observes it cannot bee denied but that undoubtedly as touching the time of their meeting they were therein ordered also by S. Paul as they were about the manner of celebrating the Lords Supper And accordingly Paraeus in the very passage alleaged by Gomarus doth take that place of 1 Cor. 16. 2. to notifie that the very time of their meeting there specified was by the ordinance of S. Paul Doctor Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells in his Theses de Sabbato Thes 34. The Apostles directed by Christs not only example but spirit also observed the same witnesse in the Acts S. Paul S. John in the Revelation 38. And from the Apostles the Catholique Church uniformly receaved it witnesse all Ecclesiasticall writers 39. And the Church hath receaved it not to be liberae observationis as if men might at their pleasure accept or refuse it 40. but to be perpetually observed to the Worlds end For as God only hath power to apportion his time so hath he power to set out the day that he will take for his portion For he is Lord of the Sabbath 8. Master Fox upon the Rev. 1. v. 10. professeth that the observation of the Lords Day doth Niti authoritate institutionis Apostolicae depend upon the authority of Apostolicall institution 9. Walaeus dissert de Sab. p. 172. we conclude saith hee this first day of the weeke was by the Apostles put in the place of the Sabbath and commended to the Church not only by a power ordinary competent to all pastors for the ordering of indifferent rites in their Churches but by a singular power also as who had the oversight of the whole Churches and who as extraordinary Ministers of Christ were by the holy Ghost put in trust that they might be faithfull not only for the delivering of certaine precepts concerning faith and manners but also as touching upright ordering of the Church that so it might be made known to all Christians every where what day in the weeke was to be kept by vertue and Analogy of the fourth Commandement least dissension there abouts and consequently confusion might arise in the Church of God and to this purpose hee alleageth Beza before mentioned and Gallesius Calvins Collegue on Exod. 31. This ordinance to wit that the Lords Day should be substituted in the place of the Sabbath we have receaved saith hee not from men but from the Apostles that is from the Spirit of God whereby they were governed and after he had proved this out of three places of Scripture Acts 20 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. Re. 1. 10. in the end hee addes For although we are not tied to the observation of dayes yet this necessary order must be observed least confusion should be bred in the Church 10. Fayus Calvins successor alleaged also by Walaeus disput 47. in q. praecept Iustly therefore may we say that the Apostles by the leading of the Holy Ghost for the seventh day of the Law substituted the first day of the week which was the first in the Creation of the first World 11. Hyperius in 1. Cor. 16. 1. The first day of the weeke in memory of the Lords Resurrection was called the Lords Day the observation of the Sabbath being translated thereunto through the command of the Holy Ghost by the Apostles 12. Adde unto these Master Perkins maintaining the same That which he delivers of the Parliament in the dayes of King Edward the sixt in that preamble of theirs concerning holy dayes as left by the authority of Gods Word to the authority of Christs Church by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers therof as they shall judge most expedient to the true setting forth of Gods Glory and edification of the people I say that this should bee understood not of holy dayes onely but of the Lords Day also is a thing most incredible neither doth hee offer to cite any parcell thereof to justifie this so bold an affirmation onely hee sayth that by the body of the act it doth appeare but what that is in the body of that act whereby this doth appeare hee very judiciously conceales How improbable is it t hat Bishop Andrewes would have opposed this Doctrine in the Starre Chamber if a Parliament of Prelates and that in the dayes of King Edward the sixt had maintained it For hee professeth that these two onely the Lords Day and the Lords Supper are called the Lords to shew that Dominicum is alike to bee taken in both and takes upon him to shew that in the very Scripture there is found a precept for observation of the Lords Day And Bishop Lake in like manner professeth that it is not Liberae observationis but necessarily to be observed Doctor Fulks answer to the Rhemish Testament was set forth in the dayes of Queene Elizabeth and dedicated to her Majesty therein on Re. 1. v. 16. hath hee delivered that to change the Lords Day and to keepe it on Munday Tuesday or any other day the Church hath none authority For it is not a matter of indifferency but a necessary prescription of Christ himselfe delivered to us by his Apostles Was hee ever questioned for this or was it ever knowne that the state of this Land excepted against it for crossing the Doctrine of the Church manifested in a preamble to one of the Acts of Parliament which I presume was never yet repealed but leave we him to live on his own juice and to please himselfe in his holinesse A THIRD DIGRESSION CONTAINING A CONFERENCE With D. Walaeus about the Divine authority of the Lords Day I Come to consider somewhat in Walaeus whose dissertation of the Sabbath from the first hath liked mee so well and the spirit which it breathes throughout that I doe not affect to differ from him but rather heartily desire there may bee little or no difference betweene us and I hope in the end there will be found little or no difference of importance betweene us especially in this point of the institution of the Lord Day whether it be divine or humane and as for the originall institution of the Sabbath namely as from the beginning of the World and as touching the morality of one day in seven therein I concurre with him really and affectionately And as touching the quality of the institution I approve his learned paines in vindicating those three places of the new Testament Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. and Re. 1. 