upon the first day of the week to abolish the true Sabbath to transpose it to another day without an express Commandment either of Christ or of his Apostles And if that Reason were good might we not say because he dyed on such a day we ought also to transfer the Sabbath unto it And to the third Objection it is true saith he we read in our Translation that the Apostles met on the first day of the week but mark ye that it was Concerning the Collection for the Saints as ye may read in the 16th Chapter of the first to the Corinthians And though it were also to Preach and break Bread as it appears in the Acts yet saith he if this Reason were sufficient for the changing of the Sabbath into the first day of the week this should be sufficient also for the continuing of it in the seventh since we read that the Apostles met oftentimes together on the Sabbath to pray preach and baptize And Christ himself and his Apostles were strict Sabbath-keepers they even after his death And Christ seems to favour this Opinion when in the 24th Chapter of St. Matthew speaking not only concerning the Destruction of Hierusalem but also concerning the last day of Judgment he saith Pray ye that your flight be not in the Winter neither on the Sabbath day 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From which words this Argument is deduced In Christ's time the Sabbath was on the seventh day therefore when he commanded us to pray that at the day of Judgment our flight should not be on the Sabbath day he commanded us to pray that it should not come on the seventh day and since this Commandment of Christ is still the same at that time in reference to the last day of Judgment the same day ought to continue still otherwise his Commandments and Threatnings are vain And it signifieth nothing to say that in the words of the fourth Commandment there is something moral as the Sanctification of days without any determination which cannot be abolished and something Ceremonial as the determination of a day which may be changed For if the determination of the seventh day be meerly Ceremonial and consequently may be changed likewise the Determination of the first day of the week is meerly Ceremonial and therefore may be changed also Wherefore the Reason why this is kept rather than another is meer Policy and to avoid Confusion which we could not prevent if there were not a day determined But if that Reason be valid is it not better to take the day assigned by God whereon he rested which he sanctified and blessed above all others upon which he declares he will bless them that keep it holy as he will curse and punish the Transgressors of it which was kept by Jesus Christ and his Apostles which God commanded usin express words and which Christ doth now command for as I have made it appear this Ordinance Pray ye that your flight be not in the winter neither on the Sabbath stands at this very day Is it not better I say to take that day than that whereof we find no Commandment in the holy Scripture Again It signifieth nothing to say it is written in the 2d Chapter to the Colossians Let no man judge you in meat or in drink or in respect of an holy day or of the new Moon or of the Sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ for in this place the word Sabbaths instead of shewing that the seventh day could be changed into the first of the week serves only to make it appear we ought to have no determined day Therefore since it is certain and granted by all men that though we are to sanctifie all the days of our life that is to say to live holily yet we ought particularly to set aside one day of the week whereon we ought to rest and keep holy to God Almighty These words then of St. Paul to the Colossians are not to be understood concerning the Sabbath assigned in the 20th Chapter of Exodus but concerning other Sabbaths which besides this the Jews did keep It is then evident if we lay down all prejudices that the said Objections are not strong enough to contradict what is before asserted viz. that men neither can nor ought to change what is established and determined by God as it is the consent of all Divines and holy Scriptures and notwithstanding all that I have just now alledged the Church of England changing the seventh unto the first day of the week to keep it holy it is manifest she breaks the fourth Commandment of the Decalogue and consequently is not the holy Catholick Church Answ All the words contained in the fourth Commandment do not bind equally some containing a Commandment as Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day and some including a Permission as Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work as likewise these of St. Paul to the Corinthians Whatsoever is sold in the shambles that eat asking no Question for Conscience sake In these sorts of Expressions God doth not command but gives only permission and leave to eat of whatsoever is sold in the Shambles As well as to eat of the Fruit of the Trees of the Garden excepting the Tree of Life which was forbidden our first Parents It is then clear that these words Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work include but a Permission for I think no body will say that it is not lawful to a man on any other day of the week to abstain from gross and slavish works to the end he might meditate God's Works and Perfections and apply himself unto Exercises of Charity and Piety Second Answer All that are contained in the Decalogue are not ex Jure naturali nor belong to the Moral Law and consequently are not Immutable for the Preface Hear Israel I am the Lord thy God who brought thee out of the Land of Aegypt out of the House of bondage sheweth evidently that God speaks unto Israel according to the Flesh as they were a Type of Israel according to the Spirit and puts them in mind of his renowned favours towards them in delivering them out of the bondage of Aegypt as a Type of our spiritual Redemption and slavery under the Devil Sin and Death Now if either we consider the Type or the thing signified thereby neither of them are ex Jure naturali or belong to the Moral Law which is the same and Immutable at all times and among all Nations but are grounded upon the good pleasure of God who by his special goodness towards that People was pleased so to deal with them Third Answer These words of the fourth Commandment In it thou shalt not do any work thou nor thy Son nor thy Daughter thy man-Servant nor thy maid-Servant nor thy Cattel nor the Stranger which is within thy Gates could not have relation to
