Philosophers are but as those Children that play with the Book and Letters but understand not the matter contained in it or like one that teacheth boyes â—litide literas pingere to write a curious hand while he understands not what he writeth Obj. But to spend so much of the day in publick as you speak of will tire out the Minister by speaking so long Few men are able to endure it Answ. 1. How did the Christians in the Primitive Churches They met in the morning and often as far as I can gatâ—â—er parted not till night And when they did go home between the Morning and Evening Service it was but for a little time Obj. Then they made it a fast and not a festival Answ. It was not the use then to eat dinners in those hot Countreys much less three meals a day as we do now And they accounted it a sufficient feasting to feast once at Supper which they did at the first all together at their Church-meeting with the Sacrament But afterward finding the inconvenience of that they feasted at home and used only the Sacrament in the Church which change was not made without the allowance of the Apostles Paul saying 1. Cor. 11. Have ye not houses to eat and drink in or despise ye the Church of God 2. I further answer that the work of the day being done according to the primitive use it will be no excessive labour to the Minister Because in the Celebration of the Lords Supper he is not still in one continued speech but hath the intermission of Action and useth shorter Speeches which do not so much spend him And the people bear a considerable part to wit in Gods praises which were spoken then in their laudatory tone and are now uttered by the singing of Psalms which should not be the least part of the work And though their manner of singing was not like ours in Rithmes and Tunes melâ—diously as neither were the Hebrew Greek or Latine Poems so sung but as most think more like to our Cathedral singing or saying yet it followeth not that this is the best way for us seeing use hath made our Tunes and Meeter and way of singing more meet for the ends to which we use them that is for the chearful consent of all the Church Neither should any think that it is a humane unlawful invention and a sinful change to turn the old way of singing used in Scripture times and long after into ours For the old way of singing was not a Divine institution but a use and several Countreys had their several uses herein And God commandeth us but to Praise him and sing Psalmes but doth not tell us what meeter or tunes we shall use or manner of singing but leaveth this to the use and convenience of every Countrey And if our way and tunes be to us by custome more convenient than those of other Nations in Scripture times we have no reason to forsake them and return to the old Though yet the old way is not to be judged a thing forbidden And we see that custome hath so far prevailed with us that many thousand Religious people do cheerfully sing Psalmes in the Church in our Tunes and way who cannot endure to sing in the Cathedral or the ancient Scripture or primitive way nor to use so much as the Laudatory Responses 3. And I further answer that every Church should have more Ministers than one as the ancient Churches had besides their Readers and then one may in speaking ease another 4. But lastly I answer that These circumstances being alterable according to the state of Countreys Conveniences I do not discommend the custome of our Countrey and of most Christian Churches in our times in making an intermission and going home to dinner as being fittest to our condition And then there remaineth the less force in the objection as to the weariness of the Ministers or the people I 〈◊〉 to say more of the publick Church-performances having described them all in a small Book called Vniversal Concord and having exemplified all except Preaching in our Reformed Liturgie given in to the Bishops at the Savoy Only here I will answer them who object much that the Ancient Churches spent not the whole day in exercises of Religion nor farbad other exercises out of the time of publick worship because we read of little other observation of it by them but what was done in the publick Assemblies Answ. 1. We find that they took it to be a sanctified or separated day And they never distinguish and say that Part of the day only was separated and sanctified to such uses If they did which part is the sanctified part of the day what houres were they which they thought thus separated But there is no such distinction or limitation in the writings of the ancient Doctors 2. What need you find much mention what they did out of the time of publick Worship when they spent all the day frequently at first and almost all the day in after times with small