recorded in the fourth Commandment p. 113. And in these words we have two several propositions viz. First That the setting apart of some whole day to Gods solemn worship is juris Divini naturalis and secondly that the Sabbath which he meaneth by this solemn day was juris Divini positivi recorded in the fourth Commandment both which shall be examined in their several turns And first I would fain know of Doctor Bernard or any other of the Lord Primates Chaplains since he cannot answer for himselfe where we shall find that the setting apart of some whole day for Gods solemn worship was juris Divini naturalis That some time was to be set apart for the worship of God is agreed by all and reckoned by most knowing men not interessed in any party to be the moral part of the fourth Commandment but that this time should be some whole day is neither imprinted in mans heart by the Law of Nature nor ever required of the Iews nor observed by the Christians Or granting that some such whole day was to be set apart for Gods solemn worship I would fain know in the first place when the said whole day was to begin and how long to continue whether it were a whole natural day or a whole artificial day as they use to phrase it And if it were a whole natural day then whether to extend from midnight to midnight after the reckoning of the Gentiles or from Sun-setting to Sun-setting from Even to Even according to the account of the Iewes or if a whole artificial day then whether a day of twelve hours onely after the reckoning of the Iewes or from Sun-rising to Sun-setting be they more or less according to the several Climates under which men lived Which points unless they be well stated the conscience will have nothing in this case to rely upon In the next place considering that the Lord Primate speaks indefinitely of some whole day without determining when and how often the said whole day was to be observed I would fain know whether such a whole day was to be set apart once or twice in the week or whether it would suffice to the fulfilling of the moral part of the fourth Commandment if it were onely once a month or once a year or once in seven year or once in the course of a mans whole life For being it is said indefinitly that the setting apart of some whole day to Gods solemn worship is juris Divini naturalis ingraffed in the Heart of man by the Law of Nature it may be probably inferred that the setting apart of one whole day at what time soever a man pleaseth may very sufficiently comply with the intention of that Law and consequently discharge the man so doing from all further observance which how far it will satisfie the consciences of men or be accounted acceptable in the sight of God I shall leave to others to determine But admitting that this whole day which the Lord Primate speaks of was to have as frequent a return as the Iewish Sabbath I would then know when such a whole day was either ordinarily kept or required to be kept by the Iewes or Gentiles That no such whole day was ever ordinarily kept by the Iewes appears by their riotous feastings on the Sabbath day which before we spake of by which it is most evident that the one half of that day was either spent in Luxury and Riot or in Rest and Idleness and that the least part of the other moyety was spent in holy Meditation and much less in the solemn worship of God which in the first settlement of that Nation in the Land of Canaan was performed onely in the Tabernacle as afterwards in the Holy Temple at which but few of the people and those which dwelt near the place of worship could give any attendance We meet indeed with a Commandment that the Sabbath was to be continued from Even to Even Levit. 23. 32. that is to say from Friday evening at Sun-set until the like time of Sun-set on the Sabbath day Which Precept being first given by God with reference to the day of Atonement or Expiation and commonly applyed by the Iewes to the weekly Sabbaths requires no otherkeeping of the day for that space of time more then the afflicting of their souls by a solemn fast then onely rest from labour all servile works And this appears plainly by the first words of the said 32. verse where it is said That it should be unto them a Sabbath of rest compared with vers 30 31. where forbearing all or any manner of work is the chief thing required to the observation of that day And yet that rest from labour and cessation from all manner of work frequently intermitted also either with reference to the solemn keeping of the day it self Mat. 12. 5. or the preservation of the creature Luke 13. 15. 14. 5. But that the whole day extending from Even to Even should be either spent in afflicting their souls as it is meant onely of the day of Atonement or Expiation which was observed but once a year or in the acts of solemn and religious worship if it be understood of the weekly Sabbath to which the Iews commonly applied it also as before was said as I no where find So have I no reason to believe it without better grounds Certain I am that so much of the Sabbath day after this account as intervened between the Sun-setting on the Friday and the Sun-rising on the Sabbath was partly spent in rest from labour and making necessary preparations for the day ensuing and part thereof in necessary repose and sleep for the refreshing of their bodies and support of nature and how the rest of that day was spent we have seen before There is another place in Scripture much prest upon the consciences of the people by the rigid Sabbatarians of these times to stave them off from any lawful recreation on their new made Sabbath that is to say Isa 58. 13 14. where God speaks thus unto that people If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath from doing thy pleasure on my holy day and call the Sabbath a delight the holy of the Lord honourable and shalt honour him not doing thine own wayes nor finding thine own pleasure nor speaking thine own words then shalt thou delight thy self in the Lord. But if we look better on this Text and compare it with vers 3. of the same Chapter where we find mention of a fast and of the afflicting of their Souls on the day of that fast we may see easily that the Text so much insisted on by our Sabbatarians relates onely to the day of Atonement which being a day of publick humiliation and of confessing their sins to the Lord their God required a stricter withholding of themselves from their lawful pleasures then any of the weekly Sabbaths So as admitting that this whole day was by God required to be
onely that some time should be set apart for the worship of God of which we have so many evident examples in the Greeks and Romans that no man can make question of it but that in all the Acts of worship a man should totally abstract himself from all worldly thoughts which might divert him from the business he was then about Orantis est nihil nisi coelestia cogitare as we learned when School-boyes But that this time should rather be the seventh day then any other is not a part or branch of the Law of Nature never accounted so by the Ancient Writers nor reckoned so by some of those of note and eminency who otherwise are great friends to the Lords day Sabbath Certain I am that Theodoret doth not so account it who telleth us that the observation of the Sabbath came not in by nature but by Moses ' s Law Sabbati observandi non natura magistra sed latio legis which is short but full Nor is it so accounted by Sedulius another of the ancient Writers who ranks it amongst the legal ceremonies not amongst those things quae legi naturali congruunt which are directed meerly by the Law of Nature nor by Damascen amongst the Greeks who doth assure us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say that when there was no Law enacted no◠no Scripture inspired by God that then there was no Sabbath neither nor finally by our venerable Beda who lived about the same time with Damascen and was of the same judgement with him in this particular for he assures us That to the Fathers before the Law all dayes were equal the seventh day having no prerogative before the others which he calls naturalis Sabbati libertatem the liberty of the natural Sabbath and by that liberty if I rightly understand his meaning men were no more restrained to one day then unto another no more unto the seventh then the fourth or eighth Tostatus to the same effect for the middle times who telleth us That howsoever the Hebrew people or any other before the giving of the Law were bound to set a part some time for religious duties Non tamen magis in Sabbato quà m in quolibet aliorum dierum yet were they no more bound to the Sabbath day then to any other For this last age though I could help my selfe by many good Authors yet I shall rest content with two that is to say the Lord Primate himselfe and Doctor Ryvet before named who build the institution of the Sabbath on a positive Law and not upon the Law of Nature And therefore if the instituting of the Sabbath in the first beginning be in effect to make it all one with the Law of Nature as was inferred from Dr. Prideaux and Tostatus it must needs follow thereupon that the Sabbath not being lookt on as a part of the Law of Nature could not be instituted as the Lord Primate saies it was in the first beginning SECT III. The sanctifying of the Sabbath in the first beginning imports a Commandment given to Adam for the keeping of it No such Commandment given to Adam in his own personal capacity nor as the common root of mankind The Patriarchs before the flood did not keep the Sabbath The Sabbath not observed by the Patriarchs of the line of Sem nor by the Israelites in Egypt That the Commandment of the Sabbath was peculiar onely to the Jewes proved by the testimony of the Fathers and the Jewes themselves That the seventh day of every week was not kept holy by the Gentiles affirmed by some of their own best Authors and some late Divines The Jewes derided by the Gentiles for their seventh day Sabbath The Lord Primates Antithesis viz. that the seventh day was more honoured by the Gentiles then the other six not proved by any ancient Author either Greek or Latine The three Greek Poets whom he cites do not serve his turn and how they came to know that the Creation of the World was finished in seven dayes which is all they say The passage of Tertullian in his Tract Ad Nationes as little to his purpose as the three Greek Poets The meaning of that Author in his Apologeticum cap. 16. not rightly understood by the Lord Primate whose Arguments from Tibullus Lucian and Lampridius conclude as little as the rest The observation of the Sabbath and other Jewish Ceremonies taken up by the later Gentiles not upon any old Tradition but by Imitation The custome of the Romans in incorporating all Religions into their own and the reason of it BUt there is one Conclusion more which follows on the instituting of the Sabbath in the first beginning and is like to afford us more work then the other did For if it be all one to bless and sanctifie the seventh day in the beginning of the World as to impose it then on Adam to be kept and sanctified as some say it is it may be very well concluded that if no such commandment was then given to Adam the Sabbath was not blessed and sanctified in the first beginning Nor can it stand with Piety Reason that it should be otherwise For to suppose that God did set apart and sanctifie the seventh day for a day of worship and yet that no Commandment should be given for the keeping of it what is it but to call in question the most infinite wisedom of Almighty God which never did any thing in vain unless perhaps we may conceive with Tornelius that the Angels solemnized this first Sabbath with joyful shouts and acclamations as he gathereth from Iob 38. 4 6. Or that the WORD the second person in the Syntax of the blessed Trinity did take our humane shape upon him and came down to Adam and spent the whole day with him in spiritual exercises as is affirmed by Zanchius with an ego non dubito as a matter which no man need make doubt of but he that listed For if any such Commandment was given to Adam it must be either given him in his own personal capacity or as he was the common root of all mankind which was then virtually in his loyns as Levi is said by the Apostle to have paid Tithes unto Melchisedeck because he was then virtually in the Loyns of his Father Abraham when those Tithes were paid But no such precept or command was given to Adam in his own personal capacity for then the Sabbath must have died and been buried in the same grave with him nor was it given to him as the common root of all mankind for then all the Nations of the World had been bound to keep it the contrary whereof we shall see anon In the mean time let us take with us the Authority of the Ancient Writers by some of which it is affirmed that no commandment was given by God to our Father Adam but that he should abstain from eating of the fruit of the Tree
observed by the ancient Gentiles whom that old Bishop of Antioch had no reference to in this citation Johannes Philoponus the Grammarian speaks more plainly then Theophilus did but he speaks nothing to the point which we have in hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. which Balthazar Corderius thus translateth Illud certè omnes homines consentiunt septem soles esse dies qui in seipsos revoluti totum tempus constituunt And so it was no question in that Authors time which was about the year 600. and somewhat after the distinction of time into weeks being then generally received by all civil Nations who either had received the Gospel or had been under the command of the Roman Empire That which comes after touching Moses Solus itaque magnus Moles septenarii dierum numeri rationem divina inspâ—ratione hominibus tradidit shewes rather the original of the distinction then the general practice it being more then a thousand years from the death of Moses before that distinction of time was received by the Gâ—eeks and Râ—mâ—ns and therefore not to be hoped nor look't for in the barbarous Nations And this is that which Petavius the Jesuite a right learned man hath thus delivered Anni divisio posterior est in Hebdomadas ea dividendi ratio prorsus à Iudaeis o iginem traxit Romani etiam ac Gentiles ante Tertulliani aevum adscivâ—sse videntur The last division of the year saith he is into weeks derived originally from the Hebrewes and seems to have been taken up by the Romans and other Gentiles before the time of Tertullian who takes notice of it By which it seems that this distinction was of no great standing in the Roman Empire till first their acquaintance with the Jewes and afterwards their receiving of the Christian faith had brought it into use and esteem amongst them The Proposition of the Histoâ—ian being thus made good I doubt not but the Application wil hold accordingly For hereupon it is inferred Hist of Sab. Part. 1. c. 4. n. 11. That the Chaldees Persians Greeks and Romans all the four great Monarchies did observe no Sabbaths because they did observe no weeks But the poor Historian must not pass with this truth neither which necessarily doth arise upon the proof of the Proposition And therefore he is told That if he had read how well the contrary is proved by Rivetus and Salmasius he would not have made such a Conclusion as he doth That because the Heathen of the four great Monarchies at least had no distinction of weeks therefore they could observe no Sabbath And I concur fully with the Lord Primate in this particular The Historian was not so irrational as to infer that the Heathen of the four great Monarchies could observe no Sabbath because they did observe no weeks in case it had been proved to his hand or that any sufficient Argument had been offered to him to demonstrate this that the very Gentiles both Civil and Barbarous both Ancient and of later dayes as it were by an universal kind of Tradition retained the distinction of the seven dayes of the week which is the point that Rivet and Salmasius are affirmed to have proved so well p. 79. But on the contrary the Historian having proved that there was no such distinction of the seven dayes of the week retained by the ancient Gentiles either Civil or Barbarous and so well proved it that the Lord Primate hath not any thing to except against him the Application will hold good against all opposition and I shall rest my selfe upon it that the Heathen which observed no Weeks could observe no Sabbath SECT V. The Historian taxt for saying that the falling of the first Pentecost after Christs Ascension upon the first day of the week was meerly casual The Lord Primates stating the Question and his inference on it Exceptions against the state of the Question as by him laid down viz. in making the Feast of First fruits to be otherwise called the feast of Pentecost or the feast of Weeks c. and that he did not rightly understand the meaning of the word Sabbath Levit. 23. 16. The Pentecost affixt by Moses to a certain day of the month as well as the Passover or any other Annual Feast made by the Primate to fall alwayes on the first day of the week and God brought into act a miracle every year that it might be so An Answer to the Lord Primates Argument from the practice of the Samaritans in their keeping of Pentecost The Quartodecimani and the Samaritans Schismaticks at the least if not Hereticks also The Lord Primate puts a wrong sense upon Isychius and Saint Ambrose to prove that they gave to the Lords day the name of Sabbath and his ill luck in it The inference of the Lord Primate examined and rejected The first day of the week not called the Lords day immediately after the first Pentecost as is collected from Waldensis nor in a long time after The Lord Primates great mistake in Tertullians meaning about the Pentecost Each of the fifty dayes which made up the Pentecost esteemed as holy by the Primitive Christians as the Lords day was The mystery of the First fruits not first opened by the Lord Primate as is conceived by Dr. Twisse who applauds him for it THe second charge which the Lord Primate layes upon the Historian relates unto the holding of the great feast of Pentecost upon which day the Holy Ghost came down and sate upon the heads of the Apostles in the shape of cloven fiery tongues and added by Saint Peters preaching no fewer then three thousand soules to the Church of Christ It was saith the Historian a casual thing that Pentecost should fall that year upon the Sunday It was a moveable feast as unto the day such as did change and shift it selfe according to the position of the feast of Passover the rule being this that that on what day soever the second of the Passover did fall upon that also fell the great feast of Pentecost Nam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 semper eadem est feria quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Scaliger hath rightly noted So that as often as the Passover did fall upon the Saturday or Sabbath as this year it did then Pentecost fell upon the Sunday but when the Passover did chance to fall upon the Tuesday the Pentecost fell that year upon the Wednesday sic de caeteris And if the Rule be true as I think it is that no sufficient Argument can be drawn from a casual fact and that the falling of the Pentecost that year upon the first day of the week be meerly casual the coming of the Holy Ghost upon that day will be no Argument nor Authority to state the first day of the week in the place and honour of the Iewish Sabbath But the Lord Primate will by no means allow of this and therefore having framed a discourse concerning the feast of Pentecost
violate the Law of Moses in keeping the feast of Pentecost on any day of the week whatsoever as it chanced to fall And on the other side the Samaritans being lookt upon by the Jewes as Schismaticks as Hereticks also by Epiphanius and divers other Christian Authors can make no president in this case nor ought to have their practice used for an Argument to consute the practise of the Jewes the more regular people and more observâ—â—â— of the Law and the punctualities or nicities of it then the others were Much like to this was the point in difference between the old Hereticks called Quartodecimani and the Orthodox Christians about the time of keeping Easter which the Quartodecimani kept alwayes on the fourteenth day of the month on what day soever it should happen on which day the Jewes also kept their Passeover the Orthodox Christians keeping it on the Sunday after in memory of the Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour for which the feast of Easter was first ordained He that shall justifie the Samaritans against the Jewes in the case of Pentecost may as well justifie the Quartodecimani against the Orthodox Christians in the case of Easter And yet to justifie the Samaritans it is after added that they produce the Letter of the Law Levit. 23. 15 16. where the feast of the first fruits otherwise called Pentecost or the feast of Weeks is prescribed to be kept the morrow after the seventh Sabbath which they interpret to be the first day of the week p. 87 88. As if the Jewes did not or could not keep themselves to the Letter of the Law in keeping Pentecost at the end of fifty dayes on what day soever it might fall because the Samaritans pretend to have the Law on their side in that particular Assuredly the Lord Primate did not consider of the absurdities he hath fallen into by thus advocating for the Samaritans and fixing the feast of Pentecost on the morrow after the seventh weekly Sabbath for by this means in stead of a feast of Pentecost to be observed on the fiftieth day from the first account we shall have a feast by what name soever we shall call it to be observed on the forty ninth forty eighth and forty seventh which though they may be called the feasts of Weeks or the feasts of the Law cannot by any means be called the feast of Pentecost For if the sixteenth of Nisan or the feast of first fruits fall upon the Monday the feast of Pentecost improperly so called must be kept upon the forty ninth if on Tuesday on the forty eighth day after and so abating of the number till we come to Saturday on which day if the sixteenth of Nisan should chance to fall as sometimes it must the next day after the seventh Sabbath would be but the forty fourth day and so by the Lord Primates Rule we shall have a feast of Pentecost but once in seven years that is to say when the sixteenth of Nisan did fall upon the first day of the week which is now our Sunday a feast of Weeks or of giving of the Law on the other six Adeo Argumenta ex absurdo petita ineptos habent exitus said Lactantius truely The second proof is borrowed from the testimony of Isychius an old Christian Writer who lived about the year 600. interpreting the morrow after the seventh Sabbath as the Samaritans also do to be the first day of the Week And true it is that Isychius doth so expound it and more then so makes it to be the first intention of the Law-giver that the day from which the fifty dayes were to be reckoned should be the first day of the week which is now our Sunday Planiùs laith he legislator intentionem suam demonstrare volens ab altero die Sabbati memorari praecepit quinquaginta dies dominicum diem proculdubio volens intelligi In which as the Lord Primate dares not justifie his Author for straining the signification of altera dies Sabbati to signifie the Lords day beyond that true meaning of the word which in Moses denoteth no more then the morrow after the Sabbath though produced by him to no other purpose then to prove that point so dare not I justifie the Lord Primate in straining the words of his Author beyond their meaning and telling us that he made no scruple to call the day of Christs resurrection another Sabbath day For if we look upon it well we shall not find that Isychius calls the day of the Resurrection by the name of another Sabbath day but onely telleth us that the Lords day the day on which our Saviour rose was altera dies Sabbati that is to say the first day of the Week or the morrow after the Sabbath understand by Sabbath in this place the feast of unleavened bread from whence the fifty dayes which ended in the feast of Pentecost were to take beginning as will appear by comparing these words with those before viz. ab altero die Sabbati memorari praecepit quinquaginta dies If the Lord Primate can find no better comfort from the Council of Friuli cap. 13. for calling the day of Christs Resurrection by the name of another Sabbath day he will finde but little if not less from those words of Saint Ambrose to which the said Council of Friuli is supposed to allude The Fathers words on which the Lord Primate doth rely to prove that the Lords day was then called a Sabbath as both Isychius and the said Council of Friuli are presumed to do are these that follow viz. Vbi Dominica dies coepit praecellere quâ Dominus resurrexit Sabbatum quod primum erat secundum haberi coepit à primo In which passage he would have us think that the Lords day is called primum Sabbatum or the first Sabbath and the Saturday Sabbatum secundum or the second Sabbath Whereas indeed the meaning of the Father is no more then this that after the Lords day had grown into estimation and got the better as it were of the Jewish Sabbath ubi Dominica dies coepit praecellere c. the Sabbath of the Jewes which was before the first in honour and account began to be lookt upon in the second place the first being given unto the day of the Resurrection And as for the Council of Friuli the Lord Primate doth not say for certain that the Lords day is there called Sabbatum primum and the Jewish Sabbath Sabbatum ultimum but that they are so called if he be not mistaken but if he be mistaken in it why not as well in this as in all the rest the Council of Friuli will conclude no more then Saint Ambrose did to whom it is said to have alluded And on the contrary if the Testimonies here alledged from Isychius the Council and Saint Ambrose may be properly used to prove that the Lords day was then called by the name of the Sabbath the Lord Primate must
have very ill luck in finding no other testimony but that of luxus Sabbatarius in Apollinaris p. 75. to evidence that the Latine word Sabbatum used to denote our Christian Festivities of which in our first Section we have spoken suffiâ—iently Nor is the Lord Primate less zealous to entitle the Lords day to some Divinity then to gratifie the Sabbatarian Brethren by giving it the name of the Sabbath day For this is that which is chiefly aimed at in the inference wherein I would very cheerfully concur in opinion with him but that I am unsatisfied in the grounds of it For if I were satisfied in this that God so ordered the matter that in the celebration of the feast of Weeks the seventh day should purposely be passed over and that solemnity should be kept upon the first I should as easily grant as he that nothing was more likely to be presignified thereby then that under the state of the Gospel the solemnity of the weekly service should be celebrated upon that day p. 90. But being I cannot grant the first for the reasons formerly delivered I cannot on the like or for better reasons admit the second I grant that under the state of the Gospel the solemnities of the weekly service were celebrated on that day and yet I can neither agree with him nor with Thomas Waldensis whom he cites to that purpose that the Lords day did presently succeed Tunc intrasse Dominicam loco ejus in the place thereof as Baptism presently as he saith succeeded in the place of Circumcision For though Saint John Apocal. 1. call the first day of the week by the name of the Lords day as most Christian Writers think he did yet doth it not follow thereupon that it was so called statim post missionem spiritus Sancti as Waldensis would have it immediately on the comming down of the Holy Ghost For not onely in the eighteenth of the Acts which was some yeares after the first Christian Pentecost but in Saint Pauls Epistle to the Corinthians it is given us by no other name then that of the first day of the Week nor did Saint John write the Revelation in which the name of the Lords day is first given unto it till the ninty fourth or ninty fifth year from our Saviours birth which was sixty years or thereabouts from the coming down of the Holy Ghost the first Christian Pentecost And though I am not willing to derogate from the honour of so great a day yet I cannot agree with the Lord Primate That it is in a manner generally acknowledged by all that on that day viz. the first day of the week the famous Pentecost in the second of the Acts was observed For Lorinus in his Commentary on the second of the Acts tells us of some who hold that at the time of our Saviours suffering the Passover fell upon the Thursday and then the Pentecost must of necessity fall upon the Saturday or Jewish Sabbath But seeing it is said to be agreed on generally in a manner onely let it pass for once All which considered I shall and will adhere to my former vote viz. that if the rule be true as I think it is that no sufficient argument can be drawn from a casual fact and that the falling of the Pentecost that year upon the first day of the week be meerly casual the comming of the Holy Ghost upon that day will be no Argument nor Authority to state the first day of the week in the place and honour of the Jewish Sabbath And now before I shut up this Dispute about the Pentecost I shall crave leave to put the Lord Primate in mind of a great mistake which he hath fallen into by putting another sense on Tertullians words about the first Pentecost as observed by the Christians than was intended by that Author For telling us p. 85. That the Gentiles did not celebrate their Saturdays with that solemnity wherewith themselves did their Annual Festivities or the Jews their weekly Sabbaths he bringeth for a proof thereof a passage cited out of the fourteenth Chapter of Tertullian De Idololatria by which it may appear saith be that Tertullian thus speaks unto the Christians who observed 52. Lords days every year whereas all the Annual festivals of the Pagans put together did come short of fifty Ethnicis semel annuus dies quisque festus est tibi octavo quoque die Excerpe singulas solemnitates nationum in ordinem tâ—xe Pentecosten implere non poterunt But clearly Tertullian in thâ—t place neither relates to the 52 Lords dayes nor the number of 50. but onely to the Christian Pentecost which in his time was solemnized 50. dayes together and took up the whole space of time betwixt Easter and Whitsuntide And this appears plainly by the drift of the Author in that place in which he first taxeth the Christians with keeping many of the feasts of the Gentiles whereas the Gentiles kept not any of the feasts of the Christians non Dominicam non Pentecosten no not so much as the Lords day or the feast of Pentecost And then he addes that if they did it onâ—â—y to refresh their spirits or indulge something to the flesh they had more festivals of their own then the Gentiles had The number of the feasts observed by the Gentiles being so short of those which were kept by the Christians of his time ut Pentecosten non potuerint they could not equal the festival of the Pentecost onely much less the Pentecost and the Lords day together And so it is observed by Pamelius in his Notes upon that place where first he telleth us that the Author in that place understands not onely the feast of Pentecost it selfe or the last day of fifty sed etiam tempus illud integrum à die Paschae in Pentecosten but the whole space of time betwixt it and the Passeover taking the word Passover in the largest sense as it comprehends also the feast of unleavened bread But what need Pamelius come in place when it is commonly avowed by the ancient Writers that all the fifty dayes which made up the Pentecost were generally esteemed as holy and kept with as great reverence and solemnity as the Lords day was No fasting upon the one nor upon the other Die dominico jejunium nefas ducimus vel de geniculis adorare eadem immunitate à die Paschae in Pentecosten gaudemus as Tertullian hath it Saint Ambrose more expresly tells us Sermon 61. that every one of those fifty dayes was instar Dominicae and qualis est Dominica in all respects nothing inferiour to the Lords day and in his Comment on Saint Luke c. 17. l. 8. that omnes dies that is to say all those fifty dayes sunt tanquam Dominica Adde hereunto Saint Jeroms testimony Ad Lucinum and then I hope Tertullians words in his Book De Idololatria c. 14. will find another sense and meaning then that which the Lord
