This book made available by the Internet Archive.

Tlie Contents.

Creafioff* It is mdde apparento thathisJUcdiJJir'was far htyondthalof'Xou.^Llw^ " , .

• • '-^ /-.' ^'Z :Seai6n 4, ' ■ ; "

created*

1, 'VQXpnmhisargtmefitsfor the ne-^

2. Di^orW'i^l^HsargHMmforC ^^"^4. the affirmative* , J

Section 4.

3. Pererius hisreafonsagainjijheinfiitutionoftj^ SahhathfrcmtheCre^tTon^aftftlkreM, ' ' |^

. Seftion 4. ' |;

4. T*?!?^ Digrejfions inanfw'^r to Rivetus intwa particulars^

l^Bj/ way of reply iipon his ^»/Wrfr? Walrus his argument s^jufiifying the morality of one day injeven' - '-^ '■-' V

2. T<? his arguments oppoftng the morality of one day infeven to he confecrated to the Lord, ■ S^rtJon 5. 5. AconffderafionofW'aildemh^dtfcourfiin dnfwerio thofe^T^ho conceive the injiitution of the Lords Day^ to have beene ordered ly Chriji himfelfe* . Seftion 5. ?. An examination ofthatphrafe of fame of our Divines,affirming the ancients to have changed the lewes Sabbath unto the Lords Day fir a pro^ bable caufe : wherein it is Jheived that the caufe hertofwas more then probable* Section 6, %. An examination of Chemnitius his difcm'fe-^concerning the mtkortty of the Lords Day»

0.. A

Ihc Contents?.

Scftion 6,

Perkins his of-guwentrfiakdtn^fair tht Divim authority 0 f the LorcisDay, 5* That the Lords Day^^nd tht Lords Supper arifo called in the fame notion* l. affirn/ed by Doctor

reafan,'" . '^ ' ' '

Seftion. 7.

7. A •britfe of the arguments on each fide for every point.

l*Ai touching the original/injiitution of the Sab' - bdfk ' ' , - ■' - '

2. jis toHchin-g the Morality of one day infeven to be confecratedto Godsfokmne worflnp^

3. As touching the authority oj the celebration of the Lords Day^andthe jwmutability thereof

8. The Prefacer^ andM. Kog,Grs oppofng D. Bovvnde avejfjewed in every particular to oppofeD.Andrcv/Qi.

IN the confederation <?/D.Prideaux his LeSure* Seaion 2. 1. Hovp jar light of nature doth dircB^ as touching the tJKrie which ought tobefet apart for Gods fckmne fir vice.

Seafon 2.$: 6. 2 Reafons why tie Cre.itorJIwuldprcfcribe the proportion of time to be confecrated unto himfclfe. Seaion 2,& 6.

3. How far Ifght of nature doth dire^ iis touching the p^riiiiidAriiy of J he day under the proprtioti of one m

feven^(ix\i^ fime.

Seaicrr 3. ^ '^^ r

4. rt^^Enofh withhis holy company app ar ting them-fdvcs from others, had a fct time for drjjne worfjip.

^ ^ ' . <,, That

The (Tontcnts;

ScWon 6> 5. That it becomes not us to #fif UkrtJ to depgm the d^ for the Sabbath.

Scftion. 6. 6 The danger of leaving it to man to mak§ cho^fe of the day.

Sc(^ion 7. J. Thai the celebration of the Lords Daf k of divine in:* JlHntion^andborpfarjuJlifiedbj the old Tefiament^ and particularly by the fourth Comp$andement* Seftion 8. 8. That it is nothing llrange^ the Lt^rds Day Jhonld bs called by the nante of the Sabbath. Sedlion S, 2. SenfuallpleafHres are cleanly caried nnder the titk of recreatii^n.

The Preface.

Have rtotfi a long time taken notice of much difference and contention about the molality ef the fourth Cemmandement, but I never gave myfelfe to looks ''^to the bottome of it till now- I ever conceived it for the fuhftance to be Morallh other-mfe, trhatfiouldit make among the ten Commande-mentt, rvlnch all account the Law moralI,in dijhncfioH both from the law judicial'-, and the law ceremoniall given by Mofes unto the Jcwes. Thefe ten Commandements the Lordrpakffrom the top of mount Sina, in th hearmgof aUthe people ■■, andby way ofpreparationtofo notable afer-vice, as to meet r^ith God, andto heare him/peak? unto them, twodayes f^eregiven them to fau(5tifie themfelves Exd..,-... and to wafh their cloathes ^ that they might be ready ^ _ on the third day : for the third day the Lord would comedowneoninoant Sina. Andfoit came topafe. For when Mofes brought forth the people out ot ths. ,7 Campeto meetwith God, and they Roodat thene-thef part of the Mount: Mount Sir.a was altogether on a fmoake. becaufe the Lord defcended upon it m fire: and the fmonke thereof afcended as the ftnoake of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. And all the people faw the thundnngs and the light- EW.»..» r^ngs, and the noife of the trumpet, and.hemoun-tainVfmoaking: ..ndwhen ^^.^ people faw .t they removed and ftood a farre off. In juch havady ft^te ]Zhk Law delivered, .«^ remember the Sabban

II.

The Preface.

day to keep it hol^^-^amongfi the refi:^ without all example efthe lik^^in all the generations thatrvent before. And the Lord thought it fit^^ to mind them hereof bj/hkfervant Mofes: Aske now of the dayes that are paft^ which were before thee,fince the day that God created man upon the earth, and aske from the one fide of heaven unto the other^ whether there hath been any fuch ^ thing as this great thing isjor hath been heard like it. * Did ever people heare the voice oi God fpeaking out of the mid ft of the fire, as thou haft heard^and live. Out of heaven he made thee to heare his voice, that he might inftruft thee^and upon the earth he (hewed thee his great fire, and thou heardft his words out of the midft of the fire: And becaufe he loved thy Fa-thersj therefore he chofe their feed after them. And in hk lift blejfing upon the people^ when now he was going out of the wsrld^ Mofes, as a King'^pntteth them in mind of this,faying /The Lord came from Sinai^ and rofe up from Seir unto them,he (hined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thoufands of Saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them.Yea^he loved the people: all his Saints are in thy hands, and they fatedowne at thy feet 5 every one (hall receive of thy words. Mofes commanded a La Wj even the inheritance of the congregation oi Jacob. And he was Kina; in Jefhurun, when the heads of the people, and ' theTribes of Ifrael were gathered together It is true^ there is an bole pickf in the fourth Commandgment^con-' cerning thejknSiiying of the Sabbath ^ as if that among all the refi:, were not morally but caremoniali. Yet this ho" nour it hath from God^ that immediatly after the Creftion^ the Lord rejling on the (event h day from bis works-^htiQ'^ Gen,i.i, for^ he blefled the fevenih day and fanftified it. And therefore D^5<?r AndreweSj erehediedBiJbopofmn-

