Selected quad for the lemma: country_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
country_n	bishop_n	city_n	presbyter_n	1,829	5	11.0717	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67849	The Lords-day, or, A succinct narration compiled out of the testimonies of H. Scripture and the reverend ancient fathers and divided into two books : in the former whereof is declared, that the observation of the Lords Day was from the Apostles ... : in the later is shewn in what things its sanctification doth consist ... / lately translated out of the Latine.; Dies dominica. English	Young, Thomas, 1587-1655.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.	1672 (1672)	Wing Y93; ESTC R5902	202,632	471

they in City were obliged to be present at Church-assemblies Which things being considered I see not to what purpose any should conclude out of the Elib Council that they which live in the Countrey are not to attend on the Lords Festival although in the Canon there be express mention of those who live in Cities because the Bishops and Presbyters to whom it belonged to go before the other members of the Church in celebrating the Lords day did dwell in the Cities and in that age there was not every where a supply of them afforded for the Villages therefore the Fathers of that Synod by name did express these who were supplied with them that laboured in the Word And a long time after the Eliberitan Council was gathered divers Villages were not furnished with Churches witness Chrysostom Hom. 18. in Act. Besides when it 's plain that the unlearned and unbelievers were admitted into the Church-assembly in the Apostles dayes 1 Cor. 14. 23. why should not the Countrey men after the Apostles death be bound to be present at the assemblies of the Church as if they who had bestowed their pains in tilling the earth had forthwith forsworn their barbarity And because they who live in the Countrey are as well Members of Christ as Citizens why should not Christ impart his communion as well to these as those in the exercises of Religion on the Lords dayes It is expresly commanded in the Constitutions which they call the Apostles that on the Lords day servants attend in the Church to hear the Doctrine of Religion And Sozomen tells us that amongst the Arabians and Cyprians he found ordained Bishops in Villages If at that time Bishops were set over some Villages then certes they who inhabited them were instructed by the Bishops in the Doctrine of Christ on all especially the Lords dayes as the custome of the Church was Eusebius also confesseth that men and women old men and children bond and free noble and ignoble learned and unlearned did almost daily assemble together in every place where-ever the men lived to receive the discipline of Christ from the rising of the Sun to the setting thereof If all men of whatever condition or quality were daily intent upon the Doctrine of Christ then they that lived in the Countrey did not refuse it on the Lords day Yea the same Author as formerly we have seen affirmeth that Christ hath prescribed all the inhabitants of the world whether at land or sea to celebrate the Lords day Eusebius therefore acknowledges not that it 's only for Noble men and others of great name to be present at Church-assemblies from which servants and those of inferiour condition should be excluded but saith that the Lord himself hath otherwise commanded Also in Theodoret that pious Emperour Theodosius witnesseth that the doors into the holy Temple are open for servants and beggars and therefore in this age they were present with other Christians in the Church-assembly and were not excluded from the same But let us return to examine that indulgence granted by the Emperour Constantine to Countrey men for working their labours on the Lords day Where first we may make a question with the learned Divine Mr. S. A. Whether any such was ever granted of him for the countrey mens sakes or no since Eusebius who was Constantius's contemporary and who well enough knew all things that the Emperour did speaking of the Law he made about observing the Lords day makes no mention of this indulgence Euseb de vita Constantin l. 4. c. 18. but only relates how the Emperour commanded that all should rest from their works In the same manner Sozomen recites the same law although lib. 1. c. 18. and in both there be a deep silence about excepting country labours Which things being considered it may justly be doubted whether ever such an indulgence were granted by that Emperour of blessed memory But come on and granting this indulgence for the authority of the Book relating it let us seek out the reason and sense thereof This was the true reason of that liberty if there was any granted Because Constantine subjected all the subjects of the Roman Empire whether they had embraced the Christian faith or had not yet tasted it to the law of observing the Lords day witness Eusebius Which though it could be known by no other argument might be judged of by this that he calls not that day in the Church manner as Baronius The Lords day but by the Heathen manner Sunday Thence I say may it be gathered that the same Law was not prescribed by him to Christians only but Heathens also for whose