Church as appeareth by the Rubrick of her book of Ordination of B. P. and Deacons b So that your assurance as sure as you take yourself to be may in this for ought I see deceive you But be it as you would that such an election is not to be found expresly written yet will it neither follow that it being an unwritten Tradition Apostolicall it is not Divine or that Cyprian in that place thought so What his opinion there was I have already told you and sure I am his words as well agree with your new-fangled distinction as if he and you had been at crosse purposes As for Traditions Apostolicall the greatest Papists hold them for divine So Bellarmine c and his reason is Quòd non sine spiritu Dei eas Apostoli instituerint Because the Apostles did not institute them without the direction of the holy Ghost And for the same cause Roffensis d calleth Consecration by which Transubstantiation is effected a divine Tradition Licèt nullis possit Scripturis comprobari Though it cannot be proved by any written Word But none more home then Gerson e It is not in the power of the Pope Counsel or Church to alter Traditions delivered either by the Evangelists or Saint Paul as some blunderers think Thus you see your self deserted by them whom you took to be the greatest fautours of your opinion Let me advise you Sir if you have any more distinctions of the same stuff with those former habitent tecum sint pectore in isto suppresse them for they will never credit you Though I have by main force of this invincible argument of Apostolicall Institution and Tradition reinvested the Lords Day into a possession of Jus divinum assured and confirmed enough against all machinations of her greatest oppugners yet wanteth she not other should need so require auxiliary to her For that Evangelicall day which was prophecied of and prefigured in and under the old Law could not certainly be an humane device But the Lords Day was shadowed under Circūcision on the eighth day prophecied in many Psalmes both proved by sufficient Testimony of the Fathers Ergò the Lords Day is no humane ordinance Lastly as the Eucharist is called the Lords Supper because he instituted it for the same reason is the Sunday denominated the Lords Day For these two the Day and the Supper have the epithete of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Scripture to shew that Dominicum is alike to be taken in both saith B. Andrews Before I take cognizance of other questions pertinent to the Lords Day lest I be thought over partiall to mine own assertion painting it as Apelles did one-eyed Antigonus who presented him half faced and lest our adversaries should upbraid us that they have not been allowed to object the negative arguments shall have audience and as they lie in order their refutation Whatsoever is of Divine Institution is to be found either in the naturall or positive Law of God But that the First day of the week should be the Christian mans Sabbath is not so found Ergò the Lords Day no divine Ordinance It is found in the positive Law of God delivered by his Apostles and founded upon the moralitie of the fourth Commandment as I formerly shewed But saith one You onely shewed what the Apostles observed themselves that they imposed the keeping of the Lords Day as necessary upon the conscience of Gods people by any law or precept whatsoever that we reade not and so it will become a Tradition which though Apostolicall is no Commandment Is not this fine stuff assuredly an argument rather that they have not left speech then that they are returned to their right senses for to omit Augustine's sanxerunt Bucer Junius Beza and others who make it the Institution of the Apostles doth not Brerewood himself confesse it to be the ordinance of the Apostles and B. White b the same also what I pray is an Ordinance but a Law and was this a Law that bound themselves onely and not at all the succeeding Church is it like they would constitute a Law to expire with themselves And whereas we are now taught a distinction betwixt Tradition and Command we will for quiet sake though it biddeth defiance to all antiquity admit it in the same sense you impose upon it and accept it for a mere leaving of the observation of this day to the Church without any expresse command to observe it yet I say you shall find Command so implicitly complicated with Apostolicall Tradition as all your waters of separation all your chymicall extracts of School-distinctions shall never be able to sever them For are you able to unmake Tradition to make that no Tradition which is Tradition If you be not so long as it is Tradition it hath expresse command affixt to it Tenete Traditiones Hold the Traditions 2. Thess. 