intermission in publick Worship Do you stay but as long at Church as they did even almost from Morning till Night and then you will find little time to Dance or Play in But yet 3. There want not Testimonies that they thought it unlawful to spend any part of the day in unnecessary diversions from holy things as Dr. Young hath shewed III. So much of the day as can be spared from publick Church-worship and diversions of necessity should be next spent most in holy family-exercises And in those unhappy places where the publick worship is slenderly and negligently performed on some small part only of the day or not at all or not so as it is lawful to joyne in it as in Idolatrous Worship c. there Family worship must take up most of the day And in better places it must take up so much as the publick Worship spareth And here the summ of holy exercises in Families is this which having elsewhere directed you in I must but briefly name 1. To see that the Family rise as early on this day as on others and make it not a day of sleep and idleness And not to suffer them to violate prophane or neglect the day by any of the sins hereafter named 2.
exercise but on one only which was the first 2. Because as is said it was not a family or by-meeting but a Churchâ—meeting The Disciples came or assembled togetherâ— 3. Because it said that they assembled for this very end to bâ—â—â—k bread 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. The great length of time which was spent in the holy exercises Besides the rest of the Worship and breaking of Bread Paul Preaching till midnight which intimateth that such work took up the day 5. Because it is mentioned as a matter of their custome They did not assemble because Paul called them to hear him only as being to depart on the morrow But Paul assembled with them at the time of their assembling to break Bread And it seemeth that he deferred his journey for that opportunity 6. Because other Texts as joyned with this and infallible Church History following do prove past all doubt that it was the constant custome of all the Churches so to do Obj. 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. The first day of the week c. gr one of the Sabbaths It is an ordinance to lay aside for charitable uses but not one word about changing of the Sabbath Answ. The abolition of the Sabbath we prove not by this Text but by others All that we bring this for is but to shew in conjunction with others as part of the Sacred History that the first day was the Churches separated day And I pray mark the strength of the proof that the Apostle did give order that all the Churches of Galatia as well as the Corinthians should deposite their Almes on one and the same day viz. on the first day Was it not enough to tie them to the contribution but he must tie them all to one set day to lay it by or deposite it if it had not been because the Churches used to assemble on this day and not to appear before God empty as Dr. Hammond noteth on the Text Whoever heard else that God or man tyed several Countreys to one set day for the private depositing of their own moneys afterward to be distributed With such Sacrifices God is well pleased And therefore it was ever accounted by Christians a fit work for the sanctified day But no other day was ever appointed peculiarly for the set time of laying by mens gifts of Charity Obj. Rev. 1. 10. John was in the Spirit on the Lords day Compare Exod. 20. 10 c. Esa. 58. 13 c. Luk. 6. 5. Mark 2. 28. Mat. 12. 8 c. And if the Scriptures be the rule to judge resolve whether that day be not the Lords day of which day and of which only as distinguished from the other dayes of the week the Son of man is Lord. Answ. We are not upon a Controversie of title or propriety whether God be Lord of other dayes For so no doubt he is Lord of all and therefore no more of one than another because his propriety in each one is absolute And it can be no more in any Thus also he is absolute Lord of all things all places all persons c. And yet some things some places some persons have been separated to his service by a peculiar Dedication and Relation and thence have been peculiarly called The Lords And the Texts cited by you out of the old Testament prove that such was the seventh day Sabbath then But not that it is so now or was to be so for perpetuity And the words of the new Testament cited The Son of man is Lord also or even of the Sabbath day shews no more then that it was in his power He giveth it as a reason for his doing that which the Pharises counted Sabbath-breaking By which he oftentimes offended them and not as a reason of his astablishing it And it seemeth plainly to mean that being but a Positive Law and a Law of Moses he had power to change it and dispense with it as well as with other Positives and Mosaical Laws As it is said Ephes. 