10. from the interpretation that some give of them to quash the evidence which they import for the observation of the first day of the weeke commonly called the Lords Day even in those primitive and Apostolicall dayes of the Christian Church And I joyne with him pag. 167. in admiring that after so many accurate prejudices of the reformed Churches concurring in the same translation interpretation of those places which we embrace yet some should be found to take so unhappy paines as to quash the evidence of them which they seem to us
the seventh day to be sanctified therefore now under the Gospell the Sabbath is to be translated from the seventh day to the first day of the weeke Or thus the Lord in the fourth commandement gave in charge to sanctifie the Sabbath and tells them that the seventh day of the weeke was their Sabbath therefore the translation of the Sabbath from the seventh day of the weeke to the Lords day is of divine institution As touching the first of these deductions that which comes nearest thereunto is the discourse of Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester in the Starre Chamber The Sabbath had reference to the old creation but in Christ we are a new creature a new creation and so to have a new Sabbath And Athanasius his discourse long agone upon that of Matth. 11. 27. All things are given to me of my Father Finis prioris creationis Sabbatum The end of the first creation was the Sabbath day but the beginning of the second creation is the Lords day and of this hee discourseth there more at large And we find manifestly this notable congruitie betweene the Sabbath day and the Lords day that like as God on the seventh day rested from the worke of creation so Christ our Saviour rising on the first day of the weeke from the dead made that the first day of his resting from the worke of redemption But when I consider the Doctors sharp censures of weaknesse of impudency of ignorance it is not credible he should closely let flee at such as Athanaesius and Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester Neither doe I find thoroughout this whole discourse any notice taken of this ground whereupon their discourse runnes It is more likely by farre that some meaner persons and poore snakes are herein set up as markes to shoot at and as signes to be spoken against It is true many doe prove herence the morality of the fourth commandement The author of the practice of pietie which goes under a Bishops name takes this course of his tenne arguments to prove the commandements of the Sabbath to be morall this is the second Because it was commanded of God to Adam in his innocency Bishop Andrewes in his Patterne of catecheticall doctrine taketh the like course as formerly hath beene mentioned and which is more professeth This to be a principle that the Decalogue is the law of nature revived and the law of nature is the Image of God now in God saith he there can be no ceremony but all must be eternall and so in this Image which is the law of nature and so in the Decalogue whereas a ceremony is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and accordingly that one day in seven is to bee observed and consecrated unto Gods Service as Chrysostome long agoe hath inferred herence but it is nothing usuall to inferre herence the celebration of the Lords day In like manner not one that I know ancient or late doe conclude from the fourth commandement either the celebration of the Lords day or the translation of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the weeke But herence indeed they inferre and most justly in my judgement that if one day in the weeke were to be consecrated unto the Lord by vertue of the morall law in the dayes of the old Testament much more doth it become us by the very light of nature to consecrate as good a proportion of time to Gods service under the Gospell And accordingly to rest from all workes that hinder the sanctification of that day in the exercises of pietie and so farre forth as they are found to hinder it not for any mysterious significations sake in which respect a very rigorous rest is most commonly conceived to bee enjoyned to the Jewes I doe wonder the Canonists are reckoned amongst those who doe build the celebration of the Lords day upon the constitution of the Church and affirme this absolutely when in the next Section many Canonists are alleaged out of Azorius as maintaining the divine authority of the Lords dayes and one of them Sylvester by name professing it to be opinionem communem And as for Schoole-men it is apparant that Dominicus Bannes puts a manifest difference betweene the Lords day and other festivities which are ex institutione ecclesiae And whereas Bellarmine is alleaged as the mouth of the Schoolemen to affirme absolutely that the celebration of the Lords day is by the constitution of the Church and that in distinction from them who say it was ordered by the Apostles I find no such matter in the place quoted but rather the contrary both confirming that one day in a weeke is to be consecrated to the Lord by law divine and whereas it was not fit that now the Saturday should be it therefore the Sabbath was turned into the Lords day by the Apostles his words are these Ius divinū requirebat ut vnus dies hebdomadae dicaretur cultui divino non autem conveniebat ut servaretur Sabbatum Itaque Sabbatum ab Apostolis in diem Dominicum versum est likewise Sixtus Senensis saith that the institution of the Lords day is of the Apostles as I have