CHAP. IV. Christ performed all these Promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them to all their commissioned work p. 11 CHAP. V. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for Holy Worship especially in Church Assemblies Which is explained in several subordinate Propositions And proved 1. By Scripture 2. By unquestionable History And the validity of this proof evinced and the denyers of it proved to subvert the Churches certainty of greater matters p. 12 CHAP. VI. This act of the Apostles appointing the Lords Day for holy Worship was done by the especial inspiration and guidance of the Holy Ghost p. 69 CHAP. VII Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. proved Where is shewed how far the fourth Commandment is abrogated and all the Law of Moses p. 71 CHAP. VIII Of the Beginning of the Day p. 91 CHAP. IX How the Lords Day should be kept Of the length of the time and the Objection about weariness p. 93 CHAP. X. How the Lords Day should not be spent or what is unlawful on it Of worldly business Of recreations of Idleness c. p. 108 CHAP. XI What things should not be scrupled as un lawful on the Lords Day p. 129 CHAP. XII Of what importance the due observing of the Lords Day is Many great Reasons for it p. 139 CHAP. XIII What other Church Festivals or separated Dayes are lawful p. 148 THE CONTENTS OF THE Appendix CHAP. I. An Answer to certain Objections against the Lords Day p. 157 CHAP. II. An Answer to more Arguments for the seventh day Sabbath p. 180 CHAP. III. Whether the seventh day Sabbath be part of the Law of Nature or only a Positive Law p. 202 CHAP. IV. Whether every word in the Decalogue be of the Law of Nature and of perpetual obligation And whether all that was of the Law of Nature was in the Decalogue p. 214 CHAP. V. Whether the truest Antiquity be for the seventh day Sabbath as kept by the Churches of Christ p. 220 The Divine Appointment of the LORDS DAY proved as a separated Day for holy Worship especially in the Church-Assemblies And consequently the Cessation of the Seventh-day-Sabbath CHAP. I. Though the principal thing desired by the Enquirers is That I would prove to them the Cessation of the Seventh-day Sabbath yet because they cast off the Lords day which I take to be a far greater error and sin than the observation of both dayes and because that when I have proved the Institution of the Lords Day I shall the more easily take them off the other by proving that there are not two weekly dayes set apart by God for holy Worship Therefore I will begin with the first Question Whether the Lords day or first day of the week be separated by Gods Institution for holy Worship especially in publick Church-conventions Aff. And here for the right stating of the Question let it be noted 1. That it is not the Name of a Sabbath that we now meddle with or stand upon Let us agree in the Thing and we shall easily bear a difference about the name Grant that it is A day separated by Gods Institution for holy Assemblies and Worship and then call it a Sabbath or the Lords day as you please Though for my self I add That the Lords day is the name that the Holy Ghost hath set upon it and the name which the first Churches principally used and that they call it also sometimes by the name of the Christian Sabbath but that is only Analogically as it is resembled to the Jewish Sabbath and as they used the names Sacrifice and Altar at the same time for the Christians Commemoration of Christs Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Lords Supper and for the Table or as Dr. Young saith pag. 23. As in Scripture Baptism is called Circumcision And that very rarely too 2. That the Question of the manner of observing the Lords day and what exercises of Worship it must be spent in and what Diversions are lawful or unlawful as also when the day beginneth are not to be here medled with in the beginning but afterwards when the Divine Institution of the Day it self is first sufficiently proved Which is done as followeth Arg. That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by God the Father and the Son The Minor only needeth proof among Christians That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost But the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost Therefore the first day of the Week was separated to holy Worship by the Holy Ghost The Minor which only needeth proof is thus proved That day which was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles who had the Holy Ghost promised them by Christ and given them to lead them into all truth and to bring all his Doctrines to their remembrance and to teach the Churches to do all his Commands and to feed and guide and order them as his principal commissioned Church-Minister was separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost But such is the first day of the Week Therefore the first day of the Week is separated to holy Worship by the Apostles by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost I have five Propositions now distinctly to be proved four for the proof of the Major and one for the proof of the Minor The first Proposition is That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches The second Proposition is That Christ promised them his Spirit to enable them to do what he had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them as his Churches Guides The third Proposition is That Christ performed this promise and gave his Spirit accordingly to his Apostles to enable them to all their commissioned work The fourth Proposition is That the Apostles did actually separate or appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-assemblies The fifth Proposition is That this act of theirs was done by the Guidance or inspiration of the Holy Ghost which was given them And when I have distinctly proved these five things no sober understanding Christian can expect that I should prove any more towards the proof of the Question in hand Whether the first day of the Week be separated by Gods
certain As of the Government of Augustus Tiberius Herod Pilate Foelix Festus c. 2. There are other certain means known to us of which I must refer the Reader to what I have written in my Reasons of the Christian Religion Part 2. Cap. 7. specially pag. 335. to 340. 3. No man can doubt but that the Christians of that same age as till the year one hundred might easily and certainly know such a matter of publick fact as whether the Lords day was constantly set apart and observed by all the Christian Churches for holy Worship For 1. It is certain that they did know it by sight and sense and therefore had no need of History 2. It is certain that they knew it before the Scriptures were written which we now speak of For it is not possible that for all those years time before any of the New Testament was written the Christians who assembled to worship God should not know on what day they used to assemble And if they knew it in the year 100. they must needs know it as well in the year 101. 102. 103. and so on For those that were young Christians fifty years after Christ would be aged at an hundred And those that were young at an hundred would be aged at an hundred and fifty and so on So that an age of people not ending at the age of a single person Congregations and societies are like Rivers that keep the same channel and name while one part of water followeth another Nay some of the same men are there anno 100. who were there anno 50. some anno 150. who were there anno 100. and so on Ten thousand thousand men women and children can tell on what day the Congregations of England use to assemble whereas if an Apostle were among us and should write on what day we assemble fewer would know it by that means And they that knew it but by his writing would know it less confidently than they that knew it by sense and experience Yet forget not that I am far from ascribing a certainty or a credibility to all humane History Much more from equalling any with the credit of Divine History But only I say 1. That sense is more assuring as to the subject than any History whatever 2. And that some History besides Divine is certain 3. And that much History is credible 4. And that this instance of the Day on which all Churches in the world assembled for holy Worship is one of the most palpable for certainty that possibly could be imagined 4. And I add that if some humane History or Tradition be not certain there can be no certainty of much of the Divine History to any but the persons who were themselves inspired or that saw the Visions or Miracles that confirmed them For as internal sense or intuition must assure the Inspired persons themselves and external sense must assure those that saw the matters of fact so all the rest have no way to know them but either still by a succession of New Revelations from Heaven which God doth not give or else by Report And I can no otherwise know what was revealed to an Apostle nor what was done in those times Of which more anon Prop. 5. The first institution of Church Offices and Orders and so of the Lords day was not by Scripture The proof is undeniable Because the Old Testament did not contain the Institution e. g. of particular Churches Sacraments Presbyters Deacons Deaconesses and the Lords day c. And the New Testament was none of it written till anno 40. at soonest when some as Bucholtzer Bellarm c. think Matthews Gospel was written though others say many years after and it was not all written till ann 99. Now it is certain that the Church was not all these years without the Orders now in question nor without a day to meet on for publick Worship Even as Baptism and the Lords Supper were instituted by Christ himself long before the writing of any part of the New Testament and the Church was in long possession of them upon the bare verbal declaration of the Apostles Prop. 6. Therefore it is certain that no part of the New Testament was written to any such end as to institute Sacraments or Church Offices or standing Orders but to instruct men about those that were already instituted as to the use of those times For it could not be written to institute that which was instituted before so many years Prop. 7. No part of the New Testament was written to make known to the Churches of those times the said Sacraments Offices stated Orders and Time of Worship Still observe that by a part I mean any book And I except the Decree written in a Letter of the Apostles Elders and Brethren Act. 15. concerning Circumcision not to be imposed on the Gentiles which yet made no new institution nor