sake he uses an appellation peculiar to them Since therefore the Gentiles also were to rest from their labours by virtue of the Law made by ●…stantine therefore he granted them a liberty to look after their countrey labours Whereas he knew that those who were not turned Christians could not easily be brought in to be bound by the Christians lawes he yielded something for these mens sakes and Constantine was sufficiently hated by them for neglecting their idolatry and therefore by little and little he studied to draw them to the true worship of God as Eusebius ubi supra Moreover the liberty of medling with countrey labours on the Lords day was granted to countrey men only in case of necessity which thing the very words of the indulgence do declare lest through occasion of a moment the profit yielded by the heavenly providence perish by the occasion of one moment the profit of fruits might perish therefore in gathering in the fruits sometimes a regard of a moment may be had no labours are therefore permitted but to undergo which they were induced by a certain necessity lest the fruits should perish in which case also we have observed worldly labour is permitted That exception therefore of Constantine cannot be brought to patronize labour used upon no necessity because he indulged this liberty for the sake of the Heathen only whom he with all lenity studied as far as he could to perswade them to embrace the Christian faith and in case of necessity which being afterwards continued a while Leo declares void by a new law set forth to the contrary and calls that indulgence a decree differing from the Apostles But because Leo doth very aptly answer the reason of this indulgence assigned by Constantine I will set down his very words for the Readers sake Because saith he it is apparent that another law doth contradict that law which commands all to reverence the day of the Lords Resurrection by a cessation from labours which determines that all generally are not prohibited working others have a liberty to work for it saith Let all Judges c. as above in the Law of Constantine the cause of which profaning that day is grounded on no reason for although the preservation of fruits may be pretended yet that is of

on that day and thinks it is to be honoured with Divine Worship for the day which is called the Lords day is by right to be dedicated to the Lord. Constantine the Great about the year 300 ordained that all the Subjects of the Roman Empire should on those dayes called by our Saviours name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. rest from all work So Sozomen lib. 1. cap. 8. Divers passages occurr amongst the ancients which shew that no earthly labour for the sake of gain is to be undertaken on that day which would be needless to run over severally since the premises demonstrate the truth to all that reject it not But lest any should be deceived in Can. 29. of the Council of Laodicea held before Constantines time I will add something to illustrate the true meaning thereof In which Christians are commanded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. that honouring the Lords day they should rest if they can as Christians By which exception if they can Zonaras on Can. 29. Conc. Laodic thinks that labour on the Lords day was prohibited all Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 except the Husbandmans works to whom the civil Law grants an indulgence Whose opinion the patrons of labouring on that day do follow But in this doubtless Zonaras derives them and they others who adhere to his gloss For first the very words of the Canon shew that Christians as Christians ought on that day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to rest whence it appears that labour on the Lords day is unlawful to Christians Now the exception which the Canon mentions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if they can ought rather to be understood with a respect had to the time in which the Council was gathered than to performing namely of harvest labours For the Council was assembled before Constantine the Great entred upon the Empire at what time the inseriour sort of Christians were compelled by their heathen Lords to whom they were subject and not of their own minds to perform worldly works on that day as on others as a long time after that Council was congregated the Christians were forced to sit and see the playes for remedy whereof the Africans ordain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that no Christian should be forced to those playes For their sakes therefore who were forced to labour by others was that exception added by the Laodicean Fathers not that labours used on that day were approved by them but because of those that were in bondage to others and by their severe authority or impetuousness compelled to undergo them on the Lords dayes I say for the comfort of these they put in this exception if any contrary to their minds were forced by others to do so Although divers that were stronger in the faith rather died for it than that they would any wayes violate the Lords day as formerly we heard out of Baronius under the reign of Dioclesian And that this which we have brought is the genuine sense