shewed in my answer to the preface S. 5. It is true that which is here reported of Brentius as who professeth it to be left indifferent to the Church to ordain one day in seven or on day in fourteene to be consecrated which whether it be not an unreasonable conceit I am willing to appeale to the judgement of Doctor Prideaux yet Gemardus the Lutheran will not follow Brentius in this as I have shewed in my answer to the preface and 5. Section For hee acknowledgeth the celebration of the Lords day to be juxta Apostolorum constitutionem And as for Chemnitius what he writes hereof is not expressed but for the divine authority of the celebration of the Lords day I have represented the joynt consent of some 11. or 12. of our moderne divines in the place before mentioned Besides the concurrence of the ancient Fathers not one of them being so much as pleaded for the opposite Tenet and lastly the generall answer of Christians in the times of persecution when they were demanded in this manner Dominicum servasti hast thou kept the Lords day for usually it was this Christianus sum intermittere non possum I cannot omit it for I am a Christian The first opinion to wit of those who maintained the divine authoritie of the celebritie of the Lords day by the old Testament is here censured for inclining much to Judaisine but it is not expressed wherein And it is apparant they doe not maintaine the observation of the seventh day Certainely this is delivered in reference to somewhat that is not thought fit to be expressed yet the prefacer did expresse it imputing unto them whom he opposeth that they doe observe the Jewish Sabbath not in respect of the Jewish day but of the Jewish manner observing it to wit in the way of a rigorous
Church kept it not neither did the Primitive Church keepe it nor doe we keepe it as ceremoniall but another seventh day for Ecclesiasticall policy sake not civill When hee saith we keepe another seventh day he implieth that by the seventh formerly mentioned hee meant that particular day of the weeke which the Iewes kept and that wee indeed acknowledge to bee ceremoniall but in this interpretation of Wallaeus hee manifestly corrupts his adversaries argument which is plainly directed against the ceremoniality of one day in seven indefinitly considered and not against the ceremoniality of the Iewes seventh Yet when he saith the Primitive Church did and we doe keepe a seventh but not as ceremoniall hee speaks to the point but his words following have no coherence herewith so that hee may seeme to shuffle miserably in this affecting to decline that which he is not able to answer But take wee him at the best he must say that the observation of one day in seven was ceremoniall if hee speakes to the purpose Now let him shew us if he can the ceremoniality of one day in seven and how Christ was the body of it nothing more common then to affirme that the Iewes Sabbath was ceremoniall hand over head without any distinction of the sanctification of the day and the rest much lesse distinguishing betweene the rest of one day in seven and the rest of the seventh At length I found a faire way opened for the explication of the ceremoniality found in the rest on the seventh day But as for any ceremoniality in the rest of one day in seven never I thinke any man set his wits on worke to devise that Lastly after such a ceremoniality is devised wee will conferre whether in reason such a thing ought to bee still observed as was ceremoniall unto the Iewes and why may wee not as well observe circumcision with the Ethiopians who observe it only in conformity to Christ who was circumcised Now because Rivetus brings arguments also to the contrary to prove that the observation of one day in seven under the Gospell is not necessary but free it is fit we should consider them also to prove what force is in them If by force of the Commandement a seventh day is to be kept then that day is to be kept which the Commandement hath defined which is the Sabbath of the Iewes To this I answer by denying the consequence and not contenting my selfe with a bare deniall I prove it to bee inconsequent For whereas God in commanding the seventh hath therewithall commanded one in seven and withall specified which of the seven shall bee rested on and sanctified unto his service If it may bee made appeare that the particularity of rest on the seventh day be abrogated and no colour can be brought for the abrogation of the proportion of time to wit of keeping one day in seven it will evidently appeare herewithall that this consequence of Doctor Rivetus is unsound Now this wee prove to bee most true forasmuch as the Jewes rest on the seventh day was ceremoniall profiguring Christs rest on that day in his grave as both the fathers of old and moderne Divines both Papists and Protestants both Lutheranes and Calvinists have acknowledged but never any man was found to devise a ceremoniality of resting one day in seven they may as well give themselves to devise a ceremonality in the setting apart of some time in generall for Gods holy worship and service 2. Now this puts me in minde of another way clearely to demonstrate the inconsequence of Rivetus his argument thus If it will follow that in case wee are bound to such a proportion of time by vertue of this Commandement therefore wee are bound also to keepe the seventh day Then it will follow as well that because wee are bound to set apart some time for the service of God by vertue of this Commandement as all confesse therefore we are bound also to keepe such a proportion of time as is here specified and the seventh day also which is here particulated For like as God doth not command such a proportion of time in speciall but by commanding the observation of the seventh day in like sort neither doth God Command a time in generall to bee set apart for his service but