the Spirit on his Apostles on the day of Pentecost hath not so much force considered alone but onely in a conjunct consideration with Christs resurrection on that day And like as after his death he arose on that day manifesting himselfe mightily thereby to be the Sonne of God so after his ascension into heaven he came downe by his Spirit on that day the seventh first day of the weeke after his resurrection manifesting thereby as Peter signifieth that he had obtained the dispensation of the Spirit We doe not say the Spirit was on the day of Pentecost sent downe because it was the Lords day But being sent down on that day as the Law is confessed to have beene delivered on that day this tends to the marking out of that day more and more for manifestation of the power of Christ That day they receiving power from on high by the descending of the holy Ghost upon them whereby they were inabled to preach the Gospel And that day of the weeke which is set apart for Divine service as our Christian Sabbath as that day whereon the Holy Ghost doth ordinarily come downe upon his servants in the ministerie of his Word and celebration of the Sacraments and putting up of our joynt prayers unto him for the sanctifying and edifying Christ body which is the Church and even in this respect that day hath a farre better congruitie to the day that is to be set apart for Divine service than any other day in the week besides The day of his ascension he departed from them as touching his presence corporall but on the day of Pentecost he came downe upon them as touching his presence spirituall and so he doth still in our Sabbath exercises on the Lords day though not in so extraordinary a manner yet no lesse effectually to that edification and sanctification of our soules Seventhly And whereas some urged that if Christ himselfe had not instituted this day after his resurrection the most Primitive Church should have beene left destitute of a certaine day of Gods worship to wit from the time of Christs resurrection to the first consecrating of the Lords Day which they take to be absurd and I confesse it seems unlikely that the Apostles tooke upon them to order ought untill they received the Spirit on the day of Pentecost that being the day they were to receive power from on high to execute the commission given them Mat. 28. 19. to teach all nations till which time they gathered no Churches For the strengthning the former reason it is added That the Jewes Sabbath was now abolished by Christs death and resurrection This I doe not deny but the Apostles might very well be ignorant hereof as yet as not having received the Spirit as yet yea after the receiving it we find they challenged Peter for going to the Gentiles to preach the Gospel Acts 11. to this argument some answer as Walaeus saith that the daies between Christs ascension and the comming downe of the Holy Ghost upon them were spent in continuall meetings of the Apostles and other Disciples But from the day of Pentecost the Lords day thenceforth observed This answer reacheth not unto the daies interceding betweene Christs resurrection and his ascention And when I consider Bishop Lake his discourse grounded as he professeth upon universall observation and which I find no reason to resist namely that the worke of the day commends the day If ever any day deserved to be festivall to any surely the day of our Saviours resurrection deserved to be festivall unto them to rejoyce in the Lord thereon according to that of the Psalmist This is the day which the Lord hath made let us be glad and rejoyce therein the ancient Fathers accommodating the place thereunto The two verses immediatly preceding carrying in the forehead of them a manifest relation unto Christ as the proprietary of their meaning 22. The stone which the builders refused is become the head of the corner 23. This is the Lords doing and it is marvellous in our eyes Now when was this manifested namely that the stone which the builders refused became the head of the corner but by Christs Resurrection from the dead being thereby mightily declared to bee the Sonne of God Rom. 14. and was there ever worke more marvellous in the eyes of Gods Servants then the Resurrection of Christ especially considering the disconsolate condition of his Disciples Luke 24. 