chejier:,

n^

The Preface*

chefler^ in hk patterm of Catechetkall doSrwe (t com* monly cite it under hif namz^ hecanfe it h commonly rt-ctivedto hethis^ and as 2 have heard upon divers good grounds^ treating »pon thkC^mmandementh and having propofed this qnejlion , But is not the Sabbath a Ceremony, and fo abrog ited by Chrift > Makes anfmr to it in this manner^ Doe as Chrift did inthecaufeofdi-vorcej look whether it were fo from the beginning 5 Now the beginning of the Sabbath was in Paradife, before there was any (inne, and (b before there needed any Saviour, and fo before there was any Ceremony or figure of a Saviour. And if they fay, it prefigured the reft that we ftiall have from our finnesin Chriftj we grant it, and therefore the day is changed, but no ceremony proved. Andyet v^e are not ignorant^ how Papijis have pra&ifed ts raze the fecond commander went alfo out of the Lat» given en mount Sina^ as if that Alfo were out ofdate^ being (as they conceive) but of ap$^ fitive nature atfirfi^fo little evidence dee they findefor it by the light ofNatureiandnovp^the world is groivnefo m/e-, that they kifow how to worjbip God by Images^ without committing any idolatry at all'-^ though this my fiery of religious fiate is not thought fit to be communicated unto the vulgar* But doe we not all acknowledge the light of Nature to be much corrupted(ince the fall of Adam ? hovf much more our judgement of morall thingt \ wherein A-riftotle r^«/p^^^ that ^Tro^^^Hy demondrationis not to fi^i.c;. be expeSed^ but only 'w^yoAo?^* perfwafton. And if way be given to mens wanton wilsforthe gratilying of corrupt gffeSions^ more breaches than thefe are like to be made in the Decalogue* I have heard that CardinaliCa^znus un -dertooke tojifftifie the fm of Sodome, Sure I am, amongjl the Lacedemonians wives were common : And Brennus that Ancient Invader of other Nations made profejfion^

^ B 2 tha$

The Preface.

that he k^evo no other Law of "Nature hut thk^ that The weaker rtiouldbe in fubjeftion to the ftronger;//4e asKmgV^n\\\\^:>inhis death-bed, being demmded^ who JhonldfHcceedhim in the Kingdom^made anfwer^ even He whofe fword is the longeft. Carneades Ithinke was the man ^ who having on a day made aftngular fpeechin comtnendation ofjHJliceh afterwards di/courfed as elo" quently to the contrary, fjewing that there was nojufi/ce at all by the laxv of nature h every naturall thingfeeking to maifttaine itfelfe by the dejiru^ton of others. So the fire maintaines itfelfe by the combujlionof each combufiible thing whereuntoit approachethh and the water overflowed all naturally:, and beats dovpne $lldammes^ it can:, to make roome for itfelfe. And the greatefi Beajis maintain them^ felves by preying on thofe that have no power to refijl them. The more caufe hdve wee to hlejfe God for giving us the haw Morall in writing,, which grew fo miferably defaced in the hearts of men. And that herein . thefanSi-fying of the Sabbath k mentioned among the refi^ thk hath ever fatisfiei mee , and ajjkred that the (ubjiance thereof is Morall':) and that accordingly wee ought to inure our felves to thefanSification of the Sabbath^ though na* turaUy we find in our felves no greater relu&ationto any Commandcment than to this : Pardon me if I judge of o-thers by my felfe in this particular-Nay ^upon this very con-Jideration have we not the more caufe tojirive againfi this intefline corruption of ours ^ His Myejiy is much deligh" ted in hunting 5 it if a recreation mixt with manly exer^ cife^ well becomming a King h but I hear e he never ufeth to hunt on the Lords day. Andfo much the ratherjhouldtlie Lords Sabbaths be deare unto us^ becanfe thegoodnejfe and mercy of God appeares no where more^than in giving us hif Sabbathf'-iCa/ling upon us thereby to relifrom the world unto him (andGodk^cwes^a C hrijii an Joule findj no refi any where bm in him) and to wMk^ with him in holy medita-

The Preface.

tion^as he ispkufedto walkjn the mjd(i ofus^ds ^ the Holy a H'/. one oflfrucl : (o to draw t(s away from worldly cares and pleafures, to the entertaining of heavenly andholy cares\to enrich our fe Ives with the knowledge of God, and tore-create our foules in the Lord^ as hee folucethhimfeljein us^ according to that^ Hee tooke his folace in the com- Proz-S.; r. ptide of the earth, and his delight was in the children of men. On the Lords day it is, that infpeciall fort rceChriJiians take hold of that holy Co muni on^ which God in great mercy in his Son Jefus Chriji voitchfafeth unto us vpithhimfelfe.fpeak^ngunto us as from heaven in hk holy PFord.andgiving us liberty tofpeakjmto himfThe Lordpit-cheth hk Tabernacle amongjl us here on earth^andwe are as it were taken up into the mount ofGod^there to be transfix gured before himJFhen the Lord appeared unto Jacob in a vipon by nighty when hefiedfiom his brother ECau^andhe Jaw a ladder ereSedbetween heaven andearth^andthe Lord on the top ofit^the Angels afcending and defcending by it^ mhenheawok§Mowdve:idiu\\ (y^i//j6e) is this place, Ge;r.i8.i6, it. The Lord wa§ here, and I was not a ware 5 furely it is no other than the houfe of God, and the gate of heaven. And are not oitrTemples the houses of God.^ are they not the very gates of heaven .<? In ourfolemne ajfemblies is not aladder ere&edbetweene earth and heaven^ is not tlic Lord on the top of it^ and are not we humbled at his feet 'd-j.^..^-. to heare his Word ? The gracious in/lruSions which wc receive from him^ are they not as fo many Angels defcending unto us\lhe gracious motions that arife in our hearts^ upon meditation of his IVord^ ofthankefgiving tohim^ of rejoycing in him yea^ojfarrowing for our fins^ are they not as jo many Angels afcencljng to him^Onrteares have a double motion-^one naturall-^downwards^ anotherfpiritu il^np-rrards^ for the Lord puts them into his bortels: thehairs of our head are nn ^j^brecl, how much more thefighcs of our

jT' B 3 h^ii^t

/

The Preface.

heart:, and'gromes ofourfpmt ? Andhavc we not great canfe to inure cur [elves betimes thm to fabbatize with God, as hefabbatizeth with us ^ that we may he the fitter to keepe our eternall Sabbath with him : (forfo is our eter-nail happinejje reprefented unto ui) in the enjoying of him lLL66.ri. f^^ ^^^^3 and being filled with his glory'-^ which Auftin siiechit.vd. calls ^Sabbatum maximumj our greatefc Sabbath^ hi^'^ff't u ^^ ^ Plenitude Sabbati 5 and to that purpofe cafis his E^^Lfl%\> eye upon that Sabbatum Sabbatorum, Sabbath of Sab-I cor.i5.24.18. ^^//j/jRevel.QS. F^ri^k^Chrift hath put downe all rule, and all authority and power, then ftiall he deliver up the Kingdome to God^ even the Father, and God fhallbeallinall.