declared any but only determined of the continued forbearance of some things forbidden before of God in the precepts called Noah's and Pauls Epistles which reduce the Churches to Orders before setled and urge them to duty and decide some doubts about particular cases of Conscience The proof is visible 1. In the Writings themselves 2. In that all the Churches were in the possession and use of all the things in question long before For mutable Orders and Circumstances are none of the things in question It would be vain to write a history now to tell English men of this present age that the Lords day is used in England as a day set apart for publike worship or that persons are Baptized or receive the Lords Supper in England For seeing it is the common usage of all the Christians almost of the Land it is needless to tell men among us by writing that it is so unless it be to inferr somewhat else from it Prop. 8. Yet those holy Scriptures which were written to men of those times were also intended for the instruction of all succeeding ages And so the foure Evangelists wrote the history of Christ and Luke wrote the history of Paul till his coming to Rome and longer and of some more of the Apostles And on the by in the Epistles extant the Churches Customes of those times are much intimated And all this together with the subordinate history and the universal tenure and practice of the Churches is that history by which we must know the matters of fact of those times Nor is there any room left for a rational pretense of Rome or any other Church to produce Divine Institutions which were committed only to them or entrusted to their particular keeping only and were not delivered in Scripture nor in Common to the whole Church Prop. 9. Thus according to the use of the writings of the New Testament the matter of fact in question of the Lords dayes separation is historically touched on and proved though but briefly and on the by as a thing as well known to the
Church before as what day goeth over their head The Historical hints of the New Testament must be taken together and not a part only that they may prove a usage And 1. That Christ rose on that day is past doubt among Christians Joh. 20. 1. Luk. 24. 1. Mar. 16. 2. Matth. 28. 1. 2. On that same day he taught the two disciples Luk. 24. 13. And the same day he appeared to the Disciples and instructed them and did eate with them Luk. 24. 33 36. Theâ— the Disciples were assembled and theâ— he blessed them gave them their Commission and the Holy Ghost Joh. 20. 19 20 21 22. 3. The next first day of the week Christ chose to appear to them again when Thomas was with them and convinced him Joh. 20. 26. 4. In Act. 20. 7. It is mentioned as the day of their Assembling to break bread which though they did oft on other daies yet no day else was peculiarly appointed for it As for the dissenters cavil about the Translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza hath given them Reason enough against it And Grotius and almost all expositors are against them And most that translate it literally una Sabbatorum take Vna and Prima here to be all one And Calvin with others noteth that the same phrase being used of the day of the Resurrection Matth. 26. 1. Luk. 24. 1. Joh. 20. 1. will direct us to expound this unless you mean also to deny the Resurrection to have been on the first day And 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needs have the same signification And Mark 26. 9. compared with the other Evangelists so expounds them as Beza noteth who also telleth us that in one old Copy he found added the Lords day and citeth Hierome adv Vigilant saying Per unam Sabbati hoc est in die Dominico c. And Dr. Hammond well noteth that it plainly relateth to the Christian assemblies to which they were not to come empty but to deposite what they brought into the treasury of the Church or if it were in their private repositories it doth not much difference the case Calvins exception against Chrysostome here is groundless as the reasons before evince So that by this Text the custome of holding Church meetings on the Lords day as a peculiar day is intimated though but on the by as most Expositors agree And the denomination of the Lords day Joh. 1. 10. being the same which the Christian Churches ever used of the First day puts it yet further out of doubt As for his conjecture who doubteth whether it may be meant of the Anniversary day of Christs Resurrection when as the constant use of the name by all the Churches sheweth that it was taken ever since for the weekly day it deserveth no other refutation Now though all this set together shew that Scripture is not silent of the matter of fact yet it is the full and unquestionable expository evidence of the practice of all Churches in the world since the very daies of the Apostles which beyond all doubt assureth us that de facto the Lords day was by the Apostles separated for holy Worship especially in publick Church-assemblies But these several intimations being seconded with so full an Exposition tell us that the Scripture is not silent in the case nor doth pass it by I was loth to name the day of the sending down of the Holy Ghost as a proof Because that some do controvert it But it seemeth to me a very considerable thing 1. That the day that year 〈…〉 of Pentecost on which the Holy Ghost was given was indeed the first day of the week even Dr. Heylin granteth without any question or stop And the Churches observation of Whitsunday as the day and that so very early as Epiphanius and many others say from the Apostles doth seem a very credible history or tradition of it 2. It s agreed on that the Passoever that year fell on the Sabboth day and that Pentecost was fifty daies after the Passover which falleth out on the Lords day And Grotius noteth from Exod. 19. 1. that it was the day that the Law was given on and so on which the Spirit was given for the new Law 3. And considering that this great gift of the Holy Ghost which was to make the Apostles Infallible and to enable them for their commission-work and bring all Christs Doctrines and Commands to their remembrance was so memorable a thing that it was as it were the Beginning of the full Gospel-state of the Church and Kingdom of Christ which through all Christs abode on Earth was as the Infant existent indeed but in the womb and on this day was as it were Born before the world and brought into the open light the Lords day also seemeth to me to be as it were Conceived on the day of Christs Resurrection but Born on this day of the Holy Ghosts descent But Dr. Heylin hath one poor reason against it viz. Because it was but an accidental thing that the day fell out that year on the first day Answ. 1. Was it not according to the course of Nature How then can that be called Accidental 2. But however it was no contingent accidental thing in his sense that the Holy Ghost was sent down on that day rather than another If a sparrow fall not to the ground without Gods providence did God choose that day He knew not why Or did it fall out hap hazard or by chance I need not insist on the confutation of his Caviâ—s about the other Texts forecited Note only 1. That as to his exception about Christs travel on his Resurrection day I have after answered it 2. That he freely granteth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifiâ—th The first day of the week both in Act. 20. 7. and 1 Cor. 16. 2. 3. That he himself citeth afterward many testimonies that oblations and contributions were in the Churches a usual Lords dayes work 4. That he confesseth that Rev. 10. 1. is meant of the Lords day as by that time grown into reputation 5. That he thinketh it was in small reputation before because Paul chose the Sabbath so often to Preach on to the Jews and Hellenists or Greeks whereas he himself is forced to confess that it was not for the days sake but the Assemblies to do them good 6. That he vainly conceiteth that Because the Lords day was kept on the account of Christs Resurrection it implyeth that it was not kept by Gods command which needeth no confutation 7. That his labour to prove that Paul meant the Jewish Sabbath as abrogated is vain for we deny it not 8. That he cannot deny that Christians had all that time of the Apostles a stated day as Pliny himself witnesseth for solemn worship above other daies 9. That he vainly snatcheth a little countenance from Calvin and Beza c. when as no man since Cochlaeus writeth more detestably of them 10. That after he
History assureth us that they did III. Nor have we any fuller Scripture proof that the Apostles used to require of those that were to be Baptized any more than a general Profession of the substance of the Christian faith in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Or of the ancient use of the Christian Creed either in the words now used or any of the same importance From whence many would inferr that any one is to be Baptized who will but say that I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God with the Eunuch Act. 8. 37. or that Christ is come in the flesh 1 Joh. 4. 2 3. But Historical evidence assureth us that it was usual in those times to require of men a more explicite understanding profession of the Christian faith before they were admitted to Baptisme And that they had a summary or Symbole fitted to that use commonly called The Apostles Creed at least as to the constant tenour of the matter though some words might be left to the speakers will and some little subordinate Articles may be since added And that it was long after the use to keep men in the state of Catechised persons till they understood that Creed And it is in it self exceeding probable that though among the intelligent Jews who had long expected the Messiah the Apostles did Baptize thousands in a day Act. 2. Yet where the Miraculous communication of the Spirit did not antecede as it did Act. 10. they would make poor Heathens who had been bred in ignorance to understand what they did first and would require of them an understanding profession of their Belief in God the Father Son and Holy Ghost which could not possibly if understanding contain much less than the Symbolum fidâ—i the Apostles Creed IV. Nor have we any Scripture proof except by inferring obedience from the precept that ever the Lords Prayer was used in words after Christ commanded or delivered it Whence some inferr that it should not be so used But Church History putteth that past doubt Other such instances I pretermit I think now that I have fully proved to sober considerate Christians that the matter of fact that the Lords day was appointed by the Apostles peculiarly for Church-Worship is certain to us by historical Evidence added to the historical intimations in Scripture as a full exposition and confirmation of it And that this is a proof that no Christian can deny without unsufferable injury to the Scriptures and the Christian cause CHAP. VI. Prop. 5. This Act of the Apostles appointing the Lords day for Christian Worship was done by the special inspiration or guidance of the Holy Ghost THis is proved 1. Because it is one of those Acts or works of their Office to which the Holy Ghost was promised them 2. Because that such like or smaller things are by them ascribed to the Holy Ghost Act. 15. 