by commanding of such a proportion of time in speciall and such a Day in particular 2. His second argument runnes thus if the observation of every seventh day bee morall it must bee knowne by light of nature but so it is not Therefore it is not morall and seeing it is not politicall it must bee ceremoniall and therefore doth nor oblige by force of Law morall To this I answer first Let but Doctor Rivetus stretch his wits to describe unto us what ceremoniality can possibly bee devised in the obsertion of one day in seven and when hee hath devised it I dare appeale to his owne judgement and conscience for the appobation of it For I doe not thinke it possible for the wit of man with any colour of reason to devise a ceremoniality to be constituted in the observation of one day in seven speaking of it indefinitly as wee doe the body whereof can bee found in Christ for of such ceremonies wee speake that as shadowes are to flee away when the body comes in place 2. Neither doth it follow that because it is not morall nor politicall therefore it is ceremoniall for some will say that it is positive as touching the defining of some particular necessarily required to the performance of a morall duty As for example not to go further then the matter in hand for instance it is generally confessed to be a morall duty by naturall instinct that some time is to bee set apart for Gods service but of our selves wee are to seeke of the proportion of time it is fit for none so much as for God himselfe our Creator and consequently our great Lord and master to define what proportion of time shall be allowed for his service now this they call positively morall as belonging to the execution of a morall duty Yet indeed not so much a circumstance thereof in proper speech as the specification of the generall concerning the circumstance of time 3. Yet to draw nearer to the morality of it what shall nothing bee morall that is not knowne to bee so by light of nature for what I pray is not our nature now corrupt nay hath not Aristotle professed that matter of morality is not capable of demonstration but onely of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perswasion Nay how is it knowne by the light of nature that some time is to bee set apart to the worship of God that made us but upon presupposition that God is knowne to bee our Creatour and is this knowne by the light of nature How came Aristotle then the greatest Philosopher that ever was and his whole schoole how I say came they to be ignorant
of it but upon presupposition of the History of the Creation knowne unto us Doctor Feild spares not to professe as Master Broad reportes him that by light of nature it is known that one day in seven ought to bee consecrated to Divine Service Yet I am not forward to say so much but rather with Chrysostome that now from the Creation God hath manifested that one day in a weeke is to bee appōrtioned for his service and with Azorius that it is most agreeable to reason after six dayes of worke to set apart one to his service And seeing God did require such a portion of time to bee consecrated unto him under the Law Undoubtedly and by the very light of nature it is cleare and evident that no lesse proportion of time can wee in conscience allow unto him under the Gospell 3. I come to his third argument which is this the necessity of one day in seven cannot consist with that liberty which the Apostle intimates Col. 2. 16. Let no man judge you in meate and drinke or in the part of a day or of Sabbaths which are shadowes of things to come Which they explicate by a similitude As nature requires meates and drinke but Christian liberty is not tied to choise of meates according to Moses his Lawes so reason dictates that some time is to be set apart for Gods publique worship but the Gospell freeth us from the necessity of the Iewish Sabbath To this I answer 1. By granting the conclusion for the Iewish Sabbath Christians observe not 2. but one day in seven they alwayes have observed a manifest evidence that they never conceaved this to be any impeachment to their Christian liberty And no marvell for they manifestly perceaved that God required this proportion of time under the Law and from the beginning of the World how much more should we be carefull to performe no lesse under the Gospell And indeed rest on the seventh day did pregnantly represent before hand Christs rest that day and that day alone full and whole in the grave But as for any ceremoniality to be found in the speciall proportion of time to wit as one day in seven never any man devised any ceremoniality therein more then in the time in generall which all confesse by the very light of nature is to be consecrated unto God So that we have no need of Doctor Rivetus his answer to helpe us in the solution of this his argument And whereas he conceaves our Christian liberty to be impeached if any proportion of time be observed of necessity by force of precept and of free choise 1. This is as much as to say that our liberty is impeached if we suffer our Lord and master to prescribe unto us his servants what proportion of service we shall performe unto him and not rather have him leave it to the servant to cut out unto him as little or as much as he thinkes good yet we do not deny but he may allow unto him more all that we stand for is that we ought not to allow him lesse under the Gospell then he required under the Law and then he required from the beginning of the World 2. I marvell that Doctor Rivetus doth not observe how herein he contradicts himselfe for hath he not formerly rested in this answer of Gomarus that by vertue of the fourth Commandement we must allow unto him dayes sufficient for his service and that these dayes must be rather Frequentiores then Rariores more rather then fewer and if it be no prejudice to our Christian liberty to be tyed