Tet-1 willingly confefie^ that in my ohfervation^ two things there are:, whichfeeme t» be of great moment.in op^ pofition to the morality of the fourth Commandement : I. i:he change of the ^lay. 2. Thegenerall opinion of the Fa-thers pronouncing in an indefinit manner the fourth Com^ mandement to be ceremoniall. Tet notwithfianding., the regijiring of it in the Decalogue:, which is generally ac compted the Law morall;, lfay:,this conftderation hath even prevailed more with mee^ to accompt thefuhjiance thereof morall. Neverthele/fe for the honour I owe:, and refpeS I beare to Antiquity, I have endevoured to underjiand the Antients aright:, and to enquire in what refpeS they accompt ed it ceremoniall For to my underfiandmg:, the fan-dfification of the reji:, or thefervice ^f the day, efpecially unto us Chriftians is meerely morall* But as concerning the refi itfelfe:, it may be:,fome ceremoniality maybe found therein^ efpecially confidtredin conjunUion with the time appointed for the worfhip andfervice ofOod. And herein I thanke God, I have found goodfatiffa^ion unto myfelfe:, at lafi 5 how ifiaHfatisfie others I know not. And when Sometimes ihadwadedthorow the Epiftleto the Romans

^ unto

The Preface.

unto the fourteenth Chapter h there occafion rvas given me to conjider further of this controverfie^fo farre^ as a few iayes vponldgivt liber tie to provide wy next Sermon: and therein I made ufe ofWo^^pxmoiVx^ and of Vcxtxiws^aHdno more as I remember , but in Pererius I came acquainted 7i?/MTofl:atus his Arguments^ direSed againjl the ancient injiitutionofthe Sabbath from the Creation^ which till then limagined had been generally received without con^ tradi&ionh according to that which theflory ofGeneJis at fir (i fight femes to commend unto us-And by this occafion my mind working hereupon in my meditations^ I thought fit^ for opening a way^ to the better clearing of the truth.to difiinguiJJj three things^infubordination^ the latter to the former. I. Thefirji .was a time in generall to befet apart for Godffer vice- 2. Thefecondwas the proportion of this time.^i The third^t he particularity oft he day according to thefpecifiedproportion- I. Thefirji feemedtome of necef-fary duty by the very light of nature^ t(fas many as know Cod^ and acknowledge him to be their Creator: and this I tooke-i and doe take to be the highejl degree of morality in this precept^ and herein hitherto I have found no oppoji-tion- 2, As touching thefecond^, by light of nature we are fomcwbat tofceke-, as whether one day in a weeke or more 5 or one day in a month or more 5 or one day in a yeare or more-i ought to befet apart for thefolemne worjijip andfer-vice of God. So that herein it is fit wefljouldexpe^ dire" if ion from God^ the Lord of the Sabbath, I. Becaufe the ferviceofthedayishis^ anditfeemcsfit hefjould cutout what proportion of time he thinker convenient. 2. For the maintenance of uniformitie therein h and kji otherwife there might be as many divifions hereaboutr^, as there are churches in the worll^ and contentions alfo confe^jucntly^ eachjianding for their owne eU&ion. Forreafon of a con • UQnrall nature is ver/varioffs^ and therein commonly af-•^ 'r frahn

The Preface..

feclion heaves the greatejljwaj^and drawes the judgement ■ to comply with it. out when God hath determined a cer" taine proportion of tinie^ it may he wejhall find great con' gruitie therein-^ even tonatnrallreafon^ andfarre morO than in any other:D^Ti^lA^ as Mafier Broad reports.pro-fejfeth^ that to one who knowes thejiory of the Creation^^it is evident by light of nature^ that one day infeven is to be Fdrt zj.ib I. confecrated to Godsfervice. And Azorius the Jefuit in cAi'z.' his nwraUlnftitutiom acknowledgeththat Itismoft a-

^reeable to reafon^that after fix work dayes,one day fhould be confecrated to divine worfhip. The kali di' vijion of dayes is into a tveeke^ the next greater divijion is into a months the next into ayeare. New by light of na' ture it fee me s far re more reafonahle^ .that one day infiven flwuldbe iwployed in Godsfervice^ than one day in a mo-nelh. Jndifafeventhpart of our time be to be confecra^ ted unto God^ better afeventh day^ than afeventhpart of every day^ becatffk the worldly occupations of each oftho/e dayes:> mt^ft needs caufe miferable dj(lra3ion. Thf^s teafon may difccitrfe in probable manner^ when God hath gone before us to open a way untom. Certainly:^ when God hath once determined the proportion oftime^ it isfofarrefrom being accotmtedmorally as perpetually andftill to hold^ un-tillGodhimfelfefijallalter it, 3. As for the particularity of the day according to the for en amed proportion'-^ therein we flwuldbe far re more tojeeke^ were wee left unto our felves 5 time confifling in a continuallflux and fuccejfion^ om part afore^and another after. As namely.fuppojing one ■ ' day infeven k to be confecrated to Gods fervice 5 yet wee fljallfidl be tojeeke^which cfa) ofthefeven is to be jet apart jor an holy w/e. And no marvcll'-yfor in itftlje it is nothing material! For a proportion offervice being required within a certaine compaffe. fo it be done within that comp^ffe^ ^very Majier rejisfatisfiedwithhfsfervantsworke. But

'^ as

The Preface.