28. Iâ— seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us when they did but declare an antecedent duty and decide a Controversie thereabout See also Act. 4. 8. Act. 5. 3. 6. 3. with 7. 55. Act. 13. 2 4. 16. 6 7. 20. 23 28. 21. 11. 2 Tim. 1. 14. Jud. 20. Act. 11. 12 28. 19. 21. 20. 22. 1 Cor. 5. 3 4. 14. 2 15 16. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. When Paul doth but counsel to a single life he ascribeth it to the Spirit of God 3. And if any will presume to say that men purposely indued with the Spirit for the works of their commission did notwithstanding do such great things as this without the conduct of that Spirit they may by the same way of proceeding pretend it to be as uncertain of every particular Book and Chapter in the New Testament whether or no they wrote it by the Spirit For if it be a sound inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly leave in writing to the Churches the doctrines and precepts of Christ Ergo whatever they have left in Writing to the Churches as the doctrine and precepts of Christ is Infallibly done by the Guidance of that Spirit Then it will be as good an inference They had the promise and gift of the Spirit that they might infallibly settle Church-orders for all the Churches universalâ—y ergo Whatever Church-orders they setled for all the Churches universally they setled them by the infallible guidance of that Spirit But this few Christians will deny except some Papists who would bring down Apostolical Constitutions to a lower rank and rate that the Pope and his General Council may be capable of â—â—ying claim to the like themselves and so may make as many more Laws for the Church as they please and pretend such an authority for it as the Apostles had for theirs By which preâ—ense many would make too little distinction between Gods Laws given by his Spirit and the Laws 〈◊〉 a Pope and Popish Council and call then all but The Laws of the Church Whereas there is no Universal Head of the Church but Christ who hath reserved Universal Legislation to Himself alone to be performed by himself personally and by his Advocate the Holy Ghost in his Authorized and Infallibly-inspired Apostles who were the Promulgators and Recorders of them All following Pastors being but as the Jewish Priests were to Moses and the Prophets the preservers the expositers and the applyers of that Law CHAP. VII Qu. 2. Whether the seventh day Sabbath should be still kept by Christians as of Divine obligation Neg. I Shall here premise That as some superstition is less dangerous than prophaneness though it be troublesome and have ill consequents so the Errour of them who keep both daies as of Divine appointment is much less dangerous than theirs that keep none yea and less dangerous I think than theirs who reject the Lords day and keep the seventh day only Because these latter are guilty of two sins the rejecting of the right day and the keeping of the wrong but the other are guilty but of one the keeping of the wrong day Besides that if it were not done with a superstitious conceit that it is Gods Law in some cases a day may be voluntarily set apart for holy duties as daies of Thanksgiving and Humiliation now are But yet though the rejecting of the Lords day be the greater fault and I have no uncharitable censures of them that through weakness keep both daies I must conclude it as the truth that We are not obliged to the observation of the Saturday or seventh day as a Sabbath or separated day of holy Worship Arg. 1. That dayes observation which we are not obliged to either by the Law of Nature the Positive Law given to Adam the Positive Law given to Noah the Law of Moses nor the Law of Christ incarnate we are not obliged to by any Law of God as distinct from humane Laws But such is the observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath Ergo we are
Text Though I know some say otherwise to the injury of their own cause 8. How many years together the Churches had been in possession and consequently in the undoubted knowledge of the true established day of holy Worship before a word of the New Testament was Written And therefore that it was not written to be the first enacting of this day or change but for other uses 9. And yet how much evidence of the fact there is in the Scripture it self that really such a day was used for the ordinary Church-assemblies as a peculiar separated day even by the Common order of the Apostles in the Churches as 1 Cor. 16. 1 2. speaks 10. And how impossible it is that all the Churches in the World should from their beginning keep this as the separated day even by the Apostles and from their times if it had not been so ordered by them indeed And whether it be possible that in no age neer the original hereof no Pastor no Christian no Heretick no Enemy would have detected the fraud or common Errour or once have written that this day was not separated or used by the Apostles or Apostolical Churches no nor any one that I know of that denyed not the Resurrection ever to have scrupled or opposed the day 11. Whether they that can reject such Historical evidence as this is do not unwittingly cast away the holy Scriptures what zeal soever they pretend or have for their honour and perfection 12. Whether they that can reject all this evidence and yet can find in the second Commandment the prohibition of all formes of Prayer Sermons Catechismes all modal inventions of men as Images if not Idols are without partiality or do not walk as men by very different measures and partial conceptions I would on my knees intreat some most dear and worthy friends on their knees to ponder these twelve particulars But because by their preterition of the Text Act. 2. 1 2. I perceive they observe not that the Holy Ghost came down on the Lords day Let them consider that the Passeover was on the Sabbath day that year and therefore it must needs be just fifty dayes to that Lords day and it must be the day of Pentecost And it is not a trifle that the first Sermon to 〈◊〉 people was Preached by Peter on that day and â—000 Converted by it and Baptized Dr. Heyliâ—s own words are these Part. 2. p. 13. The first particular passage which did occâ—â—â— in holy Scripturâ— touching the first day of the week is that upon that day the Holy Ghost did first come down on the Apostles and that on the same day St. Peter Preached his first Sermon to the Jews and Baptized such as believed there being added to the Church that day 3000 souls And to prove the day he saith p. 14. The rule being this that on what day soever the second of the Passover did fall on that also fell the great Feast of Pentecost as Scaliger de Emend Temp. l. 2. So that as often as the Passover did fall on the Sabbath as this year it did then Pentecost fell on the Sunday The last part of our Objections are from History and it is said Obj. Qu. Whether the observation of the first day was not brought into this Island by Antichrist about 408 or 409 years agoe Roger Hoveden about an 1202 above 1200 years after Christ mentioneth a Council held in Scotland for the initiation or first bringing in that which he calls the Dominical day see this testimony mentioned by Binius in his Councils and somewhat enlarged by Matth. Paris the old impression fol. 192 193. and the last Edition fol. 200 and 201 And how the King of England and the Nobility would not then receive this alteration I conceive that in the first Centuries the great Controversie relating to this was about translating the keeping the Passover which they now call Easter from the fourteenth day of the first Moon c. under the colour of honouring Christ to the first day of the Week as the Dominical day which the Popes first set themselves with great vehemency to introduce And as the Pope obtained his purpose for one day in a year so by degrees in some places came in one day in a week the first day to be observed and the seventh day by one of the Popes turned from a Festival 〈◊〉 Fast whilest many of the Eastern and some of the Western Churches did still retain withall the observation of the seventh-day Sabbath together with the first day and others of the Churches in the East and West kept only to the seventh day as the Christian Sabbath c. Answ. How much more desirable an Adversary is Heylin by his acquaintance with History 1. Were any of the Authors I before cited either Antichristian or 1200 years after Christ Ignatius if genuine was about an 102. If not as Dalaeus thinks then he was about 300. The Canons called the Apostles and the Constitutions called the Apostles very ancient Justin Martyr wrote his Apol an 150. about 50 years after St. Johns death where his testimony is as plain as can be spoken To which Plinyes who wrote about 107. some seven years after St. Johns death may be joyned that he may be understood of the day Clemens Alexand. about 94 years after St. John an 194. Tertullian who is most express and full and frequent about 198 that is 98 years after St. John Origen about 206 began his Teaching Cyprian about an 250. Athanasius who wrote largely of it about an 330. To what purpose should I mention again Eusebius Greg. Nazianzen Nyssen and all the rest It was but about an 309 that Constantine began his raign who made Laws for the Lords day which other Christian Emperours enlarged But how much earlier were all those Synods which Eusebius mentioned which in the determination of Easter owned the Lords day And that of Nice was but about an 327. The Council of Laodicea but about an 314 or 320. The Council of Eliberis about an 307. Can. 21. saith If any that live in the Cities shall stay from Church three Lords daies let him be so long suspended from the Sacrament till he be sensible of his punishment After this how many Councils and how many Imperial Laws take care of the Lords dayes It is tedious to cite them To these may be added 1. The common agreement that it is founded in the Resurrection and was from that time 2. The early contest for keeping Easter only on that day which you note as being a day by all Christians received 3. The common detestation of Fasting on that day 4. And the universal custome of not kneeling in adoration on that day which all shew that the day was specially observed Athanasius saith de sab Circ Even as at the first it was commanded that the Sabbath should be observed in memory of the finishing of the World so do we celebrate the Lords day as the commemoration