Primate hath ascribed unto it To shut up this Dispute in which we have encountred so many errors the Lord Primate tells us very rightly that on the day of the Passeover Christ our Passeover was slain for us that he rested in the grave the whole Sabbath following commonly called the feast of unleavened bread the next day after that the first fruits of the first or Barley Harvest was offered unto God and that from thence the count was taken of the seven Sabbaths and that upon the morrow after the seventh Sabbath which was our Lords day was celebrated the feast of weeks c. Upon which offering of the sheaf of the first fruits of the first or Barley Harvest which hapned at the time of our Saviours suffering on the first day of the Week he gives this note that Christ rose from the dead upon that day and became the first fruits of them that slept many bodies of the Saints that slept arising likewise after him p 91. And for this note he receives great thanks from Dr. Twisse signifying in a letter to him the great satisfaction which he received from him in opening the mystery of the feasts of first fruits to the singular advantage of the Lords day in the time of the Gospel p. 103. But herein Dr. Twisse may be said to be like those men of whom Tully speaks Qui non tantùm ornarent aliquem suis laudibus sed honorarent alienis For without derogating in the least from the honour due to the Lord Primate I cannot say that the honour of the first opening of this mystery doth belong to him it being an observation which I had both read in Books and heard in Sermons many years before 1640. in which or but the year before the Lord Primate wrote this present Letter to Doctor Twisse But because I have but few Books by me and cannot readily call to mind in what Books I read it I shall content my selfe at this present with the gloss of Deodati on the twentieth verse of the fifteenth Chapter of the first Epistle to those of Corinth where it is said that Christ was risen again and was become the first fruits of them that slept premising onely by the way that Diodati began those Annotations in the Italian tongue about the year 1606. to give his Country-men an insight of the darkness wherin they lived which afterwards he polished and perfected in such manner as they are now come into our hands Now Diodati his note is this viz. that Christ is called the first fruits of them that slept not onely because he was the first in the order of the Resurrection which is in Believers as it were a wakening from sleep but also in the quality of a Chief the cause and pledge of it in all his members inseparably united to him by communion of Spirit Rom. 8. 11. even as under the Law in the first fruits offered to God the people had an assurance of Gods blessing upon all their Harvest In a word as some things are defined or to speak more properly described amongst Philosophers rather by what they are not then by what they are so it is easier to declare to whom the first opening of this Mystery of the first fruits if there be any mystery in it doth not of right belong then to whom it doth SECT VI. The Historian charged for following the Greek Editions of Ignatius in his Epistle to the Magnesians An old Latine Translation of Ignatius preferred by the Lord Primate before any of the Greek Editions and the reason why Proofs from the best of the Greek Fathers that the Sabbath was kept as an holy day by the Primitive Christians The contrary not proved by these two testimonies which are alledged from the Council of Laodicea and the words of Gregory the Great The Council of Laodicea prohibits not the keeping of the Sabbath day but the keeping of it after the manner of the Jews by abstaining from all kind of work The Sabbatarians by imposing a restraint from all manner of work on the Lords day are by Pope Gregory the Great made the Preachers of Antichrist The Lord Primate picks a needless quarrel with the Bishop of Ely THe third charge laid by name on the Historian relates unto a passage cited out of the Epistle of Ignatius Ad Magnesianos in which he doth not stand accused either for falsifying the words of his Author or putting a wrong sense upon them but onely for not consulting with an old Latine copy of Ignatius which he never heard of The Historian had then by him no fewer then four Editions of that Father one published by Mastreus the Jesuite both in Greek and Latine another in both languages published by Vedelius a Genevian with his notes upon it a third more ancient then either of them printed at Paris in both languages also but the year I remember not and a fourth in Latine onely but of a very old Print subjoyned unto the works of Dionysius the Areopagite Out of all which compared together he cited that passage out of the Epistle to the Magnesians against which the Lord Primate hath excepted and is this that followeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let us not keep the Sabbath in a Jewish manner in sloth and idleness for it is written that he that will not labour shall not eat and in the sweat of thy brows shalt thou eat thy bread But let us keep it after a spiritual fashion not in bodily ease but in the study of the Law not eating meat dressed yesterday or drinking luke-warm drinks or walking out a limited space or setling our delights as they did on dancing but in the contemplation of the works of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. And after we have so kept the Sabbath let every one that loveth Christ keep the Lords day festival the Resurrection day the Queen and Empress of all dayes in which our life was raised again and death was overcome by our Lord and Saviour So that we see he would have both dayes observed the Sabbath first though not as would the Ebionites in a Jewish sort and after that the Lords day which he so much magnifieth the better to abate that high esteem which some had cast upon the Sabbath Against this passage and the inference which is raised upon it the Lord Primate first objecteth saying that there is no such thing to be found in an old Latine copy of the works of Ignatius which is to be seen in the Library of Caius Colledge in Cambridge which for many respects he doth prefer before any Greek Edition then extant And in that old Latine copy saith he there is nothing to be found in the Epistle to the Magnesians touching the Sabbath and the Lords day but these words onely viz. Non amplius Sabbatizantes sed secundum Dominicam viventes in qua vita nostra orta est And thereupon he doth infer that all those other words alledged by
several Greek Editions above mentioned and finding them so well backt and countenanced by those holy Fathers which succeeded in their several times need not be troubled at the starting out of an old Latine Manuscript so different from the Greek Editions as it seems to be nor to recede from any thing which he hath cited out of those Editions because the Lord Primate findes it not in his Latine Manuscript The passage of Ignatius Ad Magnesianos cited by the Historian being justified by so many good Authors all living and writing except Socrates onely in the four first Centuries we must next see what the Lord Primate hath to object against it or any thing therein delivered or rather to confirm his correction of it out of the old Latine Copy in the Library of Caius Colledge The old Latine Copy hath it thus Non amplius Sabbatizantes sed secundum Dominicam viventes in qua vita nostra orta est And this he thinks to be a sufficient Argument to prove that the Lords day was observed as a weekly holy day by the Christians in the room of the abrogated Sabbath of the Jewes p. 93. Though no such thing can be collected either as to the weekly celebrating of the Lords day or the abrogating of the Jewish Sabbath from his Authors words But then as well to justifie the reading of this old Latine Copy as to refel that which the Historian had observed from the Greek Editions he gives us two Authorities and no more but two The first is the Authority of the Fathers in the Council of Laodicea touching the time whereof whether he or the Lord Bishop of Ely be in the right we dispute not now By whom it was declared quod non oportet Christianos Judaizare in Sabbat o otiari sed ipsos eo die operari diem autem Dominicam praeferentes otiari si modo possint ut christianos p. 98. But unto this it may be answered that this Canon it is the 29 in number relates not to the meetings of the Christians on the Sabbath or Saturday for Gods publick service but to the usage of some men who did seem to Judaize upon it by giving themselves to ease and idleness and to rest from labour when the service of the day was ended And that the Canon meant no more then to reprove such men as observed the Saturday or Sabbath after the manner of the Jewes and to take order for the conttary in the time to come appears most evidently by the great care they took touching the solemnizing of that day and the Divine Offices to be done upon it declared in three several Canons the summe whereof we have seen already in this Section So that this first part of that Canon aimed at no other end but by ordaining that the people should work on the Sabbath or Saturday suppose it still after the publick service of the day was ended thereby to distinguish them from the Jewes who would not work at all upon it And then that this distinction between them and the Jewes might appear more evidently it was ordered in the later part of that Canon that preferring the Lords day before it they should as Christians rest from labour on that day if their occasions would permit them For if we mark it as we should we shall not find that the Fathers absolutely prescribed any such cessation from all or any work for which purpose it is chiefly cited but onely with a si modo possint if neither Masters Parents or other Superiors should command them otherwise or that the conveniency of their own affairs or the doing of good offices to their neighbour did not occasion them to dispose of it or some part thereof on some bodily labour The Canon must be thus expounded or else it must run cross to those which before were mentioned which were ridiculous to imagine in so grave a meeting The next Authority is taken from Gregory the Great who telleth us that it is the Doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist qui veniens diem Dominicum Sabbatum ab omni opere faeciet custodiri who at his coming shall cause both the Lords day and the Sabbath to be kept or celebrated without doing any manner of work A passage very strangely cited and such as I conceive the Lord Primate will neither stand to nor be ruled by upon second thoughts For if it be the Doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist that no manner of work is to be done upon the Saturday or Sabbath it is the Doctrine of the same Preachers of Antichrist that no manner of work be done on the Lords day neither And if it be the Doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist that no manner of work should be done on the Lords day what will become of all our English Sabbatarians and their Abetrers who impose as many restraints of this kind upon Christian people as ever were imposed on the Jewes by the Scribes and Pharisees What will become of those who framed the Articles of Ireland or have since subscribed them or preacht or writ according to the tenour of them in one of which it is decreed that the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and that therefore we are bound therein to rest from all common and daily business The Lord Primate did not well consider of these inconveniencies when he brought in Gregory the Great to bear witness for him And in that want of consideration he falls on Doctor Francis White Lord Bishop of Ely a right learned man for rendring Pope Gregories words by a strange kind of mistake in turning this word and the Copulative into or the Disjunctive But possibly this may be a fault of the Printers or a slip of the Pen without any purpose or design of altering the least word or true intention of that Father And secondly whether it be rendered by the Copulative and or the Disjunctive or is not much material for if it be the Doctrine of the Preachers of Antichrist to teach men to abstain from all manner of work both on the Saturday and the Sunday it is no doubt the Doctrine of the same preachers of Antichrist to teach men to abstaine from all manner of work upon the Saturday or the Sunday So that the Lord Primate might have spared that exception against a man of his own order and of so great Abilities in the Schools of Learning but he held a contrary opinion to the Sabbatarians and therefore was to fare no better then the Author of the History had fared before him And herein the Lord Primate seems to be of the same mind with the famous Orator who held it very just and equitable ut qui in eadem causa sint in eadem item essent fortuna And so much for that SECT VII The Historian charged for crossing with the Doctrine of the Church of England and in what particulars
new Testament quodque ex illa ipsa Doctrina Catholici Patres veteres Episcopi collegerint and had been thence collected by the Orthodox Fathers and ancient Bishops And though H. B. of Friday-street in his seditious Sermon preached on the fifth of November Anno 1636. and the Author of the Book entituled The Liberty of Prophecy published in the year 1647. endevour to make them of no reckoning yet was King James a learned and well studied Prince perswaded otherwise then so And thereupon in some Directions sent by him to the Vice-Chancellor and other of the Heads of the University of Oxford bearing date January 18. An. 1616. it was advised and required That young Students in Divinity be directed to study such Books as be most agreeable in Doctrine and Discipline to the Church of England and excited to bestow their time in the Fathers and Councils School-men Histories and Controversies and not to insist too long upon Compendiums and Abbreviators making them the grounds of their study in Divinity By which we see that the first place is given to Fathers and Councils as they whose writings and decrees were thought to have been most agreeable to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England The like may be said also of the usages and customes of the Primitive times which the first Reformers of this Church had a principal care of it being asfirmed in the Act of Parliament 2. 3. of Edw. 6. by which the first Liturgy of that Kings time was confirmed and ratified that the Compilers of the same not onely had an eye to the most pure sincere Christian Religion taught in the Scriptures but also a respect to the usages in the Primitive Church They had not else retained so many of the ancient Ceremonies as bowing at the name of Jesus kneeling at the Communion the Cross in Baptism standing up at the Creed and Gospels praying toward the East c. besides the ancient Festivals of the Saints and Martyrs who have their place and distinct offices in the present Liturgy And as for the neighbouring Protestant and Reformed Churches although she differ from them in her Polity and form of government yet did she never authorize any publick Doctrine which might have proved a scandal to them in the condemning of those Recreations works of labour and other matters of that nature which the general practice of those Churches both approve and tolerate And therefore if it can be proved that the spending of the whole Lords day or the Lords day wholly in Religious exercises accompanied as needs it must be with a restraint from necessary labour and lawful pleasures be contrary to the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers the usages and customes of the Primitive times and to the general practice of the Protestant and Reformed Churches I doubt not but it will appear to all equal and indifferent men that there is no such mind and meaning in the Book of Homilies or in them that made it as the Lord Primate hath been pleas'd to put upon it or to gather from it And first beginning with the Fathers Councils and the Usages of the Primitive Church it is not to be found that ever they required that the whole day should be employed in Gods publick service without permission of such necessary business and honest recreations as mens occasions might require or invite them to It was ordained indeed by the Council of Laodicea spoken of before that Christians on the Lords day should give themselves to ease and rest otiari is the word in Latine which possibly may be meant also of a rest from labour but it is qualified with a si modo possint if it may stand with the conveniences of their Affairs and the condition which they lived in And so the Canon is expounded by Zonaras in his gloss upon it It is appointed saith he by this Canon that none abstain from labour on the Sabbath day which plainly was a Jewish custome and an Anathema laid on those who offended herein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But they are willing to rest from labour on the Lords day in honour of the Resurrection of our Lord and Saviour But here we must observe that the Canon addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in case they may For by the Civil Law it is precisely ordered that every man shall rest that day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Hindes and Husbandmen excepted his reason is the very same with that before expressed in the Emperours Edict 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. for unto them it is permitted to work and travel on that day because perhaps if they neglect it they may not find another day so fit and serviceable for their occasions Besides which it is to be considered that many Christians of those times were servants unto Heathen Masters or otherwise obnoxious to the power of those under whom they lived and therefore could not on the Lords day abstain from any manner of work further then it might stand with the will and pleasure of those Superiours to whom the Lord had made them subject A Christian servant living under the command of an Heathen Master might otherwise neglect this Masters business one whole day in seven and plead the Canon of this Council for his justification which whether it would have saved him from correction or the Church from scandal I leave to be considered by all sober and unbiassed men All that the Church required of her conformable Children during the first 300. years was onely to attend the publick ministration or morning-service of the day leaving them to dispose of the rest thereof at their will and pleasure the very toil of Husbandry not being prohibited or restrained for some ages following For proof whereof take these words of Beza a man of great credit and esteem not onely with our English Presbyterians but the Lord Primate himself Vt autem Christiani eo die à suis quotidianis laboribus abstinerent praeter id temporis quod in coetu ponebatur id neque illis Apostolicis temporibus mandatum neque prius fuit observatum quam id à Christianis Imperatoribus nequis à rerum sacrarum meditatione abstraheretur quidem non ita praecise observatum That Christians ought saith he to abstain that day from their labour except that part alone which was appointed for the meetings of the Congregation was never either commanded in the Apostles times nor otherwise observed in the Church until such time that so it was enjoyned by Christian Emperours to the end the people might not be diverted from meditating on holy matters nor was it then so strictly kept as it was enjoyned Now the first Christian Emperour was the famous and renowned Constantine who was the first that established the Lords day which formerly had stood on no other ground then the Authority of the Church and consent of Gods people by Imperial Edicts so by the like Imperial Edict he restrained
RESPONDET PETRVS OR The ANSWER of PETER HEYLYN D. D. To so much of Dr. Bernard's Book Entituled The Judgement of the late Primate of Ireland c. As he is made a Party to by the said Lord Primate in the Point of the SABBATH And by the said DOCTOR in some others To which is added AN APPENDIX In Answer to certain Passages in Mr Sandersons HISTORY of the Life and Reign of K. CHARLES Relating to The Lord PRIMATE The ARTICLES of Ireland And the EARL of Strafford In which the RESPONDENT is concerned LONDON Printed for R. Royston at the Angel in Ivy-lane and R. Marriot in S. Dunstans Church-yard Fleet-street M DC LVIII THE AUTHORS PREFACE To the Reader IT was upon the 2. of January that Doctor Bernards Book entituled The judgment of the late Primate of Ireland c. came to me from a friend in London which I had no sooner caused to be read over to me but I lookt upon it as the most unwelcome New-years-gift that could have been sent me from an enemy So far I found my self concerned in it that without a manifest betraying of my Fame and Innocence I was not to defer my Answer notwithstanding all the difficulties which appeared before me I considered of my own unfitness to enter into new disputes having so little use of my eyes and hands for such imployments the eminence of the name which I was to deal with in reference to whom I could be lookt upon no otherwise then as a Grashopper compared with the son of Anak and finally the disagreeableness of some part of the subject to the complexion and temper of the present times But on the other side that saying of S. Hierom Se nolle quenquam in suspicione Haereseos silentem esse That he would have no man hold his peace when suspected of Heresie over-ballanc'd all And in this Book of Doctor Bernards I found my self accused of Heterodoxie at the least if not of Heresie reproacht with violating my subscription and running cross unto the publick Doctrines of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies Reproches not to be endured but by guilty persons such as sink under the calamity of an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or self-conviction So that being forced upon an answer I was resolved to make it as speedy as I could before prejudice and prepossessions had made too strong a head against me in the minds of men I never lov'd to have such work stick long in my fingers and therefore notwithstanding the extremity of the season and the tyrannie of a Quartan Ague under which I languished I gave it such a quick dispatch that it might easily have been publisht by the middle of the Term then following But contrary to my expectation it met with so many rubs between the Pen and the Press that the Term was past before it could be undertaken And then the undertakers were not willing to make too much haste a dead vacation being held to be no fit time to quicken and give life to the sale of new books not extremely popular But to say truth what I have lost one way by these delayes I have gained in another For by this means I have had the opportunity of seeing my self abused and reprochfully handled in the late History of the Life and Reign of King Charles the Author whereof hath been entertained by Doctor Bernard as a souldier of Fortune to undertake this Pen-combat for him though he would rather be supposed to serve under the Lord Primates Colours as the nobler General But serve he under whom he will t is all one to me who am design'd to bear the blowes not made the gentler by the Name and Reputation of the party who engaged him in it The best is that he hath not found me unprovided for my own defence and if he chance to fall back with some loss of Honour he must blame himself It hath been alwayes my desire not to die in debt and therefore I have paid this Creditor with an answer also For though I know well that neglected calumnies are of least continuance Convicia spreta exolescunt as it is in Tacitus yet this is to be understood of such common fames as pass upon the breath of rumor and are taken up on hear-say onely or from short-liv'd Pamphlets not of such calumnies as are enrolled upon Record or passe into the body of a publick History If contumelies of this nature were to go unanswered the party wronged must live defamed and die remedilesse a scorn unto the present times and a perpetual ignominy to the ages following To prevent which I have taken the best course I could to right my self against all opponents to let both Doctor Bernard and this fresh Adventurer understand the hazard which they so wilfully run into by provoking an unwilling Adversary who was resolv'd never to have looked back upon those Disputes which formerly had too much exercised both his Pen and Patience But being what is past cannot be recalled we must all submit our selves and our performances to the Readers judgment who I desire may be impartial and unbiassed on either side that so the truth onely may obtain the victory and let the people shout and say with them in Esdras Magna est veritas praevalet that is to say Great is truth and mighty above all things 1 Esdr c. 4. v. 41. From Lacies Court in Abingdon March 18. 1657. RESPONDET PETRVS Or the Answer of PETER HEYLYN D. D. TO So much of Doctor BERNARDS Book entitled The Judgement of the late Primate of Ireland c. SECT I. The priviledges of the dead infringed by Dr. Bernard The Answerer drawn unwillingly to this encounter The occasion and necessity of it The Fathers generally declared against the morality of the Sabbath The day of worship not transferred from the seventh day of the Week to the first by Christ our Saviour as the Lord Primate seems to make it The word Sabbatum not used to signisie the Lords Day by the Ancient Writers The Lord Primates great mistake in the meaning of Sidonius Apollinaris Sabbatarius Luxus what it was and of the riotous feastings of the Jews on the Sabbath day The Lords day vulgarly though but lately called the Sabbath by the artifice of the Sabbatarians contrary to the known meaning of the word Sabbatum in the Latine tongue IT was a pious wish of Tacitus that renouned Historian when he had brought Agricola to the funeral Pile ut in loco Piorum manibus destinato placidè quiescat that he might rest without disturbance in the place appointed for the souls of vertuous persons Thus Dido with like piety prayed ut senis Anchisae molliter ossa cubent that the bones of old Anchises might rest in peace and King Josia gave command that the Bones of the Prophet which prophesied against the Altar of Bethel should not be removed In which respect the grave is called by Tertullian