mfdf difference in the proportion^ every one account^ that A matter of great moment. God himfeife acl^now ledgeththk'^ therefore to whom he gives but little^at their hands he exptSsbut little h to whom hee gives mnch^ ef them he expeSt much^as our Saviour teachetL And Saint ^ohn exhorts Chriftians fo to carry themfelves in the Lords fervice^ that they may receive a full reward.re^ ihhn.%. both for our affurance that our fervice JJjallhe acceptable vpjth GodCfor t?/Jeroboam thefbn (?/Nebat who made iJraeltoJFn^ we reade^ that Hce offered upon the altar which he had made in Bethel the fifteenth day of the eighth month, even in the month which he had de-vifed of his owne heartjirA/V/j latter claufe undoubtedly is added by way of exprobration^ as alfo to prevent divi-fions by reafon of different opinions thereabouts^ and as different courfes therinh it it fit that herein wej/jculdwait for the Lords direSion^ and deft gnat ion of the particular day* And even this alfo wasfo ordered by God himjelfe^and that in great congruitie^ as appeares to as many^ as are ac quaintedwith the flory of the Creation. For the Lord having difpatched all his worses infix dayes:, and rijiing on thefeventh^commandedman to imitate him» For in this re^eff it was^ that at the firfi the Lord blefled the fe-venth day and fanftified it: and fowethoufand ofyeares after gives this reafon^ why after fix dayes of labour thefe-venth being the Sabbath of the Lord our God, no manner of workefl?ould be done therein -' which being once thus ordered by the Lord of the Sabbath^ it mufi be in for ce cfperpetuall obfervation^ as a reqwfiic determination of the morality of this Law s and not of an alterable nature^ faveonlyhy the fame authority whereby it was ordtittcd* Now to my underfianding^ by the fourth Commandemcnt it is cleave : Firfl^ that God commandedfome time to bee Cet apart^ andfan^ificd unto his fervicc. Secondly^ ikn

The Preface.

the prof $rthn of this time he hath defined to he one day in feven. Thirdly^ that the particular day under thif proportion vposdefignedto be thefeventh^ and that unto the lews in comfpondencie to the feventh daffrom thefirfi creati* on-) wh:reon God commmded them to reft from all their workesjik^ as on that day the Lord refled from hk vporks* Andlthinl{e^ there is no qmflion amongU Chrifiians^ hut that all this ought to be religionflj obferved by the people of God^nntiB the Lord himfelfe manifefi his pleafure for al' teratioH, and no farther^ in any particular^ thanGoAjhaU manifefi his pleajure for alteration. As for example* Firfi for the time^ then for the refi^ laflly^ for thefervice of the dayitfelfe. Firfl, IfGod hath not manifejiedhis will for any alteration^ offettingapartjjuueiime for divine fir-' vice ^ we mufiflillcontinue tofetfome time apart for di* vine fervice. Lik^voife^ if God hath not mamfe(ied his pleajure^ to have theprop^ion of time altered^which hath bin originally allotted unto hisjervice'itxfe muflnotprefume to allow a Ujfeprop(irtion of time for his fervice ^than hath been formerly prefer ibed by him. Only both Gomzrus and Rivet concur in this^that we may allow moreh and that in reafonjt is fit now under the Gof^ellto allow more time for Gods fervice^raf her than lejfe^in comparifon to that which he would have aUowedhim under the Law* And as for the particularity of the day^ if God hath manifejiedhis pleajure to have it altered^ it mnfi be altered-, ( as in cafe it ap-peare to have been ceremonially in refpe3 of the refl commanded thereon ) and another in the feven fubfiituted in the place the^'eofi and that according to Gods dire&ion^ and not other wife. Secondly, fo as touching the reft of the day commmded upon Mount Sinauntoth^ J ewes (notfo unto Adam upon the Creation^ but onely wee reaie that God blefled the feventh day and fanftified it, which JanSifiration yet on mam part drawes a refi with it') if there be found ajufi dijiin&ion betweene a re^jnorall^ ( fi

The Preface. fa^ forth as thefan&ificathn of the day requimh) and a reficeremonial^ofa more rigorotis naturcamlthat prefigu-rlngfomt thingin Chrill'^it will follow herchtnce that the reft morall Jiittcontinueth^ together with thefanSificati^ on of the day^ as much as every and that the rigorous refl ctulifaU andhe aholijhed- Thirdly, fo in the lajlplace^ as touching the fervice of the day 5 whatfoever was prefer i" bed unto the Jewes thereon as ceremonial/, is 4t ends as namely the Sabbath facrifice which doubled the daily facri" fice. Only the publique mini fiery of the Word and Prayer^ as moraU^fliU continueth.together with our SacramentaU ceremonies which Chriji hath given unto his Church^Bap^ tifme and the Lords Supper h and therefore the Lords day was called by the Ancients the day of light, in reference unto Baptifme^Baptifme being calledP'^'l'^i^^^HlIuminationy thefirji wor^e of grace-, and the day of Bread^ in reference to the Lords Supper. Now all this I hope to makeappeare^ before I give ever this taske which I have taken in hand. And I was the more confirmed in my meditations^ when I heard by one of my Auditors,a Divine ^thot in this do&rine of mine concerning the Sabbath,as touching thejuh/iance oft hat which was delivered by me^ I nothing differed from the opinion ofD» Prideaux^ whofe difcourje on that argw ptent^ at that time I had not been acquainted with. But Jlnce ifinde that Se&.8. of that his Leffure, heprofeffeth that the Jewifh reft cannot ftand with oar Chriftian liberties ifayfotoo^ and withall endevour to give evidence for the abrogation thereof Further, the fame Reverend Do&cr profeffeth^ That we only are fo farrc to ab-Aaine from worke^ as it is an impediment to the performance of fuch duties as are then commanded. / am not only of his opinion herein^ but withaU defire no more than this to be granted for the maintenance of the morallreji of the fourth Commandement*

n C Z But

The Preface.

But ihaveohfervedfome to deny any thmg in the Tevpifh Sabbath to have been ceremonially yet will not have that fourth Comm inclement morally hut pojltive rather^as toH--ching both the observation of one day infeven^andastou* ching the particnlar/ty of the dty. And therefore they deny it to be morally, hecaufe it hath not evidence hy light of nature' BHt was it evident to thejewesby light of nature^ that the God of their Fathers:, Abraham, Ifaac, and]^-coh^and that brought them out of thelandof^gypt, was the true God of the world.and that therefore they ought to have HO other gods but him^Is it evident by the light ofnak" ture that God is not to be worfiippedby an Image ? Or if naturall evidence hereoffdile us in thk (i ate of corrupt nature wherein we are-, fjall thefe lawes be denied to be the tnorall Law ofGod^yet I nothing doubt but the proportion of time allowed for Godsfervice^much more the particularity of the day appointed thereunto^ is alterable at the plea-fur e of God* And ceremonials^ Iconfjfe^ are infuch afenfe pofttive^ or rather more thanpofitive ^ namely^ fuch as not only mayj)ut mufl likefl)adowes fiy away when the body of them comes in place» Andyet I find that Cajetan in this point confounds ceremoniallwithpofitive ; though Ithin^ he would not call it ceremonially unlejjfe he conceived^ that this which he calspofitive^^hadfome ceremoniality in it.But their reafon whereupon they deny the ceremoniality ofit^n my judgment is notfufjicient.l.'Becaufe they ground it up" on afuppofition very (^uefiionahle^namely-.that the Sabbath was injiituted before the fall^ whichfome deny^ and that with very great probability in my judgment* 2. Their con-fequence is not good* For though it were no ceremony at the firji'^yet others fay it might be afterwards ^andgive injiance in the rain-bow^, which though in courfe of nature extant before^ yet was notafigne till after the Flood: and though ik^owfome who would not admit of this injiance^yet the

^-^ rhefis

The Preface.