1. 22 23. he hath made him Head over all things to the Church not Head to all things so he is Lord over or of all dayes But all are not separated to his Worship As it is said Joh. 17. 2. As thou hast given him power over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him so it may be said he hath power over all dayes that he may sanctifie one to his peculiar service and use the rest in more common works But that which we bring this text for is but to know what day is notified to the world by this title of The Lords day and consequently was then accounted his separated peculiar day Now the signification of words is known but by use They are not Natural signes but Arbitrary You know not the sense of one word of Hebrew Greek or Latine but by the History of their use by Dictionaries Authors or other Tradition Now it is unquestionable to any man verst in antiquity that all the Churches and Authors Greek and Latine Syriack Aethiopick Persian Arabick that have been known among us and speak of such things do unanimously call the first day of the week by the name of the Lords day as being so called from the beginning even from the Apostles And all old expositors so interpret this present Text. And you may as well question what day the word Sabbath signified in the Old Testament almost as what day the name of The Lords day signified in the new Or what sort of people they were that were called Christians first at Antioch when only one sort hath ever since been notified by that name Even the Disciples of Christ. The Greek with the Syriack Translation the Arabick the vulgar Latine have all The Lords day and the Ethiopick as equipollent hath the first day And Dr. Heylin who would find something against it if any thing were to be found speaking of some of late that otherwise expound it is so ingenious as to say Par. 2. cap. 1. p. 37. Touching this we will not meddle Let them that own it look to it The rather since St. John hath generally been expounded in the other sense Aretas and Andr. Caesariensis on the place and by Bedae de rat temp c. 6. and by the suffrage of the Church the best expositor of the word of God wherein this day hath constantly since the time of the Apostles been honoured with that name above other daies And I know no one man nor many that at 1600 years distance almost is so worthy to be believed for the bare sense of a word as the constant use and universal testimony of all ages from that time till now As Christ is the Lord of all our Suppers yet all are not named The Lords Supper so is it in this case I must needs conclude therefore that if I should cast off the evidence of this Text upon no greater reason than you offer me I think I should resist the
holy Ghost and use violence against Gods word which I should obey Obj. There is no Law in the Scripture to observe the first day no promise made to observers of it no threatning against the breakers of it c. shew it And if no Law no transgression Rom. 4. 15. Sin is a transgression of the Law Answ. I have shewed you full proof of a Law for it before Though it is not Christs way to enact his Laws in that Majestick Commanding forms as God did to Moses on the Mount But as he condescended into flesh to be a Teacher and Saviour in the form of a Servant under the Law himself to redeem those that were under it so he maketh his Laws in a merciful Teaching stile All that is revealed by him as his will appointing our duty is his Law But that we observe the Lords day is revealed by him as his will making it our duty These are his Laws requiring us to Hear and obey his spirit in his Apostles Joh. 20. 21 22. As the Father hath sent me so send I you And when he had said this be breathed on them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost c. Luk. 10. 16. He that heareth you heareth me And this is his Law requiring his Apostles by that spirit to promulgate his Laws and make known his will Mat. 28. 19 20. Go disciple me all Nations Baptizing them c. Teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you and loe I am with you alwaies to the end of the world or age with the other Texts forecited And that the Spirit in the Apostles hath setled the Lords day as the separated day for holy assemblies and Worship I have proved to you both by the Texts which you now sought in vain to make void and by the unquestionable practice and history of the universal Church from that age untill this And withal by other Texts which you omit which not alone but all set together make up the proof because it is historical evidence of a matter of fact which we have to seek after 1. Christs Resurrection laid the foundation or gave the Cause as Gods ceasing from his works did of the Sabbath 2. Christs appearing to them assembled on that day began the actual separation 3. The Holy Ghost coming down on them on that day did more notably sanctifie it 4. The Holy Ghost as an infallible spirit in them did cause them to make a publick settlement of that day in all the Churches which was the full and actual establishment 5. This settlement is fully proved de facto in Scripture and infallible history 6. And that there are promises and threatnings to the obeyers and rejecters of Christs commands whom the Father commanded us to hear and who is the great Prophet of the Church I hope you believe Rev. 20. 