THE Divine Appointment OF THE Lords Day Proved As a separated Day for Holy Worship especially in the Church Assemblies And consequently the Cessation of the Seventh day Sabbath Written for the satisfaction of some Religious Persons who are lately drawn into Error or doubting in both these Points By Richard Baxter Rev. 1. 10. I was in the Spirit on the Loras Day Col. 2. 16 17. Let no 〈◊〉 judge you in Meat or in Driak or in respect of an Holy day or Feast or of the New 〈◊〉 or Sabbaths which are a shadow of things to come but the Body is of Christ. LONDON Printed for Nevil Simmons at the three Crowns near Holborn Conduit 1671. THE PREFACE Reader IF thou think this Treatise both superfluous and Defective when so many larger have better done the work already I shall not at all gainsay the latter nor much the former The reason of my writing it was the necessity and request of some very upright Godly persons who are lately faln into doubt or Errour in point of the Sabbath day conceiving that because the fourth Commandment was Written in Stone it is wholly unchangeable and consequently the seventh day Sabbath in force and that the Lords day is not a Day separated by God to holy Worship I knew that there was enough written on this Subject long agoe But 1. Much of it is in Latine 2. Some Writings which prove the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath do withal treat so loosly of the Lords day as that they require a Confutation in the latter as well as a commendation for the former 3. Some are so large that the persons that I write for will hardly be brought to read them 4. Most go upon those grounds which I take to be less clear and build so much more than I can do on the fourth Commandment and on many passages of the old Testament and plead so much for the old Sabbatical notion and rest that I fear this is the chief occasion of many peoples Errours who when they find themselves in a wood of difficulties and nothing plain and convincing that is pleaded with them do therefore think it safest to stick to the old Jewish Sabbath The friends and acquaintance of some of these persons importuning me to take the plainest and nearest way to satisfie such honest doubters I have here done it according to my judgement not contending against any that go another way to work but thinking my self that this is very clear and satisfactory viz. to prove 1. That Christ did Commission his Apostles to Teach us all things which he commanded and to settle Orders in his Church 2. And that he gave them his spirit to enable them to do all this Infallibly by bringing all his words to their remembrance and by leading them into all truth 3. And that his Apostles by this spirit did de facto separate the Lords day for holy Worship especially in Church-Assemblies and declared the cessation of the Jewish Sabbaths 4. And that as this change had the very same Author as the Holy Scriptures the Holy Ghost in the Apostles so that fact hath the same kind of proof that we have of the Canon and the integrity and uncorruptness of the particular Scripture Books and Texts And that if so much Scripture as mencioneth the keeping of the Lords day expounded by the Concent and Practice of the Universal Church from the dayes of the Apostles all keeping this day as holy without the dissent of any one Sect or single person that I remember to have read of I say if all this History will not fully prove the point of fact that this day was kept in the Apostles times and consequently by their appointment then the same proof will not serve to evince that any text of Scripture is Canonical and uncorrupted nor can we think that any thing in the world that is past can have Historical proof I have been put to say somewhat particularly out of Antiquity for this evidence of the fact because it is that which I lay the greatest stress upon But I have not done it so largely as might be done 1. Because I would not lose the unlearned Reader in a Wood of History nor overwhelm him instead of edifying him 2. Because it is done already in Latine by Dr. Young in his Dies Dominica under the name of Theophilus Loncardiensis which I take to be the moderatest soundest and strongest Treatise on this subject that I have seen Though Mr. Cawdry and Palmer joyntly have done well and at greater length and Mr. Eaton Mr. Shephard Dr. Bound Wallaeus Rivet and my dear friend Mr. George Abbot against Broad have said very much And in their way Dr. White Dr. Heylin Bishop Ironside Mr. Brierwood c. 3. I chose most of the same Citations which Dr. Heylin himself produceth because he being the man that I am most put to defend my self against his confessions are my advantage 4. And if I had been willing I could not have been so full in this as the Subject will bespeak because I have almost eleven years been separated from my Library and long from the neighbourhood of any ones else I much pitty and wonder at those Godly men who are so much for stretching the words of Scripture to a sense that other men cannot find in them as that in the word Graven Images in the second Commandment they can find all set Formes of Prayer all composed studyed Sermons and all things about Worship of mans invention to be Images or Idolatry and yet they cannot find the abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath in the express words of Col. 2. 16. nor the other Texts which I have cited nor can they find the Institution of the Lords day in all the Texts and Evidences produced for it But though Satan may somewhat disturbe our Concord and tempt some mens Charity to remissness by these differences he shall never keep them out of Heaven who worship God through Christ by the Spirit even in spirit and truth Nor shall he I hope ever draw me to think such holy persons as herein differ from me to be worse than my self though I think them in this to be unhappily mistaken much less to approve either of their own separation from others or of other mens condemning them as Hereticks and inflicting severities upon them for these their opinions sake THE CONTENTS CHAP. 1. THE state of the Question with the summary proof of the Divine separation of the Lords Day page 1. CHAP II. That Christ commissioned his Apostles as his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and to deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches p. 5. CHAP. III. Christ promised his Spirit to his Apostles to enable them to do what he had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them at his Churches Guides p. 9.
Institution for holy Worship especially in Church-assemblies CHAP. II. Prop. I. That Christ Commissioned his Apostles or his principal Church-Ministers to teach the Churches all his Doctrine and deliver them all his Commands and Orders and so to settle and guide the first Churches This I prove 1. By their Commission it self 2. By their performance with its proper seal 3. By the Consent of all the Christian world 1. Luke 6. 13. He called to him his Disciples and of them he chose twelve whom also he named Apostles Their first Commission is recited Matth. 10. at large Matth. 28. 18 19 20. All Authority is given me in Heaven and in Earth Go ye therefore and disciple all Nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you And loe I am with you alway even unto the end of the world Amen John 20. 21. Then said Jesus to them again Peace be unto you As the Father hath sent me even so send I you And when he had said this he breathed on them and said Receive ye the Holy Ghost Whosesoever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and whosesoever sins ye retain they are retained Luke 10. 16. Even of the seventy it is said He that heareth you heareth me and he that despiseth you despiseth me and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me And to the twelve Matth. 10. 40. He that receiveth you receiveth me c. Acts 26. 17. Delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles to whom now I send thee to open their eyes 1 Cor. 15. 3. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received c. 1 Cor. 11. 23. For I received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you 1 Cor. 4. 1 2. Let a man so account of us as of the Ministers of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God Gal. 1. 11 12. But I certifie you brethren that the Gospel which was preached of me is not after man For I neither received it of man neither was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ. John 21. 15 16 17. Simon Son of Jonas lovest thou me Feed my Lambs Matth. 16. 19. I will give unto thee the Keyes of the Kingdom of Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever thou shalt loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven John 17. 18. As thou hast sent me into the world so have I also sent them into the world See John 13. 16 20. Acts 1. 24 25. Shew whether of these two thou hast chosen that he may take part of this Ministry and Apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell Gal. 1. 1. Paul an Apostle not of men neither by man but by Jesus Christ and God the Father Acts 1. 2. After that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandment to the Apostles whom he had chosen to whom also he presented himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs being seen of them forty dayes and speaking of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God Acts 2. 42. They continued stedfast in the Apostles doctrine and fellowship c. Eph. 4. 11 12 13 14 15 16. He gave some Apostles some Prophets c. 1 Cor. 12. 28 29. First Apostles secondarily Prophets c. Are all Apostles c. Eph. 2. 20. Being built on the foundation of the Apostles c. 2. Pet. 3. 2. That ye may be mindfull of the words which were spoken before by the holy Prophets and of the Commandments of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour Acts 10. 