Thefts feemcs very pojjihk h and clearely offnch a condition VP^ matrimony^ ordained rrithout all qiicfijon before the fall. 5. what is that which they fay is not ceremonially is it thefervics of the day in thcfanlfifying of it ^ None that iknorp^^maintains that to be mcejfarily ceremonialU Or if it the reft of the day ^ Obferve voell^indyoujljalfindno reji exprejly commanded at the fir !i.,but only it isjignified, that Goddedicated it to his fervice 5 which yet, I confeffe ml-lingly:,draws afterlt a reft from all jv or kj oppoftte or impe^ dimentallto thefan^ificationofit* 4. Thtisihey take little care tofatisfie the Fathers:^ voho generally concnrreinac-k^ovpledging the ceremoniality of it. And we are too wea^ in thffe dayes^ to heare up an opinion in flat contradiBion to the Ancients, and to keepe our [elves blamelejfc. Yet Doctor Andrews (Bijhop of Winchefter^ ere hce died) in his pattern ofCatecheticaldoSrineprofeJfeth againjithe cere* moniality of it h hntfo as acknowledging it to prefigure the reft wejhail have from our (ins inChriJi^andthat therefore the day is changed ^though (as he thinks) the ceremony not thereby proved. Tet pag. 241. having propofedfuch a qne-' ^/^^jWhcther we muft obferve the Sabbath as the Jewes didj not to kindle a fire, nor to drefle any meat on that dzy.anfwereth thus ^ We fay No 5 for this was but ceremoniall,and belonged only unto them.^.Vp-en this ground (to wit,upon the denying of the ceremoniality of the particular day) they will hardly be able tojujiifie the abrogation of it. For albeit, they findfome ground for obfervation of the Lords day^, yet no ground at all for the abrogation of thefeventh. And that which is only pofitive^ mufijiill continue, till it he abrogated by as good authority, as whereby it was made. 1 • ^^^^ wee find the pra&ife of the Church for the obfervation of both fome hundreds of yeares continued. 2, Anditfeemes congruous to reafon in the judgement ofihofe.who oppofc both tl)e inftitution oft ■^ ^ .J C 3 fortbf

The preface.

ferthmth after the creation,anA the mordHy of one day in feven, that me JhouU confecrate toGodsfervice rather weredayesthanftwer*

Andfurely to difcever as geod ground^for ohfervation of the Lords day notx>, as for ohfervation ofthefeventh formerly,is the greatejl d^culty that ifindin thk argument^ if not infitperahle h whereof jet vpeejballfind our Selves in greater meafure eafed^ifvpe canjhexp manifed evidence for the abrogation ofthefeventh which wasfahbaticallto the Jewes. Nowfirji'ithis k clearly performedhy acknowledge-ing the ceremoniality ofit'ywhichyet I doe not affeSfljohld he acknowledged without f roofe. Secondly^ thus alfo the fathersjhattfairely hefatisfied. thirdly,andthe Introdu-Bion of the Lords day in the place therofadvanced^Fonrth-ly, efpecially if the ceremonialiiyhefo cleared^ ss plainly to manifefi, that the body thereof was Chrifl^ which is a very^^ hardtaske to per for me of all other ceremonies^ yea^ ofai other Sabbaths or any other Sabbath fave of the weekly Sabbath. "But ofallthefe, to wit: I. Of the originall injii^ tution of it. 2. Of the morality of one day infeven^ as perpetually to be oljerved. 3. Of the authority of the Lords day^ introduced into the place ofthefeventh, by more than EcclefsafticaUor Humane conliitution^wefhaUf^eakjnore by occafton of the fever aUpaJfages in this difcou>fe, which comes to be examined, fo to make way to enquire about the fanSification of the Lords day, whether inoppofition as much to worldlyJports andpajiimes (or more rather) as to theworksofour calling. For to the confideration hereof we are now driven-^it being now held that they whofpeakjor write agawftfuchfports and pafiimes upon the Lords day^ our Chrijiian Sabbath,doe oppoje truth- Now whether we do oppofe truth inftandmgfor thefan&ification of the Lords day,and maintaining thefe pajiimesfpecified to be an impe diment thereunto 5 we deftre to commend our felves to the

/^ judge-

The Preface.

judgement of every Chriftran cdnfcience.upon conjiderati^ on of our reafons herein reprefented.Onr Savior commands m to give unto Caefar that which is Caerars, and unto God the things that are Gods 5 andme hold our fehes hound to hearken unto his voice^^ as we hope to be faved by his grace. Andhecaufeinfome cafes it may bee donhtfull^ what belongs unto C^far, and what belongs unto God-, by reafonofthe darkne/fe of our underjianding., and weak" neffi of our judgement h it behooves mfo much the more to labour in the invefiigation of this difference^ and carefully looke unto it^ that under colour of giving unto Cxizr ^that which is CsefarSj we doe not give unto Gxfar that which is not CsefarSj and not give unto God that which is Gods : and under colour of giving unto God that which is Godsy we doe not give unto God that which is not Gods^ and not give unto Caefar that which is Cx[aTs.And albeit D. Pri-deaux his Le&ure was neither delivered (as lamperfwd-ded^ by word of mouth ^^nor afterwardsfet forth in print to Jirengthen fofharpe_^roceedings againjl the Minijiers of Godasnow arein courfe'-^ yet feeing it hath been of late tranflatedandpublifhedinEngliflj^ with a Preface^ to the . jujiifying of the fame proceedings ^even then (as itfeemes) intended':i and that neither accordingto any Law or Canon that we know ofh therefore I am driven^ (who otherwife^ I am verilyper/wadedyfjould never have fet hand unto this worke^bht left it unto others^who are better verfed in pra-fficall andpafiorall Divinity than f^yfelfe) to give myfelf to the examination-, both of the Preface^ and of the Booke itfejfe : for we labour ^as it werCj for life under the burthen of it 5 and this is fet forth^ as it ftcmes^ to promote our condemnation.

THE

(9%^ (ir%^W%(9\>.^(» (»\.^9) (3^^^ (»\U#«

!THE DOCTRINE OF

^ THE SABBATH DELIVERED

in the Aft at Oxenprd^ Anne 1622:

By D. P RI D E A u XjHis Majcftics

ProfcfTor in Divinity in that

Universitie.

And now tranflated into ^nglifli for the benefit of the common people. Marine 2.27. The Sabbath was made for man-, not man for the " Sabbath. Together with an Examination thereof.