of those five there is but one material and of any consequence in the main concernments of the Cause the other four being either extrinsecal or of less importance more then to shew that nothing in that History which was found liable to exception should escape uncensured Assuredly it had been a work more proper for so great an Antiquary a man so verst and studied in all parts of Learning to have returned a full and complete Answer to that History had he found it answerable then to except against some few passages in it of no greater moment and by so doing to justifie and confirm the Author in all the rest Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis is a good old rule and which I might crave leave to use to my best advantage but that I am resolved to try my fortune and make good those passages against which the Lord Primate hath excepted To the defence whereof with all due reverence to his Name and Memory I shall now proceed Noster duorum eventus ostendat utra gens sit melior And first the Lord Primate tells us this that when he gave himselfe to the reading of the Fathers he took no heed unto any thing that concerned this Argument as little dreaming that any such Controversie would have arisen amongst us p. 74. And I concur with him in words though perhaps not in meaning also there being none who reads the Fathers with care and caution who can suppose that any Controversie should arise about the Sabbath against the morality whereof the Fathers generally declare upon all occasions The Lord Primate tells us of Saint Augustin pag. 75. That purposely selecting those things which appertained unto us Christians he doth wholly pretermit that Precept in the recital of the Commandments of the Decalogue To which Testimony though this alone may seem sufficient to confirme the point I shall adde some more And first the said Saint Augustine tells us that it is no part of the Moral Law for he divides the Law of Moses into these two parts viz. Sacraments and Moral Duties accounting Circumcision the New Moons Sabbaths and the Sacrifices to appertain unto the first ad mores autem Non occides c. and these Commandments Thou shalt not kill Thou shalt not commit Adultery and the rest to be contained within the second The like saith Chrysostom that this Commandment is not any of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which naturally were implanted in us or made known unto our conscience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that it was temporary and occasional and such as was to have an end where all the rest were necessary and perpetual Tertullian also in his Treatise against the Jewes saith that it was not Spirituale aeternum Mandatum sed temporale quod quandoque cessaret not a spiritual and eternal institution but a temporal onely Finally to ascend no higher Justine Martyr more expresly in his Dispute with Trypho a learned Jew maintains the Sabbath to be onely a Mosaical Ordinance and that it was imposed upon the Israelites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of their hard-heartedness and irregularity And as for the Lords day which succeeded in the place thereof the Fathers generally think no otherwise of it then as an Ecclesiastical Institution not founded upon any precept either of Christ or his Apostles but built perhaps upon some Apostolical practice which gave the Church authority to change the day and to translate it from the Seventh on which God rested to the First day of the week the day of our Saviours Resurrection And though the Lord Primate to gain unto the Lords day the Reputation of having somewhat in it of Divine Institution ascribes the alteration of the day to our Lord and Saviour page 76. yet neither the Author whom he cites nor the Authority by him cited will evince the point And first the Author will not do it the Homily De Semente out of which the following proof is taken being supposed by the Learned not to have been writ by Athanasius but put into his Works as his by some that had a mind to entitle him to it as generally all the Works of the Ancient Fathers have many supposititious writings intermingled with them Secondly the Authority or Words cited will not do it neither though at first sight they seem to come home to make proof thereof The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the Lord translated the Sabbath from the seventh day of the week to the Lords day or first day of the week Which words are to be understood not as if done by his Commandment but on his occasion the Resurrection of our Lord upon that day being the principal motive which did induce his Church to make choice thereof for a day of Worship For otherwise the false Athanasius whosoever he was must cross and contradict the true who having told us that it was commanded at the first that the Sabbath should be observed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his own words are in memory of the accomplishment of the worlds Creation ascribes the institution of the Lords day to the voluntary usage of the Church of God without any Commandment from our Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We celebrate saith he the Lords day as a memorial of the beginning of a new Creation which is plain enough In the next place it is acknowledged by the Lord Primate That generally the word Sabbatum in the writings of the Fathers doth denote our Saturday p. 74. Which notwithstanding either because it was affirmed by the Historian History of the Sabbath Part 2. Chap. 2. Num. 12. that the word Sabbatum was not used to signifie the Lords day by any approved Writer for the space of a thousand years and upward or not to leave the Sabbatarian Brethren at so great a loss in that particular he would fain find out one though but one of a thousand who hath used it to denote our Christian Festivities also Where not that the Lord Primate doth not say as indeed he could not that the word Sabbatum was used to signifie the Lords day but onely to signifie the other Festivals of the Church the Christian Festivities as he calls them in which how much he is mistaken we shall see anon That one here meant and mentioned is Sidonius Apollinaris Bishop of Auvergne in France who describing the moderation of the Table of Theoderick King of the Goths upon the Eves and the excess on the Holy-day following he writeth of the one that his Convivium diebus profestis simile privato est that his Table on the working-dayes was furnished like the Table of private men but of the other dayes or Festivals he telleth us this De luxu autem illo Sabbatario narrationi mâ—ae supersedendum est qui nec latentes potest latere personas that is to say that his excess or Sabbatarian luxury required
not to be spoken of because it could not be concealed from those who lived most retiredly If either the Lord Primate or Sirmondus the Jesuite could infer from hence that the word Sabbatum was used by Apollinaris to signifie or denote our Christian Festivities much less the Sunday or Lords day I shall miss my mark They say it is a sign of ill luck for a man to stumble at the threshold and never was such a stumble made by a man of learning in the first beginning of a work for clearly Sabbatarius luxus relates not to the Lords day nor the other Festivals but is there used proverbially to signifie that excess and riot which that King used at his Table on the dayes aforesaid The proverb borrowed from the Jewes and the riotous feastings on the Sabbath It s true the Jews did commonly fast till noon upon their Sabbath till the devotions of the morning were complete and ended on which account they tax the Disciples of our Saviour for eating a few ears of Corn on the Sabbath day Matth. 12. 2. but then it is as true withal that they spent all the rest of the day in their riotous feastings not onely with plenty of good cheer but excess of wine In which regard whereas all other marketing was unlawful on the Sabbath dayes there never was restraint of selling Wine the Jews believing that therein they brake no Commandment Hebraei faciunt aliquid speciale in vino viz. quòd cùm in Sabbato suo à caeteris venditionibus emptionibus cessent solum vinum vendunt credentes se non solvere Sabbatum as Tostatus hath it And for the rest of their excesses Saint Augustine telleth us that they kept the Sabbath onely ad luxuriam ebrietatem in rioting and drunkenness and that they rested onely ad nugas luxurias suas to luxury and wantonness they consumed the day languido luxurioso otio in an effeminate slothful ease and finally did abuse the same not onely deliâ—iis Judaicis in Jewish follies but ad nequitiam even to sin and naughtiness Put altogether and we have luxury and drunkenness and sports and pleasures enough to manifest that they spared not any dainties to set forth their Sabbath Tertullian hath observed the same but in fewer words according to his wonted manner who speaking of the Jewes in his Apologeticum adversus Gentes Cap. 16. hath told us of them that they did Diem Saturni otio victui decernere devote the Saturday or Sabbath unto Ease and Luxury But before either of them this was noted by Plutarch also an Heathen but a great and grave Philosopher who layes it to their charge that they did feast it on their Sabbath with no small excess but of wine especially and thereupon conjectureth that the name of Sabbath had its original from the Orgies or feasts of Bacchus whose Priest used often to ingeminate the word Sabbi Sabbi in their drunken ceremonies From whence we have the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to triumph dance or make glad the countenance And from hence also came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the sirname of Bacchus or at the least some Son of his mentioned in Coelius Rhodiginus as is observed by Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato This said the meaning of Apollinaris will be onely this that though Theoderick kept a spare Table on the other dayes yet on the Festivals of the Church he indulged unto himself a kind of Sabbatarian luxury that is to say such riotous feasting and excess as the Iewes used upon their Sabbath Nothing in this to prove that the word Sabbatum was used by any approved Writer for the space of a thousand years and upward to signifie either the Lords day or any of the Christian Festivities as the Lord Primate would sain have had it which notwithstanding partly by the diligence of our Sabbatarians and their active Emissaries and partly by the ignorance of some and the easiness of the rest of the people the Sunday or Lords day is generally called by no other name then by that of the Sabbath he who shall call it otherwise then the vulgar do being branded commonly with profaneness or singularity And yet if any of these fine fellows should be asked the English of the Latine word Sabbatum they could not chuse but answer that it signified the seventh day of the week or the Saturday onely Or if they should every Clerk Notary and Register in the Courts of Judicature would deride them for it who in drawing up their Processes Declarations Entries Judgements and Commissions never used other Latine word for Saturday but Dies Sabbati as long as any of those forms were written in the Latine tongue And they continued in that tongue till toward the later end of the late long Parliament in which it was ordered that all Writs Declarations and other legal instruments of what kind soever should be made in English the readiest way to make all Clerks Atturnies Registers c. more ignorant of Grammar learning then they were before SECT II. The Lord Primates judgement of the Sabbath delivered in two Propositions His first Proposition for setting apart some whole day for Gods solemn worship by the Law of Nature found both uncertain and unsafe no such whole day kept or required to be kept by the Jewes or Gentiles His second Proposition neither agreeable to the School-men or the Sabbatarians nor grounded upon Text of Scripture He reconciles himself with the Sabbatarians by ascribing an immutability to a Positive Law but contrary therein to the first Reformers and other learned men of the Protestant and Reformed Churches He founds the Institution of the Sabbath on Genesis 2. An Anticipation or Prolepsis in that place of Gen. maintained explicitly by Josephus and many of the most learned of the Jewish Rabbins as also by Tostatus and his followers amongst the Christians implicitly by those who maintained that the Sabbath was not instituted in the first beginning The like Anticipations frequent in the holy Scripture and justified by many of the Ancient Fathers and not a few learned men of the later times The Sabbath not a part of the Law of Nature BUt now before we can proceed to such other passages which the Lord Primate hath excepted against in History of the Sabbath either by name or on the by it will be necessary that we know his own Judgement and Opinion in the ground of this Controversie as well concerning the morality of the fourth Commandment as the true ground and institution of the Sabbath And to find that we must consult his Letter to Mr. Ley in which he telleth us That for his own part he never yet doubted but took it for granted that as the setting of some whole day apart for Gods solemn worship was juris Divini naturalis so that this solemn day he means the Sabbath should be one in seven was juris Divini positivi
spent in some religious Acts of solemn worship though never kept so by the Iewes yet was it but one whole day in a year and that injoyn'd also by a positive Law which if it be sufficient to discharge the obligation laid upon us by the Law of Nature the observation of the Sabbath formerly of the Lords day now may be thought superfluous And if no such whole day were kept or required to be kept by the Iewes Gods peculiar people there is small hope to find it amongst the Gentiles who did too much attend their profit and indulge their pleasures to spend whole dayes upon the service of their gods I speak here of that which the Gentiles did in ordinary and common course as a thing constantly required of them and observed by them and not of any extraordinary and occasional action such as the three dayes fast which was kept in Nineve by the Kings command upon that fearful Proclamation which was made against it by the Prophet Ionah As for the Christians I dare with confidence affirm that the spending of the whole Lords day in the acts of worship was never required of them or of any of them by any Imperial Edict or National Law or Constitution of the Church till the year 1615. at what time it was enjoyned by the Articles of the Church of Ireland as shall be proved at large hereafter when that passage in those Articles comes to be examined The Lord Primates first Proposition being thus blown off we next proceed to the examination of the second that is to say That the solemn day of worship should be one in seven was juris Divini positivi recorded in the fourth Commandment A proposition which will find few Friends and many Adversaries especially as it comes attended with the explication which he makes upon it For first it crosseth with Tostatus a man of as great industry and as much variety of learning as any of the age he lived in and not with him onely but with Thomas Aquinas the great Dictator of the Schools and generally with all the School-men of which thus Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato Sect. 3. It is as Abulensis hath it a Dictate of the Law of Nature that some set time be put apart for Gods holy worship but it is Ceremonial and Legal that this worship should be restrained either to one day of seven or the seventh day precisely from the worlds creation A time of rest is therefore moral but the set time thereof is ceremonial which is confessed by those who have stood most on this Commandment and urged it even to a probable suspicion of Iudaisme Aquinas also so resolves it and which is seldome seen in other cases the School-men of what Sect soever say the same whereby saith he we may perceive in what respects the Fathers have sometimes pronounced it to be a ceremony and a shadow and a figure onely In the next place it crosseth with the Sabbatarians of these later times who generally make the sanctifying of one day in seven to be the moral part of the fourth Commandment the limiting of that day to the last day of the week or the seventh day on which God rested to be the ceremonial part of it and it concerns them so to do in point of interest for otherwise they could find no ground for the morality of the Lords day Sabbath and founding that morality on the fourth Commandment and pressing it upon the consciences of the people with such art and industry So that we have three parts at least of this one Commandment viz. the moral part consisting in the setting apart of one whole day but no matter when for Gods solemn worship the Positive part consisting as the Lord Primate saith in sanctifying one day in seven and then the ceremonial part in limiting that day to the seventh day precisely of the creation of the world on which God rested from his labours And strange it were if the judicial Law should not put in also for a share and make up the fourth the man that gathered sticks on the Sabbath day being tried according to this Law and condemned accordingly But here before we shall proceed to the Explication by which the Lord Primate makes his opinion more agreeable to the Sabbatarians then at first it seemed I must ask some of the Lord Primates followers where I shall find the Institution of that positive Law which before we heard of by whom it was ordained and on whom imposed for positive Laws must be declared and enjoyned in terms express or else they are neither Laws nor Positive If they shall say that we may find the Institution of it in the second of Genesis then must it be the sanctifying of that very seventh day on which God rested from his labours and not the setting apart or sanctifying of one day in seven as the Lord Primate would fain have it And secondly if the setting a part or sanctifying of one day in seven as it is juris Divini positive be that which is recorded in the fourth Commandment as the Lord Primate sayes it is then must it also be the same very seventh day on which God rested as before there being no other day but that commanded to be kept holy in that Commandment or mentioned to be blessed and sanctified by the Lord our God And on the other side if sanctifying the seventh day precisely on which God rested from his labours either as mentioned in the fourth Commandment or instituted in Gen. 2. be onely juris ceremonialis but a matter of Ceremony as the Sabbatarians would fain have it then as they leave no room at all for the Lord Primates positive Law in either Scripture so do they furnish the Church with a better Argument against themselves concerning the Antiquity and use of Ceremonies then hath yet been thought of But leaving them to free themselves from these perplexities at their better leisure we must next see what satisfaction will be offered to the Sabbatarians who make the sanctifying of one day in seven to be the moral not the positive part of the fourth Commandment And herein we shall find the Lord Primate very ready to give them all possible contentment And therefore he ascribes so much morality to his positive Law as to make it immutable and unchangeable by Men or Angels which is one of the chiefe priviledges of the moral Law and then he fixeth the first Institution of it on Gen. 2. which makes it equal in a manner to the Law of Nature if not part thereof And first saith he I mean here such a jus Divinum positivum as Baptism and the Lords Supper are established by which lieth not in the power of any Man or Angel to change or alter pag. 105. This makes it somewhat of kin to a moral precept of which the School-men have afforded us this general Aphorism Praecepta legis naturalis esse indispensabilia that is to say that the
precept of the Moral Law or the Law of Natures are not to be dispenst withal upon any occasion or necessity whatsoever it be and much less to be changed and abrogated at the will of man which explanation not to dispute the mutability or immutability of a positive Law will find as many Adversaries as the proposition as that which crosseth with the Doctrine of some of the first Martyrs in the Church of England and with the first Reformers and other leading men of the Protestant and Reformed Churches And first it is resolved thus by Mr. Tyndal a man sufficiently famous for his great pains in translating the Bible into English who suffered Martyrdom in the year 1536. As for the Sabbath saith he we be Lords over the Sabbath and may yet change it into Monday or into any other day as we see need or may make every tenth day a holy day onely if we see cause why Neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday but to put a difference between us and the Jewes neither need we any holy day at all if the people might be taught without it And somewhat to this purpose though not in terms so fully significant and express we find affirmed by John Frith a man of much learning for his age who suffered Martyrdom in the year 1533. Our fore-fathers saith he which were in the beginning of the Church did abrogate the Sabbath to the intent that men might have an example of Christian liberty c. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be reserved in which the people should come together to hear the word of God they ordained in stead of the Sabbath which was Saturday the next day following which is Sunday And although they might have kept the Saturday with the Jew as a thing indifferent yet they did much better Which words of his if they seem rather to demonstrate the Churches power in altering the time of worship from one day to another then the mutability of the precept on the which it was founded I am sure that Zuinglius the first Reformer of the Church among the Switzers will speak more fully to the purpose Hearken now Valentine saith he by what wayes and means the Sabbath may be made a ceremony if either we observe that day which the Jewes once did or think the Lords day so affixed unto any time Vt nefas sit illum in aliud tempus transferre that we conceive it an impiety it should be changed unto another on which as well as upon that we may not rest from labour and hearken to the word of God if perhaps such necessity should be this would indeed make it become a ceremony But Calvin speaks more plain then he when he professeth that he regarded not so much the number of seven Vt ejus servituti Ecclesias astringeret as to enthral the Church unto it And this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much as can be comprehended in so narrow a compass More largely Vrsine the Divinity Reader in the University of Heidelberg and a great follower of Calvin in all his writings who makes this difference between the Lords day and the Sabbath That it was utterly unlawful to the Jewes either to neglect or change the Sabbath without express Commandment from God himself as being a ceremonial part of Divine Worship but for the Christian Church that that may design the first or second or any other day to Gods publick service so that our Christian Liberty be not thereby infringed or any opinion of necessity or holiness affixt unto them Ecclesia verò Christiana primum vel alium diem tribuit ministerio salva sua libertate sine opinions cultus vel necessitatis as his own words are Chemnitius yet more plainly for the Lutheran Churches who frequently affirms that it is libera observatio a voluntary observation that it is an especial part of our Christian liberty not to be tied to dayes and times in matters which concern Gods service and that the Apostles made it manifest by their example singulis diebus vel quocunque die that every day or any day may by the Church be set apart for religious exercises And finally as Bullinger Bucer Brentius cited by Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato è nostri◠non pauci besides many others of the Reformed Churches by telling us that the Church hath still a power to change the time of worship from one day to another do tacitly infer that the Church hath power to change that time from the seventh day to the tenth or twelfth as well as from the first day of the week to the third or fourth so they which teach us that the sanctifying of one day in seven is not the moral part of the fourth Commandment do imply no less Of which opinion beside Tostatus and the Schoolmen before remembred we find also Calvin to have been Lib. Instit 2. c. 8. 11. 34. besides Simler in Exod. 20. Aretius in his common places Loco 55. Franciscus Gomarus in his Book De origine Institutione Sabbati Ryvet in Exod. 20. p. 190. to whom Chemnitius may be added for the Lutheran Churches In one of which it is affirmed that the sanctifying of a seventh day rather then of the eighth or ninth juris est Divini sed ceremonialis And if it be ceremonial only though of Gods appointment it must be subject unto change and mutability as well as Circumcision and the Passover or any other of the legal or Mosaical Ordinances And by another it is said that it can neither be made good by the Law of Nature or Text of Scripture or any solid Argument drawn from thence Vnum è septem diebus ex vi praecepti quarti ad cultum Dei necessariò observandum that by the fourth commandment one day in seven is of necessity to be dedicated to Gods service which does as plainly contradict the Lord Primates second Proposition as the Explication of it is found contrary to the rest before The second way whereby the Lord Primate doth strengthen and support his positive Law and makes it to come more near to the Sabbatarians of these later times is by his fixing the first Institution of it on the second of Genesis which makes it equal in a manner to the Law of Nature if not part thereof For that the institution of it in the first beginning is the very same with making it a part or branch of the Law of Nature may be inferred first from these words of Tostatus in Gen. 2. Num Sabbatum cùm à Deo sanctificatum fuerit in primordio rerum c. whether the Sabbath being sanctified by God in the infancy of the World had been observed by men by the Law of Nature And secondly it may be inferred from Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato Sect. 2. Some saith he fetch the Original of the Sabbath from the beginning of the World
when God first blessed the seventh day and sanctified it Whence well this question may be raised Whether before the publishing of Moses ' s Law the Sabbath was to be observed by the Law of Nature And that the Lord Primate doth fetch the original of the Sabbath from the beginning of the World is evident from a passage in his Letter to Dr. Twisse p. 78. In which saith he addressing his speech unto that Doctor The Text of Gen. 2. 3. as you well note is so clear for the ancient institution of the Sabbath and so fully vindicated by Dr. Ryvet from the exceptions of Gomarus that I see no reason in the earth why any man should make doubt thereof And yet the matter is not past all doubt neither I am sure of that For other men as eminent in all parts of Learning and as great Masters of Reason as Doctor Ryvet ever was have affirmed the contrary conceiving further that those words in the second of Genesis are spoken in the way of a Prolepsis or Anticipation Gods sanctifying the day of his Rest being mentioned in that time and place not because the Sabbath was then instituted but because it was the occasion of setting apart that day by the fourth Commandment to be a Sabbath or a day of holy repose and rest to the House of Israel Of this opinion was Tostatus in his Comment on Gen. 2. countenanced by Iosephus Antiq. l. 1. c. 2. by Solomon Iarchi one of the principal of the Rabbins and many other learned men of the Iewish Nation as appears by Mercer a learned Protestant Writer and one well verst in all the learning of the Iewes in his Comment on Gen. 2. who addes de proprio that from Gods resting on that day Postea praeceptum de Sabbato natum est the Commandment for sanctifying the seventh day was afterwards given And this opinion of Tostatus passed generally for good and currant with all sorts of people till Ambrose Catharinus one of the principal sticklers in the Councel of Trent opposed him in it who though he grant the like Anticipation Gen. 1. v. 27. disalloweth it here And disallowing it in this place he not onely crosseth with Tostatus but with some of the most learned Christian Writers both of the Church of Rome and the Protestant Churches who hold that the Sabbath was not instituted in the first beginning nor imposed on Adam as a Law to be observed by him and his posterity Of this opinion was Pererius a learned and industrious man of the Romish party in his Comment on the second of Genesis And of this opinion was Gomarus that great undertaker against the Arminians in his Tract De origine institution Sabbati with many other eminent men of both Religions too many to be named in this place and time whose opinions in this point cannot otherwise be made good and justifiable but by maintaining an Anticipation in this Text of Moses though few of them speak their minds so fully and explicitely in it as Dr. Prideaux no way inferiour to the best of those who opine the contrary For what weak proofs are they saith he which before were urged God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it therefore he then commanded it to be kept holy by his people And then he addes Moses as Abulensis hath it spake this by way of Anticipation rather to shew the equity of the Commandment then the original thereof So he in the third Section of his Tract De Sabbato Nor are such Anticipations strange in Holy Scripture for besides that Anticipation in the first of Genesis vers 27. allowed by Catharinus as before was said defended by St. Chrysostome on Gen. 2. Origen on Gen. 1. Gregory the Great in his Morals lib. 32. cap. 9. and finally justified by St. Hierom who in his Tract against the Jewes doth affirm as much we find the like Gen 12. 8. Judges c. 2. v. 1. both which are granted without scruple by Dr. Bound the first who set on foot the Sabbatarian Doctrines in the Church of England The like Anticipation is observed in Exod. 16. 32. as appears plainly both by Lyra and Vatablus two right learned men the first a Jew the second eminently studied in the Jewish Antiquities And yet the observation is much elder then either of them made by St. Augustine who lived long before the time of Lyra in his 62. Question on the Book of Exodus and by Calvin who preceded Vatablus in his Comment on that Tract of Scripture These passages and Testimonies I have onely toucht and pointed at as plainly and briefly as I could for the Readers better satisfaction in the present difference referring for the Quotations at large to the History of the Sabbath Part 1. c. 1. n. 2 3. 4. and there he shall be sure to find them From all which laid together it is there concluded that for this passage of the Scripture there is nothing found unto the contrary but that it was set down in that place and time by a plain and neer Anticipation and doth relate unto the time wherein Moses wrote and therefore no sufficient warrant to fetch the institution of the Sabbath from the first beginning Nor could I find when I had Doctor Ryvet under my eye that his Arguments against Gomarus were of weight enough to counter ballance the Authority of so many learned Writers both Jewes and Christians or to weigh down so many Texts of holy Scripture in which the like Anticipations are observed by Origen Hierom Chrysostome and Gregory the Great men of renown for Piety and Learning in the primitive times and by many other learned men in the times succeeding though otherwise of different perswasions in the things of God But Ryvet and the Lord Primate held the same opinion both of them grounding the first institution of the Sabbath on a Positive Law Legem de Sabbato positivam non naturalem agnoscimus are the words of Ryvet p. 173. which is the same with the Lord Primates jus Divinum positivum though in different terms And therefore it can be no marvel if Ryvets Arguments be cried up for vindicating that passage in the second of Genesis in so full a manner that the Lord Primate can see no reason in the earth why any man should make doubt thereof And yet there may be good reason for it though he see it not Now that the seventh day Sabbath was not a part or branch of the Law of Nature which is observed to be a necessary consequent following upon the fixing of the first institution of it in the second of Genesis will evidently appear by the concurrent testimonies of learned men both of the elder and last times It was indeed naturally ingraffed in the heart of man that God was to be worshipped by him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 said the Grecian Orator Imprimis venerare Dium said the Latine Poet. And it was also naturally ingraffed in the heart of man not