and that by vertue of the fourth Commandement to allow unto him a better proportion of time for his service then that of one day in seven how can it bee prejudiciall to our Christian liberty to allow unto him this and that by vertue of the fourth Commandement Now whether Doctor Rivetus his answers to the arguments of Wallaeus or his owne arguments to the contrary bee of any force to hold him to that opinion which he conceaves to bee Calvirs in opposition to the Doctrine delivered by Wallaeus I am consent the indifferent may judge as also whether the two causes mentioned by him for the observation of the Sabbath contained in the Commandement doth not infer the third also which Rivetus opposeth namely the proportion of one day in seven And that this is as free from all colour of ceremoniality as any of the other two The first was that some time is to be set apart for Gods Service now this generall is not commanded there but as contained in the speciall to wit the proportion of one day in seven Both of them being equally contained in the particularity of the seventh day in that Commandement expressed And as for the morality of rest to bee allowed to servants after six dayes of labour this doth clearely draw with it the confinement of the time appointed for Gods Service to the proportion of one day in seven unlesse the day of rest for servants shal not be the day consecrated to the exercises of piety And I much wonder that Doctor Rivetus a man of such judgement and perspicacity doth not observe this The only way to helpe this anomaly is in plaine termes to professe that some rest is to be allowed to servants by their Masters but in what proportion that is not defined but left at large to the pleasure of their Masters And as for ceremoniality in the proportion of one day in seven never any man devised any such thing more then in the setting apart of some time in generall for Gods Service all confessing this to be a duty known by the very light of nature But I doe not finde that Calvin hath any other meaning then that we are not so tied to one day in seven but that more time then this may be consecrated to Divine Service which as I have disputed before so now I am the more confirmed herein Doctor Rivetus manifesting this to be his opinion also as well as it was the opinion of Gomarus For in this he rests as may appeare by his answer to the first argument of Doctor Wallaeus Neither is it true that Calvin did censure them who simply maintained that the observation of one day in the weeke doth still remaine as morall but that so maintained it as in reference to some mysterious signification as Doctor Wallaeus hath manifested and the words immediatly following in Calvin doe evince which are these but this is no other thing then in contumely of the Jewes to change the day and in heart to retaine the same holinesse of the day Here commonly the alleagers of Calvin to the same intent that Doctor Rivetus doth use to make a period as if Calvin delivered this absolutely whereas Calvin proposeth it onely conditionally as appeares by the other halfe of the sentence thus If so bee there remaine yet unto us a signification in the dayes equally mysterious to that which
of the Apostles unlesse instituto there be to be referred to that which goes before and ought to be distinguished from Apostolorum which comes after by a comma though it be not But let this be the opinion of Iunius and Piscator which perhaps we may meet with some more evidence for than hitherto Neither doe I see any necessity of expressing concerning every thing they taught that they received it of the Lord Neither doe I thinke fit to conclude that whatsoever they ordered they ordered by Gods Commandement But consider there is a great difference between things ordered by them some were concerning particulars others for the Church universall Some ordered by them for a certaine time other things to continue to the worlds end The ordinance of the Lords Day concerned the whole Church and to this day no Church throughout the world hath thought fit to alter it a notable evidence that the Church generally hath conceived it as an ordinance of the Apostles intended to continue to the worlds end The ingenuity of Master Perkins is to be commended confessing ingenuously that hee proposeth his arguments not as necessary but as probable onely to inferre the institution of the first day of the weeke to be observed by Christians in place of the seventh I would those that oppose him would carry themselves with the like ingenuity nothing inferiour is the ingenuity of Doctor Walaeus pag. 156. professing that this opinion touching Christs institution of the Lords Day seeing it hath so great Divines as favourers thereof is neither to be accused of novelty nor easily to be despised as false provided that they themselves doe not propose it as necessary but as probable nor inveigh against such as are of another opinion or condemne them Now let us see upon what grounds he preferres the second opinion making the institution of the Lords Day to depend upon Apostolicall authoritie before it Therefore first he urgeth that the Apostles have given no expresse commandement as being charged thereto by Christ nor Christ himselfe In briefe thus neither Christ hath any where in Scripture commanded it nor doe the Apostles any where signify that hee did I answer the Apostles doe not use to signify that what they deliver in particular was given them in charge by Christ sometimes they doe but this extends not to the hundreth part of that they doe deliver And it may bee by S. Iohns calling it the Lords Day compared with that which our Saviour delivers in the Gospell pray that your flight bee not in the Winter nor upon the Sabbath day and with the denomination of the Jewes Sabbath called in the Old Testament the Lords holy day wee shall finde sufficient