14. Happy are they who do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life c. Heb. 12. 25. See that yee refuse not him that speaketh For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth much more c. Act. 3. 23. It shall come to pass that every soul that will not hear that Prophet shall be destroyed from among the people 1 Joh. 4. 6. We are of God He that knoweth God heareth us he that is not of God heareth not us Hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of Errour If besides all this you must have particular precepts promises and threatnings in the form which you imagine to be fittest you may for want of those deny many other Gospel Laws as well as this Have you not much more for the separation of the Lords day than you have for Infants Baptism for a Christian Magistrate for Christians wageing Warr for prohibited degrees as to Marriage c. I am perswaded the sober study of these points would do much to convince the contrary minded 1. How much of Christs work as to the settlement of Church-Orders was committed to the Apostles to be done and how little he publickly setled himself in person before his Resurrection 2. How much the Gospel administration excelleth that of the Law And what eminent Glory God designeth to himself by the work of mans Redemption and how much more now he calleth man to Read and Study and Know him in the face of Jesus Christ than in the Creation And how largely the change of the Covenant is proved in the Epistle to the Hebrews 3. What a change is made herein as to mans duty since the fall of man under the wrath of the Creator who is not now his Rest but his terrour and a consuming fire till Reconciled and Adopting us in Christ And since the Earth is cursed to us as a punishment for our sins 4. How much of the certainty and Glory of the Christian faith and of all our Rest and Consolation in it is laid in the Gospel on the RESURRECTION of our Lord as beginning a new World or Creation as it were and as conquering and triumphing over death and Satan and sealing the promise and bringing Life and Immortality to Light and opening the Kingdom of Heaven to Believers 5. How much of Christs Legislation and administration of his Church-settlement and Government was to be done by the Holy Ghost And how glorious this office of the Holy Ghost is and of what grand importance to be understood As he was the promised Paraclete or Advocate or Agent of our glorified Lord to do his Work on Earth in his bodily absence To whom the Infallibility of the Scriptures the sealing operation of Miracles the Sanctification of Believers and forming them for Glory in the Image of God is to be ascribed Whom to Blaspheme is the unpardonable sin 6. How dangerous a thing it is made by the Holy Ghost to seek to set up Moses Law as the whole Epistle to the Gal. besides most of the other Epistles testifie as intimating a denyal of Christ and a falling from Grace and a perverse setting up of that which Christ came to take down as part of our own redemption And how large and plain Paul is upon this Subject and how the spirit in all the Apostles did determine it Act. 15. And how the Cerinthians Nicolaitans Ebionites Nazaraeans and many more of the condemned Heresies of that age which troubled the Churches and whom the Apostles wrote against went all that way of mingling the Jewish Law with the Gospel 7. How plainly and expresly Paul numbreth Sabbaths with the shaddows that cease Col. 2. 16. to pass by other Texts And what violence mens own wits must use in denying the evidence of so plain a Text. Their reason that he saith not Sabbath but Sabbaths is against themselves the plural number being most comprehensive and other Sabbaths receiving their name from this And the word Sabbath alwaies used in Scripture for a Rest which was partly Ceremonial See what Dr. Young in his excellent Dies Domin saith of this
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