offered sacrifice on the same day also So was the second day of the month consecrated to the Bonus Genius the third and fifteenth to Minerva the last to Pluto and every twentieth day by the Epicures to their God the Belly Thus also had the Romans their several Festivals in every month some in one month and some in another the ninth day onely of every month being solemnly observed by them and from thence called Nundinae because devoted unto Iupiter the most supreme Deity But what need more be said in this when we have confitentem reum For Dr. Bound the first that set on foot these new Sabbath-Doctrines doth confess ingeniously That the memory of Weeks and Sabbaths was altogether suppressed and buried amongst the Gentiles to whom I shall subjoyn de novo the Lord Primate himself who though he stick hard to prove that the Saturday was held in greater estimation by the Gentiles then all the rest yet he acknowledgeth at the last that they did not celebrate their Saturdayes with that solemnity wherewith themselves did their Annual Festivities or the Jews their weekly Sabbaths p. 85. therefore not kept by them as a Sabbath there 's no doubt of that which was by the first of the two Mediums to be clearly proved The second Medium by which it is proved by the Historian that the Gentiles did not keep the Sabbath is gathered from those bitter scoffs and Satyrical jeers which the Gentiles put upon the Jewes and such of their own people as did Judaize for the observation of the same Of this we have an evâ—dent proof in the Prophet Ieremiah who telleth us in his book of Lamentations how the adversaries of the Jewes did mock at their Sabbath c. 1. v. 7. And adversaries they had of all sorts and of different Countreyes who did mock at them for their observation of the Sabbath day The name derived by Apion from Sabbo an Egyptian word signifying an inflammation in the privy parts from which by resting on the seventh day they received some ease then which what greater scorn could be put upon it by a wretched Sycophant But others with more modesty but as little truth from Sabbo signifying the Spleen with which the Jews were miserably tormented till on the seventh day released from it for which consult Giraldus in his Book De Annis Mensibus By Persius in his fifth Satyre called recutita Sabbata in which their Circumcision and their Sabbaths were both jeered together by Ovid Peregrina Sabbata in his first Book De Remedio Amoris because not known or commonly observed amongst the Romans the men themselves by Martial in his Epigram to Bassa reprochfully nick-named Sabbatarii Accused for spending the seventh part of their lives in sloth and idleness by Seneca apud August de Civit. Dei l. 6. c. 11. Iuvenal Sat. 14. Tacitus Hist l. 5. and therefore fitted with a day of equal dulness the Saturday or dies Saturni as the Latines call it being thought unfit for any business rebus minus apta gerendis as it is in Ovid whose words I shall produce at large because I am to relate to them on another accasion Quaque die redeunt rebus minus apta gerendis Culta Palaestino septima sacra viro The seventh day comes for business most unfit Held sacred by the Jew who halloweth it A fansie not so strange in Ovid as it seems in Philo a Jew by birth and a great stickler in behalf of the Jewish Ceremonies who telleth us that the seventh day was chosen for a day of rest because the seventh number in it selfe was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the most peaceable number the most free from trouble war and all kind of contention Yet not more strange in Philo then it is in Aretius a Writer of the Reformed Churches who thinks that day to have been chosen before any other Quod putaretur civilibus actionibus ineptum esse c Because that day was thought by reason of the dulness of the Planet Saturn more fit for contemplation then it was for action Adde more to end as I began with an Etymology that Plutarch derives the name of Sabbath from Sabbi Sabbi ingeminated by the Priests of Bacchus in his drunken Orgies as others do from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to celebrate those Orgies both with reproch enough to the Jewish Nation who by their riotous feastings and excesses on the Sabbath day gave such a scandal to the Gentiles that luxus Sabbatarius became at last to be a by-word as in that passage of Apollinaris spoken of before Out of all which it may be probably inferred that they that did so scornfully deride the Jewish Sabbaths did keep no Sabbath of their own by consequence that no command for the keeping of it was given to Adam as the common Root of all mankind and therefore no such institution in the second of Genesis as the Lord Primate would fain have it Against these passages proofs the L. Primate makes not any Exceptions and therefore it may be took for granted that the Gentileâ— neither were commanded to keep the Sabbath nor did keep the Sabbath which were the matters to be proved But for an Answer thereunto he sets upon Antithesis a contrary proposition of his own of purpose to run cross to that which is maintained by the Historian l. 4 c 1. n 8. For wheras it was there affirmed by the Historian that the 7th day was not more honoured by the Gentiles then the eighth or ninth the Lord Primate on the other side hath resolved the contrary affirming that the Heathens did attribute some holiness to the Seventh day and gave it a peculiar honour above the other dayes of the week p. 83. For proof of this he first supposeth a Tradition among the Jewes and Gentiles that the seventh day was not of Moses but the Fathers and did not begin with the Commonwealth of Israel but was derived to all Nations by lineal descent from the Sons of Noah p. 82. But where to find and how to prove this Tradition we are yet to seek the Lord Primate vouching no more ancient Author for it then Tertullian who lived almost two hundred years after Christ our Saviour and relates onely to his own times not to those of old No evidence produced to prove the Proposition or the Supposition out of any of those famous Writers Philosophers Historians Poets Orators who flourished in the heroick times of Learning amongst the Grecians nor from any of the like condition amongst the Romanâ— who lived and flourished before or after the triumphant Empire of Augustus Caesar one passage out of Tibullus excepted onely till we come to Aelius Lampridius an Historian who lived after Tertullian It 's true the Lord Primate cites three Greek verses from as many of the old Greek Poets but they make nothing to his purpose as himselfe confesseth The verses alledged as he telleth us
Which though it may be true enough in the Proposition yet I cannot think that it agrees with the Authors meaning in the Application Nor am I better edified with the criticism of Gothofredus on this place who thinketh it to lie under some great corruption qui locus haectenus in foedissimo mendo cubat leaves in worse case then he found it by his pretended Emendation And therefore I conceive Tertullians meaning to be briefly this that the Jewes then living had so disused and estranged themselves by their riotous feastings on the Sabbath from that sobriety and moderation wherewith their Ancestors had used to observe that day that they seemed ignorant in a manner of the ancient custome of their own Nation in that case These passages of Tertullian being thus explained the Answer to the rest of the Lord Primates Authors will find less difficulty Tibullus in a verse of his Saturni sacrâ me tenuisse die bestowes the Epithet of Sacrâ upon the Saturday or day of Saturn But this I say and so sayes the Lord Primate too is not so properly to be understood of the Gentiles who made not the seventh day a festival or an holy-day as the Jewes did p. 83. but of the very Jewes themselves who kept it for a festival or an holy-day And then Tibullus sayes no more then what Ovid hath affirmed in the verse formerly cited in which he calleth the seventh day by the name of septima sacra dies with reference to the Jewes and to them alone That which comes next from Lucian in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 touch the Boyes getting leave to play 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the seventh day or Saturday p. 86. is of little consequence Lucian then lived in the East Countries where the Gentiles Jewes and Christians lived promiscuously with one another And it is probable enough that the School-masters observing that the Saturday was held in great veneration by the Christians and kept for a Festival by the Jewes the better to comply with both or to send home their Children if they had any such in their Schools in convenient time might rather chuse to gratifie the Boyes with a play day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on the seventh day or Sabbath then on any other And as for the Emperor Alexander Severus and his using to go unto the Capitol and other Temples on the Saturday or seventh day as Aelius Lampridius hath informed us of him it is of less consequence then the former it being well known to all which have read the Stories of that age and time that being trained up under the wing of his Mother who was inclinable enough to the Christian Faith he had not onely somewhat in him of a Christian but a smack also of the Jew And therefore if he more frequented the Capitol and other Temples on the seventh day or Saturday then on any other it is not to be attributed to any Authority which the Lord Primates Tradition might have gained upon him but unto education or imitation no great matter which For that many of the Gentiles who lived within the verge of the Roman Empire had taken up divers of the customes and ceremonies of the Iewes who lived scattered and disperst amongst them is affirmed positively by Iosephus Quin etiam populi jam olim saith he multam nostram pietatem aemulantur nèque Civitas Graecorum ulla usquam aut Barbarorum nec ulla gens ad quam septimanae in qua vacamus consuetud◠minimè pervenerit c. that is to say that the Gentiles long since shewed themselves inclinable to the religion of the Jews and that there was no City of the Greeks or barbarous people or any Nation whatsoever in which their custome in observing the seventh day for a day of rest as also of their games and fasts was not taken up In which respect Philo hath told us more then once that the Sabbath was become a general Festival which in his Treatise De Dec alogo may be easily found And it was very agreeable to the ancient custom of the Romans that it should be so who used when they had conquered any Country not onely to carry away their gods and set them up amongst their own but to take from them some part of their religion thinking thereby to enlarge the bounds of their Empire and bring all the Nations of the World under their command Sic eorum Potestas Authoritas totius Orbis Ambitus occupavit sic imperium suum ultra solis vias ipsius Oceani limites propagavit sic dum Vniversarum gentium sacra suscipiunt etiam regnare meruerunt as Cecilius pleads the cause for them in Minutius Foelix SECT IV. The Historian charged by name for saying that the ancient Gentiles knew not the distinction of weeks and sent to be taught his lesson better of Dector Ryvet and Salmasius His Arguments to prove the point laid down at large and not refelled by the Lord Primate The Lord Primates opinion to the contrary not proved by any ancient Author either Greek or Latine The practice of the Sclavonians related by Helmoldus an obscure Writer and a Postnatus too doth not prove the point Nothing affirmed by Theophilus Antiochenus or Johannes Philoponus to prove that the distinction of weeks was anciently known amongst the Gentiles The Historians Application justified WE are now come at last to the first of those Charges in which the Author of the History is concerned by name touching the division of time into weeks whether observed or not observed by the ancient Gentiles in which the Lord Primate thus declares The Gentiles saith he both Civil and Barbarous both ancient and of later dayes as it were by an universal kind of Tradition retain the distinction of the seven dayes of the week which if Dr. Heylyn had read so well proved as it is by Rivetus and Salmasius he would not have made such a conclusion as he doth that because the Heathen of the four great Monarchies at least had no distinction of Weeks therefore they could observe no Sabbath p. 79. The Historian is here sent to School to learn of Ryvet and Salmasius that the Gentiles both civil and barbarous both ancient and of later dayes as it were by an universal kind of Tradition retained the distinction of the seven dayes of the week of Ryvet he must learn for one because he was of the same opinion with the Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath and of Salmasius for the other because he was of the same judgement with him in the point of Episcopacy But the Historian will not learn of any such Masters but onely of the Lord Primate himselfe But first it will be necessary to know what the Historian saith to the point in hand and yet not onely what he saith as if he could carry it out on his own Authority but what he proves by witnesses of unquestioned credit The passage is not long and therefore without any
and the day on which it was to be holden he lets us see by a marginal Note p. 90. against whom it is that he bends his forces viz. against Dr. Heylyn Part 2. c. 1. pag. 14. Let us see therefore what he hath to say against Dr. Heylyn in this particular and into what inconveniencies he runs himselfe by the contradiction In order whereunto he must first observe how he states the question and then consider whether his proofs and arguments will come up to it The Israelites saith he by the Law of Moses were not onely to observe their weekly Sabbath every seventh day but also their feasts of weeks once in the year which although by the vulgar use of the Jewish Nation it may now fall upon any day of the week yet doe the Samaritans untill this day constantly observe it on the first day of the week which is our Sunday for which they produce the Letter of the Law Leviticus 23. 15 16. where the feast of the first fruits otherwise called Pentecost or the feast of weeks is prescribed to be kept the morrow after the seventh Sabbath which not they onely but also amongst our Christian Interpreters Isychius and Rupertus do interpret to be the first day of the week p. 87 88. This ground thus laid and some proofs offered quite beside the point in question to shew that the Lords day was called by the name of Sabbath in some ancient Writers he builds this superstructure on it and makes this following Descant on the former Plain song viz. But touching the old Pentecost it is very considerable that it is no where in Moses affixed unto any one certain day of the month as all the rest of the feasts are which is a very great presumption that it was a moveable Feast and so varied that it might alwayes fall upon the day immediately following the ordinary Sabbath And if God so order the matter that in the celebration of the feast of weeks the seventh day should purposely be passed over and that solemnity should be kept on the first what other thing may we imagine could be presignified thereby but that under the state of the Gospel the solemnity of the weekly service should be celebrated upon that day p. 90. Such is the state of the Question and such the inference which ariseth from that stating of it both which are now to be examined as they lie before us And first the feast of first fruits was not otherwise called Pentecost or the feast of weeks as the Lord Primate sayes it was For though two loves in the name of the first fruits of the second or wheat Harvest were to be offered to the Lord on the feast of weeks which being celebrated on the fiftieth day from the sixteenth of Nisan had the name of Pentecost yet was the name of the feast of first fruits appropriated more especially to the second day after the Passover or the sixteenth of Nisan on which the people offered the first fruits of their Barley which in that country was first ripe and from which the Computation of the said fifty dayes was to take beginning And it was thus appropriated for these reasons following 1. Because the sixteenth of Nisan was the first day of their Harvest on which the people were to offer the very first fruits of the increase of the earth which in that Country was their Barley before which time they were not to eat either bread or parched corn or the green ears of it this offering to be made in the Sheafe or Gripe before the Corn was thresht out v. 10. to the end that all the subsequent Harvest by the offering of these first fruits might be blest unto them whereas the offering of the two loves in the name of the first fruits of their Wheat was not until the end of Harvest above seven weeks after when the Wheat was hous'd and threshed and made into bread And secondly the name of the feast of first fruits was appropriated to the sixteenth of Nisan because it had no other name by which it might be dignified above the rest of the fifty and distinguished from them whereas the day on which the two loves were to be offered was eminently known by the name of the feast of weeks and the feast of Pentecost and sometimes also called the feast of the Law because the Law was given that day by the hand of Moses In the next place the Lord Primate either did not understand the meaning of the word Sabbath Levit. 23. 15 16. or if he did he would not seem to understand it the better to carry on some design for the Sabbatarians for by the tenour of his discourse it appeareth most evidently that in both places he understands the word Sabbath in no other sense but as it signifies the weekly Sabbath of the fourth Commandment and thereupon concludes that the computation of the fifty dayes beginning on the morrow after the Sabbath and continuing till seven Sabbaths should be complete even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath the feast of Pentecost must of necessity fall upon the first day of the week which is now our Sunday If so the Sabbatarian Brethren are in the right in making the falling of the first Christian Pentecost on which the Holy Ghost came down and sat on the heads of the Apostles three thousand souls being that day added to the Church of Christ to be an argument of some weight for their Lords-day Sabbath and Dr. Heylyn is in the wrong for making the falling of that Pentecost upon the first day of the week to be a matter of casualty the feast of Pentecost not being tyed to a certain day but falling on any day of the week as the year did vary But by his leave by Sabbath in verse 15. And you shall count unto you from the morrow after the Sabbath we are to understand the feast of unleavened bread which with all other of the Annual feasts had the name of Sabbath as appears plainly by many several passages in this very Chapter And this is that which is observed by some of the Fathers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Saint Chrysostom Hom. in Matth. 39. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Isidore Epist 110. l. 3. And secondly by Sabbath in the rest of those two verses viz. Seven Sabbaths shall be complete even unto the morrow after the seventh Sabbath c. we are not to understand the weekly Sabbath but the week it selfe the whole seven dayes which from the last in order but the first in dignity took the name of Sabbath For so we read it in Chap. 18. of Saint Luke where the Pharisee boasted of himself that he fasted twice a week verse 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the Greek original Jejuno bis in Sabbato saith the vulgar Latine Thus also in Matth. 28. Luke 24. we find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 prima una Sabbati as the vulgar hath it to denote
the first day of the week as our English reads it And then the meaning of the Text will be briefly this that the feast of Pentecost reckoning the computation from the morrow after the Sabbath that is to say the feast of unleavened bread was to be kept precisely on the morrow after the end of the seventh week from the sixteenth of Nisan on what day soever it should happen and not on the morrow after the seventh weekly Sabbath as the Lord Primate would fain have it And therefore thirdly if the Samaritans observing it until this day upon the first day of the week which is our Sunday produce the letter of the Law Levit. 23. 15 16. by keeping it upon that day they transgress the Law because they take not along with them the true meaning of it and the intent of him that gave it for a Law to the House of Israel And this is just the case of Origen in the Primitive times who by following the letter of the Gospel made himself an Eunuch contrary to the mind and meaning of Christ our Saviour and therefore sinned against God and his own body Fourthly and finally if Ruportus speak no otherwise then Isychius doth he must be reprehended by the Lord Primate as Isychius is for straining the signification of altera dies Sabbati to express thereby the Lords day though both produced in this place to no other purpose then to prove that the morrow after the seventh Sabbath was the first day of the week which is now our Sunday Let us next see what Superstructures have been made by the Lord Primate on the former grounds what descant he hath made on the plain-song which before we toucht at And first he telleth us how considerable it is thâ—t the old Pentecost is no where in Moses affixed unto any one certain day of the month as all the rest of the feasts are p. 90. But this is gratis dictum also the feast of Pentecost being as precisely tied to a certain day as either the Passover the feast of Expiation or the feast of Tabernacles for being the Passover is sixt on the fourteenth of Nisan the feast of unleavened bread on the fifteenth the offering of the first fruits on the sixteenth and that the feast of Pentecost was to be kept on the fiftieth day after that it must-needs fall expresly and of course allowing thirty dayes to the month as the Jewes computed it on the fifth of Sivan which makes it evident that the old Pentecost was affixt by Moses to one certain day of the month as well as any of the rest He telleth us next that the old Pentecost may be presumed to have been a moveable feast but varied so that it might alwayes fall upon the day immediately following the ordinary Sabbath Which were it so it must needs be a movable immovable feast though being constantly reckoned from the sixteenth of Nisan and kept as constantly on the morrow after the end of the seven weeks from thence computed seems to have nothing moveable in it but all fixt and firm Thirdly whereas it is took for granted and affirmed expresly that the Pentecost did alwayes fall upon the day immediately following the ordinary Sabbâ—th there is not any thing more different from the truth it self nor less agreeable to right reason The Passovâ—r though it was fixt on the fourteenth of Nisan as to the day of the month did â—all in course as the fâ—ast of Christmas the Epiphany the Annuntiation and all the rest of the Festivals which depend not on the keeping of Easter do with us in England on every day of the week successively in their turns and courses So that if the fourteenth of Nisan full upon the second day of the week the feast of Pentecost must fall that year upon the Wednesday and if the fourteenth of Nisan fell upon the Tuesday then the Pentecost must fall that year upon the Thursday sic de caeteris Besides the year was so unequal amongst the Jewes that it was impossible the feast of Pentecost should be kept always on the first day of the week or the morrow after the ordinary Sabbath as the Lord Primate would fain have it For the Jewes measuring their months by the course of the Moon they made their year fall shorter by eleven dayes than those who measured their year by the course of the Sun and therefore were necessitated at the end of every 2d or 3d. year to insert a month which they commonly called Veadar or the second Adar because it followed after the 12th month which they called Adar By reason whereof it was altogether impossible in the course of nature or in the ordinary revolution of times and seasons that the Pentecost should always fall on the first day of the week and therfore God himself is brought upon the Stage and must work a miracle every year to make up the matter for so it followeth viz God saith he so ordered the matter that in the celebration of the feast of Weeks the seventh day should purposely be passed over and that solemnity should be kept upon the first p. 90 And this I needs must look on as an high presumption in another man absit reverentia vero in the Poets language that God should be entitled to the maintenance of our private fancies and brought to act his part without any necessity in the abetting of mens quarrels The Heathen Poet was a better Divine then so who would not have God made an Actor in the common Enterâ—udes Nec Deus intersit nisi dignus vindice nodus Inciderit as his own words are unless some great and weighty difficulty not otherwise to be resolved did require the same But I am sure there is no such difficulty in the case which we have before us as to make God a party in it to bring him down once in every year to act a miracle in ordering the matter so that howsoever the course of the year did change and vary the Pentecost or feast of weeks should alwayes fall upon the first day of the week which is now our Sunday Now though I should proceed to the examination of the inference which ariseth from the former premises yet I shall first consider of the proofs and testimonies which the Lord Primate hath produced in this particular And the first Argument which he brings is from the practice of the Samaritans of whom he tells us that the Samaritans do constantly observe the Pentecost on the first day of the week which is now our Sunday p. 87. their practise in it being preferred before the vulgar use of the Jewish Nation by whose account it may now fall on any day of the week as is there affirmed Assuredly the Jews who so tenaciously adhere to their Circumcision and their Sabbaths and so religiously observe the feast of unleavened bread and the feast of Purim according to the times appointed in the holy Scripture cannot be thought to