intimation of Christs institution Especially considering that the question is but of the circumstance of a particular day not of the proportion of time and withall the analogy of the day of Christs Resurrection to the day of the Lords rest from Creation And whereas the Doctor further sayth that it seemes not likely that Christ should not command it if he meant to binde us to the observation of any day as a part of his worship and service Now I wonder what the worthy Doctor meanes to thrust in the circumstance as a part of Gods Worship If the Apostles might command it as he thinkes they did yet not as a part of Gods worship why might not Christ command the observation of that day yet not as a part of his worship I am not perswaded that when God at the first sanctifyed the seventh day hee made the observation of that day a part of his worship And it is strange that the circumstance of time should bee an homogeneall part of Gods worship First it is true the rest on that day commanded afterwards might bee and was as a ceremony preaching something unto them All that is to bee considered in time pertaining to Gods Worship is the proportion of it as whether one day in a weeke bee most fit or one day in a moneth bee sufficient and this is of momentous consideration whether wee consider the advancing GODS Glory thereby or our owne good in a greater or lesser proportion But the particularity of the day in seven whether first or last or middlemost this consideration in my judgement is of no moment Only for the avoyding of dissention confusion we have neede of authoritative specification and that God did not define at the first without congruous reason to still all motion tending to alteration and if we have as fayre evidence under the Gospell for our Sabbath as the Jewes had for theirs wee are by Gods goodnesse as much freed from dissension and confusion as they and nothing the more ingaged in superstition as making the observation of the day a part of Divine worship which never was but in the way of prefiguration of somewhat in Christ which kind of pedagogy is now quite out of date neither is there any place for it in the observation of the Lords day Doctor Walaeus his second argument is because those places of Scripture Rom. 14. Gal. 4. Coloss 2. in which the Apostle takes away all difference of dayes can hardly bee reconciled with this opinion or if Christ himselfe not by example onely but by an ordinance commanded unto his Disciples the observation of this day it cannot bee imagined as it seemes that any liberty should now remaine in the observation of this day for that which Christ hath determined is not left under Christian liberty any more then the observation of the seventh day from the Creation was left free to the Jewes when God not onely by his example but also by precept separated it from all other dayes to his service To this I answer 1. I finde no liberty at all left to the Church to change the day by the Doctors owne grounds for hee holds it to bee invariable p. 168. Secondly Hee professeth the change of the day cannot bee attempted without the greatest scandall of the Church p. 169. Now what sober Christian would affect liberty to bee scandalous 3. others who acknowledge the observation of the day by Apostolicall institution and withall to bee changeable and left to the liberty of the Church doe withall maintaine that the Apostles did not command it as extraordinary Ministers of Christ but Doctor Waleus p. 172. acknowledgeth the institution of it made by the Apostles as Ministers extraordinary 4. the Doctor professeth that the Apostles were entrusted by the Holy Ghost to give precepts concerning the good government of the Church and that in this particular case to make knowne to all Christians every where what day in the weeke ought to be kept holy and that by vertue and analogy of the fourth Commandement and withall to prevent dissension and confusion amongst the Churches thereabouts 5. and lastly hee joynes the precepts concerning this with precepts concerning faith and manners and this hee doth without specifying any the least difference nay the word
precepts is once proposed as subservient indifferently as to faith and manners so also to the well ordering of the Church and that in this particular of notifying unto all what day of the weeke is it to bee sanctified to Gods Service As for the places Rom. 14. Gal. 2. Coloss 2. I answer that if wee made the observation of the day as it denotes a circumstance of time any part of Gods Service or for some mysterious signification contained therein then indeed wee should carry our selves in contradiction to the places mentioned but seeing we observe times onely out of respect to order and policy which is necessary for the edification of the Church and God having always required one day in seven to be set apart for this even when there was not so great need nor had God manifested his love to mankinde in such sort as in these latter dayes and of our selves wee are to seeke of the particularity of the day under a fit proportion of time from the beginning of the World rquired and hereupon were we left to our owne judgements a way would bee opened to miserable dissension and confusion what cause have wee to blesse the Lord for marking out a day to us with such notable characters to make it our Sabbath and to honour it by his appearance amongst his Apostles when they were assembled together both that day and that day senight after as also by his Apostles to commend it and establish it in such sort that for 1600. yeares the observation thereof hath continued unto this day which order of the Apostles doth carry pregnant presumption that it proceeded originally from the institution of Christ The necessity of the Church Christian requiring the specification of the day for the preventing of dissension and confusion as