5. Send men to Joppa and call for Simon c. and be shall tell thee c. They that will not take all this plain evidence of Scripture for a proof of this first Proposition I suppose would not be ever the more moved by it if I should be so needlesly tedious as to stay to fetch Arguments from each Text. 2. The Apostles exercised such a power as the Proposition mentioneth and God sâ—t to it the seal of Miracles Therefore such a Power or Office was given them by Christ. The Consequence is undenyable The Antecedent of this Enthimeme is so plainly expressed in Scripture that I am loth to take up much of my own or the Readers time in proving so known a thing They founded the Churches they delivered them the Doctrine and Commands of Christ they setled the Churches as to Officers Orders and Discipline according to Christs Commands and the Spirits determinations Thus they ordained the new Office of Deacons and Deaconeffes or Widows and they ordained them Elders in every Church or City and they determined of Church Controversies and gave the Church Decrees and delivered the Will of Christ about the Sacrament Church-Assemblies Prophecyings c. Acts 2. 14. 23. Acts 6. 3 4 c. 1 Tim. 3. Titus 1. Acts 15. 1 Cor. 11. 1 Cor. 14 c. 3. That all Christians save Hereticks did acknowledge their power and acquiesce in their Decrees and Conduct being a matter of fact needs no other proof than the common History of former Ages and practice of this Which are so well known that I will not injure the Reader by proving it CHAP. III. Prop. 2. Christ promised his Spirit to his Apostles to enable them to do what be had commissioned them to do by leading them into all truth and bringing his words and deeds to their remembrance and by guiding them as his Churches Guides In the Old Testament it is prophesied and promised Jer. 3. 15. And I will give you Pastors according to mine heart which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding See all the Texts that promise the pouring out of the Spirit Isa. 44. 3. Ezck. 36. 27. 37. 14. 39. 29. Joel 2. 28 29. Which were principally fulfilled on the Apostles Luke 24. 49. And behold I send the promise of my Father upon you But tarry ye in the City of Jerusalem untill ye be endued with power from on high John 15. 26 27. But when the Advocate is come whom I will send unto you from the Father he shall testifie of me and ye also shall bear witness because ye have been with me from the beginning John 16. 7 12 13 14 15. It is expedient for you that I go away for if I go not away the Advocate will not come unto you But if I depart I will send him unto you I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now Hoâ—beit when he the Spirit of truth is come he will guide you into all the truth For he shall not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak And he shall shew you things to come He shall glorifie me for he shall receive of mine and shew it unto you All things that the Father hath are mine Therefore said I
that he shall take of mine and shall shew it unto you John 17. 8. I have given to them the words which thou gavest me and they have received them V. 17 18. 〈◊〉 then through thy truth thy word is truth As thou hast sent me into the world so have I also sent them into the world And for their sakes I 〈◊〉 my self that they also might be sanctified through the truth Matth. 28. 20. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you and loe I am with you alwayes to the end of the world Acts 1. 4. And being assembled together with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem but wait for the promise of the Father which ye have heard of me For John truly baptized with water but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many dayes hence V. 8. But ye shall receive Power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you and ye shall be witnesses uitto me both in Jerusalem and to all Judaea and in Samaria and unto the uttermost parts of the earth By these Texts it is most evident that Christ promiseth the Apostles an extraordinary Spirit or measure of the Spirit so to enable them to deliver his Commands and execute their Commission as that he will own what they do by the guidance thereof and the Churches may rest upon it as the Infallible revelation of the Will of God CHAP. IV. Prop. 3. Christ performed all these promises to his Apostles and gave them his Spirit to enable them for all their commissioned work This is proved both from the fidelity of Christ and from the express assertions of the Scripture He is faithful that hath promised Heb. 10. 23. Titus 1. 2. God that cannot lye hath promised 2 Cor. 1. 18. As God is true Rev. 6. 10. H w long O Lord Holy and True Rev. 19. 11. He was called faithful and true Rom. 3. 4. Let God be true and every man a lyar 1 John 5. 10 He that believeth not God hath made him a lyar John 20. 22. He breathed on them and saith unto them Receive ye the Holy Ghost Acts 2. Containeth the Narrative of the comeing down of the Holy Ghost upon them at large Acts 15. 28. seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us Heb. 2. 4. God also bearing them witness both with signs and wonders and with divers mighty works and distributions of the Holy Ghost according to his own will 1 Pet. 1. 12. The things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the Gospel unto you by the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven Rom. 15. 19 20. Through mighty signs and wonders by the power of the Spirit of God so that from Jerusalem and round about to Illyricum I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ. Read all the Texts in Acts and elsewhere that speak of all the Apostles Miracles and their giving of the Holy Ghost c. And 1 Cor. 7. 40. Acts 4. 8 31. Acts 5. 3. 6. 3. 7. 51 55. 8. 15 17 18 19. 9. 17. 10. 44 45 47. 11. 15 16 24. 13. 2 4 9 52. 16. 6. Rom. 5. 5. 9. 1. 1 Cor. 2. 13. 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Cor. 12. Eph. 4. 7 8 c. 3. 5. But this Proposition is confessed by all Christians CHAP. V. Prop. 4. The Apostles did actually separate and appoint the first day of the Week for holy Worship especially in Church-Assemblies Here the Reader must remember that it is 〈◊〉 matter of fact that is to be proved in the proof of this Proposition and that all till this is clearly and undenyably proved so that the whole Controversie resteth upon the proof of the fact That indeed The Apostles did separate 〈◊〉 set apart this day for ordinary publick Worship And in order to the fuller proof of this I have these 〈◊〉 Propositions to prove Prop. 1. Matter of past fact is to be known to us by History Written Verbal or Practical This is evident in the nature of the thing History is the Narration of facts that are past We speak not of the fact of meer natural agents but of Moral or humane facts It may be known without History what Eclipses there have been of the Sun what changes of the Moon c. But not what in particular Morals have been done by man The necessity of other distinct wayes of knowledge are easily disproved 1. It need not be known by Divine supernatural Revelation Otherwise no men could know what is past but Prophets or inspired persons nor Prophets but in few things For it cannot be proved that God ever revealed to Prophets or inspired persons the general knowledge of things past but only some particulars of special use as the Creation to Moses c. so that if Revelation by Inspiration Voice or Visions were necessary Scripture it self could be understood by none but inspired persons or that had such revelation 2. It is not known by Natural Causes and by arguing from the Natural Cause to the Effects It is no more possible to know all things past this way by knowing the Causes than all things future Therefore it must be ordinarily known by Humane report which we call History or Tradition Prop. 2. Scripture History is not the only certain History much less the only credible Without Scripture History we may be certain that there was in 1666. a great Fire in London and a great plague in 1665. and that there were Wars in England 1642 1643 c. and that there have been Parliaments in England which have made the Statutes now in force and that there have been such Kings of England for many Ages as our Records and Histories mention c. Prop. 3. Scripture History is not the only certain History of the things of the Ages in which it was written or of former Ages much less the only credible History of them We may know by other History certainly that there were such persons as Cyrus Alexander c. That the Macedonians had a large extended Empire that the Romans after by many Victories obtained a spacious Empire that there were such persons as Julius Caesar Augustus Tiberius Nero Cicero Virgil Horace Ovid c. Prop. 4. Scripture History is not the only means appointed by God to help us to the knowledge of Ecclesiastical matters of fact transacted in Scripture times 1. For if Humane History be certain or credible in other cases it is certain or credible in these There being no reason why these things or much of them should not be as capable of a certain delivery to us by humane History as other matters As that there were Christians in those times may be known by what Tacitus Suetonius c. say And the antient Writers oft appeal in many cases to the Heathens own History And no man pretendeth as to the Civil matters mentioned in the Scriptures that no other History of the same is credible or