2.15 So that if Tradition were it self no command yet hath it here command annext to it And though I grant that our Expositours understand this place especially of the written word yet extend they it to Traditions unwritten also such as are clearly held to be Apostolicall and have if not mention yet foundation in Scripture amongst which the observation of the Lords Day is worthily accounted a It hath the approbation of the Scriptures and therefore cannot be numbred amongst unwritten Traditions saith the Reverend Salisbury with others b And for the Church succeeding the Apostles it is most evident she held her self obliged to the same observation For even in times of persecution before any either imperiall Edict or Canon of Councel enjoned it the observation of this Day was so taken notice of by the Heathen that it became a constant Interrogatory to the Christians in their examining Dominicum servasti Have you kept the Lords Day To which their answer was ever ready c I cannot intermit it for I am a Christian and the Law of God prompteth me to it Here we see these holy Saints had a Law for the celebrating of this day and have we none Perhaps you will say It may be questioned whether Dominicum here signifieth the Lords Day because Baronius d and Bellarmine e apply it to the Masse and it may also well be understood of the Eucharist which is often in antiquity called Dominicum I answer It cannot properly and distinctly be understood of either Not of the Masse for though Papists inform their disciples of I know not what pro-sekenique antiquitie it hath yet sure we are that as now stated it was not in being above a thousand years after our Saviour and so it could not be meant in this place Besides the question was propounded as well to the Lay as Clergy-Christians of whom it had been absurd to expostulate Num Dominicum egissent whether they had said Masse which is onely done by the Priest Nor can it respect the
it is to be examined the Lords day being an Apostolicall Tradition whether it be immutable whether the Church hath power to alter the day and substitute another in liew thereof I answer Nay the Church hath not such a power the sphere of her activitie extendeth not so farre she cannot null and rescind the act of God If the Sunday be established and established so I have proved it Jure divino it is without all dispute unchangeable for Immutable is one ingredient into the definition of Jus divinum as the Canonists compound it who make it which is comprehended in the Law and Gospel and remaineth perpetuall a True it is I grant that many positive divine Laws are changeable by the same authority which first imposed them but that a divine Law can be abrogated yea or displaced by humane authority that no sober man will yield to And I hope though many have of late set her on her tip-toes and advanced her to a tickle point the Churches power and authority reacheth not Divine Besides there is an especiall and peculiar reason of the inalterability of the Lords Day more then is usuall in other constitutions though Divine for God hath a propriety therein Six dayes in the week he hath bestowed upon us but the seventh he reserved for himself wherein he hath as good nay better freehold estate then any man in his possessions and then the rule of the Law is b What is ours without our assent cannot be transferred to another So that the Church hath no power to make that a work-day which God himself hath consecrated to his holy worship Nor mattereth it whether this designation were performed by Christ immediately or by the mediation of his Spirit assisting and infallibly directing the Apostles and so it becometh an Apostolicall Tradition for even this though the lowest degree of Divine appointment doth conferre exemption enough upon this day to secure it from any jurisdiction the Church can claim over it I will not dissemble it some learned men have I confesse ascribed to the Church an authoritie over this day so as she may if it please her transferre it to another But you must know withall that not one of these do repute it as an Apostolicall Tradition which is the hinge upon which the hole question moveth nor if they did are we to give absolute credit to their dictates Men they were of excellent endowments great both for their piety and learning and amongst them I honour none more then that famous Bishop c of Geneva Mr Calvin yet in some things as this for one I may say of him as Augustine of Cyprian d As there were many things which learned Calvin taught others so were there some things which he might learn of others If you can produce any one who hath affirmed it to be an Apostolicall institution or tradition and withall an alterable ordinance and I will promise you to affoard you two at least for him who have resolved the contrary But here perhaps you will demand What are all Apostolicall Traditions immutable That restriction from eating bloud or things offered to idoles that of collections for the poore every Lords Day c. I answer let it be first agreed what Apostolicall Traditions are under which name many upstart and recent customes intruded themselves into the Church a Every Province accounteth the constitutions of its Forefathers Apostolick Traditions saith Hierome Apostolicall Traditions then I say were of two sorts the one particular the other generall Particular were such as were framed by the Apostles either joyntly or severally but restrained to some especiall circumstance of time place persons or the like and so having onely reference and regard to such circumstance the removall of that circumstance made the observation of the Law to cease Such are those Traditions above named in the objection such are supposed to be the different rites of the East and West b one observing both the Sabbath and Lords Day the other the Lords Day onely and fasting on the Sabbath one celebrating the Festivall of Easter on the fourteenth day of the Moon the other upon the Sunday after Generall were such as neither regarding any circumstance of time place c. nor