the Apostles actual settlement thereupon was the Promulgation 3. The gradual notification by the Preachers to the Churches and finally the destruction of the Jewish Policie and Temple and Priesthood were the fuller proclamation of it and the way of bringing the change that was made by Command into fuller Execution 10. The seventh day Sabbath was observed by the Apostles after the Resurrection and Ascension Act. 13. 14 15 16 42 44. 16. 13 14. And constantly Act. 17. 2. the same Greek phrase with that Luk. 14. 16. for Christ constant keeping the seventh day Sabbath as before Act. 18. 1 4. c. 10 A. 1. But withal in this time they stablished the Lords day as soon as on that day the Holy Ghost came down upon them 2. So all that while they kept other parts of the Jewish Law They scrupled yea refused a while Communion with the Gentiles as Act. 10. shews They so carryed it to the Jews that Paul made it his defence that he had not offended any thing at all either against the Law of the Jews or against the Temple Act. 25. 8. And when he Circumcised Timâ—thy purified himself shaved his head for his Vow c. Do you think that all these are duties to Believers 3. None of the Texts cited by you do prove that the Apostles kept the Sabbath at all as a Sabbath that is a day on which it was their duty to Rest But only that they Preached on that day in the Synagogues and to the people For when should they Preach to them but when they were Congregated and capable of hearing They took it for no sin to Preach on the Sabbath no more than I would do to Preach Christ on Friday which is their Sabbath to the Turks if they would hear me But Sabbatizing according to the Law was something else than Preaching 4. And it is most evident that for a long time the Christian Jews did still keep the Law of Moses And that all that the Apostles did against it then was but 1. To declare that Christ was the end of the Law and so to declare the keeping of it to be unnecessary to Salvation but not unlawful laying by the opinion of necessity 2. That the Gentile Christians should not be brought to use it because it was unnecessary For the Apostles Act. 15. do not forbid it to the Jews but only to the Gentiles who were never under it Therefore the Apostles who lived among the Jews no doubt did so far comply with them to win them as to keep the Law externally though not as a necessary thing that is not as a Law in force obliging them but as a thing yet lawful to further the Gospel And therefore no wonder if Peter went so far as to withdraw from the Gentiles when the Jews were present when even Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles who speaketh so much more than all the rest against the Law doth yet as aforesaid Circumcise Timothy shave his head purifie himself c. and as he became all things to all men so to the Jews he became a Jew But when the Jews Policie and Temple ceased the change was executively yet further made and the Jewish Christians themselves were weaned from their Law In the mean time Paul and John Rev. 2. 3. do openly rebuke the Judaizing Hereticks the Ebionites and Cerinthians and Nicolaitans and shew the perniciousness of their conceits 11. The Holy Spirit calls the seventh day and no other day the Sabbath throughout the Scriptures before and after the Death Resurrection and Ascension of the Lord Jehovah Christ Gen. 2. 2 3 4. Exod. 20. 10 c. Act. 13. 14 15 16 42 44. 16. 13 14. 17. 2. 18. 1 4. 11. A. Though it be not true that the seventh is called the Sabbath Gen. 2. and though others deny the sufficiency of your enumeration yet I grant your assertion as true And therefore am satisfied that it is the seventh day which is put down when Sabbatizing was put down and that it could be none but the seventh day which Paul meant Col. 2. 16. Let no man judge you in meaâ—s c. and Sabbaths which were Shadows of things to come For the first day is never called a Sabbath as you truly say therefore it was not put down with the Sabbath See Dr. Youngs Dies Dom. on Col. 2. 16. 12. The seventh day Sabbath was prophaned by the Church heretofore and reformed Neh. 10. 28 29 31. 13. 15 17 18 22. See Belg. Annot. on Dan. 7. 25 c. as prophesied who would change it 12. This is all granted Sacrificing also was then Prophaned and Reformed and polluted and destroyed by Antiochus And yet we are not still under the obligation of Sacrificing We are not under the Law but under Grace CHAP. III. Whether the seventh day Sabbath be part of the Law of Nature or only a Positive Law IT is but few that I have any Controversie with on this point But yet one there is who objecteth and argueth as followeth God hath put this into nature Ex. 20. 10. Thy Stranger Deut. 5. 14. The three first Chapters of Romans Particularly Chap. 2. 14 15 26 27. 3. 9. 21. 1 Cor. 11. 