Doctor Heylyn Part 2. page 43. to prove that Ignatius would have both the Sabbath and the Lords day observed were afterwards added by some later Grecian who was afraid that the custome of keeping both dayes observed in his time should appear otherwise to be directly opposite to the sentence of Ignatius p. 95 96. This is the easiest charge that may be and if there were nothing else intended but to shew that the Historian was not the Master of so much good fortune as to have seen the old Latine Copy in Caius Library before he undertook that work we might here end this Section without more ado But the main matter aim'd at in it is to disprove that which the Historian hath delivered concerning the observing of both dayes as well the old Sabbath as the new Lords day by the Primitive Christians That which the Lord Primate cites out of the third Book of Eusebius to shew that the main intention of Ignatius was to oppose the Ebionites of his own time is no more then what he might have found in the same Part and Page of the History of the Sabbath which himselfe hath cited and therefore might have here been spared were it not used by him as an Argument to prove that which no body doth deny viz. That by their imitation of the Church herein the antiquity of the observation of the Lords day might be further confirmed p. 96. Nor is it to much better purpose that he proves the universality of the observance of the Lords day out of another passage of the same Eusebius in his Book De laudibus Constantini in which he doth but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having no other Adversary that I know of to contend withal The Author of that History had said so much of the Antiquity of the Lords day and the Universality of the observance of the same with many other things conducing to the honour of that sacred day that he received thanks for it sent to him in the name of divers Ministers living in Buckinghamshire and Surrey though of a different perswasion from him in other points about that day whom he never saw But that the Saturday or old Sabbath was not kept holy at the first by the Primitive Christians by those especially who lived in the Eastern parts of the Roman Empire neither the antiquity nor the universality of keeping the Lords day can evince at all For on the contrary that the old Sabbath was kept holy by the Primitive Christians is proved first by the Constitutions of the Apostles ascribed to Clement of good Authority in the Church though not made by them where it is said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By which it evidently appears that both dayes were ordered to be kept holy the one in memorial of the Creation the other of the Resurrection Which Constitutions being not thought to be of weight enough to make good the point though of so great antiquity and estimation as to be mentioned and made use of by Epiphanius a right learned man are somewhat backt by the Authority of Theophilus Antiochenus an old Eastern Bishop who lived not long time after Ignatius Anno 174. by whom we are told of that great honour which the seventh day or Jewish Sabbath had attained unto qui apud omnes mortales celebris est as before we had it in our fourth Section on another occasion with all sorts of people But if this be not plain enough as I think it is they are secondly most strongly countenanced by the Authority of the Synod held in Laodicea a Town of Phrygia Anno 314. where there passed a Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 touching the reading of the Gospels with the other Scriptures upon the Saturday or Sabbath that in the time of Lent there should be no oblation made 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but on the Saturday and the Lords day onely neither that any festival should then be observed in memory of any Martyrs but that their names onely should be commemorated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 upon the Lords day and the Sabbaths Which Canons were not made as may appear plainly by the Histories of these elder times for the introduction of any new observance never used before but for the Declaration and Confirmation of the ancient usage Thirdly we find in Gregory Nyssen that some of the people who had neglected to observe the Saturday were reproved by him on the Sunday 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. With what face saith the Father wilt thou look upon the Lords day which hast dishonoured the Sabbath knowest thou not that these dayes are Sisters and that whosoever doth despise the one doth affront the other Fourthly by Saint Basil the Saturday or Sabbath is reckoned for one of those four dayes on which the Christians of his time used weekly to participate of the blessed Eucharist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lords day Wednesday and Friday being the other three And though it cannot be denied but that the observation of the Saturday began to lessen and decay in divers places towards the latter end of the fourth Century and in some other places as namely the Isle of Cyprus and the great City of Alexandria following therein the Custom of the Church of Rome had never been observed at all Yet fifthly Epiphanius Bishop of Salamis in the Isle of Cyprus could not but acknowledge that in other places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they used to celebrate the holy Sacrament and hold their publick meetings on the Sabbath day And sixthly the Homily De Semonte ascribed to Athanasius doth affirm as much as to the publick Assemblies of the Christians on the Sabbath day and so doth Socrates the Historian who accounts both dayes for weekly festivals 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and addes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that on them both the Congregation used to be assembled and the whole Liturgy performed By which account besides Socrates and the Author of the Constitutions against whom some objections have been pretended we have the Testimonies of Theophilus Antiochenus Gregory Nyssen Basil Epiphanius and the Author of the Homily De Semente ascribed to Athanasius most plain and positive in this point that both the Sabbath and the Lords day were observed for days of publick meeting by the Eastern Christians as was affirmed before out of the Epistle of Ignatius ad Magnes And I conceive that the Lord Primate did not or could not think or if he did cannot be justified for so thinking that men of such an eminent sanctity as those Fathers were would falsifie that Epistle of Ignatius to serve their turns or adde any thing to that Epistle which they found not in it out of a fear that the custome of keeping both dayes observed in their times should appear otherwise to be directly opposite to the sentence of Ignatius p. 96. And therefore Doctor Heylyn taking the words of Ignatius as he found them in the
Mr. Ley accused by the Lord Primate for being too cold and waterish in the point of the Sabbath That by the Declaration of the three Estates convened in Parliament 5. 6. of Edw. 6. the times of publick worship are left to the liberty of the Church and that by the Doctrine of the Homilies the keeping of the Lords day hath no other ground then the consent of godly Christian people in the Primitive times No more of the fourth commandment to be now retained by the Book of Homilies then what belongs to the Law of Nature Working in Harvest and doing other necessary business permitted on the Lords day both by that Act of Parliament and the Queens Iniunctions No restraint made from Recreations on the Lords day till the first of King James The Sundaies and other Festivals made equal in a manner by the publick Liturgy and equal altogether by two Acts of Parliament The Answer to the Lord Primates Obiection from the Book of Homilies with reference to the grounds before laid down The difference between the Homilies of England and the Articles of Ireland in the present case Several strong Arguments to prove the Homily to mean no otherwise then as laid down in the said Answer Doctor Bounds Sabbath Doctrines lookt on as a general grievance and the care taken to suppress them WE are now come unto the third most material charge of all the rest by which the Historian stands accused for opposing the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies to which he had formerly subscribed and that too in so gross a manner that all the Sophistry he had could neither save him harmless for it nor defend him in it This is an heavy charge indeed and that it may appear the greater the Lord Primate layes it down with all those aggravations which might render the Historian the less able either to traverse the Indictment or plead not guilty to the Bill I wonder saith he in his Letter to an Honourable Person pag. 110. how Doctor Heylyn having himself subscribed to the Articles of Religion agreed upon in the Synod held at London Anno 1562. can oppose the conclusion which he findeth directly laid down in the Homily of the time and place of Prayer viz. God hath given express charge to all men in the fourth Commandment that upon the Sabbath day which is now our Sunday they shall cease from all weekly and week-day labour to the intent that like as God himself wrought six dayes and rested the seventh and blessed and consecrated it to quietness and rest from labour even so Gods obedient people should use the Sunday holily and rest from their common and dayly business and also give themselves wholly to the heavenly exercise of Gods true Religion and service This is the charge which the Historian suffers under wherewith the Lord Primate as it seems did so please himself that like a crambe his cocta it is served in again in his Letter unto Mr. Ley but ushered in with greater preparation then before it was For whereas Mr. Ley had hammered a Discourse about the Sabbath which he communicated to the Lord Primate to the end it might be approved by him the Lord Primate finds some fault with the modesty of the man as if he came not home enough in his Propositions to the point in hand Your second Proposition saith he p. 105. is too waterish viz. That this Doctrine rather then the contrary is to be held the Doctrine of the Church of England and may well be gathered out of her publick Liturgy and the first part of the Homily concerning the place and time of prayer Whereas you should have said that this is to be held undoubtedly the Doctrine of the Church of England For if there could be any reasonable doubt made of the meaning of the Church of England in her Liturgy who should better declare her meaning then her self in her Homily where she peremptorily declareth her mind That in the fourth Commandment God hath given express charge to all men c. as before we had it Assuredly a man that reads these passages cannot chuse but think that the Lord Primate was a very zealous Champion for the Doctrine of the Church of England but upon better consideration we shall find it otherwise that he only advocateth for the Sabbatarians not onely contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England but the practise also which that we may the better see I shall lay down plainly and without any sophistry at all upon what grounds the Lords day stood in the Church of England at the time of the making of this Homily both absolutely in it self and relatively in respect of the other Holy dayes And first we are to understand that by the joint Declaration of the Lords Spiritual Temporal and the Commons assembled in Parliament in the 5. 6. years of King Edw. 6. the Lords day stands on no other ground then the Authority of the Church not as enjoyned by Christ or ordained by any of his Apostles For in that Parliament to the honour of Almighty God it was thus declared viz. Forasmuch as men be not at all times so mindful to laud and praise God so ready to resort to hear Gods holy word and to come to the holy Communion c. as their bounden duty doth require therefore to call men to remembrance of their duty and to help their infirmities it hath been wholsomly provided that there should be some certain times and dayes appointed wherein Christians should cease from all kind of labour and apply themselves onely and wholly unto the aforesaid holy works properly pertaining to true Religion c. which works as they may well be called Gods service so the times especially appointed for the same are called holy dayes Not for the matter or the nature either of the time or day c. for so all dayes and times are of like holiness but for the nature and condition of such holy works c. whereunto such dayes and times are sanctified and hallowed that is to say separated from all profane uses and dedicated not unto any Saint or Creature but onely unto God and his service dayesâ—rescribed â—rescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word unto the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Country by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth of Gods glory and edification of their people Which Statute being repealed in the Reign of Queen Mary was revived again in the first year of Queen Elizabeth and did not stand in force at the time of the making of this Homily which the Lord Primate so much builds on but at such time also as he wrote his Letter to Mr. Ley and to that Honourable Person whosoever he was
followeth in that Statute Be it enacted c. that all the dayes hereafter mentioned shall be kept and commanded to be kept holy dayes and none other that is to say all Sundayes in the year the feasts of the Circumcision of our Lord Jesus Christ of the Epiphany of the Purification with all the rest now kept and there named particularly The like ennumeration we have also in the Book of Common-prayer the publick Liturgy of this Church by Law established where we shall find it thus expressed That these shall be accounted holy dayes and none other that is to say all Sundayes in the year the feast of the Circumcision the Epiphany with all the rest before specified in the Act of Parliament Nor doth the Church onely rank the Lords day with other holy dayes in that enumeration of them but hath appointed the same Divine offices the Letany excepted onely to be performed upon the Saints days other festivals as upon the Sundays each of them having his proper Lesson Collect Epistle and Gospel as the Sunday hath and some of them their proper Psalms also which the Sunday hath not And as for the attendance of the people it is required with as much diligence upon the Saints dayes and other Festivals as upon the Lords day by the Laws of this land For so it is enacted in the Statute of the first of Queen Elizabeth viz. That all and every Person and Persons inhabiting within this Realm c. shall diligently and faithfully endeavour themselves to resort to their Parish Church or Chappel c. upon every Sunday and other dayes ordained and used to be kept as holy dayes then and there to abide orderly and soberly during the time of common prayer preaching or other service of God Nor was it only enacted that men should diligently repair to their Church or Chappel as well upon the other holy dayes as upon the Sunday but that the same penalty was imposed on such as without any reasonable let did absent themselves as well upon the one as upon the other For so it follows in that Statute viz. That every person so offending shall not alone be subject unto the censures of the Church but shall forfeit for every such offence twelve pence to be levied to the use of the poor of the same parish by the Church-wardens of the same c. Which grounds thus laid the Lord Primates Argument from the Book of Homilies will be easily answered For if the weight of his argument lie in the first words cited out of the Homily that in the fourth Commandment God hath given express charge to all men that upon the Sabbath day which is now our Sunday c. and therefore that the Sunday or Lords day may be called a Sabbath this will prove nothing but a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a contention about words and not within the compass of the Homily neither it being declared in the former words of the same Homily that we keep now the first day which is our Sunday and make that our Sabbath that is our day of rest So that the destinating of the Sunday or first day of the week for the day of rest makes it at the most but a tanquam to the Sabbath neither entituling it to the name nor prerogatives of it But if the weight of the Argument lie in these words viz. That men upon the Sunday or Lords day should cease from all weekly and work-day labour c. and also give themselves wholly to Heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service For the first part thereof touching the forbearing of all weekly and work-day labour is no otherwise to be understood but of such labours as are prohibited by the Laws of the Realm or otherwise may prove an avocation from Gods publick service at the times appointed for the same And as for the last words touching mens giving of themselves wholly to heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service they are of a far differing meaning from the Article of the Church of Ireland for which the Lord Primate chiefly stickleth in which it is declared that the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God For certainly there is a great difference between the dedicating of a day wholly to the service of God as in the Articles of Ireland and the giving of our selves wholly to heavenly exercises as in the Homilies of England the one implying that no part of the day is to be otherwise spent then in the service of God no place being left either for necessary business or for lawful pleasure the other that in the Acts and times of publick worship we should give our selves wholly that is our whole selves souls and bodies to the performance of those heavenly exercises which are then required It had before been told us in this very Homily that nothing in the fourth Commandment was to be retained but what was found appertaining to the Law of Nature but it appertaineth not to the Law of Nature either that one day in seven should be set apart for Religious worship or that this one day wholly be so imployed vel quod per totam diem abstineatur ab operibus servilibus as Tostatus hath it or that there be an absolute cessation during the whole day from all servile works By consequence there is no more required of us by the Law of Nature in this case but that at the times appointed for Gods publick worship we wholly sequester our selves yea our very thoughts from all worldly business fixing our souls and all the faculties thereof upon that great and weighty business which we are in hand with That does indeed appertain to the Law of Nature Naturale est quod dum Deum colimus ab aliis abstineamus as Tostatus hath it and to this point we have been trained in the Schools of Piety Orantis est nihil nisi coelestia cogitare as was said before So that the meaning of the Homily in that place will be onely this that for those times which are appointed by the Church for the assembly of Gods people we should lay by our daily business and all worldly thoughts and wholly give our selves to the heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service as in the Homily we are willed And that this only was the meaning of the Homily in that place may be convincingly concluded from the reasons following First from the improbability that the Authors of that Homily should propound a Doctrine so evidently contrary to the Declaration of the Act of Parliament in the 5 6. of Edw. 6. which was then in force and unto which not onely the Commons and the Lords Temporal but even the Lords Spiritual and the King himselfe did most unanimously concur or that the Queen should authorize a Doctrin in the Book of Homilies as by ratifying the 39. Articles she must be supposed to have done
which was so plainly and professedly contrary to her own Injunctions Secondly from the strong Alarm which was taken generally by the Clergy and the most knowing men of the Laity also at the coming out of Doctor Bounds Book about the Sabbath Anno 1595. In which book it is declared amongst other things that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual That there is great reason why we Christians should take our selves as straightly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath that there should be no buying of victuals upon that day no Carriers Packmen Drovers or other men to be suffered to travel no Scholars to study the Liberal Arts no Lawyers to consult the case of their Clients or peruse their Evidences no Justices to examine Causes for preservation of the peace no Bells to ring upon that day no solemn Feasts or Wedding Dinners to be made on it with so many other prohibitions and negative precepts that men of all sorts and professions looked upon it as a common grievance Thirdly from the great care which was presently taken by such as were in Authority to suppress those Doctrines the said Book being called in by Arch-Bishop Whitgift both by his Letters missive and his visitations as soon as the danger was discovered Anno 1599. and a command signified in the Queens name by Chief Justice Popham at the Assizes held at Bury in Suffolk Anno 1600. that the said Book should no more be printed though afterward in the more remiss Government of King James it came out again with many Additions Anno 1606. Fourthly and finally from the permitting of all sorts of Recreations even common Enterludes and Bear-baitings in the so much celebrated Reign of Queen Elizabeth as also by the Declaration about Lawful sports published by King James An. 1618. and revived afterwards by King Charles Anno 1633 which certainly those godly and religions Princes would neither have suffered nor have done had they conceived it to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England of which they were such zealous Patrons and such stout Defenders No breaking of Subscription here by the Historian no crossing or opposing of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies and consequently no such need of Sophistry to elude the Lord Primates Argument which was drawn from thence as the said Honourable Person N. N. must believe there was SECT VIII A further Argument to prove the meaning of the Homily as before laid down The high esteem which the Church of England hath of the ancient Fathers as also of the usages of the primitive times with her respect unto the neighbouring Reformed Churches No restraint from labour on the Lords day imposed by the Council of Laodicea Beza's opinion of the liberty in those times allowed of Law-suits and Handy-crafts prohibited in great Cities on the Lords day by the Emperour Constantine but Husbandry permitted in the country Villages Proof from Saint Jerome Chrysostom Augustine that after the Divine service of the day was ended the rest of the day was spent in mens several businesses Husbandry first restrained in the Western Churches in the Council of Orleans Anno 540. and by the Edict of the Emperour Leo Philosophus in the Eastern parts about the year 890. Several restraints laid on the Lords day by the Council of Mascon Anno 588. Pope Gregory offended at such restraints and his censure of such as did enioyn them The liberty allowed in the Lutheran Churches on the Lords day as also in those of the Palatinate till after the year 1612. Nor in the Churches of the Low-Countries till the year 1618. Not onely servile Works but Fairs and Markets continued on the Lords day in those Countries till the same year also Necessary labour permitted on the Lords day in the Reformed Churches of the Switzers and honest Recreations in the French and Genevian Churches as also in the Kirk of Scotland The conclusion and application of the last Argument IT hath been proved sufficiently in the former Section that the passage alledged by the Lord Primate from the Book of Homilies and that twice for failing is capable of no such sense and meaning as he puts upon it for if it were the Homily must not only contradict it self but the Authors of it must be thought to propound a Doctrine directly contrary to the Queens Injunctions and the publick Liturgy of this Church and several Acts of Parliament which were then in force And which is more the whole body of Gods people in this Land by following their necessary business and lawful pleasures upon the Sunday or Lords day when no attendance at the place and hours of Gods publick service was required of them must be supposed to have run on in a course of sin against Gods Commandments and of contempt and disobedience to the publick Doctrine of the Church for the space of 80. years and upwards without contradiction or restraint which to imagine in a Church so wisely constituted and in a State founded on so many good Lawes cannot find place with any man of sober judgement But there is one Argument yet to come of as much weight and consequence as those before that is to say that if any such restraint from labour and honest recreations was by the Doctrine of this Church imposed on the people of God this Church must openly oppose the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers the laudable usages and customes of the Primitive times together with the general practise and perswasion of all the Protestant and Reformed Churches in these parts of the world a matter so abhorrent from the principles of the first Reformers and from the Canons and Determinations of this Church and the Rulers of it that no surmises of this kind can consist with reason The Church of England hath alwayes held the Fathers in an high regard whether we look upon them in their learned and laborious writings or as convened in General National and Provincial Councils appealing to them in all Differences between her and the Church of Rome and making use of their authority and consent in expounding Scripture witness that famous challenge made by Bishop Jewel in a Sermon preached at Saint Pauls Cross Anno 1560. in which he publickly declared that if all or any of the learned men of the Church of Rome could produce any one sentence out of the writings of any of the ancient Fathers or any General or National Council for the space of the first 600. years in justification of some Doctrines by them maintained and by us denied he would relinquish his own Religion and subscribe to theirs Witness the Canon made in a Convocation of the Prelates and Câ—ergy of England Anno 1571. Cap. De concionatoribus by which it was ordered and decreed that nothing should be preacht to the people but what was consonant unto the Doctrine of the old and
some labours on that day and permitted others The Judges in that age used to hold their Courts of Judicature even in the hours and times of Gods publick service by which means many were necessitated to absent themselves from the publick meetings of the Church and neglect their duties unto God Many of the Artificers also which dwelt in great Towns and populous Cities whose penny was more precious with them then their Pater noster used to do the like For remedy whereof it was ordained by the Emperours Edict Vt omnes Judices urbanaeque plebes cunctarum Artium officia venerabili die Solis quiescant But on the other side it was permitted unto those who lived in Countrey Villages to attend their Husbandry because it hapneth many times Ut non aptius alio die frumenta sulcis vineae scrobibus mandentur that no day is more fit then that for sowing Corn and for planting Vines And then he gives this reason for it Ne occasione momenti pereat commoditas coelesti provisione concessa lest otherwise by neglect of convenient seasons they lose those benefits which their God had bestowed upon them And if the toyles of Husbandry were not onely permitted upon that day but in a manner seemed to be enjoyned by the former Edict no question but such worldly businesses as did not take men off from their attendance at the times of the ministration might be better suffered And so Saint Hierom doth inform us of Paula a devout and religious Lady that she caused her Maidens and other Women which belonged to her to repair diligently to the Church on the Lords day but so that after their return operi distributo instabant vel sibi vel caeteris vestimenta faciebant they betook themselves unto their tasks in making garments either for themselves or others Nor doth the Father censure or reprove her for it as certainly he would have done had any such Doctrine been then taught and countenanced in the Church of Christ touching the spending of the whole day or the Lords day wholly in religious exercises It appears also by S. Chrysoft that after the Divine duties of the day were finished which held but 1 or 2 hours in the morning unam aut duas hor as ex die integro as it is in Origen the people were required only to spend some time in meditation at their coming home 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and were then suffered to pursue the works of their several callings Saint Austine in his Tract De rectitudine Catholicae Conversationis adviseth us to be attent and silent all the time of Divine service not telling tales nor falling into jarres and quarrels as being to answer such of us as offend therein Dum nec ipse verbum Dei audit nec alios audire permittit as neither hearkning to the word of God our selves nor permitting others But for the residue of the day he left it in the same estate in which he found it to be disposed of by Gods people according as their several necessities and occasions required of them Thus have we seen as well the Doctrine as the Practise of the African and Eastern Churches Let us now turn our selves towards the West and we shall find that some in France had begun to Judaize so far as to impose many of those restraints on the Lords day which the Jewes had put upon their Sabbath viz. that none should travel on the Lords day with Waines or Horses or dress Meat or make clean the House or meddle with any manner of domestick business Which being taken into consideration by the third Council of Orleance Anno 540. it was there ordained that since those prohibitions did savour more of the Jew then of the Christian Die Dominico quod ante licuit licere that therefore whatsoever had formerly been lawful on that day should be lawful still Yet so that for the satisfaction and contentment of those troublesome Spirits who would not otherwise submit to the Determinations of the Council it was thought convenient that men should rest that day from Husbandry and the Vintage from sowing reaping hedging and such servile works quo facilius ad Ecclesiam venientes orationis gratia vacent that so they might have better leisure to go unto the Church and there say their prayers This as it was the first restraint from Husbandry on the Lords day which had been made by the Canons of the Church so was it seconded by a Canon made in the Synod of Mascon in the 24. year of Ganthram King of the Burgundians Anno 588. and followed by another in the Council of Auxerre in France under Clotaire the second about two years after In both of which it was decreed Non licere die dominico boves jungere vel alia opera exercere that no man should be suffered to yoke his Oxen or do any manner of work upon the Sunday But then we must observe withall that these Councils acted onely by their own Authority not charging those restraints on God or on his Commandment it being positively declared by the Canon of the Council of Mascon that the Lord did not exact it of us that we should celebrate this day in a corporal abstinence or rest from labour who onely looks that we do yield obedience to his holy will by which contemning earthly things he may conduct us to the Heaven of his infinite mercy Which Declaration notwithstanding the Doctrine of it selfe was so offensive to Pope Gregory the first that partly to encounter with some Christians of the Eastern Countries who still observed the Jewish Sabbath and partly to prevent the further spreading of these restraints in the Western parts which made men seem to Judaize on the Lords day also he pronounced such as were active in promoting the practise and opinion of either side to be the Preachers of Antichrist qui veniens diem Sabbati diem Dominicum ab omni opere faciet custodiri as his own words are Less forward were the Eastern Churches in imposing any of these new restraints upon the people then the Western were the toiles of Husbandry it self not being prohibited in the Eastern parts of the Empire til the time of Leo Philosophus he began his Government Anno 886. who grounding himself on some command of the holy Ghost and the Lords Apostles which neither he nor any body else could ever finde decreed by his Imperial Edict ut omnes in die sacro c. à labore vacent Neque Agricolae c. that all men whatsoever as well the Husbandman as others should on the Lords day rest from all manner of work So long it was before any such general restraints were laid upon Gods people either in the West or East In all which time we neither find that the setting of some whole day apart for Gods solemn worship was lookt upon as Juris Divini naturalis which is the Lord Primates own opinion or