Children were circumcised now since Baptism is in the place of Circumcision weare to baptize young Children since they were circumcised and seeing Circumcision which was a Ceremony and divine Institution did neither require Doctrine nor Repentance in young Children though it were necessary in adult Persons as it appears in Abraham and in all others who turned Jews even so Baptism which is a Ceremony and a divine Institution doth neither require Faith nor Repentance in young Children although it doth in adult Persons Which is confirmed by the words of St. Matthew where it is said that They brought unto Jesus Christ little Children that he should put his hands on them and pray and that the Disciples rebuking them Jesus said suffer little Children and forbid them not to come unto me for of such is the Kingdom of God From whence I argue thus To whom do belong the things signified unto them belong the Signs also as the Crown which is the Sign and Mark of Royalty belongs to him to whom the Kingdom belongs but unto little Children belongs the Kingdom of God as it is written in St. Matthew 19. 13. Therefore unto them belongs Baptism which is the Sign of the entring into that Kingdom For except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Therefore young Children born with original sin as it appears in several places of the holy Scripture but especially by these words of St. Paul to the Romans By the Offencof one Ju dgment came upon all men to Condemnation are not to be deprived of Baptism lest they should not enter into the Kingdom of Heaven which is the Reason that St. Cyprian and Austin have so often declared the Baptism of little Children to be necessary Moreover if they brought unto Jesus Christ young Children and he put his hands on them and prayed for them why shall they not bring unto him little Children in the Church Why shall not the Minister pray for them And why shall he not confer unto them the Ceremony or the Institution of Baptism as Jesus Christ gave unto little Children the Ceremony or Institution of Imposition of hands I ask this Question whether the Ceremony of Imposition of hands was in vain or whether they received by it some particular Grace from Christ Ye will not say that it was in vain because then Jesus Christ in whom were hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledg would not have used it if they received by it some special Grace notwithstanding their want of Repentance and Faith which they were not then capable of why shall not young Children now receive the Ceremony of Baptism and thereby all Graces annexed unto it though they be not capable of Faith and Repentance When a Father or Mother were baptized all those of the Houshold were baptized also as it appears in the Acts where it is said that Lydia a seller of Purple of the City of Thyatira was baptized and her Houshold and that the Keeper of the Prison was baptized he and all his And in the first Chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians St. Paul saith that he hath baptized the Houshold of Stephanus but it is probable though not convincing that in so many Families there were Children And since our Fathers and their Children were baptized in the Cloud and in the Sea and they being the Figures of our Baptism as is evident by St. Paul that that which is by them figured may be accomplished the Children now ought to be baptized in the Baptism of Jesus Christ Object It is forbidden in several places of the holy Scriptures to Swear or to take an Oath Ye have heard that it hath been said to them of old time thou shalt not forswear thy self but I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. But let your Communication be yea yea and nay nay for whatsoever is more than these cometh o evil and in the Epistle of St. James Above all things my Brethren swear not lest ye fall into Condemnation But the Church of England is not against swearing or taking an Oath yea she uses and maintains it lawful therefore she believes and practises an Article forbidden in the holy Scripture therefore she is not the holy Catholick Church Before I give an Answer it is necessary to know that an Oath is an Invocation to God or an Appeal to him as a Witness of the Truth of what we say so that in case that that we swear be not true we if not expresly at least virtually invoke God as a Judge and Avenger There are two sorts of Oaths one Assertory and the other Promissory an assertory Oath is when we promise by Oath something that is Future and if our promise be made directly and immediately to God 't is called a Vow if to men an Oath That being supposed I Answer That an Oath is not only lawful but also is sometimes necessary as when mens Estates are concern'd and no Evidence can be had to decide and clear the matter but what is assured by Oath Then it is necessary to make an end of and decide the Controversie as it appears by these words of St. Paul An Oath for Confirmations is to them an end of strife And its lawfulness appears by several Texts of the holy Scripture wherein God who is truth it self and cannot lie and consequently might be believed of men upon his bare word and without necessity of making an Oath yet to confirm his promises is willing to take it For when God made the Promise to Abraham because he could not swear by a greater he sware by himself And verse 17. God willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his Counsel confirmed it by an Oath Therefore if God himself swears and takes an Oath why shall it not be lawful to men to take an Oath in dubious matters and of great Concern and when no Evidence can be had to decide and clear them Was not Mephibosheth spared because of the Lord's Oath that was between them between David and Jonathan the Son of Saul Did not the Law of Moses in many cases require them Doth not St. Paul use them oftentimes as when he saith God is my witness I call God for a Record upon my Soul Before God I lie not Which Oaths St. Paul who was to teach the Precepts of Christ to others should not have used if they had been unlawful and forbidden in the holy Scriptures And Christ himself as ye may read Mat. 26. 63 64. did not refuse it when the High-Priest asked him to answer upon his Oath whether he was the Son of God I adjure thee saith the High-Priest by the living God that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ the Son of God and Jesus said unto him thou hast said Therefore seeing Jesus Christ himself doth answer when he is