of the Laodicean Canon divers authorities of Fathers before the Council of Laodicea wherein Christians are prohibited earthly labours do shew neither can there from thence any in this our age in which all God be thanked have given up their name to Christ take a pretence to defend the using of worldly labour on the Lords day since now it is the fashion as well of Masters as servants to rest from their labours on that day And secondly that Civil Law on whose authority Zonaras exposition depends was made by Constantine of which briefly anon wherein the countrey men had liberty freely to attend their countrey labours on the Lords day Now the Laodicean Fathers being gathered before the first Council of Nice could have no respect unto a law made some time after the meeting of their Council but are to be understood as I said according to the condition of that age in which the Christians although they of themselves rested from labours were by others compelled that had not yet embraced the Christian faith to undergo them In the second Council of Matiscon Can. 1. about the year 588. it is ordained that none give themselves to labours as on private dayes as they speak for this is in a rash manner to give up the Lords day to contempt But the words of the Canon come a little more narrowly to be examined lest at the first sight the Reader be imposed upon through some mens perverse interpretation of them First the Fathers ordain that if any have a Church near him that he betake himself thither These words are not so to be expounded as if none were bound to be present at Church-meetings but those that had neighbouring Churches at hand from which they that lived farther off might at their pleasure be absent He that will attentively read the beginning of that Canon will not say that this was the sense of the Bishops in that Council who had it put upon them by King Guntheramnus's command that by all means they could they look to that the Christian people should not in a rash manner give up the Lords day to contempt and therefore the Bishops admonished all Christians in this matter from which admonition they neither exempt Lawyers nor Countrey men nor the Clergy or Monks as the words of the Canon do shew And when Guntheramnus required it of them that the body of all the people should assemble on that day to exercise their devotion he decrees that those who set at nought this admonition should by right be corrected with canonical severity or the punishment of the Law If therefore he by his own authority according to the vigor of the Bishops decree allowed none a liberty to be absent from Church assemblies none can interpret the aforesaid words of the Canon as if only those that are near to Churches were bound to be present at them since all as well near as far off are bound by one and the same law when therefore they say if any have a Church near him it is the same with Let all go to the Church as afterwards in Concil Foroju Can. 13. Secondly Let none wonder that the Matiscon Fathers reciting the exercises of the L. Day in that Canon do there only make mention of Prayers Hymns as if there were no other exercises of piety besides Prayers and singing of Psalms to attend on that day for afterwards in the same Council they have ordained something of the Sacraments Can. 6. And Guntheramnus doth faithfully charge his Bishops that by frequent preaching they study to amend the people by Gods providence committed to their charge Therefore they declare that no offices of piety be pretermitted on that day Nor do they define those things only for the exercises of Hymns or Prayers but peradventure they mention hymns and prayers because they direct the Canon to the people whose part it was to attend these offices and celebrate the same and not to preach the Word Thirdly The

of Old and New Testament yet did they judge that Fasts on that day were to be relaxed To the Africans he that fasteth on the Lords day is no Catholick to Ignatius he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a killer of Christ Yea in Concil Gangren Can. 18. an anathema is denounced against the observers of this fast and prohibitions of this nature are frequent amongst the ancients the cause whereof Zonaras seems to teach while he saith the time of fasting is appointed for sorrow but a festival celebrity for mirth and joy He teaches the same in Can. 18. Concilii Gangrensis Therefore because the Lords day being consecrated by Christs Resurrection from the dead it is a day of joy to the Church thereupon the rejoycing Christians gave thanks on that day to God and relaxed their fasting and abstained from every right that might inferr any sorrow They were stirred up to this also by the pranks of Hereticks who denied the Resurrection of Christ amongst whom the Manichees acted with a Diabolical spirit and studying to diffuse this errour that they might extinguish the joy of Christians for the saving Resurrection of Christ have prescribed Fasts on the Lords day to their followers whose errours and others which held the same that the Orthodox might prevent they have lookt to it that on overy Lords day the Fast should be relaxed But although we reject not the Canons set out by the Church in detestation