21. We trusted it had beene he that should have delivered Israel The women departed from the Sepulcher though with feare by reason of the consternation receaved from Angelicall presence their countenance being like lightning yet with great joy by reason of the newes they heard from them of Christs Resurrection upon the noise whereof for they were commanded to carry word of it to his Disciples the Apostles as it seemes were gathered together and in the evening after hee had shewed himselfe to his Disciples going to Emaus Christ presented himselfe in the midst of them Eight dayes after they were met together and Thomas with them who being absent the time before gave out speeches of peremptory incredulity concerning his Resurrection therefore then and not till then also the dores being shut Christ came before them and calls unto Thomas to see his hand and to put his finger into his side These apparitions of our Saviour twice on the first day of the weeke might well adde somewhat to the confirmation of them in the festivity of this day and howsoever betweene his ascension and the day of Pentecost they had their meetings yet how improbable is it they should put no difference betweene such a festivall and other dayes of the weeke A second answer Walaeus gives namely that others say that from the day of Pentecost it was not necessary that the Lords Day should bee observed but that at the first the Apostles together with the Jewes observed their Sabbath not as a ceremony of the Old Testament but as a free circumstance of divine worship as for a while they reteyned Circumcision and difference of meats which they gave over after the Jewes were found obstinately to refuse the Gospell So that in these mens judgements the Lords Day was no festivall to the Apostles till by occasion of the Jewes obstinatenesse a proper occasion for the institution of a new festivall And give mee leave to differ from them in yoking Circumcision and difference of meats with the Jewes Sabbath neither of them prefiguring Christ as to come like as the Jewes Sabbath did prefiguring his rest that day in the grave as the ancients have conceived it without any contradiction that I know Had they permitted sacrifices for a time their comparison had beene more congruous I see no reason to withhold me from concurring with Austin and in him with all the ancients for ought I know to the contrary that Dies Dominicus Resurrectione Domini declaratus est Christianis ex illo coepit habere
by God himselfe in the second Commandement yea otherwise than he ordained in the first Creation when he sanctified precisely the Sabbath day and not the day following Such great power did Christ leave to his Church and for such causes gave he the Holy Ghost to be resident in it to guide it into all truthes even such as in the Scripture are not expressed And if the Church had authority and inspiration from God to make Sunday being a working day before an everlasting holy day and the Saturday that before was holy day now a common work-day why may not the same Church prescribe and appoint the other feasts of Easter Whitsontide Christmas and the rest for the same warrant she hath for the one as she hath for the other Now to this Doctor Fulk makes answer after this manner The Apostles did not abrogate the Jewish Sabbath but Christ himselfe by his death as he did all other ceremonies of the Law that were figures and shadowes of things to come whereof he was the body and they were fulfulled and accomplished in him and by him And this the Apostles knew both by the Scriptures and by the Word of Christ and his holy Spirit By the Scriptures also they knew that one day of seven was appointed to be observed for ever during the World as consecrated and hallowed to the publike exercise of the Religion of God Although the ceremoniall rest and prescript day according to the Law were abrogated by the death of Christ Now for the prescription of this day before any other of seven they had without doubt either the expresse commandement of Christ before his ascension when he gave them precepts concerning the Kingdome of God and the order and government of the Church Acts 1. 2. or else the certaine direction of his Spirit that it was his will and pleasure it should be so and that also according to the Scriptures And observe how in the words following he falls in upon the same reason of the change of the day which of old was mentioned by Athanasius formerly rehearsed herein by Beza Doctor Andrews D. Lake as I have already shewed Seeing there is the same reason of sanctifying the day in which our Saviour Christ accomplished our redemption and the restitution of the world by his resurrection from death that was of sanctifying the day in which the Lordrested from the creation of the world And after many lines nothing necessary to be recited he comes to the comparison made betweene the Lords Day and other Festivalls saying Although the Church in dayes or times which are indifferent may take order for some other dayes or times to be solemnized for the exercises of Religion or the remembrance of Christs nativity resurrection ascension or the comming of the holy Ghost may be celebrated either on the Lords Day or any other time yet there is great difference between the authority of the Church in this case and the prescription of the Lords Day by the Apostles for the speciall memory of those things are indifferent of their nature either to be kept on certaine daies or left to the discretion of the Governours of the Church But to change the Lords Day or to keepe it on Munday Tuesday or any other day the Church hath no authority For it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe delivered to us by his Apostles And againe in the next place The cause of this change it was not our estimation that either we