Church I answer That they are deceived for when the Fathers said that the Catholick Church did confist in such and such a thing as for Example in the belief of the Trinity they did not intend to exclude the belief of the other points of Faith nor the practise of the Commandments enjoyned us in the holy Scripture And Jesus Christ who saith to the young man that if he will enter into Life he must keep the Commandments here mentioned pronounces Wo unto the Authors of Heresies as unto all Scribes Pharisees and Hypocrites will have us to eat his Body and to drink his Blood Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood ye have no Life in you bids us to be baptized Except a man be born of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Besides practice he desires belief He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved Wherefore it is not enough to say I thought I was a Member of the Catholick Church because I thought it did consist in believing and practising such and such things only our ignorance is not sufficient to excuse us before God we are bound to inquire after Truth and the true Worship of God A wilful and affected ignorance is a double Crime and we must not believe because we think we do well and are Members of the Catholick Church that this is sufficient to excuse us this is a mistake otherwise the Jews should not have been guilty when they crucified Jesus Christ because they did it ignorantly and thought they acted according to their Law For had they known it they would not have crucified the Lord of Glory We could not say that Paul was guilty when breathing out threatnings and slaughter against the Disciples of the Lord he went unto the High-Priest desiring Letters from him to Damascus to the Synagogues that if he found any Christians whether they were men or women he might bring them bound to Hierusalem Nor when he made havock of the Church entring into every House and haling men and women committing them to Prison Nor when he was consenting unto the death of Stephen and kept the Cloaths of the Witnesses who stoned him though Austin speaks thus of him Vt enim esset in omnium lapidantium manibus ipse omnium vestimenta servabat magis saeviens omnes adjuvando quà m suis manibus lapidando For he thought he did well transported by a Zeal which he had for his Law Neither could we now blame the Papists when they act so horrid and cruel Tragedies against those that they call Hereticks for as I suppose they think they do a Sacrifice well-pleasing unto God If any ignorance can excuse a man it is that which is called Invincible as that of young Children and mad People Therefore when we live in a Kingdom wherein Religion there practised is not contrary to the holy Scripture we are bound to conform unto it I know that We had rather obey God than men but it is when their Commandments are contrary to the Commandments of God otherwise we are obliged to obey the Princes and Magistrates which we are subject to put them in mind to obey Principalities and Powers to obey Magistrates Tit. 3. 1. Obey them that have the Rule over you and submit your selves Heb. 13. 17. Submit your selves to every Ordinance of men for the Lord's sake whether it be to the King as Supreme or unto Governors as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evil doers and for the praise of them that do well 1 Pet. 2. 13. Let every Soul be subject unto the higher Powers for there is no Power but of God The Powers that be are ordained of God whosoever therefore resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation Rom. 13. 1 2. Wherefore the holy Powers enjoyning usto conform to the Church of England which as I have made it appear teaches or practises nothing contrary to the holy Scripture we are obliged to obey them Neither do I see how those that are convinced of what I have here written and still refuse to obey can excuse themselves from being Schismaticks and from being out of hope of Salvation He shall not have God for his Father who will not have the Church for his Mother Whosoever resisteth the Power resisteth the Ordinance of God and they that resist shall receive to themselves Damnation O Ecclesia Romana aut quaecumque sis alia quid insultas quid exsufflas quid etiam ad tempus multa usurpas adversus Ecclesiam Anglicanam Licet haec doleat non te magna metuit sponsa Christi sancta Catholica Ecclesia cum enim respexerit ille sponsus ejicieris tu ut ancilla cum filiis tuis quoniam non erunt haeredes filii ancillae cum filiis liberae O Church of Rome or whatsoever other Church thou art Why dost thou boast Why art thou puffed up Why also dost thou usurp upon the Church of England Though she be sorrowful yet the great spouse of Christ the holy Catholick Church doth not fear thee for when the Bridegroom looks upon her then thou shalt be cast out as the Bond-woman with thy Children because the Children of the Bond-woman shall not be heirs with the Sons of the Free woman Although I have made appear that the Church of England is the holy Catholick Church and that all those who knowing her to be such and still refuse to conform are Schismaticks out of hope of Salvation and shall not be heirs with the Sons of the free-woman but cast out as the bond-woman with her Children yet I am not of that Opinion that they ought to be persecuted this Doctrine of Persecution being contrary to the Law of Nature and to the Doctrine of our Saviour Jesus Christ As ye would that all men should do unto you so do you unto them We would not be persecuted for our Religion therefore we must not persecute others But the Reader will object we have a Law and by our Law they ought to be persecuted I Answer if that were a sufficient Reason to warrant Persecution we could not blame the Jews when they killed the Prophets and stoned them and crucified Jesus Christ who is Heir and Lord over all and God blessed for ever For they said We have a Law and by our Law he ought to die And we could not blame Queen Mary who by a Law in her days caused so many to suffer Martyrdome nor now the Papists who formerly and at this very time in France Spain and Italy establish Cruelty and Oppression by Law If any men be Plotters or contrive any evil against the King or Government or breed Sedition and Disturbance in the Kingdom they must suffer according to the Law but if they be found without Plots or evil Contrivances but erring only concerning Religion