of Hereticks yet we affirm that provision was made in them about this matter was ordained by the Fathers and not by the Apostles Otherwise St. Austin had missed it when he said It is not defined by our Lords command or of the Apostles on what dayes we ought not and on what to fast And if this had been a true Apostolical ordinance it had been lawful for the Church to fast on the Lords day when no occasion was offered But Hierom thinks otherwise while he wisheth that we might fast at every season he excepts not the Lords day and sayes that Paul and the faithful with him fasted on the Lords day yet doth he not accuse them of the Manichean Heresie And because we read not that the aforesaid Canons were ordained by the Apostles therefore they are grown out of use in the Church because like as the impious madness of Hereticks adulterating the Christian faith hath given the Church occasion to ordain divers ceremonies in the external worship of God by which they might both extinguish their poison and better confirm the minds of Christians in the truth once received which as before those Herefies did put up the head were not in use so those being extinct they grew into disuse again Therefore whatever we meet with in the ancients of prohibiting Fasts on the Lords day doth not at all enervate my opinion of avoiding surfeit on that day which is confirmed with the gravest sayings of the approved Fathers neither do they make any thing against me to fast and surfeit do differ far enough between which extremes a third thing is given namely a sober and moderate dinner the use whereof none will deny to Christians on the Lords day unless any think with Urbicus that not to fast is to be drunk Austin who used a sparing and frugal table tells us that he entertained at dinner with him a man miraculously restored to his former health on the Lords day because he shewed hospitality as Possidonius Arbogastes being entertained at a feast by the King of France and asked Whether he knew Ambrose answered that he knew the man and was beloved of him and often was wont to feast with him Some interpret this as if St. Ambrose fared delicately on the Lords day on which day and the Sabbath and when the birth-dayes of Martyrs were celebrated Paulinus reports he was wont to dine because on that day Noble men were entertained by him but Paulinus relates not that Ambrose did entertain to a Feast Count Arbogastes on the Lords day Arbogastes boasteth in Paulinus that he often feasted with Ambrose but whether he spoke the truth in this is a question although Baronius reporteth it for a truth who yet mentions not the day on which he held this feast Arbogastes also glories that he was beloved of Ambrose but it 's easie to conjecture that there was but small friendship between Ambrose and Count Arbogastes whenas Ambrose so hated his sacrilege for which cause Arbogastes being incensed vowed that he would make a stable of the Church of Millain and would try how the Clergy could fight Therefore it 's not certain whether what he spake of the feast was true He might perhaps insinuate to the King who highly esteemed Ambrose the Bishop of Millain that he was prized by him somewhat that he might be more highly regarded of the King However it was when Ambrose himself would never be present at a feast in his own countrey being invited it may be judged whether it 's likely that he would invite others to a feast on the Lords day who refused to be present at other mens feasts himself Lastly if it were granted that Ambrose did entreat Count Arbogastes at a Feast whether will any believe it who considers the austere life of Ambrose chastizing his body with that discipline as Paulinus ibidem that he observed a daily Fast that he would distain himself with feasts on the Lords day which hindred the exercises of Religion either publick or private Nay truly He might perhaps dine on the Lords day as the custome of the Church required but we must not believe that the grave Father did fare so daintily on that day as that he could not attend the duties of piety concerning which nature of feasts we are here speaking in which number that is to reckoned which Baronius mentions out of Gregor Turonens who tells us of a certain Presbyter invading the Bishoprick of Avergue after the death of Sidonius Apollinaris who when the Lords day came having prepared a banquet commanded that all the Citizens should be invited into the Church a wickedness indeed beseeming the author that he who had ambitiously invaded the Bishops See against the Canons of the Church should violate the Lords solemnity by his feast that hindred the duties of Divine worship which unlawful example I hope no body that relisheth any thing of Christ will follow And now I will conclude with St. Austin that none can rightly deny that a Christian may on the Lords day be refreshed with a moderate and sober dinner and also will affirm with that grave Father that those who fear God must not riot on the Lords Day CHAP. XIV Sports are not at all to be held on the Lords Day by the judgment of divers Fathers and Emperours Four kinds of shows condemned by the Fathers and not to be acted on the Lords Day and that not only while the sacred meetings are kept THey that are