Original is not known 4. That the Antients joyn not the Lords day with these but take the Lords day for an Apostolical institution written in Scripture though the universal practice of all Churches fullier deliver the certain History of it But the rest they take for unwritten Customs as distinct from Scripture Ordinances As Epiphanius fully sheweth 5. That most Christians are agreed that if these later could be proved Apostolical Institutions for the Church universal it would be our duty to use them though they were not in Scripture So that we reject them only for want of such proof But the proof of the Lords dayes separation being far better by concurrence of Scripture and all antient History it followeth not that we must doubt of that which hath full and certain proof because we must doubt of that which wants it 6. And if it were necessary that they stood or fell together as it is not it were necessary that we did receive those three or four Ceremonies for the sake of the Lords day which â—ath so great evidence rather than that we cast off the Lords day because of these Ceremonies Not only because there is more Good in the Lords dâ—y than there is evil to be any way suspected by a doubter in these Ceremonies but especially because the Evidence for the day is so great that if the said Ceremonies had but the same they were undoubtedly of Divine authority or institution In a word I have shewed you somewhat of the evidence for the Lords day Do you now shew me the like for them and then I will prove that both must be received But if you cannot do not pretend a parity 7. And the same Churches laying by the Customs aforesaid or most of them did shew that they â—â—ok them not indeed for Apostolical institutions as they did the Lords day which they continued to observe not as a Ceremony but as a necessary thing 8. And the ancient Churches did believe that even in the Apostles dayes some things were used as Indifferent which were mutable and were not Laws but temporary customs And some things were necessary setled by Law for perpetuity Of the former kind they thought were the greeting one another with a holy kiss the Womens praying covered with a Veil of which the Apostle saith that it was then and there so decent that the contrary would have been unseemly and the Churches of God had no such custom by which he answereth the contentious yet in other Countreys where custom altereth the signification it may be otherwise Also that a man wear not long hair and that they have a Love Feast on the Lords day which yet Paul seemeth to begin to alter in his rebuke of the abusers of it 1 Cor. 11. And if these ancient Churches thought the Milk and Honey and the white Garment and the Station and Adoration Eastwards to be also such like indifferent mutable customs as it is apparent they did this is nothing at all to invalidate our proof that the Lords day was used and consequently appointed in the dayes of the Apostles Obj. At least it will prove it mutable as they were Answ. No such matter Because the very nature of such Circumstances having no stated necessity or usefulness sheweth them to be mutable But the reason of the Lords dayes use is perpetual And it is founded partly in the Law of nature which telleth us that some stated dayes should be set apart for holy things and partly in the positive part of the fourth Commandment which telleth us that once God determined of one day in seven yea and this upon the ground of his own Cessation of his Creation-work that man on that day might observe a Holy Rest in the worshipping of the great Creator which is a Reason belonging not to the Jews only but to the whole world Yea and that Reason whatever Dr. Heylin say to the contrary from the meer silence of the former History in Genesis doth seem plainly to intimate that this is but the repetition of that Law of the Sabbath which was given to Adam For why should God begin two thousand years after to give men a Sabbath upon the reason of his rest from the Creation and for the Commemoration of it if he had never called man to that Commemoration before And it is certain that the Sabbath was observed at the falling of Manna before the giving of the Law And let any considerate Christian judge between Dr. Heylin and us in this 1. Whether the not falâ—ing of Manna or the Rest of God after the Creation was like to be the Original reason of the Sabbath 2. And whether if it had been the first it would not have been said Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day for on six dayes Manna fell and not on the seventh rather than For in six dayes God created Heaven and Earth c. and rested the seventh day And it is causally added Wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it Nay consider whether this annexed Reason intimate not that the day on this ground being hallowed before therefore it was that God sent not down the Manna on that day and that he prohibited the people from seeking it And he that considereth the brevity of the History in Genesis will think he is very bold that obtrudeth on the world his Negative Argument The Sabbath is not there mentioned therefore it was not then kept And if it was a Positive Law given to Adam on the reason of the Creation Rest it was then such a Positive as must be next to a Law of Nature and was given to all mankind in Adam and Adam must needs be obliged to deliver it down to the world So that though the Mosaical Law even as given in Stone be ceased yea and Adams Positives too formally as such yet this is sure that once God himself determined by a Law that one stated day in seven was the fittest proportion of time to be separated to holy Worship And if it was so once yea to all the world from the Creation it is so still Because there is still the same reason for it And we are bound to judge Gods determination of the proportion to be wiser than any that we can make And so by parity of Reason consequentially even those abrogated Laws do thus far bind us still not so far as abrogated but because the record and reason of them is still a signification of the due proportion of time and consequently of our duty Now the Lords day supposing one weekly day to be due and being but that day determined of and this upon the Reason of the Resurrection and for the Commemoration of our Redemption and that by such inspired and authorized persons it followeth clearly that this is no such mutable ceremony as a Love Feast or the Kiss of Love or the Veil or the washing of feet or the anointing of the sick which were mostly occasionall actions and
customs taken up upon reasons proper to those times and places Obj. But by the reason aforesaid you will prove the continuance of the seventh day Sabbath as grounded on the Creation rest Answ. This is anom to be answered in due place I only prove that it continued till a successive dispensation and Gods own change did put an end to it but no longer Obj. But to commemorate the Creation and praise the Creator is a Moral work and therefore ceaseth not Answ. True but that it be done on the seventh day is that which ceaseth For the same work is transferred to the Lords day and the Creator and Redeemer to be honoured together in our Commemoration For the Son is the only way to the Father who hath restored us to Peace with our Creator And as no man cometh to the Father but by the Son and as we must not now worship God as a Creator and Father never offended but as a Creator and Father reconciled by Christ so is it the appointment of Christ by the Holy Ghost that we commemorate the work of Creation now as repaired and restored by the work of Redemption on the Lords day which is now separated to these works That the Sabbath was appointed to Adam Wallaeus on the fourth Commandment cap. 3. and Rivet dissert de sab c. 1. have most copiously proved And Clem. Alex. Strom. l. 5. out of Homer Hesiod Callimachus and others proveth that the Heathens knew of it We may therefore summ up the prerogatives of the Lords day as Leo did Ep. 81. c. 1. On this day the world began on this day by Christs Resurrection Death did receive Death and Life its beginning on this day the Apostles take the trumpet of the Gospel to be preached to all Nations on this day the Holy Ghost came from the Lord to the Apostles c. See more in Athanas. de Sab. Circ August Serm. 154. de Tempore Therefore saith Isychius in Levit. l. 2. c. 9. The Church setteth apart the Lords day for holy Assemblies And in the times of Heathenish persecution when men were asked Whether they were Christians and kept the Lords dayes they answered that they were and kept the Lords day which Christians must not omit as you may see Act. Martyâ— apud Baron an 303. n. 37 38 39. They would die rather than not keep the holy assemblies and the Lords dayes For saith Ignatius After the Sabbath every lover of Christ celebrateth the Lordâ— day 〈◊〉 to or by the Lords resurrection the Queen and chief of 〈◊〉 dâ—yes as is afore cited For saith Augustine The Lords Resurrection hath promised us an eternal Day and consecrated to us the Lords day which is called the Lords and properly belongeth to the Lord Serm. 15. de Verb. Apost And saith Hilary Prâ—leg in Psalm Though the name and observance of a Sabbath was placed to the seventh day yet is it the eighth day which is also the first on which we rejoyce with the perfect festivity of the Sabbath Of the fâ—â—l keeping of the whole day and of the several Exercises in which it was spent and of the more numerous testimonies of Antiquity hereupon Dr. Yâ—ung in his Dies Dominica hath said so much with so much evidence and judgement 〈◊〉 I purposely omit abundance of such Testimonies because I will not do that which he hath already done The Learned Reader may there find unanswerable proof of the matter of fact that the Lords day was kept in the Apostles dayes and ever since as by their appointment And for the unlearned Reader I fear lest I have too much interrupted him with Citations already I only tell him in the Conclusion that If Scripture Hiâ—tory interpreted and seconded by fullest practice and History of all the Churches of Christ and by the consent of Heathens and Heretickâ— and not contradicted by any Sect in the world be to be believed then we must say that the Lords day was commonly kept by the Christians in and from the Apostles times Prop. 11. This evidence of the Churches universal constant usage is a full and sufficient proof of the matter of fact that it was a day set apart by the Apostles for holy Worship especially in the publick Church-assemblies 1. It is a full proof that such Assemblies were held on that day above others as a separated day For if it was the usage in Anno 100. in which the Apostle John dyed it must needs be the usage in the year 99. in which he wrote his Revelations where he calleth it the Lords day For all the Churches could not silently agree on a sudden to take up a new day without debate and publick notice which could not be concealed And if it was the universal usage in the dayes of Ignatius or Justin Martyr it was so also in the dayes of St. John and so before For the Churches were then so far dispersed over the world that it would have taken up much time to have had Councils and meetings or any other means for agreement on such things And it is utterly improbable that there would have been no dissenters For 1. Did no Christians in the world so neer to the Apostles daies make any scruple of superstition or of such an addition to Divine institutions 2. Was there no Countrey nor no persons whose interest would not better suit with another day or an uncertain day or at least their opinions when we find it now so hard a matter to bring men in one Countrey to be all of one opinion 3. And there was then no Magistrate to fâ—rce them to such an Union And therefore it mast be voluntary 4. And they had in the second age such Pastors as the Apostles themselves had ordained and as had conversed with them and been trained up by them and knew their mind and cannot soberly be thought likely to consent all on a sudden to such a new institution without and contrary to the Apostles sense and practice 5. Yea they had yet Ministers that had that extraordinary spirit which was given by the laying on of the Apostles hands For if the aged Apostles ordained young men it is to be supposed that most of those young men such as Timothy overlived them 6. Yea and the ordinary Christians in those times had those extraordinary gifts by the laying on of the Apostles hands as appeareth evidently in the case of Samaria Act. 8. and of the Corinthians 1 Cor. 12. 14. and of the Galathians Gal. 3. 1 2 3. And it is not to be suspected that all these inspired Ministers and people would consent to a superstitious innovation without and against the Apostles minds 2. Therefore this history is a full proof that these things were done by the consent and appointment of the Apostles For 1. As is said the inspired persons and Churches could not so suddenly be brought to forsake them universally in such a case 2. The Churches had all so high an esteem of the Apostles