have or ought to have of our redemption before our creation but the Ordinance of God who as first he sanctified the rest from creation for the glory of that weeke so now also he sanctifieth the day of the restitution of the world for his glory of the accomplishment of our redemption Thus wee have not onely authority Humane but authority Divine for the alteration of the Day and that by the testimony of more Bishops antient and late than this Prefacer makes shew of amongst farre meaner names Yet he doth immodestly abuse Doctor Prideaux in putting it upon him that in the fifth Section he maintaines the alteration of the day to be onely an humane and Ecclesiasticall institution For in that Section he onely opposeth them who would derive the Divine authority which they stand for of the alteration of the Day from the old Testament but as for those who derive the Divine authority thereof from the new they hee confesseth doe carry themselves herein more warily the other more weakly and them alone he disputes against in that Section In the sixth Section he comes to the deriving thereof from the new Testament and first he challengeth them who boast that they have found the institution of the Lords Day in the new Testament expressely to shew the place Then in the often disputations of our Saviour with the Pharisees about their superstitious observation of the Sabbath Day he demands where is the least suspicion of the abrogation of it or any mention that the Lords Day was instituted in the place thereof And indeed the time hereof was not yet come onely the death of Christ setting an end to ceremonies Then he demands whether the Apostles did not keepe the Jewish Sabbath now I doe not find they did although they tooke occasions of their meetings on that day to dispute with them and to instruct them in the Faith of Christ Then he demands whether the Primitive Church did not designe as well the Sabbath as the Lords Day to sacred meetings I find in Baronius that Orthodoxi Orientales did and the occasion also to wit in detestation of the Marcionites yet without any such respect it had been nothing strange considering that even now adayes Saturday is counted halfe holy day and that the Jewes had a preparation for the Sabbath in such sort that on their behalfe Augustus made a rescript that no Jewes should be compelled to make good their suretiships as much to say they should not be arrested either on the Sabbath dayes or after three a clocke of the day going before Hereupon which is yet a very weake ground in my judgement he saith that Papists inferre that the Lords Day is not of Divine institution he doth not make any such inference himselfe Yet notwithstanding he confesseth that even in the Church of Rome Anchoranus Panormitane Angelus and Sylvester all which this Prefacer conceals very judiciously for his owne advantage have stoutly set themselves against these luke-warme Advocates in affirmation of the Divine authority of the Lords Day And I find that Azorius in his institutions makes mention of them to the same purpose and addes that Sylvester professeth hanc esse opinionem communem that this is the common opinion And after this Doctor Prideaux in that Section disputes for the Divine institution thereof rather than against it After this he takes notice of Pauls fact Acts 20. 7. and disputes therehence for a custome to celebrate on
the fall which I thinke more then probable though the Broughtonists hasten the fall before the Sabbath And I cannot without good reason yield that the patriarchs had no set time for divine service I meane a weekely time 31 True it is that Christ did rest from suffering upon the seventh but the last enemy death was not apparently overthrowne untill the reunion of his soule and body till he rose againe for our justification c. Therefore did the apostles make that the consummation of redemption in Christs Person 35 You cannot finde in all the 14. to the Romans that the Apostle is positive in the doctrine of dayes he expresseth a mutuall indulgence untill men had attained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 concerning the liberty from Moses Law Neither doth he beare out the Gentiles against the Jewes but qualifie rather the destempered zeale of the Gentiles that were too hot against the Jewes Sensus dictorum sumendus est ex causis dicendorum It is plaine that there was a questioÌ„ whether the Christian gentile should be pressed to observe the ceremonies whereunto the christian Jewes were pertinaciously addicted but never was there for ought I read a question whether the Jewes should keepe the Lords day for I think they never refused it Had there been such a quarrell I would enlarge the sense of that Chapter as you doe to our question but seeing there was not I see not how it should be reasonably done 36 I say not that the Apostles imprinted any holinesse upon the first day of the weeke It was Christs resurrection that honoured that day which I say the Apostles were to respect not arbitrarily but necessarily You may perceive the reason in my Theses You cannot observe from the beginning of the world any other inducement to the institution of feasts but Gods worke done on the day If it were not a continued worke as the dwelling in Tabernacles But you thinke the Apostles did not prescribe the observation of that day No you confesse they made choice of it and were moved so to doe by the reason which I alleage And were they not scattered over all the world where they came did they not all give the same order for the sacred assemblies And shall we thinke that this could be done without an apostolicall prescript 37. 