the matter The matter of a Commandment how and in what sense made an Article of the Faith and made a matter of the faith in this particular of the Lords day by the Assemblie of Divines at Westminster The consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops as capable of being taken into the Creed as the Parity of Ministers No verdict passed in behalf of the Lords day Sabbath by the Church of England The great difference between the Lord Primate and the Church of England in this business of the Lords day Sabbath A parting dash bestowed by the Lord Primate on the Historian THis leads me on to the fifth and last charge laid on the Historian meerly extrinsecal as to the main concernments of the point in hand though such as hath better ground to stand on then the other four The Historian having carried on his design as far as he could by the help of Books was forced to take up two passages concerning the affairs of Ireland upon information an information not took up upon a vulgar hear-say but given to him by such hands from which he was confident he might receive it without doubt or scruple The first particular is this that at such time as his Majesties Commissioners in Ireland employed about the setling of that Church Anno 1615. there passed an Article touching the keeping of the Lords day by which the English Sabbatarians were much confirmed in their Courses and hath been often since alledged to justifie both them and their proceedings Hist Sab. p. 2. l c. 8. n. 9. But the Lotd Primate now assures us that the said Article was passed and the Book of Articles published in Print divers yeares before the Commissioners whom he meaneth came thither p. 109. And thereunto Doctor Bernard addeth that the said Articles were subscribed by the Arch-Bishop of Dublin then Speaker of the House of Bishops in Convocation by the Prolocutor of the House of the Clergy in their names and signed by the Lord Deputy Chichester in the name of King James If so as now I believe it was I must needs say that the Sabbatarians and the rest of the Calvinian party in England were wiser in their generations then the children of light who seeing that they had no hopes of thrusting the nine Articles of Lambeth their Sabbath Speculations and the rest of their Heterodoxies of which particularly hereafter on the Church of England they began to cast their eyes on Ireland which lying further off might be less looked after And in that Realm they made themselves so strong a party that they obtained those Points in the Convocation held at Dublin Anno 1615. which neither their seditious clamours in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth nor their Petition to King James at his first entrance on this Kingdom nor their motion at the Conference in Hampton Court nor their continual Addresses to the Houses of Parliament were able to effect in England The out-works being thus easily gained they made from thence their Batteries on the Fort it self of which they doubted not to make themselves Masters in short time as in fine they did For after this when the Sabbath Quarrels were revived and the Arminian Controversies in agitation no argument was more hotly prest by those of the Puritan faction then the Authority of these Articles and the infallible judgement of King James to confirm the same The other particular in which the Historian doth confess himself to have been too credulous in believing and inconsiderate in publishing such mistaken intelligence is that the Articles of Ireland were called in and that in their place the Articles of the Church of England were confirmed by Parliament in that Kingdom Anno 1634. For this mistake though it be only in the circumstance not in the substance of the fact which is now before us he stands accused by the Lord Primate of no less then shamelesness Nor shames he to affirm saith he that the whole Book of the Articles of Ireland is now called in which is a notorious untruth and that the Articles of the Church of England were confirmed by Parliament in this Kingdom Anno 1634. Which passage with some others in this Letter makes me apt to think that it was never the Lord Primates meaning or desire to have it published in Print though Dr. Bernard hath been pleased to adventure on it For if it had been so intended he would have shewed less passion and more civility towards a Doctor in Divinity Chaplain in ordinary to the King and one not altogether untravelled in the wayes of Learning then to brand him with Sophistry Shamelessness and extravagant Fancies to tax him with notorious untruths speaking inconsiderately and finally to send him back to School again to learn his Catechism Egregiam vero laudem spolia ampla tulistis Tuque puerque tuus Assuredly the Lord Primate and his Chaplain too have reapt great praise and micle meed for this notable victory by which notwithstanding they have gain'd nothing but the name and noise For if it can be proved as I think it may that the Articles of Ireland were called in and that those of England were received in their place then whether it were done by Parliament or Convocation is not much material But on the contrary it is affirmed by the Lord Primate That the House of Convocation in the beginning of their Canons for the manifestation of their agreement with the Church of England in the confession of the same Chrstian faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments as themselves profess and for no other end in the world did receive and approve of the Articles of England but that either the Articles of Ireland were ever called in or any Article or Canons at all were ever here confirmed by Act of Parliament may well be reckoned amongst Dr. Heylyns fancies This the Lord Primate hath affirmed but takes no notice that the receiving of the Articles of England imports no less then the repealing of those of Ireland of which since Doctor Bernard hath discoursed more fully in his following Paper I shall reserve my Answer unto this Objection till I come to him In the mean time we are to know that the Lord Primate having been wrought on to propose the Canon which he speaks of about the Articles of England did readily consent unto it conceiving it to be without any prejudice to the other and thereupon he did not onely propose it in the House of the Bishops but commended it to the House of the Clergy where by his motion many assented the more readily as Dr. Bernard hath informed us p. 118. But afterwards the Lord Primate upon further consideration conceiving that he had been surprized and that he had passed more away in that Canon then he first intended began to cast about for some expedient to salve the matter and keep the Articles of Ireland in their former credit And thereupon it was thought fit that both the Lord Primate himself and some other
Bishops of his party should at an Ordination take the subscription of the party ordained to both Articles the Articles of England not being received instead but with those of Ireland p. 120 121. A sorry shift but such as was conceived to be better then none though as good as nothing But leaving this Dispute to another place as before was intimated we now proceed to the Examination of some other passages in the Lord Primates Letter unto his Honourable Friend in which he first chargeth the Historian for speaking inconsiderately in saying that before that time viz. Anno 1615. The Lords day had never attained such credit as to be thought an Article of the Faith though of some mens fancies And why was this so inconsiderately spoken Because saith he he that would confound the ten Commandments whereof this must he accounted for one unless he will leave us but nine with the Articles of Faith had need be put to learn his Catechisme again But this I look on as a flourish or a fansie onely For I hope the Lord Primate doth not think the Historian so extremely ignorant as to mean there a justifying and salvifical faith but that he takes faith there in the general notion as it importeth a firm perswasion and beliefe that those things are undoubtedly true which are commended to him by the Church in which he liveth or found in any creditable and unquestioned Author And in this notion of the word the matter of a Commandment being made a Doctrine may be called an Article of the Faith without any such scorn as to be put to learn the Catechism again The Articles of England by such as write of them in Latine are called Confessio Ecclesiae Anglicanae praeter Confessionem Anglicanam quam mihi ut modestam praedicabant c. saith the Arch-Bishop of Spalato In like manner and in the same sense and signification as the Articles of the Belgick Churches and the Kirk of Scotland are called confessio fidei Ecclesiarum Belgicarum Confessio fidei Scoticana sit de caeteris that is to say the confession of the Faith of those several Churches By which name the Articles of Ireland being also called by a most eminent learned and judicious person as Doctor Bernard sets him out p. 121. and the new Doctrine of the Sabbath being made a part of that Confession it may be said without any absurdity or being put to School again to learn the Catechisme that till that time viz. 1615. the Lords day never had attained that credit as to be thought an Article of the Faith But to make the matter sure and beyond exception I must put Dr. Bernard in mind of a Book entituled The Humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines assembled at Westminster by the Authority of Parliament concerning a Confession of Faith In which Confession of the Faith it is said expresly that As it is in the Law of Nature that in general a due proportion of time be set apart for the worship of God so in his word by a positive moral and perpetual Commandment binding all men in all ages he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a Sabbath to be kept holy unto him which from the beginning of the world to the Resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week and from the Resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week which in Scripture is called the Lords day and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath The institution and keeping of the Lords day here is made an Article of the Faith an Article of that Confession of the Faith which by the Assembly of Divines whereof the Lord Primate was nominated to be one was recommended to the two Houses of Parliament and yet I trow the Lord Primate wil not send the whole Assembly to learn their Catechism again unless it were one of the Catechisms of their own making either the larger or the lesser 't is no matter which But the Lord Primate stayes not here he goes on and saith That he that would have every thing which is put into the Articles of Religion to be held for an Article of Faith should do well to tell us whether he hath as yet admitted the Book of the ordination of Bishops and the two volumes of Homilies into his Creed both which he shall find received in the Articles of Religion agreed upon in the Synod held at London Anno 1562. But unto this it may be answered that the Book of the Ordination of Bishops and the two Volumes of Homilies may be so far taken into the Historians Creed as to believe as much of either as is required of him in the Book of Articles For he may very warrantably and safely say that he does verily believe that the second Book of Homilies doth contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine and necessary for those times that is to say the times in which they were first publisht and that the Book of Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops and ordering of Priests and Deacons doth contain all things necessary to such Consecration and ordering and that it hath nothing that of it self is superstitious or ungodly All this the Historian doth and may believe without making it an Article of his Faith except it be in that general notion of the word which before we spake of and in which notion of the word the Article of the Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. may as well finde a place in the Confession of the Faith of the Church of England as that Article of the Parity of Ministers hath found admittance in the Confessions of the Belgick Scotish and other Reformed Churches For in the Belgick Confession Art 31. it is thus declared quantum vero attinet Divini verbi Ministros ubicunque locorum sint eandem illi Potestatem Authoritatem habent ut qui omnes sint Christi unici illius Episcopi universalis unicique Capitis Ecclesiae Ministri The French Confession bearing this Title Gallicarum Ecclesiarum Confessio fidei that is to say The Confession of the Faith of the French or Gallick Churches as the Scotish Confession is called Confessio fidei Scoticana doth affirm as much viz. Credimus omnes veros Pastores ubicunque locorum collocati fuerint eadem aequali inter se potestate esse praeditos sub unico illo capite summoque solo universali Episcopo Jesu Christo And so no question in the rest The Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops may as well be an Article of the Faith amongst us in England as the Parity of Ministers amongst those of France or the Low-Countries These Interlocutories being thus passed over the Lord Primate comes at last to his final and definitive sentence for what remaineth after the Verdict is once given but that Judgment in the Case be pronounced accordingly And the Judgment is given us in these Words viz. By the
Verdict of the Church of England the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit as nothing more could be left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles afterward to adde unto it But against this Judgment I appeal and must reverse the same by Writ of Error For first although the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit in the Realm of England as is here affirmed it was obtained rather by the practises of the Sabbatarians who were instant in season and out of season to promote the Cause then by any countenance given unto it by the Church and the Rulers of it And secondly if any such Verdict had been given it was not given by any Jury which was legally summoned or trusted by the Church to act any thing in that particular And then the Foreman of this Jury must be Doctor Bound Master Greenham Master Perkins Doctor Lewis Bayley Master Dod Master Clever Doctor Gouge Master Whateley Doctor Sibs Doctor Preston Master Bifield Doctor Twisse and Master Ley must make up the Pannel the five Smectymnuans and he that pulled down the Cross in Saint Pauls Church-yard standing by in a readiness to put in for the Tales as occasion served Unless the Verdict had been given by these or such as these the Lords day never had attained such a pitch of credit as is here supposed but how a Verdict so given in may be affirmed to be a Verdict of the Church of England I am yet to seek So that except there had been something left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles to adde unto it The Sabbatarian Brethren would have found small comfort from any Verdict given on their side by the Church of England The Church of England differs as much in this point from the Articles of Ireland as the Lord Primate differeth in it from the Church of England The Lord Primate sets it down for a Proposition that the setting apart of one day in seven for Gods solemn worship is juris Divini Positivi recorded in the fourth Commandment p. 105. But the Lords Spiritual the most eminent Representers of the Church of England declared in the Parliament in the 5 6. of Edw. 6. That there is no certain time or definite number of dayes prescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word to the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Countrey by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth Gods glory and edification of their people The Church of England hath declared in the Homily of the time and place of prayer that the Lords day was instituted by the Authority of the Church and the consent of godly Christian people after Christs Ascension But the Lord Primate doth entitle it unto Christ himself and to that end alledgeth a passage out of the Homily De Semente ascribed but ascribed falsly unto S. Athanasius viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The proper meaning of which words hath been shewen already in the first Section of this Treatise The Lord Primate in conformity to the Articles of the Church of Ireland affirms for certain that the whole day must be set apart for Gods solemn worship But in the Church of England there is liberty given upon that day not onely for honest Recreations but also for such necessary works of labour as are not or have not been restrained by the Laws of the Land Which makes the difference in this case between the Lord Primate and the Church of England to be irreconcilable And here I would have left the Lord Primates Letter writ to his Honourable Friend the Contents whereof have been the sole Subject of the present Section but that the Lord Primate will not so part with the Historian he must needs bestow a dash upon him before he leaves him telling his Honourable Friend How little credit the Historian deserves in his Geography when he brings news of the remote parts of the world that tells so many untruths of things so lately and so publickly acted in his neighbour Nation This I must needs say comes in very unhandsomely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dictum at the best and savours little of that moderation humility and meekness of Spirit for which Doctor Bernard hath so fam'd him not onely in this present Treatise but his Funeral Sermon But let this pass cum caeteris erroribus without more ado I have some other game in chase to which now I hasten SECT X. Seven Points of Doctrine in which the Lord Primate differeth from the Church of England The Lord Primates judgment in the point of Episcopacy and the ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas That Bishops and Presbyters did differ Ordine and not onely Gradu proved by three passages in the Book of Consecration and by the different forms of the Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons used in the said Book The form and manner of making Bishops Priests and Deacons expresly regulated by the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage The Ordination of Presbyters by Presbyters declared unlawful by the Rules of the Primitive Church The Universal Redemption of Mankind by the blood of Christ maintained by the Church of England but denied by the Lord Primate not constant to himselfe in his own opinion A Real presence of Christ in the Sacrament maintained by the Church of England and affirmed by the most eminent Prelates of it but both denied and opposed by the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Jesuites challenge That the Priest hath power to forgive sins proved by three several passages out of the Book of Common-Prayer The meaning of the two first passages subverted by the Lord Primates Gloss or Descant on them but no notice taken by him of the last which is most material That the Priest forgiveth sins either Declarativè or Optativè better approved by the Lord Primate neither of which come up close to the Church of England and the reason why The Church of England holdeth that the Priect forgiveth sins Authoritativè by a delegated not a soveraign power and that she so holdeth is affirmed by some learned men of the Church of Rome The benefit of Absolution from the hands of the Priest humbly desired and received by Doctor Reynolds at the time of his death The Church of England maintains a local Descent and the proof thereof The Church not altered in her judgement since the first making of that Article Anno 1552. as some men imagine The Lord Primate goes a different way from the Church of England and the great pains by him taken to make it good A transition to the nine Articles of Lambeth THe difference between the Church of England and the Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath we have shewed already and well it were if he differed from the Church of England
Asylum Mortis the Sanctuary of the dead and great complaint is by him made that the priviledges of that Sanctuary were infringed by the Gentiles and the bodies of dead Christians most barbarously ravished by them de requie Sepulturae from the resting places of the grave A thing so odious in it self and to all man-kind that grievous punishments have been inflicted even by Heathen Emperours upon offendors of this nature Et certè gravissimae poenae in Sepulcrorum violatores vel ab ipsis Ethnicis Imperatoribus statuâ—ae sunt as Pamelius notes upon the place In this respect also sollicitare umbras as Manilius hath it to disturb the spirits of the dead and sorce them by Charmes and Incantations from the place of their repose and rest to the end that we or others may ask counsel of them hath been alwayes held for execrable both by God and man For that this is a trouble and disturbance to them appears plainly by the passionate words which Samuel spake to Saul saying Cuâ— inquietasti me why hast thou disquieted me and brought me up that is to say disquieted my spirit and brought up my body by the Charmes and Sorceries of this accursed woman the Witch of Endor The crime is prohibited by God himselfe in the Book of Deuteronomy Let none be found amongst you that is a Charmer or that counselleth with spirits aut qui quaerit à mortuis veritatem or that asketh counsel of the dead a Necromancer as we read in our last Translation The criminal Party by the Law of Moses to be stoned to death Levit. 20. 27. nor were less punishments inflicted on them by the Laws Imperial though differing in the kind of death which was ordained by God in the Law of Moses it being ordered by the Edict of the Emperour Constantine that such as were guilty of this crime as of all other kinds of Witchcraft though otherwise priviledged by their birth from all sorts of tortures tormenta cruciatas non fugerent should first be put upon the Rack and endure several sorts of torments and then be broken on the Wheele and there end their miseries for which see the Codex 1. 9. Ad Taurum Which passages had they been seriously considered by Doctor Bernard as they should have been he would not have offered the Lord Primate his deceased Patron so great an injury as to force him from the place of Repose and disturb his Rest that either he or any others might ask counsel of or receive it from him to bring him back upon the Stage from whence he had made his Exit with a general Plaudite especially to bring him back to so ill a purpose as either to begin new Controversies or revive the old His memory by this means must needs become less precious then before it was with all knowing men whom either in the point of Episcopacy or in that of Vniversal Redemption by the death of Christ or in the Doctrine of the Sabbath or finally in defence of the Orders Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England to which the Doctors Book declares him to be no great friend he hath made his Adversaries I know well how unworthy a thing it is to rake into the graves of men deceased and like Vultures to prey on dead bodies and that of all combats there is none more fruitless and ignoble then that which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to fight with shadows But if the dead be made to speak and by writings published in their names shall disturb the Church and send out Chartels of desiance to particular men to my selfe for one it is all the reason in the world that their writings should be called to an account though their persons cannot and that the parties so defied should stand upon their guard and defend themselves and use all honest Arts and Means for conjuring down a spirit so unhappily raised No man of courage will be frighted with an Apparition or terrified with the Ghost or Shadow for the word Vmbra takes in both of the greatest Clerk But much more reason is there for it when the dead are not onely made to speak but to give ill language to tax a modest man with Sophistry Shamelessness and I know not what reproches not to be endured with patience from the dead or living A worm if trod upon will turn again as the Proverb is and seeing I may say in the Psalmists language that I am a Worm and no Man I hope I shall not be condemned if I turn again and rather chuse to plead not guilty to the whole Indictment then by a wilful standing mute to betray both my own fame and the cause together let the worst come that can befal me it will be thought no discredit to me to be vanquisht by so great an Adversary whom to contend with is an honour and to be overcome by him would be no disgrace should it so fall out so that I may affirm with him in Ovid and perhaps more justly then he did Nec tam Turpe mihi vinci est quà m contendisse decorum For I must needs say that the Doctor hath engaged me with a Noble Adversary who by his indefatigable industry and unwearied studies had made himself the Master of as great a Treasury both of Divine and Humane Learning as any man living in this last age could pretend unto and which is more he had it all ready at command by the benefit of an excellent memory but no Abilities not governed by an infallible Spirit can exempt a man from being many ways obnoxious to mistakes and errors the common incidences to humane frailty men of the greatest eminence in point of learning being as subject thereunto as those of weaker parts and less reputation Tertullian Cyprian Origen and Lactantius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men of renown for Learning in the Primitive times shall attest to this as in the general Rule or Thesis but whether it will hold good also in the application the matter in dispute before us the event must shew The matter in dispute occasioned by publishing certain Letters of the late Lord Primate in which he excepteth against some passages in a Book of mine entitled The History of the Sabbath and signified those exceptions to some special friends that is to say to Doctor Twisse of Newberry Mr. Ley of Badworth Presbyterians both and to an Honourable Friend not named but like to be of the same stamp with the other two The Letters writ many years ago Anno 1640 and writ with no intent as I verily think to have been publisht but lately publisht howsoever by Doctor Bernard of Grayes Inne and publisht to no other purpose for ought I can find but to engage me in this necessary but unequal Duel The passages excepted against are but five in number in which I am concerned by name and but one more or two at the most in which I am interessed on the By. And