Certainty from Most certainly abundance of testimonies might be produced to prove that they came together early in the Morning and stayed till Evening if not till within Night The former Pliny and many others witness And the later many accusations of the Heathens that censured them for night-crimes at their meetings And all that report it almost tell us of the Sacrament administred and Tertullian and others of their feasting together their Love Feasts as a Supper before they parted Now let but the time be measured by the work By that time the Scriptures of the Old Testament and New were read and all the prayers then made and all the Preaching and Exhortations and then all the Prayers and Praises at the Celebration of the Lords Supper especially if they were half as long as the Liturgies ascribed to Basil Chrysostom and the rest in the Biblioth Patrum and by that time the Sacrament it self was administred with all the action and singing of Psalms and all the Oblations and Collections made and besides this all the Church Discipline on particular persons exercised where Questions and Answers and Proofs must take up a great deal of time sure one day would be at an end or very near it And after when the Love Feasts were left off and the Church met twice and made an intermission they did as we do now And the very Custom of Preaching all the Morning to the Audientes and Catechumens till almost Noon when they were dismist with a Missa est and spending the rest of the day in Teaching the Church and Celebrating the Sacrament with all the larger Eucharistical acts do fully shew how the day was spent Which I would quickly prove by particular Testimonies but that I am separated from my Library and Dr. Young hath fully done it to my hand The very Context of these testimonies with what Albaspinaeus hath of their Catechizing and Church order will soon satisfie the impartial searcher As for what he saith out of Justin of returning to their labours I can find no such word in him nor do I believe there is any such to be found unless of returning to their six dayes weekly labour when the Religious work was ended with the day And I imagine the Reader will find no more if so much 9. The next proof is universal even the consent of all the Christian Churches without one contradicting Vote that ever I read of that the Lords dayes worship was to be performed standing and that it was not allowed them to pray or worship kneeling upon any Lords day in the year or any week day between Easter and Whitsontide And the difficulty of these stations is expressed see Albaspinaeus of it which sheweth that it was for a long time Whatever they did in Hearing its like they sate for Justin saith We rise to pray but it is certain they stood in worshipping acts as prayer and praise This Justin Martyr hath before mentioned Tertullian hath it expresly and Heylin himself citeth him de Coron Mil. Basil l. de Spir. S. c. 27. Hieron advers Luciferian August Epist. 118. Hilar. Praef. in Psal. Ambros. Serm. 62. To which he may add Epiphanius and divers Councils especially Nic. 1. Trul. of which after I once pleaded this ancient custom with them that would have all excluded from the Sacrament that kneel not to prove that kneeling at the Sacrament on the Lords dayes could not be in the Church of many hundred years after the Apostles when the universal Church condemned kneeling on all Lords dayes worship And Dr. Heylin himself saith What time this custom was laid by I can hardly say but sure I am it was not laid aside in a long time after not till the time of Pope Alexander the third who lived about the year 1160. c. Now from all this it is most evident that the Lords day was then observed 10. In this place though by anticipation I add the two General Councils now named The first great General Council at Nice Can. 20. which reneweth and confirmeth this antient custom of not kneeling in prayer on the Lords dayes that there might be an uniformity kept in the Churches And the Canoâ— Conâ—â—â— Trul. have the same again which proveth what we seek the matter of fact of the dayes general observation 11. The next is Origen who is not denyed to witness to the matter of fact but Heylin thinks he was against the Right of it But his mistake is the same as about Clemens Alex. Origen did but desire that other dayes might be kept also as profitably as they could as our Lecture dayes are 12. Cyprian is the next whose testimonies for matter of fact are full and Heylin hath nothing to say against him but that it is his private opinion that the Lords day was prefigured in the eighth day destined to Circumcision Which is nothing at all to our business in hand 13. And he himself cites Pope Fabians Decretal Anno 237. a testimony therefore that he is not to refuse for every man and woman on the Lords dayes to bring a quantity of bread and wine to be first offered on the Altar and then distributed in the Sacrament The Canon of Clem. before mentioned I now pretermit But saith Dr. Heylin 1. All days between Easter and Whitsunday had adoration by genuflection also prohibited on them 2. And the Church had other Festivals also Answ. 1. The Reason of Station was to signifie Christs Resurrection and ours Therefore it continued for these dayes But that was for the short occasional meetings of those dayes which he himself will not say were separated to worship 2. And the other Festivals of the Church make nothing against us For 1. Some of them as Easter and Whitsunday were but the same Lords day 2. And some of them were but Anniversary and not weekly Holy dayes as the Nativity c. 3. And he confesseth even these were brought in long after the Apostles dayes and therefore can lay no claim to Apostolical institution Pag. 62. he himself saith that The Feast of Christs Nativity was ordained or instituted in the second Century and that of his Incarnation in the third And besides Easter and Whitsunday which are the Lords day Christmas is all that he nameth out of Beda so long after as the Majora Solennia The Eves were but hours for preparation 14. To these though in the fourth Century I may add Epiphanius who recordeth the Station and Adoration to the East on the Lords dayes as those Traditions received by the Universal Church And here I would have it specially noted that when Tertullian Epiphanius and others note standing on the Lords dayes to be an unwritten Tradition received by the whole Church they do not say the same of the Lords day it self though the Antients oft say that we received it from the Apostles Now by this it is plain that they took the Lords day to be of Apostolick Institution past all question
and the unwritten Vniversal Traditions to be somewhat lower which there was no Scripture for at all Among which the white Garment and the Milk and Honey to the Baptized and the Adoration toward the East are numbred For he that is appointed to worship on the Lords dayes standing or toward the East is supposed to know that on that day he is to worship If the Mode on that day be of Universal Tradition as a Ceremony the day is supposed to be somewhat more than of unwritten Tradition 15. I add here also though in the fourth Century because it looks back to the Institution the words of Athanasius cited by Heylin himself Homil. de Semente though Nannius question it That our Lord transferred the Sabbath to the Lords day But saith Dr. Heylin This must be understood not as if done by his Commandment but on his occasion the Resurrection of our Lord on that day being the principal Motive which did influence his Church to make choice thereof for the Assemblies For otherwise it would cross what formerly had been said by Athanasius in his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Answ. It expresseth the common judgement of the Church that Christ himself made the Change by these degrees 1. Fundamentally and as an Exemplar by his own Resurrection on that day giving the first cause of it as the Creation-rest did of the seventh day 2. Secretly commanding it to his Apostles 3. Commissioning them to promulgate all his Commands 4. Sending down the Spirit on that very day 5. And by that Spirit determining them by promulgation to determine publickly of the day and settle all the Churches in long possession of it before their death That which is thus done may well be said to be done by Christ 2. And what shew of Contradiction hath his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to this It was commanded at first that the Sabbath day should be observed in memory of the accomplishment of the World so do we celebrate the Lords day as a Memorial of the beginning of a new Creation Had not he a Creating head here that out of these words could gather that we celebrate the Lords day without a command Voluntarily One would think so should signifie the contrary But ib. pag. 8. he citeth Socrates for the same saying that The designe of the Apostles was not to busie themselves in prescribing festival daies but to instruct the people in the wayes of Godliness Answ. Socrates plainly rebuketh the busie Ceremonious arrogancy of after Ages for making new holy dayes and doth not at all mean the Lords day but saith that to make festivals that is other and more as since they did was none of the Apostles business Nor is this any thing at all to the matter of fact which none denyed 16. I will add that as another Testimony which p. 9. he citeth against