any moveable occasion were universally agreed upon to be received and so prescribed to the Christian Church by all the Apostles such were the Creed the books of the Canonicall Scripture the observation of the Lords Day Paedobaptisme c. whereof that golden rule of S. Augustine b is a character What the Catholick and Vniversall Church holdeth not decreed by Councels but ever observed we may safely believe it proceeded from no lesse then Apostolick authoritie Now these generall Traditions I averre to be immutable and such as must ever be observed in the Church not onely because they have or mention or foundation in the Scripture for so the particular have also and they which have not are not by us owned for Traditions Apostolicall but because they were at first made without limitation and restriction and herein I have the suffrage of Zanchy c Pareus d and other learned men As for particular Traditions they being at first framed for speciall occasions are now those occasions being ceased but as laws dormant untill the emergency of the like occasion awakeneth them again Dormant I said not dead Life vigour and force they have still and should the same occasion arise again God would expect from the Church the same observation For they being Apostolicall and so evidences of the Divine will upon severall occasions we must not think that one and the same cause can operate in the Immutable Essence a diverse will seeing in Philosophy The same agent whilest he is the same effecteth the same thing Dead therefore they cannot be so long as there remaineth a possibilitie for the same occasion to set them on work again and so that School-rule may fit them well e They oblige alwayes but not upon all occasions Well be the Lords Day Divine be it Immutable what then are we obliged to observe it with that severe and rigid vacation which the Jewish Sabbath required I answer Yes f He which succedeth into anothers jurisdiction is invested in his predecessours right The same strictnesse of observation belongeth to the Lords Day that anciently did to the Sabbath I say by the fourth Commandment for that Commandment hath not lost under the Gospel the least scruple or atome of obligation which it injoyed during the Law but bindeth still without abbreviation of time or alleviation of restraint during that time As for the duration of time though I cannot discern such distinct abbuttalls thereof in this Commandment as some seem to perswade yet am I of opinion that the word Day comprehendeth {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} a hole naturall Day And as touching restraint from negotiation and toil on that Day the words are
the contrary The Ancients whilest might and main they endeavour to beat down one errour many times fall into another So a Sixtus Senensis A thing too infallibly true witnesse three of the foresaid Fathers Justin Ireneus and Tertullian who in their fierce bickerings with the Valentinians Marcionites and Manichees violently bare down their Chrysippean fate and inevitable necessitie but upon the ruines of that errour laid the foundation of the doctrine of Freewill which afterwards was so augmented by the superstruction of Pelagius and his Ape Arminius If they writ in cool blood did they throughly scanne and sift the point did they ruminate upon what they delivered or did it rather carelesly escape from them in passage b Every man though never so learned is one way to be esteemed when he onely glanceth upon the question otherwise when he undertaketh to examine and discusse it throughly saith our great Prelate Lastly it must be inquired whether the question was started before they delivered themselves thus for if it was not they are not so much to be regarded For they often delivered things somewhat negligently not doubting but what they writ was orthodox enough because it had past once for currant till it came to the touch Augustine hath no other shift to salve the Fathers aforesaid from Pelagianisme in the point of Originall sinne and Freewill Many things indeed go a while for granted and without controul which in tract of time are discovered to be of dangerous consequence and then justly exploded for men are wont till they foresee the mischief which may ensue to deliver things as they took them by way of frolick one from another and so in a plodding carelesnesse a which way most go all follow But all these exceptions laid aside one there is from which no appeal will be admitted It is naturall to man to erre Men they were and might erre yea and did every one in other things why might they not in this I speak not this to avile them or abate any thing of the reverence we owe them and if it be suspected that I bear them no good will Of my self they were b Zanchy's words once but shall now be mine and mine own Genius I speak it From the unanimous consent of the Fathers where necessitie compelleth not I am very scrupulous to differ No my onely scope and intention is to tell you what Saint Augustine c hath told me That humane authoritie though never so learned never so holy is not to be trusted unlesse it produceth Canonicall Scripture to prove or probable reason to demonstrate what it saith How farre the Fathers slipt in other things is not cognoscible in this place whether in the point in question they did yea or nay is now to be debated and that they did I think it probable