much as ever the necessity of the Jewish Church required the like and over and above by reason of the fourth Commandement wee have now better evidence to conclude therehence the observation of the Lords Day by the congruity that Christs Resurrection hath to the Lords rest from Creation better means I say to conclude ours then they without a Commandement to inferre the observation of their seventh forstill the day of the Lords rest is made the day of our rest Thirdly that which is alleadged in the third place that both ancient and late writers doe maintaine that wee celebrate the Lords Day not as any part of Divine worship nor as absolutely necessary For the first of these wee willingly grant for as much as wee conceave the observation of the 7 th by the Jewes was no otherwise a part of Divine worship then as it was a ceremony and shadow the body whereof was Christ prefigured thereby and it is well knowne that no Christians observe it in any such Notion But the observation thereof wee hold to bee absolutely necessary and so doth Doctor Walaeus in holding it to bee invariable and that it cannot bee altered without the greatest scandall And Doctor Lake Bishop of Bath and Wells professeth it to bee not liberae observationis but necessariae And if it were free then not to use this freedome at all doth manifestly give way to superstition in taking that for a thing necessary which is not though not as touching the substance of Gods worship and service yet as touching a circumstance thereof such as is the circumstance of time As for expresse precept if hee meanes a precept expressely written no man I trow ever stood for that but if hee meanes a precept given by Christs expresse charge to his Apostles no man that I have met with saith more hereupon then Doctor Walaeus seemes to affirme himselfe in saying that they were entrusted by the Holy Ghost as extraordinary Ministers that they should bee faithfull ad tradenda praecepta to give praecepts of faith and manners and of the good government of the Church and right order and particularly in this that might be known to all what day in the weeke was to be set apart for Gods service both by vertue and analogy of the fourth Commandement and to praevent dissension and confusion among the Churches Neither doe we acknowledge any other celebrity of the day then this and therefore doe no more affront Hierome then Doctor Walaeus himselfe As for festivall dayes in Socrates and Nicephorus I see no cause why as touching that they speake thereof the Lords Day should bee comprehended under them and as for apostolicall precept concerning this Doctor VValaeus is as expresse as any And it is not credible to mee that the Apostles should make such an invariable ordinance to the Church and not bee verily perswaded that it was the Will of God the Father and of God the Sonne it should bee so whether manifested by Christs particular charge unto them or by comparing Christs Resurrection with the Lords rest from the workes of Creation Otherwise in my judgement they had never called that day the Lords Day Fourthly he excepts against the argument drawne from Christs Resurrection denying that therehence it followes that that day was to bee consecrated to God But herein hee opposeth all the ancients neither doe I thinke hee can alleage any one that doth not hereon build the observation of the Lords Day which nuiversall concurrence doth manifestly argue to be more then probable Austin as Waleus alleadgeth him professeth not as his peculiar opinion but as he took it generally received without contradiction that Dies Dominicus Christianis resurrectione Domini declaratus est and that resuscitatio Domini consecravit nobis diem Dominicum And Athanasius plainly takes notice of the analogy it hath to the fourth Commandement and analogy Doctor Walaeus grants and I wonder hee takes no notice of it here by comparing the second Creation with the first Creation and so Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester professeth that the new Creation requires a new Sabbath especially seeing the old must bee abrogated as ceremoniall But the analogy I confesse may be differently shaped Athanasius shapes it thus that the Jewes Sabbath was the end of the first Creation and that the Lords Day is a beginning of the second Creature to wit as the day of Christs resurrection in reference whereunto the Apostle saith Old things are passed behold all things are become new And I conceive reason to justifie Athanasius in making the beginning of the new creature to be our Sabbath answerable to the end of the first creation to wit because the second creation hath no end in this world Againe Adam and Eve were made but the immediate day before the seventh and the seventh he was to spend in rejoycing in Gods works so Christs death was the worlds redemption and immediately after to wit with Christs rising it was as fit we should Sabbatize with God for joy of our Redemption Otherwise the analogie which Doctor Walaeus grants but doth not explicate may be conceived thus The seventh day of the weeke was the Lords rest from the worke