it The Council at Paris An. 829. c. 50. which as he speaketh ascribeth the keeping of the Lords day to Apostolical Tradition confirmed by the Authority of the Church The words are ut creditur Apostolorum traditione immo Ecclesiae authoritate descendu c. Now I have proved that if the Apostles did it they did it by the Holy Ghost and by Authority from Christ But he citeth p. 7 8. the words of Athanasius Maximus Taurinensis and Augustine saying that We honour the Lords day for the Resurrection and because Christ rose and Aug. The Lords day was declared to Christians by the Resurrection of our Lord and from that or from him rather began to have its festivity From whence he gathereth that it was only done by the authority of the Church and not by any precept of our Saviour Answ. As if Christs Resurrection could not be the fundamental occasion and yet Christs Law the obliging cause Would any else have thus argued The Jews observed the seventh day Sabbath because the Creator rested the seventh day Therefore they had no command from God for it Woe to the Churches that have such expositors of Gods commands Or as if Christ who both Commissioned and Inspired the Apostles by the Holy Ghost to teach all his commands and settle Church Orders were not thus the chief Author of what they did by his Commission and Spirit What Church can shew the like Commission or the like Miraculous and Infallible Spirit as they had See further August de Civitat Dei l. 22. c. 30. Serm. 15. de Verb. Apostol But saith he Christ and two of his Disciples travelled on the day of his Resurrection from Jerusalem to Emaus seven miles and back again which they would not have done if it had been a Sabbath Answ. 1. They would not have done it if it had been a Jewish Sabbath of Ceremonial Rest But those that you count too precise will go as far now in Case of need to hear a Sermon And remember that they spent the time in Christs preaching and their Hearing and Conferring after of it 2. But we grant that though the Foundation was laid by Christs Resurrection yet it was not a Law fully promulgate to and understood by the Apostles till the Coming down of the Holy Ghost nor many greater matters neither who was promised and given to teach them all things c. And it is worth the noting how Heylin beginneth his Chap. 3. l. 2. The Lords day taken up by the common consent of the Church not instituted or established by any Text of Scripture or Edict of Emperour or Decree of Council save that some few Councils did reflect upon it In that which follows we shall find both Emperours and Councils very frequent in ordering things about this day and the Service of it Answ. Note Reader What could possibly besides Christ and the Holy Ghost in the Apostles be the Instituter of a day which neither Emperour nor Council instituted and yet was received by the common consent of all Churches in the World even from and in the Apostles dayes Yea as this man confesseth by their Approbation and Authority But hence forward in the fourth Century I am prevented from bringing in my most numerous witnesses by Heylins Confession that now Emperours Councils and all were for it But yet let the Reader remember 1. How few and small Records be left of the second Century and not many of the third 2. And that Historical copious Testimonies of the fourth Century that is Emperours Councils and the most pious and learned Fathers attesting that the Universal Church received it from the Apostles is not vain or a small Evidence when as the fourth Century began but 200 years after St. Johns death or within less than a year And that the first Christian Emperour finding all Christians unanimous in the possession of the day should make a Law as our Kings do for the due observing of it And that the first General Council should establish uniformity in the very Gesture of Worship on that day are strong Confirmations of the matter of fact that the
the Reasons of them 1. A Law of Clâ—tharius King of France forbidding servile labours on the Lords day Because the Law forbids it and the holy Scripture wholly contradicteth it 2. A Constitution of the Emperour Leo Philosophus to the same purpose Secundum quod Spiritui sancto ab ipsoque institutis Apostolis placuit As it pleased the Holy Ghost and the Apostles instructed by him You see that then Christian Princes judged the Lords day to be of Divine Institution Yea to these he addeth two more Princes of the same mind confessing that Leo was himself a Scholar and Charles the Great had as Learned men about him as the times then bred and yet were thus perswaded of the day yea and that many Miracles were pretended in confirmation of it yet he affirmeth that the Church and the most learned men in it were of another mind Let us hear his proofs 1. Saith he Isidore a Bishop of Sevil makes it an Apostolical Sanction only no Divine Commandment a day designed by the Apostles for Religious Exercises in honour of our Saviours resurrection and it was called the Lords day therefore to this end and purpose that resting in the same from all earthly acts and the temptations of the world we might intend Gods holy Worship giving this day due honour for the hope of the resurrection which we have therein The same verbatim is repeated by Beds l. de Offic. and by Raban Maurus l. de inst Chr. l. 2. c. 24. and by Alcuinus de Die Offic. c. 24. which plainly shews that all these took it only for an Apostolical usage c. Answ. Reader is not here a strange kind of proof This is but just the same that we assert and I am proving save that he most grosly puts an Apostolical usage and sanction sanxerunt as distinct from and exclusive of a Command which I have fully proved to be Christs own Act and Law to us by vertue of 1. Their Commission 2. And the infallible Spirit given them And having brought the History to so fair an account by our chief Adversaries own Citations and confessions I will not tire my self and the Reader with any more but only wish every Christian to consider whether they that thus distinguish between Apostolical Sanctions and Divine Institutions as this man doth do not teach men to deny all the holy Scriptures of the New Testament as being but Apostolical writings and go far to deny or subvert Christianity it self by denying the Divine Authority of these Commissioned Inspired men who are foundations of the Church and sealed their Doctrine by Miracles and from whom it is that our Christian Faith and Laws and Church constitutions which are Universal and Divine are received I only remember you of Pliny a Heathens testimony of the Christians practice stato die No man can question Pliny on the account of Partiality And therefore though a Heathen his Historical testimony as joyned with all the Christian Church History hath its credibility He telleth Trajan that it was the use of Christians on a stated day before it was light to meet together to sing a Hymn to Christ as to God secum invicem among themselves by turns and to bind themselves by a Sacrament not to do any wickedness but that they commit not Thefts Robberies Adulteries that they break not their word or trust that they deny not the pledge or pawn which being ended they used to depart and to come again together to take meat but promiscuous and harmless Epist. 97. p. 306 307. Where note 1. That by a stated day he can mean no other than the Lords day as the consent of all other History will prove 2. That this is much like the testimonies of Justin and Tertullian and supposing what they say of the use of Reading the Scripture and Instructing the Church it sheweth that their chief work on that day was the Praises of God for our Redemption by Christ and the celebration of the Lords Supper and the Disciplinary exercises of Covenanters thereto belonging 3. That they had at that time where Pliny was two meetings that day that is they went home and came again to their Feast of Love in the Evening Which no doubt was varied as several times and places and occasions required sometimes departing and coming again and sometimes staying together all day 4. That this Epistle of Pliny was written in Trajans dayes and it is supposed in his second year And Trajan was Emperour the year that St. John the Apostle died if not a year before so that it is the Churches custom in the end of the Apostles dayes which Pliny here writeth of 5. That he had the fullest testimony of what he wrote it being the consent of the Christians whom he as Judge examined even of the timorous that denyed their Religion as well as of the rest And many of them upon his prohibition forbore these meetings 6. And the number of them he telleth Trajan in City and Countrey was great of persons of all degrees and ranks So that when 1. Christian History 2. And Heathen acquaint us with the matter of fact that the day was kept in the Apostles time 3. Yea when no Hereticks or Sects of Christians are found contradicting it but the Churches then and after universally practised it without any controversie what fuller historical evidence can there be And to say that 1. The Apostles would not have reproved this if it had not been their own doing 2. Or that it could be done and they not know it 3. And that all Christians who acknowledged their authority would have consented in such a practice superstitiously before their faces and against their wills and no testimony be left us of one faithful Church or Christian that contradicted it and stuck to the Apostolical authority even where the Churches received their writings and publickly read them all this is such as is not by sober Christians to be believed But the great Objection will be That other things also were then taken for Apostolical Traditions and were customs of the universal Church as well as this which things we now renounce as superstitious Answ. Though I answered this briefly before I now give you this fuller answer I. It is but few things that come under this charge viz. the Unction white Garment with the taste of Milk and Honey at Baptism Adoration towards the East and that standing and not kneeling on the Lords dayes and the Anniversary Observation of Easter and Whitsuntide And the last is but the keeping of one or two Lords dayes in the year with some note of distinction from the rest so far as there was any agreement in it 2. That these are not usually by the Antients called Apostolical Traditions but Customs of the Vniversal Church 3. That when they are called Traditions from the Apostles it is not with any assertion that the Apostles instituted them but that they are supposed to be from their times because their