7 he Preface of the Tranjlator to the Chrifiian Reader. Preface^

[F all the Controverfies which have excrci- SeHl i. fed the Church of Chrift, there is none more ancient than that of the Sabbath. So ancient, that it tookc beginning even in the Infancie of the Church, and grew up with it. For as we reade in the hdis^Thcre rofe u]f cert at ne of the SeEl of the Pharifes which beleeved, faji/JgyThat it was needfuR to circumcife the people^ and to command them to keep the Law of Mofes, whereof the Sabbath was a part: which in the general], as the Apoftlcs laboured to fupprede in the firft general! Counccllholden in Jerufalcm; 3. So did Saint TW ^-

(upon occafion of whofe miniltry this controvcrfie firft began) endevour what he could againft this particular; fharply reproving thofe, which allowed yet the lewesSahbath, orob-aH.j^.io»i ferved dayes, and months, andtimes^asifhe had befi creed his /x-bourinvaine ufonthtm. But more particularly in his Epiille

D to

J J he moralitie dfthe feurth Cemmandiment

to the GolQlfiam, Let rie mUn judgejoH In reffeSl ofm holy day, or of the new Moone^or of the Sabbath dayes .which were a Jhadov^ of things to coms^but the body wM ofChrifi.^oth which expreP-fions of Saint PW are in this following difcourfe produced to this very purpofe. Yet notwithftanding all this care, both generally of the Apoftles^ and mo^ efpccially of Saint Pnftl to fupprefle this errour, it grew up (till and had its patrons 2 and abettors. 3. E^/(?^and^m«f^^,tWoof thcwretchedeft

See Ai^ufi. de Herctiques of iItc Primitive times, and after them Ajjollinaris, Htrcfhr E^iph. are ifaid to countenance and defend it,which doubtleflc made the Ancietit Fathers declare thtmfclves fully in it,as a dangerous point: which fecmed to confirme the Jewes in their incredulity, and might occafion others to make queftion of our 4. Saviours comming in the flefh. 4. Hence was it that/r<?«^?//3 Juftin Martyr, TertMan and Ettfebiuf, men of renowne for learning in the primitive times (three of which are cited in the text of this following difcourfe, and the fourth quoted in the margin) affirme for CertainCj that nearer any of the Patparches before Mofesh^vf-did dbfcrve the Sabbath : which qucftion-leffe they muft have dortc,had that: Law been moral^and difta-t-. ted by nature, as now Tome teach us. J. Afterwards by the

* oppofition made by Epiphamiis, in his Confutation of the he-

refies of the Ebionites; and by the refolutions o^T'heodoret on the 26 * o^€z.ech, Procopm Gazit.m on the 2 , of Gen, by 7)^-mafien^ and otir Venerkble "Bede, (which tvjo Jaft are here alfb cited. 5'(?S«1.) concurring with the former Fathers, all talke and dbfcrvatioti of the JewiQi Sabbath vani(hed utterly ; and the Lords day which had from the Apoftlcs times been infti-cuted by the Church,in the placcthcreof, was hallowed with-^. oat any rivall. 6, Nor do I find but that all fuperftitious fan-

cies about that day, were as wholly abrogated as the day it felfe. Save that S. G'r^^'^ry tels us, howfomeiniJ^w? wercfo fuperftitious in this kind, that they would neither work upon the Saturday, no nor fo much a^ wa(h upon the Sunday. Ex^m* ^ obferve in the title firft, tharthe Tranflator profdleth, he

bar-h performed his part,/or f/j^ ^fW!?^r ^/^ r^<? r<??»»?^» peeple, I doe not envie them that benefit, if it be a benefit: but ifit be not fo, but prove contrary, t fhall grieve rather. No doubt the Tranflator thinks he ihath an advantage thereby^ fo did

Is fiill in force to hind Christians. . i

Rdlffljakeh, when he rcfaftd to fpcak in the Aramites language, but chofe rather to fpcake in the Jewcs tongue in the audience of the people that were on the wail; that it they did not har-ken unto him, they ml^ht eat their owne dung^anddrinl^ their oyvn piffe^ with the reft. What will bee the condition of (bme of them who doe not hearken to this Prafacer ; I know not but according to ray poore judgement, my opinion is^that as many as hearken to this Prafacery if Chrills comming (hall bee on his owne day as tAu^in hoped, it would bee { and what Sermm. detem. day more likely in all probabllitie ? ) and at his comming on A'^'*'- * H-die Lords day he fhould take thcmin their Iports, their owne hearts would mifgive them, that their comfort diould bee as little as that the Orator threatned unto the Jewes upon the wall, in cafe they did not hearken unto him. In a book printed not long ago I hear,there is alleaged a paflage of one of the « Tkidoret ^"^ Fathers, for the free ufe of fcripturc by all iorts of the vulgar people;and it i^tranflated alfo into EngliOijbelikejfbr the benefit ofthecommon people, but in a (etond edition the Greeke^entcnceis'^faidtobereteined, but the Englifh tran- ''andbyin^ui^ flation quite omitted. Did the Author report of gratifying ^fif^dlitttuc the people thus, and quench his care of providing for their benefit? This obftrvation is none of mine, but accidentally l>rought unto my hands by one of (bme qualitie, by occafion >of mutuall communication betweene us. But fince, I hearc the Author hath made amends for that another way. For having in thc.firil edition profeflTed, that Poftfi errours Are not damKfibU in themfehes^ which with what refpeft it ftioqld bee delivered fir the benefit of the common -people^ amongft Prote-ftantSj I know not •, in the (ccond edition it is correfted thus, fopifljerrours are not duTrmahle in the iffue. But where correfted t not in the text, (that continiung the fame ftill, that fuch er^ rours are not damnahle in themfelves) but among the Errata at the end of the booke, although the Author was warned of the ftrangenefle of that aflertion (as Iheare) and that in contradiction to the doftrincof the Bi^opof Canterbury inhisTrcatifeofCouncels, profeiTing that the Papifts withholding the^up from the ' people^is a damnable errour. Here *j>fw^. is brave jugling in the Text to comply with fome, and in the £rr^ayioiiVos\dt againll afterclaps for himfeltc, and to com-