which grew in the middle of the Garden as namely by Tertullian adversus Iudaeos Basil de jejunio Ambrose Lib. de Elia jejunio c. 3. Chrysostom Hom 14. 16. on the Book of Genesis Austin de Civitate l. 14. c. 12. As also by many other Christian Doctors of all times and ages who from hence aggravate the offence of Adam in that he had but one Commandment imposed on him and yet kept it not By others it is said expresly that Adam never kept the Sabbath as certainly he would have done at some time or other if any such Commandment had been given him by the Lord his God as namely by Iustin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho the Iew Tertullian in his Book adversus Iudaeos which may be gathered also in the way of a necessary consequence from the words of Eusebius De Praep. Evang. l. 7. c. 8. and those of Epiphanius adversus Haereses l. 1. n. 5. Whose words we have laid down at large Hist of Sub. p. 1. c. 1. n. 5. This is enough to prove that no command for keeping of the Sabbath day was given to Adam in his own personal capacity and no more then so besides the necessary expiring of the Sabbath with him had it been so given And that it was not given to him as the common Root of Mankind will appear as plainly by the not keeping of that day by any which descended from him till it was declared unto the Israelites in the fall of Mannah and afterwards imposed upon them by the fourth Commandment for if it had been kept by any it must have been by those of the godly Line from whom our Saviour was to derive his Humane nature and yet it hath been proved out of very good Authors that it was never kept by Abel Seth Enos Enoch or Methusalem nor finally by Noah himselfe though called in Scripture by the name of a Preacher of Righteousness the proofs whereof may be found at large in the History of the Sabbath Part 1. Chap. 2. Num. 6 7 8 9. And if it were not kept by those of the godly Line we have no hope to find any thing for the keeping of it in the house of Cain or in the families of any of the other Sons of Adam whose extreme wickedness grew so abominable in the sight of God that he was forced to wash away the filth thereof by a general Deluge After the Flood we find the world repeopled by the Sons of Noah the godly Line being as ignorant of the Sabbath as the rest of the Nations for it hath been sufficiently proved out of very good Authors that neither Sem nor Melchisedech if a different person from him nor Heber nor Lot ever kept the Sabbath and that it was not kept by Abraham or any of his Sons as neither by Iacob Ioseph Moses or any of the House of Israel as long as they remained in Egypt in the House of Bondage for which see Hist of Sab. Part. 1. c. 3. n. 4 5 7 8 9. And if we find no such observance in the House of Sem who were more careful of their wayes and walked agreeably to the declared will and pleasure of Almighty God it were in vain to look for it in the House of Iaphet or in that of the accursed Cain the founders of the Europaean and African Nations or amongst any others which descended from the Sons of Sem who pass together with the rest by the name of Gentiles Now that the Gentiles were not bound to observe the Sabbath is proved by divers of the Fathers and many of the greatest Clerks among the Iewes whom affirm expresly that the Commandment of the Sabbath was given to none but those of the House of Israel Of this mind was St. Austin Epist 119. De Gen. ad lit l. 4. c. 11 13. Epist 86. Ad Casalanum in all which places he appropriates this Commandment to the Iewes or Hebrews St. Cyril in Ezek. h. 20. Theodoret in Ezek. 20. Procopius Gazaeus in Gen. 21. And for the Iews it was a common opinion received amongst them that the Sabbath was given to them onely and not to the Gentiles as Petrus Galatinus proves from the best of their Authors who thereupon inferreth Quod Gentes non obligantur ad Sabbatum that the Gentiles were not bound to observe the Sabbath The like may be gathered from Iosephus who in many places calls the Sabbath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a national custome Antiq. lib. 4. cap 8. de bello lib. 2. cap. 16. to whom I shall now adde another of later date of my Lord Primates own commending that is to say Manasses Ben Israel who telleth in his Book De Creatione that the observation of the Sabbath was commanded onely unto the Israelites and that all the Duties which the Heathen were tied unto were comprised in the precepts given to the sons of Noah as is affirmed in the Letter to Dr. Twisse p. 78. And that the Sabbath was not kept by the Gentiles as well as not imposed upon them by any Commandment the Historian hath made good by two several Mediums whereof the first is taken from the writings of the Gentiles themselves by which it doth appear that they gave no greater respect to the Saturday then to any other day whatever and that though they celebrate the seventh day as a festival day yet was it not the seventh day of the weeek but the seventh day onely of every month which might happen as well upon any of the six dayes as upon the Saturday And so it is observed by Philo a right learned Jew who puts this difference between the Gentiles and the Jews that divers Cities of the Gentiles did solemnize the seventh day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 once a month beginning their account with the new Moon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that the Jewes did keep every seventh day constantly Nor was the seventh day of the month on which they sacrificed to Apollo esteemed more holy by the Gentiles then their other Festivals on which they tendered their Devotions to their other Gods and in particular was not accounted more holy then the first or fourth which Hesiod placeth in the same parallel with the seventh in this following verse viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which if any should take notice that the attribute of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or holy is affixt unto the seventh day onely the Scholiast on that Author shall remove that scruple A novilunio exorsus tres laudat omnes sacras dicens septimam etiam ut Apollinis natalem celebrans and tells us that all three are accounted holy and that the seventh was also celebrated as Apollo's birth-day As for the first day of the month as is observed by Alexander ab Alexandro it was consecrated by the Greeks to Apollo also the fourth to Mercury the eighth to Theseus because he was derived from Neptune to whom as Plutarch saith they
abbreviation I shall here subjoyn it Whereas it is conceived by some that the Gentiles by the light of nature had their weeks which is supposed to be an argument that they kept the Sabbath a week being onely of seven dayes and commonly so called both in Greek and Latine we on the other side affirm that by this very rule the Gentiles many of them if not the most could observe no Sabbath because they did observe no weeks For first the Chaldees and the Persians had no weeks at all but to the several dayes of each several month appropriated a particular name of some King or other as the Peruvians do at this present time Et nomina diebus Mensis indunt ut prisci Persae as Scaliger hath noted of them The Grecians also did the like in the times of old there being an old Attick Calendar to be seen in Scaliger wherein is no division of the month into weeks at all As for the Romans they divided their account into eights and eights as the Jewes did by sevens and sevens the one reflecting on their Nundinae as the other did upon their Sabbath Ogdoas Romanorum in tributione dierum servabatur propter Nundinas ut hebdomas apud Judaeos propter sabbatum For proof of which there are some ancient Roman Calenders to be seen as yet one in the aforesaid Scaliger the other in the Roman Antiquities of John Rossinus wherein the dayes are noted from A to H. as in our common Almanacks from A. to G. The Mexicans go a little further and they have thirteen dayes to the Week as the same Scaliger hath observed of them Nay even the Jewes themselves were ignorant of this division of the year into weeks as Tostatus thâ—nks till Moses learnt it of the Lord in the fall of Mannah Nor were the Greeks and Romans destitute of this account onely when they were a rude and untrained people as the Peruvians and Mexicans at this present time but when they were in their greatest flourish for Arts and Empire Dion affirmes for the ancient Greeks that they knew it not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for ought he could learn and Seneca more punctually that first they learnt the motions of the Planets of Eudoxus who brought that knowledge out of Egypt and consequently could not know the week before And for the Romans though they were well enough acquainted with the Planets in their later times yet they divided not their Calendars into weeks as now they do till near about the time of Dionysius Exiguus who lived about the year of Christ 520. Nor had they then received it in all probability had they not long before admitted Christianity throughout their Empire and therewithal the knowledg of the holy Scriptures where the account by weeks was exceeding obvious Such are the Arguments and such the Authors by which the Historian proved or endevoured to prove that the division of the year into weeks was not known anciently amongst the Gentiles And against these the Lord Primate takes not any exception but thinks that he hath done his work if he can find out two or three witnesses to affirm the contrary It might have been expected that a man so verst and studied in Antiquities would have prest the Historian with the weight of such proofs and evidences as had been digged out of the rock extracted out of the Monuments and Records of the elder times But on the contrary we have not so much as one single testimony produc'd from any Latine Authors Historians Orators Poets or Philosophers which lived between the first foundation of the Roman greatness and the declining of the same nor from the writings of those famous men amongst the Grecians who made their country as renowned for Arts and Eloquence as otherwise it had been innobled for Arms and Victories For the first Author we are sent to who though he liv'd far off in respect of place yet liv'd not very far off in regard of time is one Helmondus or Helmandus who wrote the History of the Sclaves or Sclavonian Nations Nations not known or heard of by that name in Europe till the year 600 converted to the Christian Faith by Cyril and Methodius between the years 860. 890. So that if the distinction of weeks did reach etiam ad ipsos usque Sauromatas and was known to the Sclavonians themselves while they continued in their ancient Paganism as the Lord Primate saies it was p. 79. I trow this can be no sufficient argument that the distinction of weeks was anciently known amongst the Gentiles which was the matter to be proved The Sclavonians having conquered Dalmatia and those other Provinces which bordered on Macedon and Thrace two hundred years at the least before they received the Gospel might take up the distinction of time into weeks from the Nations whom they had subdued whilest they were yet in the state of paganism and no harm done to the Historian in the present business and therefore granting all that hath been said by Helmoldus though a post-natus living about the year 1180. the Historians Proposition still holds good and unconfuted unless this Argument be of force viz. The Sclavonians when they were in the state of Paganism betwixt the year 600. 860. used to assemble on the second day of the week to determine Controversies as Helmoldus tells us therefore the distinction into weeks was anciently known amongst the Gentiles in their several Countries above 2000. years before them But if the same order of the dayes of the week be retained by them which The ophilus the old Bishop of Antioch noteth to have been observed by all mankind all is well enough and the Sclavonians though a Nation of later standing may well be made an instance for that observation which all mankind had generally been accustomed to in all times foregoing But certainly Theophilus Antiochenus tells us no such matter The place here cited as it stands translated in the Bibliotheca Patrum is as followeth Praeterea de die septimo qui inter omnes Mortales celebris est magna apud plerosque ignoratia est Hic enim dies qui ab Hâ—braeis Sabbatum vocatur Graecè si quis nomen interpretetur septimus dicitur hoc nomine mortales omnes diem istum appellant nominis causam nesciunt plâ—rique Where clearly Theophilus speaks nothing with reference to the Gentiles of the elder times but tells us in the present tense what estimation there was had of the seventh day which the Jewes called the Sabbath in the present times I mean the times in which he lived which was about the latter end of the second Century Anno 174. And therefore if all mankind in his time by reason of the observation of the seventh day amongst the Jewes retained the same order of the dayes of the week which the Sclavonians after did this cannot be conceived a sufficient Argument that the same order was
But since he hath appeal'd to the Book of Homilies to the Book of Homilies let him go where he shall find as little comfort as he found in the Statute For in the Homily touching the time and place of prayer out of which the Lord Primate hath selected this particular passage it is thus doctrinally resolved viz. As concerning the time in which God hath appointed his people to assemble together solemnly it doth appear by the fourth Commandment c. And albeit this commandment of God doth not bind Christian people so streightly to observe and keep the utter Ceremonies of the Sabbath day as it did the Jewes as touching the forbearing of work and labour in the time of great necessity and as touching the precise keeping of the seventh day after the manner of the Jews for we keep now the first day which is our Sunday and make that our Sabbath that is our day of rest in honour of our Saviour Christ who as upon that day rose from death conquering the same most triumphantly Yet notwithstanding whatsoever is found in the Commandment appertaining to the Law of Nature as a thing most godly most iust and needful for the setting forth of Gods glory ought to be retained and kept of all good christian people So that it being thus resolved that there is no more of the fourth Commandment to be retained by good Christian people then what is found appertaining to the Law of Nature that the law of nature doth not tie us to one day in 7. or more to one day of the 7. then to any other let us next see by what Authority the day was changed how it came to be translated from the 7th to the first Concerning which it follows thus in the said Homily viz. 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 of the week to come together in the very same with that before declared in the Act of Parliament yet not the seventh day which the Jewes kept but the Lords day the day of the Lords Resurrection the day after the seventh day which is the first day of the week c. Sit hence which time Gods people hath always in all ages without any gainsaying used to come together on the Sunday to celebrate and honour Gods blessed name and carefully to keep that day in holy rest and quietness both man and woman child servant and stranger So far the Homily and by the Homily it appears plainly that the keeping of the Lords day is not grounded on any commandment of Christ nor any precept of the Apostles but that it was chosen as a standing day of the week to come together in by the godly christian people immediately after Christs Ascension and hath so continued ever since So then the keeping of the Lords day being built on no other grounds as is declared both in the Homily and the Act of Parliament then the authority of the Church the consent of godly Christian people it must needs follow thereupon that it is to be kept with no greater strictness with reference either unto worldly business or honest recreations then what is required of the people by the Law of the Land the Canons of the Church or by the Edicts and Proclamations of the King or other supreme Governour under whom we live And if we please to look into the Act of Parliament before remembred we shall find it thus in reference unto worldly business viz. It shall be lawful to every Huusbandman Labourer Fisherman and to all and every other Person or Persons of what Estate Degree or Condition he or they be upon the Holy dayes aforesaid of which the Lords day is there reckoned for one in Harvest or at any other times in the year when necessity shall so require to labour ride fish or work any kind of work at their free will and pleasure any thing in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding The like we also find as to worldly business in the Queens Iniunctions published in the first year of her Reign in which the Sunday is not onely counted with the other holy dayes but labour labour at some times permitted and which is more enjoyned upon it For in those Injunctions it is ordered with a non obstante That all Parsons Vicars and Curates shall teach and declare unto their Parishoners that they may with a safe and quiet conscience after Common-prayer in the time of Harvest labour upon the holy and festival dayes and save that thing which God hath sent And if for any Scrupulosity or grudge of conscience men should superstitiously abstain from working on these dayes that then they should grievously offend and displease God And though it may be said that the Queens Injunction and every thing therein contained was buried in the same Grave with her yet cannot this be said of the Act of Parliament which is still in force and gives as much permission unto Worldly businesse as the said Injunction And as for Recreations there was not onely permission of such civil pastimes and man-like exercises by which the spirits of men might be refresht and their bodies strengthned but even of Common Enterludes Bear-baitings Bull-baitings and the like fit onely for the entertainment of the ruder or more vulgar sort For though the Magistrates of the City of London obtained from Queen Elizabeth Anno 1580. that Playes and Enterludes should no more be acted on the Sunday within the liberties of their City and that in the year 1583. many were terrified from beholding the like rude sports upon that day by the falling of a Scaffold in Paris Garden whereby many were hurt and eight killed out right yet there was no restraint of either in other parts of the Realm till King James to give a little contentment to the Puritan party in the beginning of his Reign prohibited the same by his Proclamation bearing date at Theobalds May 7. 1630. But for all other civil Recreations they were not onely permitted as they had been formerly but a Declaration issued from that King about sixteen years after concerning lawful sports from which some of the preciser sort of Justices had by their own authority restrained the people In the next place let us behold the Sunday or Lords day comparatively with the Saints days and other Festivals and we shall find them built on the same foundation the same Divine offices performed in both and the like diligent attendance required on both For in the Act of Parliament 5 6. of Edw. 6. before remembred the appointing of all holy dayes and set times of worship being first declared to be left by the Authority of Gods Word unto the liberty of Christs Church to be determined in every countrey by the discretion of the Rulers thereof it is next signified what dayes shall be accounted holy dayes and what shall not For so it
that the first day of the Week which is the Lords day was wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore that men should be bound to rest therein from their common and daily business which is the Doctrine of the Articles of the Church of Ireland Next let us look upon the Protestant Lutheran Churches amongst whom though restraints from labour formerly imposed by many Canons Laws and Imperial Edicts do remain in force yet they indulge unto themselves all honest and lawful recreations and spare not to travel on that day as well as upon any other as their necessities or pleasures give occasion for it If they repair unto the Church and give their diligent attendance on Gods publick service there is no more expected of them they may dispose of all the rest of the day in their own affairs and follow all such businesses from which they are not barred by the Laws of the several Countries in which they live without being called to an account or censured for it And as for the Reformed or Calvinian Churches they give themselves more liberty on that day then the Lutherans doe few of them having any Divine offices until now of late in the Afternoons as neither had the Primitive Christians till toward the later end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth Century In those of the Palatinate the Gentlemen betake themselves in the Afternoon of the Lords day to Hawking and Hunting according as the season of the year is fit for either or spend it in taking the Air visiting their Friends or whatsoever else shall seem pleasing unto them as doth the Husbandman in looking over his grounds ordering his cattel or following of such Recreations as are most agreeable to his nature and education And so it stood in the year 1612. at what time the Lady Elizabeth daughter to King James and wife to Frederick the fifth Prince Elector Palatine came first into that Countrey whose having Divine Service every afternoon in her Chappel or Closet officiated by her own Chaplains according to the Liturgy of the Church of England might give some hint to the Prince her Husband to cause the like religious offices to be performed in some part of the Afternoon in the City of Heidelberg and after by degrees in other the Cities and towns of his Dominions In the Netherlands they have not onely practice but a Canon for it it being thus decreed by the Synod of Dort Anno 1574. Publicae vespertinae preces non sunt introducendae ubi non sunt introductae ubi sunt tollantur that is to say That in such Churches where publick Evening prayer had not been admitted it should continue as it was and where they were admitted they should be put down And if they had no Evening Prayers there is no question to be made but that they had their Evening Pastimes and that the Afternoon was spent in such employments as were most suitable to the condition of each several man And so it stood till the last Synod of Dort Anno 1618. in which it was ordained that Catechism-Lectures should be read in their Churches on Sundayes in the Afternoon the Minister not to be deterred from doing his duty propter Auditorum infrequentiam though possibly at the first he might have few Auditors and that the Civil Magistrate should be implored ut omnia opera servilia quotidiana c. That all servile works and other prophanations of that day might be restrained quibus tempus pomeridianum maxime in pagis plerumque transique soleret wherewith the Afternoon chiefly in smaller Towns and Villages had before been spent that so they might repair to the Catechizing For both before that time and since they held their Fairs and Markets their Kirk-masses as they used to call them as well upon the Lords day as on any other and those as well frequented in the Afternoon as were the Churches in the forenoon France and even in Geneva it self the New Rome of the Calvinian party all honest Exercises shooting in peeces long-bows cross-bows c. are used on the Sunday and that in the morning both before and after Sermon neither do the Ministers find fault therewith so they hinder not from hearing of the Word at the time appointed And as for the Churches of the Switzers Zuinglius avoweth it to be lawful Die dominico peractis sacris laboribus incumbere On the Lords day after the end of Divine Service for any man to follow and pursue his labours as commonly we do saith he in the time of Harvest And possible enough it is that the pure Kirk of Scotland might have thought so too the Ministers thereof being very inclinable to the Doctrine of Zuinglius and the practise of the Helvetian Churches which they had readily taken into their Confession Anno 1561 but that they were resolved not to keep those holy dayes which in those Churches are allowed of all Holy dayes but the Lords day onely having been formerly put down by their Book of Discipline Nor could I ever learn from any of my Acquaintance of that Kingdom but that men followed their necessary businesses and honest recreations on the Lords day till by commerce and correspondence with the Puritan or Presbyterian party here in England the Sabbatarian Doctrines began by little and little to get ground amongst them On all which premises I conclude that the Authors of that Homily had neither any mind or meaning to contradict the Ancient Fathers the usages and customes of the Primitive times in the general practice of the Protestant and Reformed Churches and therefore that the words of the Homily are not to be understood in any such sense as he puts upon them The Doctrine of the Church of England is clear and uniform every way consonant to it self not to be bowed to a compliance with the Irish Articles of the year 1615. and much less with the judgement and opinion of one single person in 640. No Sophistry in all this but good Topical Arguments and such as may be more easily contemned then answered And so much toward the exonerating of the fourth charge the most material of them all in which the Historian stands accused for opposing the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies to which he had formerly subscribed SECT IX The Historian charged for mistaking the affairs of Ireland in two particulars which he ingenuously confesseth The great cunning of the Puritan faction in effecting their desires in the Convocation of Dublin Anno 1615. which they could not compass here in England The Historian accused for shamelesness c. for the second mistake though onely in a point of Circumstance the Articles of Ireland being called in and those of England received in the place thereof by the Convocation though not by Parliament The Lord Primates narrative of this business he finds himself surprized in passing the Canon and makes use of a sorry shift to salve
as are to receive the Communion viz. Almighty God our Heavenly Father who of his great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them which with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto him have mercy upon you pardon and deliver you from all your sins and confirm and strengthen you in all goodness and bring you to everlasting life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen Or else the first clause in the form of Absolution used at the visitation of the sick would have served the turn that is to say Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truely repent and believe in him of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences And there could be no reason at all imaginable why the next clause should be superadded to this prayer viz. And by his Authority committed to me I absolve thee from all thy sins c. if the Priest did not forgive sins Authoritativè by such a delegated and commissionated power as before we spake of And that this is the Doctrine and intent of the Church of England appears by the acknowledgement of two learned men of the opposite faction For thus saith one of the great sticklers for the Church of Rome viz. Hereunto is also pertinent the Doctrine of those Protestants who hold that Priests have power not onely to pronounce but to give remission of sins Yea it seemeth to be the Doctrine of the Communion-Book in the visitation of the sick where the Priest saith And by his Authority committed unto me I absolve thee from all thy sins Then which there could not come a clearer Testimony from the mouth of an Adversary And for the other side I will take Dr. Lewis Bayley afterwards Bishop of Bangor a man precise enough as to the perpetual morality of the Lords day Sabbath and Calvinist enough in some other Tenets of that rigid Sect And yet this man in his Book called the Practice of Piety not onely doth advise his sick Penitent to send in time for some godly Minister to whom he may unfold his griefs confess his sins that so he may receive the benefit of Absolution but tells him that then he should not doubt in foro conscientiae but that his sins be as verily forgiven on earth as if he did hear Christ himself in foro judicii pronouncing them to be forgiven in Heaven And this he doth exemplifie in Doctor Reynolds the ablest and most learned man of all that shewed themselves on the Puritan party who being on his death-bed did earnestly desire to receive the benefit of sacerdotal Absolution according to the form prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer and humbly received it at the hands of Dr. Holland the Kings Professor in Divinity in the University of Oxon for the time then being and when he was not able to express his joy thankfulness in the way of speech did most affectionatly kiss the hand that gave it and yet this Doctor had not only a chief hand in the Millenary Petition as they commonly called it presented to K. James at his first coming to this Crown wherein they excepted not only against the use but the very name of Absolution as being a forinsecal word which they desired to have corrected but managed the whole busines of it at Hampton Court And this he did with such fidelity and zeal that to give that party some contentment it was ordered in the Conference there that to the word Absolution in the Rubrick following the general confession these words Remission of sins should be added for explanation sake as it stil continueth so powerful an Orator is death as to perswade men in extremities of sickness to apply those remedies which in the times of health they neither thought lawful nor convenient to be used in such extremities 7. But to proceed in the Article of Christs descending into Hell the Church of England doth maintain a local descent that is to say That the Soul of Christ at such time as his body lay in the grave did locally descend into the nethermost parts in which the Devil and his Angels are reserved in everlasting chains of darkness unto the judgment of the great terrible day This proved at large by Bishop Bilson in his learned and laborious Work entituled The Survey of Christ's sufferings in which he hath amassed together whatsoever the Fathers Greek and Latine or any of the ancient Writers have affirmed of this Article with all the Points and Branches which depend upon it And that this was the meaning of the first Reformers when this Article amongst others was first agreed upon in the Convocation of the year 1552. appears by that passage of S. Peter which is cited by them touching Christs preaching to the Spirits which were in prison And though that passage be left out of the present Article according as it passed in the Convocation of the year 1562. yet cannot that be used as an Argument to prove that the Church hath altered her judgment in that Point as some men would have it that passage being left out for these reasons following For first that passage was conceived to make the Article too inclinable to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which makes the chief end of Christs descent into Hell to be the fetching thence the souls of the Fathers who died before and under the Law and secondly because it was conceived by some learned men that the Text was capable of some other construction than to be used for an argument of this Descent The judgment of the Church continueth still the same as before it was and is as plain and positive for a local descent as ever formerly She had not else left this Article in the same place in which She found it or given it the same distinct Title as before it had viz. De Descensu Christi ad Inferos in the Latine Copies of King Edward the Sixth that is to say Of the going down of Christ into Hell as in the English Copies of Queen Elizabeths Reign Nor indeed was there any reason why this Article should have any distinct place or Title at all unlesse the maintenance of a local Descent were intended by it For having spoken in the former Article of Christs Suffering Crucifying Death and Burial it had been a very great impertinency not to call it worse to make a distinct Article of his Descending into Hell if to Descend into Hell did signifie the same with this being buried as some men then fancied or that there were not in it some further meaning which might deserve a place distinct from his Death and Burial The Article speaking thus viz. As Christ died for us and was buried so is it to be believed that he went down into Hell is either to be understood of a local Descent or else we are tied to believe nothing by it but what was explicitely or implicitely comprehended in the former Article Now that this