14. Nature hath its teachings The humane Nature in the first Adam was made and framed to the perfection of the ten words some Notions whereof are still retained even in the corrupt state of fallen man Gen. 1. 26 27. Eccl. 7. 29. Eph. 4. 20. Col. 3. 10. The Law of the seventh day Sabbath was given before the ten words were proclaimed at Sinai Exod. 16. 23. Even from the Creation Gen. 2. 2 3. Given to Adam in respect of his humane nature and in him to all the world of humane creatures Gen. 1. 14. Psalm 104. 19 Lev. 10. 23. Numb 28. 2 9 10. 'T is the 〈◊〉 word in the Original Seâ— times of Divine appointment fâ—r solemn asseâ—â—â—ing and for Gods instituted service are directed to and pointed at by those great Lights which the Creator hath set up in the Heavens Psal. 19. with Rom. 10. 4 5 6 7. 8 18 19 20. Deut. 30. 10 15. John 1. 9. Every man hath a Light and Law of Nature which he carrieth about him and is born and bred together with him These seeds of truth and light though they will not justifie in the sight of God and bring a soul throughly and safely hâ—me to glory Rom. 1. 20. Yet there are even since Adams fall those reliques and dark Letters of this holy Law of the ten words to preserve the memory of our first created dignity and for some other ends though these seeds are utterly corrupted now Titus 1. 15. Natural reason will tell men that seeing all men in all Nations do measure their Time by Weeks and their Weeks by seven dayes they should besides what of their time they offer up as due to God every day give one whole day of every Week to their Maker who
day And for the most part they Celebrated not the Lords Supper on that day And they abhorred the keeping it as a day of Rest. 2. They met on that day for all these Reasons 1. Because having been used in the beginning to meet every day in the Week when they had all things common and were to shew the power of the Evangelical Doctrine to the height Act. 2. 44 45 46. 4. 33 34 35. as they found cause to retrive their community so did they to meet seldomer and yet not so seldome as once a Week And therefore as we now keep other meetings for Lectures and Prayers besides the Lords day so did they then on Wednesdayes Fridayes and Saturdayes 2. Because the Conversion of the Jews was a great part of their work and hope And therefore to win them they would with Paul become Jews that is not affect an unnecessary distance but come as neer them as Lawfully they could 3. Because Converted Jews were no small part of the Eastern Churches who could not easily be quite brought off from Jewish Customes And the rest were unwilling to offend them being taught not to despise the weak that observed meats and days Rom. 14. 15. Gal. 2. 4. Because the Assemblies on the seventh day were taken as fit preparatories to the sanctifying of the Lords day on which account the Church of England now appointeth them These things one that is acquainted with Church History needeth no proof of And they are sufficiently proved before Ignatius words before cited are full And those of the Council of Laodicea Can. 29. are more full who do at once appoint meetings on the seventh day and yet Anathematize them that Judaize thereon by bodily rest and would have men labour on it and preferr the Lords day before it Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho doth largely shew that Circumcision and the Sabbath are ceased by the coming of Christ and his Institutions and are not now to be used by Christians And what writer have we of full reputation and credibility more ancient than Justin from whom any testimony in this case might be sought Tertullian one of the next li. 2. against Marcion saith that the Sabbath was for that Time and present occasion or use and not for perpetuity Athanasius was one that was for meeting on the Sabbath And yet writeth his Book de Sab. Circum purposely to prove that the Sabbath is ceased with Circumcision as a Shadow and that now the Lords day is the sanctified day And the like he hath most expresly in Homil. de Semente as is cited before saying that The Master being come the Vsher was out of use and the Sun being risen the Lamps are darkened Basil Ep. 74. Writeth against Apollinaris for holding that after the Resurrection we should keep Sabbaths and Judaizeâ— As if that were the perfection to which Christ would restore men See Greg. Nazianz. Orat. 43. And Chrysoft Hom. 19. in Mat. 12. against the use of the Sabbath Cyril Hieros cat 4. Epiphan against the Nazaraei condemn them for keeping the Sabbath and Circumcision though withal they kept the Lords day The same doth Epiphanius li. 1. Haer. 30. nâ— 2. and before him Eusebius Hist. li. 3. say of the Ebionites Augustine oft telleth us that the observation or keeping of the seventh day Sabbath is ceased and not to be done by Christians Qu. ex N. Test. 69. Ad Bonif. l. 3. Contr. Faust. Manich. li. 6. c. 4. De Genes ad lit l. 4. c. 13. de spir lit c. 14. de util Cred. c. 3. 