nor any that I know that in this sense all or any are bound to keep the seventh or a seventh day holy but onely by vertue of Gods command Yet this wee professe that seeing it is generally confessed that by the very light of nature some time is to be set apart for Gods service Wee cannot devise in reason any better course then to set one day in seaven apart for this considering the first division of dayes is into weekes and if a seventh part of our time be in reason to be consecrated unto God wee thinke it more convenient to set one intire day in seven apart for this then the seventh part of every day because the other businesses of every day are apt to cause distraction from the Lords service And as I have but erst discoursed it is more fit the Master should appoint unto the servant what proportion of service hee shall performe unto him then that this should be left to the discretion or liberty of the servant 1. both the honour of the Master requiring this 2. and the good of the servant for hereby hee shall be assured of the better acceptance at the hands of his master And so for the particular day it is fit the Master should marke out that also unto him by some prerogative set upon the day as hee did the seventh day by finishing the worke of Creation and by his rest thereon from his workes to call man to an holy rest from his so to be more free for the service of his Creator In which cases both touching the proportion of the time and particularity of the day the Law being made it shall continue immutable and unalterable by the will of the Creature but mutable and alterable according to the will of the Creator so that things being well distinguished and rightly considered and stated I see no bug-beare of inconvenience in all this Neyther doe I see any reason why the spending of one day in Gods holy worship as a morall and perpetuall duty should seeme distastfull to any Since it is apparant that God commanded it unto his people of the Jewes and for 1600 yeares it hath beene continually observed by Christian Churches unto this day and I make no doubt but it shall hold till Christs comming though from the beginning of the World it was never found to be so hotly opposed as at this day And why should any man stick in acknowledging it to be morall when never any man busied himselfe to finde out any ceremoniality in reference to the proportion of one day in seven Neither doe I thinke ever any man called it judiciall but Azorius professeth it to be rationi maximè consontaneum most agreeable to reason and no man that I know hath at any time set himselfe to devise a proportion of time to be spent in Gods service more agreeable to reason then this And as for the third offence taken for I know not any that give it The fourth Commandement is brought by none that I know to prove that the Lords Day is now become our Christian Sabbath but supposing it to be our Sabbath as the booke of Homilies sayth it is and our Saviour signified that Christians should have their Sabbath as well as the Jewes had theirs Math. 24. 20. wee produce the fourth Commandement to prove that wee ought to sanctifie it and that we may the better sanctifie it to rest from all workes that hinder the sanctification thereof And indeed the Commandedement is so drawen as to command one day in seaven to be observed and whatsoever is that seventh prescribed by lawfull authority to sanctifie it and abstaine from all works whereby the hallowing of it is disturbed and all this we take to be morall namely the worshipping of God in a certaine proportion of time prescribed by him and to that purpose to rest from workes not for any mysterious signification sake as did the Jewes wee thinke the practise of the Church in the Apostles dayes is sufficient to inferre the apostolicall and divine institution thereof from hence Athanasius Cyrill Austin and the Fathers generally for I know not one alleaged to the contrary so take it And the Lords Day hath no other notion in Scripture language then a day of the Lords institution and this is confirmed in that it comes in the place of the Jewes Sabbath which is called in Scripture the Lords holy day Esay 58. and Psal 118. 24. of the day wherein Christ was made the head of the corner having beene formerly refused of the builders it is expresly said that it is the day that the Lord hath made and thereupon wee are called to rejoyce and be glad in it And it hath this congruity in the cause of its institution to the first Sabbath that as on the seventh day the Lord rested from his worke of Creation so on the first day of the weeke the Lord Christ rising from the dead then rested from his worke of redemption And lastly Christ bringing with him a new Creation is it strange that he should bring with him a new Sabbath and no day so fit for this as the day of his Resurrection And lastly whosoever doth not rest satisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church must hee not be driven to acknowledge an ordination more then humane requirable thereunto Of the necessity of my consequences and evidence of expresse Scripture formerly mentioned I leave it to the indifferent to judge and to none sooner then to Doctor Prideaux himselfe none being more able to judge of consequences then hee being so versed therein and I am well persuaded of the indifferency of his affections and had those writings in the canvassing of this point beene extant before this Lecture of his which hath since come to the light of the presse I am apt to conceave that either hee would have given way to that which seemes in my judgement to be the truth or represented good reason of his dissenting from it The Apostles example nor so onely but drawing the Churches generally to the same practise doth argue a constitution yet more is brought for the confirmation of the authority of the Lords Day then example That of searching into the veyles and shadowes of the old Testament to finde this institution is a mystery unto mee and so farre am I from that course that I know none guilty of it The ancient Fathers sometimes doe expatiate this way for the setting forth of the honorable condition of the Lords Day but they build not doctrines thereupon which if they had done in some particular case advantageous to our adversaries it had beene enough to have cryed us downe As for Judaisme I have often shewed how little colour there is for any such imputation to be cast upon us but rather upon our adversaries I see no cause to range the Petrobusian with the Ebionite but were they yoake-fellowes whereof I finde not the least evidence yet should not wee draw with them under the