before the Congregation according to the custome of other Reformed Churches of which care there had been no need if the publick Liturgy had been read as it ought to be as well the Commandments as the Creed being appointed to be read publickly in the Course thereof But being it is said with reference to the Reformed Churches I want reason to believe that the often publick reading of the Commandments and the Creed supplied the place of the Publick Liturgy on the dayes of Preaching according to the Custome of some of the Reformed Churches which were therein imitated Secondly it is appointed by the Liturgy or Common-prayer-Book of Both Churches what dayes should be accounted holy and observed as Festivals each of them having their several Lessons Collects Epistles and Gospels as well the Sunday or Lords day it selfe or as the greater Festivals of Easter and Whitsuntide or those of the Ascension and Nativity of our Lord and Saviour No difference made between them except it be the addition of some proper Psalmes to some special Festivals in the intent and purpose of the publick Liturgies But whether the Lord Primate observed all these several Holy dayes which the Church allows of and in such manner as is prescribed by the Church may be very well doubted It s true that Doctor Bernard tells us that it was the Lord Primates judgement and opinion That the Annual Commemorations of the Articles of the Faith such as the Nativity Passion Resurrection of our Saviour c. were still to be observed which Saint Austin saith in his time were in use through the whole Catholick Church of Christ and is now in other Reformed Churches as a means to keep them in the memory of the vulgar according to the pattern of Gods injunction to the Israelites in the Old Testament for the types of them as appeared by his then constant preaching on those Subjects p. 152. But then it is as true withal that Doctor Bernard tells us nothing of the Lord Primates observation of the other Holy dayes as certainly he would have done had there been ground for it And therefore if the Lord Primate were so punctual in keeping the Anniversaries of the Nativity Passion Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord and Saviour and of the coming down of the Holy Ghost as Doctor Bernard saith he was it may be probably conceived that this was done rather in compliance with some of the forraign Reformed Churches which observe those dayes and those dayes onely than in obedience to the prescripts of the Churches of England and Ireland Thirdly the day of the Passion of our Saviour commonly called Goodfriday is by both Churches reckoned for jejunium statum a standing though but an Annual Fast as well as Lent the Ember dayes and Rogation week and hath its proper and distinct office that is to say its proper Lessons Collect Epistle and Gospel accommodated to the day and every way instructive in the story of our Saviours passion And it is ordered by the thirteenth Canon of the year 1603. That all Ministers shall observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer as well in reading the holy Scriptures and saying of Prayers as in Administration of the Sacraments without either diminishing in regard of preaching or in any other respect or adding any thing in the matter and form thereof But on the contrary Doctor Bernard telleth us that the Friday before Easter Good Friday by no means take heed of that appointed for the remembrance of the Passion of our Saviour was by the Lord Primate at Droghedah in Ireland observed duly as a solemn fast inclining the rather to that choice that is to say of making it a solemn not a standing fast out of prudence and the security from censure by the then custome of having Sermons beyond their ordinary limit in England and that when the publick prayers were ended that is to say so much of the publick prayers as might be no hindrance to his preaching be preached upon that subject extending himself in Prayer and Sermon beyond his ordinary time which being known to be his constant custom some from Dublin as other parts came to partake of it p. 154. Fourthly by the 55. Canon of the year 1603. there is a form of Prayer prescribed to be used by Preachers before their Sermons the beginning of which Canon is as followeth viz. Before all Sermons Lectures and Homilies Preachers and Ministers shall move the people to joyn with them in prayer in this Form or to this effect as briefly as conveniently they may Ye shall pray for Christs holy Catholick Church c. But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate that he did not onely spin out his own Prayers to a more then ordinary length as appeareth by the former passage but that he was also much for the Ministers improving of their gifts and abilities in prayer before Sermon and after according to his own practice p. 150. and that he required the like extemporary and unpremeditated prayers of his houshold Chaplains in his Family-prayers at six of the clock in the morning and at eight at night Fifthly it is appointed by the eighteenth Canon of the year 1603. That as often as in the Divine Service the Lord JESUS shall be mentioned due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present as it hath been accustomed testifying by these outward Ceremonies Gestures their inward Humility Christian Resolution and due acknowledgment that the Lord Jesus Christ the true and eternal Son of God is the onely Saviour of the World in whom alone all Mercies Graces and Promises of God to mankind for this life and the life to come are fully and wholly comprised But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate p. 147. That as for bowing at the name of Jesus though he censured not those that did either in our or other Reformed Churches according to the custome of each which we of England must needs take for a special favour yet he did not conceive the injunction of it could be founded upon that of the Apostle Phil. 2. 10. and wondered at some learned mens assertions that it was the exposition of all the Fathers upon it a touch for Doctor Andrews the late learned and most renowned Bishop of Winchester and as the wise composers of the Liturgy gave no direct injunction for it there so in Ireland he withstood the putting of it into the Canon Anno 1634. Sixthly it is appointed by the said eighteenth Canon of the year 1603. That no man shall cover his head in the Church or Chappel in the time of Divine Service whereof I hope the Sermon did deserve to be accounted part except he have some infirmity in which case let him wear a night-Cap or Coif and in the seventh Canon of the year 1640. that all good and well-affected people members of this Church be ready to tender their acknowledgement
we next proceed unto the Confirmation which he hath in hand And therein also pretermitting his whole Narrative touching the carriage of the business in the Convocation of the year 1634. we will pitch only on the examination of this point viz. whether the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England were not a virtual repealing of the Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the better proceeding in it I think it not unnecessary to produce that Canon which is the ground of the Dispute The Title of it this viz. Of the Agreement of the Church of England and Ireland in the profession of the same Christian faith The Body of it this viz. For the manifestation of our Agreement with the Church of England in the Confession of the same Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments We do receive and approve the Book of Articles of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops and the whole Clergy in the whole convocation holden at London Anno Dom. 1562. for avoiding of the diversities of opinions and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion And therefore if any hereafter shall affirm that any of those Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe unto Let him be excommunicated and not absolved before he make a publick revocation of his error These are the very words of the Canon it selfe and from these words the Observator did conclude that the Articles of England were received in stead of the other but Doctor Bernard makes this construction of the Canon That there was not a reception of the one in stead of the other but the one with the other p. 119. That in the Canon the Articles of England are received not in stead but with those of Ireland p. 120. But which of the two is in the right will be best seen by the Arguments produced on both sides and by the Answers which are made to those several Arguments And first the Observator takes notice of some scandal given unto the Papists and the occasion of some derisions which they had thereby that in the Churches of three Kingdoms professing the same Religion being under the patronage of one soveraign Prince there should be three distinct and in some points contrary confessions and that for the avoiding of this scandal it was thought fit there should be one Confession or one Book of Articles onely for the Churches of England and Ireland not without hope that Scotland would soon follow after And thereupon he doth infer that if the superinducing or receiving of a new Confession be not a repealing of the old there must be two Confessions in the same Church differing in many points from one another Which would have been so far from creating an uniformity of belief between the Churches and taking away thereby the matter of derision which was given the Papists in two distinct and in some points contrary Confessions yet both pretending unto one and the same Religion that it would rather have increased their scorn and made a greater disagreement in Ireland it selfe then was before between the Churches of both Kingdoms The second Argument is taken from these words of Saint Paul Heb. 8. 13. viz. Dicendo novum veteravit prius c. that is to say in that he saith a new Covenant he hath made the first old as our English reads it and then it followeth that that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away that is to say the old being disanulled by the new there must necessarily follow the abolishment of its use and practice So that unless it may be thought that Saint Paul was out in his Logick as I think it may not the superinducing of a new Covenant must be the abrogating of the old His third Argument is taken from the Abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath by superinducing of the Lords day for the day of Worship By means whereof the Sabbath was lessened in authority and reputation by little and little and in short time vvas absolutely laid aside in the Church of Christ the fourth Commandment by vvhich it vvas at first ordained being still in force His fourth and last Argument vvas that the first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth confirmed in Parliament vvith several penalties to those vvho should refuse to officiate by it or should not diligently resort and repair unto it as appears by the Statute 2 3. Edw. 6. c. 1. vvas actually repealed by the authorizing of the second Liturgy of the 5 6. of King Edw. 6. vvhich vvas forthvvith received into use and practice in all parts of the Kingdom the former Liturgy being no otherwise suppressed and called in then by the superinducing of this the Statute upon which it stood continuing unrepealed in full force and virtue and many Clauses of the same related to in the Statute which confirmed the second Upon which Ground it was inferred that the Articles of Ireland were virtually though not formally abrogated by the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England Of the first and last of these four Arguments Doctor Bernard takes no notice at all and returns but one Answer to the second and third which notwithstanding may serve also for the first and last just as an Almanack calculated for the Meridian of London may generally serve for the use of all Great Britain The Answer is That the Apostles speech of making void the old Covenant by speaking of a new or taking in the first day of the Week to be the Sabbath instead of the last when but one of the seven was to be kept doth not fit the Case for in these there was a Superinduction and reception of the one for the other but in the Canon the Articles of England are received not instead but with those of Ireland which by his leave is not so much an Answer to the Observators Arguments as a plain begging of the Question For if this Answer will hold good in Ireland it might have held good also in the Land of Judaea and the Parts adjoyning where both the Lords-day and the Sabbath the old Law and the Gospel did for a time remain together As for the Doctors Arguments That the Reception of the Articles of the Church of England doth no more argue an Abrogation of the Articles of Ireland than that the Apostles Creed was abrogated by the reception of the Nicene and Athanasian p. 118. it is easily answered For as the Doctor well observes the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds are but Enlargements of the other and that in some particular Points onely in which the Hereticks of those times had disturbed the peace of the Church So that those Creeds are but the Explanations of the other in the Points disputed and were received by the Church with reference onely to the condemnation of some Heresies and the Explication of some Orthodox or Catholick Doctrines which had been opposed by
those Heresies More easily is the Argument answered importing That the reception into our use the form of the Lords Prayer according to S. Matthew should by the same reason abrogate that of S. Luke being the shorter For first the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Lukes Gospel was never received into the Lyturgie of the Church and therefore could not be abrogated by the Churches making choice of the other which we find in S. Matthew And secondly it was not in the power of the Church to have abrogated that Prayer as it stands in S. Luke because it is a part of the Gospel of the word of God which the Church hath no Authority to change or alter and much lesse to abrogate All that the Church can be said to have done in this particular is that the Church made choice rather of the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Matthew then as it stands in S. Luke when it was absolutely in her power to make choice of either No contrariety to be found in any one clause of the said two Pater Nosters nor any the least contradiction to be met with between those three Creeds or any one Article of the same differing no otherwise in a manner but as the Commentary and the Text. But so it is not in the Case which is now before us nor in the supposition of making one general confession of all the Reformed Churches if they were severally subscribed with the Irish Articles He that subscribes unto the Articles of Ireland may without any doubt or scruple subscribe unto the Articles or Confessions of all the Reformed or Calvinian Churches But if he take the Articles of England also into that account he must of necessity subscribe to many plain and manifest contrarieties Against this nothing hath been said but that there is no substantial difference between those Articles as was conceived by the Lord Primate p. 118. that both Confessions are consistent as is affirmed by Doctor Bernards most eminent learned and judicious person p. 121. and finally that there is no difference in substance but onely in Method number of Subjects determined and other circumstantials as is declared by Doctor Bernard p. 119. But if the contrary be proved and that it shall appear that there is a substantial difference between those Articles that the Confessions of both Churches are inconsistent and that they do not onely differ in the Circumstantials of Method Number and the like I hope that then it will be granted that the approving and receiving of the Articles of England was virtually and in effect an Abrogating of the former Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the proof of this I shall compare some passages in the Articles of Ireland as they passed in Convocation Anno 1615. with the Doctrines publickly professed in the Church of England either contained expresly and in terminis in the Book of Articles or else delivered in some other publick Monument of Record of the Church of England to which those Articles relate First then The Articles of the Church of Ireland have entertained and incorporated the Nine Articles of Lambeth containing all the Calvinian Rigours in the Points of Predestination Grace Free-will c. which Articles or any of them could never find admittance in the Church of England by reason of their inconsistency with the authorized Doctrines of it as before was said so that by the incorporating of those Nine Articles into the Articles of Ireland there are as many aberrations from the doctrine of the Church of England Secondly It is said of Christ Num. 30. that for our sakes he endured most grievous torments immediately in his Soul and most painful sufferings in his Body The enduring of which grievous torments in his Soul as Calvin not without some touch of Blasphemy did first devise so did he lay it down for the true sense and meaning of the Article of Christs descending into Hell In which expression as the Articles of Ireland have taken up the words of Calvin so it may rationally be conceived that they take them with his meaning and construction also the rather in regard that there is no particular Article of Christs descending into Hell as in those of England and consequently no such Doctrine of a local Descent as the Church of England hath maintained Thirdly it is declared Num. 50. That the Abstinencies which are appointed by publick order of that State for eating of Fish and forbearing of Flesh at certain times and dayes appointed are no wayes meant to be Religious Fasts nor intended for the maintenance of any superstition in the choice of meats but are grounded meerly upon Politick Considerations for provision of things tending to the better preservation of the Common-wealth But the Church of England not taking notice of any Politick Considerations for the breeding of Cattle increase of shipping or the like as the Statists do nor intending the maintenance of any Superstition in choice of meats as the Papists do retaineth both her Weekly and her Annual Fasts ex vi Catholicae consuetudinis as Apostolical and Primitive Institutions and she retains them also not as Politick but as Religious Fasts as appears by the Epistle for Ash-wednesday taken out of the second Chapter of Joel from verse 12. unto verse 18. and by the Gospel for that day taken out of the sixth Chapter of S. Matthew from verse 16. unto verse 22. And more particularly from the Prayer appointed to be used on the first Sunday in Lent viz. O Lord which for our sakes didst fast fourty dayes and fourty nights give us grace to use such abstinence that our flesh being subdued to the Spirit we may ever obey the Godly motions in righteousness and true holinesse to thy honour and glory which livest and reignest c. Fourthly It is affirmed Num. 56. That the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore we are bound to rest therein from our common and daily businesse and to bestow that leisure upon Holy Exercises both publick and private How contrary this is to the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies we have seen already and if it be contrary to the Book of Homilies it must be also contrary to the Book of Articles by which those Homilies are approved and recommended to the use of the Church Besides it is declared in the seventh of those Articles first that the Law given by Moses as touching Ceremonies and Rites do not bind Christian men nor ought the Civil Precepts thereof to be received in any Common-wealth and secondly that no Christian whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral So that the Ceremonial part of the Law of Moses being wholly abrogated there is no more to be observed in any of the said Commandments then that which is naturally and plainly moral For otherwise the Old Testament must be
contrary to the New which is denied in the first clause of this Article and secondly this Article must be contradicted by the Book of Homilies which in another of these Articles is approved as before was said As Adversaries to which truth the Author of the Book entitled The Faith Doctrine and Religion professed and protected in the Realm of England c. being a Commentary on the 39. Articles Perused and by the lawful Authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick doth account all such as have taught and published first that whereas all other things were so changed that they were clean taken away as the Priesthood the Sacrifice and Sacraments this day that is the Sabbath day was so changd that it yet remaineth and secondly that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual If so then no such thing required of Christians as to dedicate the first day of the week wholly to the service of God or to rest thereon from our common and dayly business as it is positively determined in this Article of the Church of Ireland Adde here those desperate consequences which have been raised by some men from these Sabbath-Doctrines It having been preacht in some of the Pulpits in this Kingdom as Mr. Rogers tells us in his Preface to the Book above mentioned that to do any servile work or business on the Lords day is as great a sin as to kill a man or commit adultery that to throw a Bowle to make a Feast or dress a VVedding Dinner on the Lords day is as great a sin as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat and that to ring more Bells then one on the Lords day is as great a sin as to commit a wilful murder Most desperate consequents indeed but such as naturally do arise from such dangerous premises Fifthly it is declared Num. 71. that we ought to judg those Ministers to be lawfully called and sent which be called and chosen to the work of the Ministry by men who have publick Authority given them in the Church This serves to countenance the Ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas ordained if I may so call it by the imposition of the hands of two Lay-Elders for each single Presbyter without the assistance or benediction of the Bishop and is directly contrary to the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons according to which Book justified and approved by the 36. Article of the Church of England no Priest or Presbyter can be otherwise ordained then by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop Sixthly it is declared Num. 74. That God hath given power to his Ministers not simply to forgive sins which prerogative he hath reserved onely to himselfe but in his name to declare and pronounce unto such as truly repent and unfainedly believe his Holy Gospel the absolution and forgiveness of sins VVhich Doctrine how contrary it is to the Doctrine of the Church of England hath been shewed at large in the tenth Section of this Book To which I shall now onely adde that for the better encouragement of the penitent party to make a true and sincere confession of his sins that so the Priest may proceed to Absolution on the better grounds it is ordered by the 113. Canon of the year 1603. That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister for the unburthening of his conscience and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him the said Minister shall not at any time reveale and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same under pain of Irregularity By incurring of which pain of Irregularity he doth not onely actually forfeit all those spiritual promotions of which he is at that time possessed but is rendered utterly uncapable of receiving any other for the time to come Seventhly it is declared Num. 80. That the Bishop of Rome is so far from being the Supreme head of the Universal Church of Christ that his works and Doctrine do plainly discover him to be that man of sin foretold in the holy Scriptures whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and abolish with the brightness of his coming Of which opinion the Lord Primate also was as is affirmed by Doctor Bernard p. 162. where he telleth that the Lord Primate had in two learned Sermons given his judgement at large that the Papacy was meant by Babylon in the seventeenth and eighteenth of the Revelation But there is no such Doctrine concerning Antichrist in the Book of Articles or in any other publick Monument or Record of the Church of England but the contrary rather And this appeareth by a prayer at the end of the second Homily for Whitsunday viz. That by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truly preached truly received and truly followed in all places to the beating down of Sin Death the Pope the Devil and all the Kingdom of Antichrist In which words the Pope the Devil and the Kingdom of Antichrist being reckoned as the three great enemies of the Church of Christ it must needs be by the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies that the Pope and Antichrist are as much distinguished as either the Devil and the Pope or the Devil and Antichrist which no man of reason can conceive to be one and the same Eighthly the Church of England in the tenth Article speaks very favourably of the will of man in the act of Conversion and all the other Acts of Piety which depend upon it viz. That we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will according to that memorable saying of Saint Augustine the greatest Champion of Gods grace against the Pelagian Heresies Praevenit nos gratia Dei ut velimus subsequitur ne frustra velimus Whereas it is declared in the Articles of Ireland that man is meerly passive in the work of his own Conversion velut inanimatum quiddam as was said by Luther the Article affirming Num. 32. That no man can come unto Christ unless the Father draw him that is to say unless the Father doth so draw him that nothing be ascribed to mans will either in receiving of Grace preventing or working any thing by the assistance of Grace subsequent or Grace concurring no other kind of drawing by our Heavenly Father being allowed of in this Act in the Schools of Calvin For on this ground Calvin dislikes that saying of Saint Chrysostome that God draws none but such as are willing to come