D 2 ply

The ^oralitie of the fourth Commandement^

ply with othersjand betray deep diffimulation in bothjcnough to make foim man (when fiichcourfes are difcovered) to be abhorred of al. But toproceed,thc TranflAtor doth not fay,he hath performed this taske foe the benefit of himfelfe, yet he plainly deales upon an advantagious argumcnt.But if his Ma-jeftie (hall be pleafcd out of his gracious difpofition ( whereof he hath given many remarkable documents) tovouchfafeto receive information concerning the honor of the Lords day/m way of a >Lilt and neceffary Apologie, which wee are driven to make, I truft (through Gods goodnefle ( in whofe hands-arc the hearts of Kings ) it (hall bee neither advantagious to him, nor difadvantagioustous 5 and his Maje(tie may perhaps bee found to abfolvc lis in the Court of his owne confcience. But what is that hnefit of the common feofU^ whereof this Tranfla-tor is fo zealous > I gueffe it is in freeing them from fuperrt iti-on 5 and that hereafter they may not bee fo peevifhly fooliCh, as out of any Cabalifmes of confcience, to torbeare their may-games j andiifuall dancings on the Lords day; yet fome, and tiiey no fniall ones^as I have heard,do profefTe them no o-therwile to be allowed then as they may be done to the prailc and glory of God. Which calls to my remembrance what a Scotchman (bmetimes raid,as he was going in one of London ftreets, and fpyingoneof his acquaintance on the other fide: for calling him aloud by his name; O Sir, faith hc^when (hall we meet ata Tavernej to give God thanks for our deliverance out of the He de Re 1 But how comes that to bee accounted fuperftitious, which all the Bifhops of the land,and the whole Kingdome accounts the prophanation of the Sabbath, not to fpeake ok particular Bi(hops, though as great for learning and place, as Bi(hpp aAndrewes, who in nis patterne of catecheti-call doftrine^tells us of rome,who on the Lords dd^y^vacant nu^ gis^ (-peBACtdts, theatrii^ chorei^yZnd approves the (tiling of fuch a S^bhsLthySahlfatu aurei vttttli^the Sahbath of ihe golden Ca/f;l niake bold to tranflate k for the benefit of the comon people; and B,Downhambeikov;cs the like denomination upon (iich a Sabbath. Bifhop Andrerces over and above cites «^«/?/» for ihclifrefaying, but that is more then any quotation of his doth make good/or ought I find hithcrunto But whatfhould I alleage ohc Or two Dodors opinions hereupon though

never

isjiill in force to bindChriflians.

never fo great, when an whole Kingdome ftands for the 0me in my judgement, even the Kingdome of England, as may appeare by the Act of Parliament i. C^oli^ concerning the Sabbath* The introdu(^ion thereunto, manifeftcth three grounds whereupon they proceed to make that Aft. i That there is nothing more acceptable to God, then his holy wor-fhip and (ervicc. 2 That the due fanftification of the Lords day^ is a great part of Gods holy wofhip and (crvice. 5 That men are very prone to prophane it. Now to prevent this pro-pljanation of the Sabbath, many things arc there prohibited; and one amongft the reft is this^that none (hall come forth out of his.own parifli about any (ports or paftimes; whence 1 conclude, that to come out of a mans pariOi on the Lords day, a-bout any ^orts or paftimes is to prophane the Sabbath. For to prevent the prophanation of our Chriftian Sabbath and to maintaine the landification thereof is this law made* Now to come out of a mans owne parilh about what bufinefle (o-ever^ no wife man will fay that it is to prophane the Sabbath; but according to the nature of the bufmelTe ^ whereabout hee comes forth of his owne parifti, fo (hall hee bee found^ either to prophane the Sabbath, or not to prophane it. As for example 3 for a man to come forth of his owne parifti to heare a fermon, no man I thinke, will fay, that it is to prophane the Sabbath. Li like manner, to come forth of his owne parifb, into an other parilh to fetch a Phyfitlan or Surgeon in cafe of iiecelTitie, no man will fay that this is to prophane the Sab-bath 5 becaufe the bniinefTe about which hee comes is not to prophane the Sabbath. But for a man to come out of his own pariQi to buy or fell, to trade or trafBque, no necelTitie urging thereunto, this is to prophane the Sabbath ^ becaufe in fiich foi t to trade on the Sabbnh day, is to prophane the Sabbath. In like fort, for a man to come out ot his owne pariih about any (pores or paftimes, is therefore to Prophane the Sabbath in the judgement of the Parliament, becaufe the keeping and performing of thefe fports and paftimes, isa maniteft profanation of the Sabbath in the judgement of the King and his Parliament. Now if all fports and palfimcs on the Lords day bee a prophanation ofthe Lords day our Chriftian Sabbath ; it foUowcuh that may-games and mancings, and

D 3 dancings.

The Moralitie of the fourth Commmdemmt ^

dancings, at fuch timesufuall, are alfo a manifefl: profannion of the Sabbath. And hererin wee fpeake, aslconceive^ in his Mc^jeftics meaning, asfifted with the great Conncell of his Kingdome, the Lords Spirmiall and Temporal!, and the HoLife of Commons : and vvhofocver (liall account it iupcr-ftition to fay fo, fhall therewithal! charge his royallMajeltic, and all the Lords both ^puitiiall and Temporal! 5 and in a word, the whole Parliament with fuperltition. Yet if it were onely the benefit of the common people, that this Tran-flator did intend, I for my part (liould bee content to fuffer liim to enjoy the honour of feeking the benefit of the people; onely admonifhing the people commited to my charge, to coiilider well whether there bee any fuch benefit to bee reaped thereby as is pretended. And feeing Saint Pff^?* exhorts us to give diligence, thatyvcemaybee fonndof Chr'iftirtfeace^ when hee ccmes inflam'wafre to render vengeance on all them that know not Gedt nor ohej not the G off ell of Chrifi Jefm : Let every one examine himfelfe, whether hee could bee content to bee taken dancing about a may-pole on the Lords day, when the Lord, even the Lord of the Sabbath fliall come, and that to be found of him in this condition, were to bee found of him in peace. But feeing this tranflation, and efpecially the Preface of this Author tends to the promoting of the moft rigorous cenfures againft many ; it (tands us upon to plead our ownc t:au(c3 ancTto labour herein as for life : even in examination ofthe doctrine here delivered, that wee may finde upon how juft ground it proceeds ; otherwife wee may beejuftly condemned of all : and in the cenfures that pafle upon us whether of Excommunication, or Sulpenfion, or Deprivation, finde none to plead our caufe, or to commiferatc us. The (e-eond thing lobferve in this title, isthepaflageof Scripture here mentioned, as juftifying the dodVrine here delivered out ofAfa7l^2,2y, The Sabbath wa^ wade for man^ not man for the Sahbath, Now none of us makes quefiion but that the Sab* bath was made for man : Nay wee nothing doubt but tliat all the dayes of the weeke were made for man , that is, for the good of man, but the Sabbath for the bcft good,not the bafeft good of man in following his worldly pleafures* The fix daycs ofthe wcekc are given us to labour in our ordinary cal-