at least if not evident For is it not said God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it What is this Blessing but the dispensing a peculiar favour towards it what this Sanctifying but a separation and consecration of it to holy worship If yea what then shall hinder but that we think the Sabbath instituted in that very article of time whereof Moses wrote shall this prodigious Prolepsis a Nothing is easier then to cry out O that is a Trope a Figure a peculiar manner of expression A strange wantonnesse in Expositours to apply Tropes devised upon necessity to places clear as the mid-day That according to Augustines b rule is a figurative speech which being properly understood can neither be applied to Faith Charitie nor Edification Somewhat fuller is that of Bellarmine c The Scripture ought to be understood according to the true proprietie of the words where we are not diverted by some manifest absurditie and this he calleth Commune axioma Theologorum the universall tenet of all Divines which I take to be granted on all parts the rather because neither Chamier Amesius nor any other as farre as I have examined hath accriminated the Jesuite for it Now lest we should misconstrue the word Absurd he explaineth himself in another place thus d Vnlesse we be inforced by some other portion of Scripture or other article of Faith or the universall interpretation of the Church Let this rule then judge us I for my part compromise to be tried by it God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it there is the Text God did honour the seventh day and consecrated it to his worship there is the genuine and proper sense and because in the tissure and series of divine story Moses hath inserted this sanctification of the Sabbath immediately next after the six dayes creation why should we not conclude that it was sanctified then and in the same order of time whereof he wrote why should we not take Moses his meaning as we find his words Is there any portion of Scripture any article of Faith the generall explication of the hole Church repugnant to it Is there any absurdity compelleth us to think otherwise Ostendant let them shew it which till they do let them give us leave to hold our first opinion to which the absurditie of the Prolepsis hath compelled us Absurd it is for it is clear the Patriarchs had a Sabbath and that they observed the seventh day Sabbath is evident from the reasons thereof common to both times They had a Sabbath For the Law of Nature instilleth this notion a That as every thing else which excelleth so especially God Paramount and superlative in excellency is to be worshipped as also That to the performance of this worship certain times are to be b deputed Is it likely that the Patriarchs failed in so necessary a dutie was Gods Church then so supinely governed or indeed so not governed at all that no time was set apart for solemn assemblies There was a consecration of Materials for sacrifices whereof beasts therefore distinguished by clean and unclean a consecration of Persons who a consecration of Places where was there none of Times when assuredly yes and therefore S. c Augustine hath put the Quando as one of those circumstances wherein Cain might have been deficient So a Sabbath they had The seventh day Sabbath they had Look into the Essence the body and soul of that Sabbath as d Brerewood calleth them what are they but Vacation or Rest from bodily labour and the Sanctification of that rest by dedicating the soul to Gods worship Were the bodies both of man and beast before the Law of a more brassie and adamantine durablenesse then after were they not conditioned not attempered alike was not the sweet repose of lucid intervalls equally necessary and welcome to both Did not devout sequestration to pious exercises as well sute and become the souls of them as of these Look especially into the end peculiar to it as the seventh from the Creation what is it but to eternize the honour of the Creation in
which is the greatest of all But none ever affirmed a Divine Institution Ergò c. They do not indeed mention it sub terminis because it was not questioned in their dayes but if they make it instituted by Christ as some or by his Apostles as almost all and if they tell us * Whatsoever the Apostles delivered by the dictate of the holy Ghost is as firm and indefeasable as what Christ himself then I hope by necessary consequence they make it of Divine Institution That which the orthodox condemne for popery should not be consented to by us But that the Lords day is a part of Gods worship and more holy then other dayes as from Divine authoritie is condemned by Reformists in the Papists Therefore we ought not to symbolize with them No reformed Writers condemne this in the Papists because they hold the Lords Day more holy then others but onely such and those very few as think the Day to be of Ecclesiasticall not of Divine Institution The orthodox Thesis is this * Festivall dayes cannot by humane constitution be made more holy then others as Amesius to whom you appeal could have informed you Lastly Socrates affirmeth that the Apostles never intended to establish laws concerning Holydayes S. Augustine also maketh it will-worship or idolatry to observe any day as commanded of God S. Hierome likewise saith we have no dayes having any holinesse in them and necessitie from