43. I conjoyne them because one answer will cleare both Let us then first agree what it is for a thing to be Liberae observationis The Questionist in his interpretation which commonly is received leaveth a possibility for an alteration by humane auctority if any reason shall perswade a conveniency so to doe though so long as publike auctority commandeth it he will have it dutifully observed Whereupon will follow a Consectary or two First that this Law doth not immediately bind the conscience because Merè humani Iuris positivi Secondly that Extra scandalum a man may transgresse it For example a Tradesman may worke in his Chamber if no body bee privy to it If this be the Commentary upon Libera observatio and if it be well inquired into you will finde that I doe not mistake the meaning then I professe I cannot like of such a Libera observatio For I am perswaded that if all Christendome should meete and have never so plausible a ground they cannot alter the day de jure though de facto they may but it is worse then pâ—evishnesse so to doe And why they cannot alter the first ground Christs rising upon that day Secondly they cannot alter the uniforme order that upon that undenyable ground was set down by the Apostles themselves which were infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost And out of these grounds I deduce that the Law doth immediately bind their conscience And that it is to be observed even where it may be transgressed without any scandall Christ and the Apostles were not absolutely bound to lay such a foundation of the Lords Day and so it was Liberae institutionis but they having layd it I deny that it is now Liberae Observationis so that under God I know no power that can alter it The Fathers speake of the Jewish Sabbath and Allegorize that as it was carnally used by the Jewes But we shall wrong the Fathers if we thinke they held that there was no Morality in the Letter of the Commandement For though there were a mystery figured in it yet they doe not deny that there was a morall proportioning of time for Divine Service prescribed therein which is the seventh part of the weeke It is one thing to say that all our life time we must be religious in our conversation and keepe a spirituall Sabbath anotherthing to affirme that we must not have a solemne weekely day wherein to intend onely Divine worship This last point the Fathers doe not say the former they doe and to argue from their Omission is to extend their words beyond their meaning at least their meaning is not adaequate to the sense of the Commandement No nor to their practise For they did constantly observe a seventh part of the weeke which I say is the first principle contained in the fourth Commandement Though I deny not but there is moreover a limitation to the seventh day from the Creation exprest which Christ and his Apostles altered but this alteration cannot overthrow the first principle they may both well goe together To the particular allegations out of the Fathers I will answer no more then that what they say is true but doth not contradict what I hold For the mysticall sense doth not overthrow the literall of the Commandement And they understand the seventh day precisely from the Creation which we confesse altered and speake not of the divine Ordinance for the apportioning of time but the carnall observation of the Jewes And your answer to the first Question grounded on the Fathers words may passe for good but there is more in the Commandement then so Your Answer to the second I cannot so well approve because it is Exclusive As for your third answer That the fourth Commandement is not the Law of nature but a positive law take the Law of Nature for Morall Reason then I think there is more then meere positivenesse in it For morall reason teacheth to honour the day whereon the work is done and that morall reason which gave this in charge was Apostolicall and so of a commanding power in both And then you see that it is neither meerely positive nor meerely naturall but mixt and so binding accordingly ut supra ad Thesin 37. 43. You adde two Questions 1 Whether seeing the Lords day succeeds the Jewish Sabbath wee are to keepe it in the same manner and with the same strictnesse First I hold in my Theses that our Lords day doth properly succeed the Sabbath instituted at the Creation Whereupon I separate all the Accessories from Moses Law Secondly The Jewes did misconsture the stricknesse of their Sabbath as appeareth by the many