3. And as for the Abassians keeping the Sabbath It s true they keep that day in some sort But it is as true that they use Circumcision and many other Jewish Ceremonies besides oft Baptizings And that they profess not to use these as the Jews do but only as ancient Customes and as Paul did while he complyed with them using the outward action for other ends than Judaizers do And the rather because they think their Emperours descended from Solomon But the Lords day they keep on the same account as other Christians And if this instance make any thing for Sabbatizing it will make as much for Circumcising and other Jewish rites but nothing against the Sanctifying of the Lords day 4. And as for the matter of Fasting on the Sabbath the Churches greatly varyed in their Customes The Eastern Churches and Millan in the West were against Fasting on the Sabbath on two accounts 1. Because as is said they would not offend the Jewes Even as many peaceable Non-Conformists who are against many Holy dayes now established do yet forbear labouring and opening their Shops on those dayes because they will not give offence Yea and go to hear the Sermons on those dayes though they keep them not Holy as such dayes 2. Because there were many sorts of Hereticks in those times who held that the World was made by an evil God and thence came evil and so they Fasted on the seventh day on that reason Which made the Christians avoid it lest they should Symbolize with those Hereticks And therefore the real or pretended Ignatius speaketh so severely against Fasting on the Sabbath as well as on the Lords day And so do the Constitutions called the Apostles yea and the Canons called theirs Can. 65. But in the Western Churches as is aforesaid both Jews and Hereticks were more distant or less considerable for numbers and therefore they fasted on the seventh day and that the rather lest they should seem by Sabbatizing to Judaize Which was before Antichrists appearing unless you think all the holy Doctors before cited and all the Western Churches to be Antichristian Having gone thus far I here add two more Scripture Arguments to prove the abolition of the Jewish Sabbath The first is because it is frequently made as Circumcision is a sign of the particular Covenant between God and that Nation as they were a political body and peculiar people Therefore if their Policy cease and Gods relation to them as a Political body and peculiar people and so that Political Covenant with them then also the signe of the Covenant and Relation ceaseth And though the word for ever is sometime added it is no other than is oft added also to the Jewish Law and Ceremonies 2. From Act. 15. Where the case is determined by a Council of Apostles Elders and Brethren yea by the Holy Ghost V. 28. It appeareth by V. 24. that the thing asserted by the false Teachers was that the Gentiles must be Circumcised and keep the Law that is of Moses V. 1. Now the seventh day Sabbath was part of that Law As Sacrificing was though it was a Law before But the Holy Ghost determineth the case to lay on them no greater burden than these necessary things after named where the Sabbath is none of them and therefore hereby shut out The precepts given to Noah are named of which the Sabbath was not
33. 18. 34. 19. 〈◊〉 7. 6. 14. 26. 10. 3 Neh. 8. 2 7 9 〈…〉 10. 29 13. 3. Mal. 2. 6 7 8 9. 〈…〉 11. 13. 12. 5. 26. 36 40. 〈…〉 Luk 2. 22. 27. Joh. 1. 17 45. 7 19. 23. â—1 8. 5. 10. 34. 12. 34. â—5 25 Act. 6. 13. 13. 15 39. 15. 5 24. 21. 20 28. 22. 3 12. 23. 3 29 〈◊〉 23. Rom. 2. 12 13 14 17 18 20 23. 3. 19 20 21 28 31. 4. 13 14 15 16. 5. 13. 7. 1 2 3 4. 5 6 c. And so to the end of the New Testament which I need not fâ—rther number 7. That the seventh day Sabbath was kept by the Lord Jehovah Christ during his life Maâ—k 1. 21. 6. 2. Luk. 4 31. 6. 6. 1. 5. 13. 10. Mat. 12. 1 9. 13. 1 2. and constantly Luk. 4. 16. 17. See Christs counsel which was to come to pass about forty years after his death Mat. 24. 20. 7. 1. So Christ was Circumcised and joyned in the Synagogue Worship and held Communion with the Jewish Church and Priesthood and observed all the Law of Moses never violating any part For he was made under the Law to redeem them that were under the Law Gal. 4. 4 5. Do you think that all this is established for us 2. And his Counsel Mat. 24. 