Divine institution The book of Homilies affirmeth that Christian men of themselves without any Divine precepts did take upon them the observation of the Lords Day All reformed Churches consent with us and many Martyrs in the Marian dayes as Tindall Frith Barnes Lastly Master Perkins speaketh doubtfully herein yet he was one of the first that took up this tenet Socrates must have a candid Reader or be argued of overbold singularitie against all Antiquitie who affirmed the contrary Augustine saith that the Christians in his time did not observe so much the festivals themselves as what was signified by them and therefore he saith that the Apostle did blame the Galatians in this because they did observe appointed times servilely not knowing the mystery to which they tended he speaketh nothing of their institution not one word Hierome indeed I grant was inclining to your opinion but his single judgement is not equivalent to the many reasons and authorities urged on the contrary The book of Homilies affirmeth no such thing as you say these words of themselves without any Divine precept are yours not the Churches not expresly not interpretatively so not hers as she is positive in the direct contrary For there being two things wherein the Divine right of the Lords Day is founded upon legall Institution in the fourth Commandment and Evangelicall by either Christ or his Apostles for the first she saith that God expresly in that precept commandeth the observation of the Sabbath which is our Sunday and not onely commandeth it but also by his own example doth stirre and provoke us to diligent keeping of the same For the second having a while after declared it to be Gods Will and Commandment to have a solemn time and standing day in the week consecrated to him she presently addeth This example and Commandment of God the godly Christian people began to follow immediately after the ascension of our Lord Christ and began to chuse them a standing day in the week to come together in Now where she speaketh of Godly Christian people she doubtlesse meaneth the Apostles for who else durst at that time take upon them to begin such a custome and so as touching the Institution of the day as a weekly day she reduceth it to the fourth precept and as the first of the week she foundeth it upon Apostolick practice What some other reformed Churches think in this point of the Lords Day may plausibly enough against us be urged on your parts I confesse and it is your Drusian your keenest objection and yet we can oppose many things to turn the edge of it For first they are onely positive in setting down their own opinions but the reasons inducing them thereto they suppresse and seeing they are not {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} we must not be governed by their bare Thesis Secondly those confessions are not generall but particular to some Churches Thirdly were they the Canons of a generall Councel yet must they not predominate over Truth a Nationall and Provinciall councels ought to give place to the authoritie of Vniversall and Oecumenicall and these have been oftentimes amended when experience hath cleared some truth which before lay hid saith Augustine Lastly though some will think it b periculosa praesumptio judicare de caeteris ipsum ab omnibus judicandum to speak the truth yet to speak it with all terms of venerable regard to those famous Churches I dare pronounce they are not right in this point not so full reformed but they stand yet in need of further reformation Nor ought we to wonder at their mistake herein For first the precept of the Lords Day is not so legible in sacred Scripture as the rest which concern matters of faith thereby to instruct us to put a difference betwixt fundamentalls and ceremonies it is written in a finer character in a smaller Print and therefore might well escape the eyes of those Churches at the first break of day of Reformation when the light shone somewhat dimme Secondly the question was never on foot in their times and so the evidences demonstrating Divine Right were never laid open to them and having inquiries concerning sacrifice of the Altar Adoration c. more proper for those times to imploy them they were not like to inform themselves better upon accident What I have said concerning the Reformed Churches may also be applyed to those holy and blessed Martyrs you cite and partly to master Perkins who had he lived now would I dare say have been as positive and resolute as any other And whereas you make him the prime inventer of this tenet though what I have urged out of the book of Homilies is your sufficient confutation yet will I produce one Testimony more and that no lesse then Royall and as Reformation it self ancient The Sabbath Day was used and ordained but for mans use and therefore ought to give place to the necessity and behoof of the same whensoever that shall occur much rather any other holy day instituted by man What say you now Sir if Perkins was the first that took up this tenet who I pray laid it down and down it was laid for certain if he took it up for up it was you see in Henry the eighths time Having thus waded through all the objections and discovered their frame to consist of very loose and defeasable stuff wherein truth is no ingredient I step forward to other questions incident and pertinent to this discourse And first