20. had respect to the Jews misery and not to their duty He therefore foretelleth their destruction because they would reject him and his Law in a perverse zeal for Moses Law And therefore intimateth that even Moses should condemn them and their misery should be increased by their zeal for his Law For their City was taken on the Sabbath day which increased their Calamity who scrupled on that day to fight or fly And can you think Christ approved of that opinion who had so oft before condemned the like about their over rigid sabbatizing Or as Dr. Hammond thinks it is liker to be spoken of a Sabbath year when the War and Famine would come together However it be it only supposeth their adherence to their Law and Sabbath but justifieth it not at all Though yet the total and full abrogation of the Jewish Law was not fully declared till at that time of the destruction of their City and Temple their policy more fully ceased 8. That after Jehovah had finished the work of Redemption Joh. 19 30. his body rested in the Grave Mat. 27. 66. and himself in Heaven Luk. 23. 42 43. as he rested when he ended the work of Creation Gen. 2. 2 4. 8. You again adde to the Word of God It is not said that he had finished the work of Redemption But only It is finished which seemeth to mean but that 1. This was the last act of his life in which he was actively to fulfill the Law and offer himself a Sacrifice for man 2. And in which all the Law and Prophets were fulfilled which foretold this Sacrifice For that it is not meant of the whole work of Redemption as finished when he spoke those words is evident 1. Because after those words he was to die 2. Because his state in death and his burial were part of his humiliation as is implyed 1 Cor. 15. 4. Joh. 17 7. Rom. 6. 4. Col. 2. 12. Isa. 53. 9. 1 Cor. 1â— 35. Act. 2. 24. 1 Cor. 15. 26. Phil. 3. 10. 2 Tim. 1. 10. Heb. 2. 14 15. 3. Because his Resurrection was his victorious act and a part of the work of mans Redemption 4. And so is his Intercession For Redemption is larger than Humiliation or Sacrifice for sin As Exod. 6 6. Luk. 24. 21. Rom. 3. 24. 8. 23. 1 Cor. 1. 30. Eph. 1. 14. Luk. 21. 28. It is the Resurrection by which we are made Righteous and receive our hope of life and victory over death and Satan Rom. 1. 4. Phil. 3. 10 11. 1 Pet. 1. 3. 3. 21. Rom. 4. 25. 2. The clean contrary therefore to your Collection is true viz. That God did indeed end the Work of his Creation on the sixth day and rested in it as finished on the seventh But Christ was so far from ending his on the sixth and resting in it on the seventh that on that day above all other he seemed conquered by men and by him that had the power of death Heb. 2. 14 and was held as Captive by the Grave so that his Disciples hopes did seem dead with him Luk. 24. 21. This State of Death being not the least if not the lowest part of his Humiliation Whence came the Churches Article that he descended into Hades 3. I did more probably before prove from Christs own words compared with his burial a casting down of the seventh day Sabbath thus That day on which the Disciples are to fast is not to be kept as a Sabbath For that is a day of Thanksgiving But on the day of Christs Burial the Disciples were to fast that is to walk heavily Which appeareth from Mark 2. 20. When the Bridegroom is taken from them then they shall fast Now though this meant not to command any one day for fasting much less the whole time of his bodily absence yet both the sense of the words themselves and the interpretation of the Event tell us that as there was no day in which he was so sadly taken from them as that Sabbath day which almost broke their hearts and hopes for the next day he was restored to them So there was no day in which they were so dejected and unlike to the Celebraters of a Gospel day of Joy or Sabbath Do you call the day of Satans power and triumph and of the Discples greatest fear and grief that ever befell them the Celebration of a Sabbath rest It had indeed somewhat like an outward Rest but so as seemed plainly to burie in his Grave the seventh day Ceremonial Sabbath And from the Reasons now pleaded it was that the Western Churches kept the seventh day as a Fast. 9. Whilest the Lord Jehovah Christ rested private believers rested according to the Commandment Luk. 23. 55 56. Mar. 15. 42. 16. 1. compared 9 A. They did indeed keep yet the Jewish Sabbath till Christs Resurrection and the coming down of the Holy Ghost And so they did the rest of the Jewish Law For they yet knew not that it was abrogated But must we do so too You may as well argue from their keeping the Sabbath before Christs Death as on that day when he was dead The change of the day was made by Degrees by three several acts or means 1. The Resurrection of Christ was the founding act which gave the Cause of changing it Like Gods finishing his works of Creation at first 2. The Inspiration of the Holy Ghost in the Apostles doth teach them and bring all things to their remembrance which Christ commanded and was the authorising means of the change And