is Jill I in force t& bind Chrijiians. m

n«gs, for the maintenance of oiirlife teinporali : but the kventh is fanftitied by God, that is, dedicated to holy ex-ercifesintheferviceof God, and to inure us to recreate our felvcs and to delight in the Lord ; that as his foule takes pleasure in us, Co our foules tnight be accuftomed to take pleafure in him ; and to make his Sabbaths our delight, to confe-cratethem as glorious unto the Lord,^ It is true, there is another end of the Sabbath, and that was tit vires recolllgeret, to recollcft his ftrength which had been fpcnt and wafted in the fixe dayes of labour ; whence it followes evidently , that when a man was hungry as the difciples were, when they plucked the eares of corne, they w^ere not bound by any religion of the Sabbath to abftaine from fiich a courfe, whereby a mans ftrength would become more and more weakned and impaired. Not that thefe things were commanded on the Sabbath day, but permitted ; as is often fignified by the word Ijjj./ itislawfiall 5 and for good reafon. For the Sab- <' Mmkiu bath being ordained to promote a mans benee^e^ his ivell b(» lo.n. ing ; and that in the beft things it fuppoleth libertie to pro- ^^-^^5.4. videforhisfjff>incafeofneceiricie ; left otherwifc he {halLlie ^"^•^•9* found uncapable ofthofe things that concerne his bene ejfe^ his we/i being. For our nature wanting neceflTaric refrcftiment doththereby many times become the moicuntit for holy ex-eerifes, and to performe that dutie which God requires^ and hath defei-ved at our hands. How were/^»^r^4?»/eyes cn-lightncd upon the taft'iHg of a little honey, i Sam, 14,2$^. ButthisTranfla-ordelires, as it feemes. from the generalitie of mans good to feale up an opinion in the minds of his Readers , that the Sabbath was made not onely for the (crvice of God, and tor the promoting of a man in the kno-^ ledge and feare of God, but for the furthering of his carnall pleaf^jres alfo. Bjt never v»'as it knowne that our Saviour juftified any libertie to fuch courles on the Sabbath : Neither were any inch things, as it feemes in courfe, in the diyes of the Prophet y^wcj,whoteprehends them for fayinpr, .-Ir.j.S.'^Jf^hen will the Sabbath be aone^ that they might retuinc to their worldly courfes 1 Rather they could wifh their fun might ft-and ftill on that day, as fometimes it did in the dzycJ of IcfhHjy if libeitie were given to (ports, paftime?, and pleasures on that

D 4 day:

g The ^oralitie of the fourth Commandement ^

day : and it wvre wondrous ftrangethat libertie (hould bee debarred chem from kindling a fire to fet forward the ftrufture 'Exod, 35 ^ "of the Sanftuarie, made to this very end that the Lord nrlght Luhe^^.il^'isi. dwell amori^ them : And from (bpreciousa worke as the embalming of the body of Chrift, the Lord of the Sabbath, and that at the very end of the day, if at that time they were not rertrained from any fenfuall coiirfeof recreation^ according to the common fafliion of the world. Undoubtedly, towfocvcr it ftands now with us Chriftians ; in the dayes of onr Saviour, they that refted on their Sabbath from embalming the body of Chrift, and that according to the appoim" merit^ which is as much as to fay, according to the Lavp ofGoJ*^ flireiy they, by the fame Law of God were much more reftrai-ned from worldly pleafiires, the(e Itanding far more in oppo-fition to the (anftification of the Lords Sabbath^then the em-balnung of the body of the Sonne of God, who was Lord of the Sabbath# And therefore this text is moft unfcafonably and impertinently alleaged by thcTranflator to ferve his turn, being fane more fit to croue his purpofes, then any way to promote them. So from the confideration of the title I come to the preface*

If the antiquitic of this controverfic concerning the Sabbath, were any thing materiall ; this Prasfacer were foundered at the firft : For what if the Sabbath bee a part of the Law oiCMofes ? Was not the law of fanftifying the name of God, the law forbidding images, the law commanding them to have no other Gods but him, that brought them out of the land of ^gypt : the law commanding to honofcrparents, toabftainefrommurther, adultery, theft, were not all thefe the Law oi iMofes ? Is not the law of fanftifying the Sabbath one of the tenne Commandenients delivered by God from Mount *y/W as well as the othernine ? and was it not kept in the Arke as well as the reft ? C'rcumcifion was no law of Mofes, and therefore albeit it be (aid loh, 7.22. That Mofesgave unto them Circumcifion^ yet forthwith it is added not hecatife it is of Mofes^ but of the Fathers : fo that Mofe$ rather confirmed it, then was the firft giver of it. So that the Law of Ul/^/fi in this place is to bee undcrftood of the ceremonial! law 5 not of the morall law contained in the

Decalogue,

Decalogue, and among thefc tenne Commandemcnts, that of the Sabbath is one, and commended unto them in that ftatc as none fb mnch^ Remember the Sabbath day tofanSlifie it ; and not onely before Afofes, but before Abraham and Noah alfo, wccread, X.\\AttheJcve}7thd^y Godrcftcdfromallthe tv9ri>esthat Gsn. i.z,: hec had made^ and that therefore God b/ej]cdthe fcvemh day and fan&jfidd it.

Of any Miniiler orPaltor in the Church ofEngland that ^

maintaines us Chriftians to be obliged to the obfervation and fandification of the Jewifh Sabbath , or of any Sabbath that is ajhadovf of things to comcy the body whereof is ofChrift I never heard or read» Yecforfome hundred yejres in the 2

Primitive Church, not the Lords day onely, but the (eventh day al(b was religioufly obferved, not by Ebion and Cerin^ thm onely, but by pious Chriftians alfo, as ISaronim writcth and Gomarus conJefTetk, and Rivet alfo, that we are bound in confcience under the Golpell, to allow for Gods fervice a better proportion of time, than the Jewes did under the law, rather than a worfe. And further it is well knowne, that befides the weckely Sabbath; there was variety of obfervation of times amongft the Jewes, and divers of them called Sabbaths al{b, as (ome think, not one whereof was mentioned in the Decalogue, or pronounced by the Lord from Mount Sinai^ as the fourth Commandement was, for the fanftify-ing of the weekly Sabbath. So that this Pracfacer every way fhcweth miferableloofenellc in his dift:ourfe. And if Ebion and Cerinthmy and ayfpoffinari^^ how wretched heretickes fo-cver did ftill inforce the fanftification of the Jewifh Sabbath, ( whofe wretchednefle yet conlifted not fo much in inforcing this, as in inforcing all the ceremonies of A/ofes ; the Jewifh Sabbath long after ^m«/^/«* continuing to beobfer-Vcd by many pious Chriftians,as Baronim oh^cvwah &others, and SaintT*^/i/dothoppo(e all filch doctrine and praftifc in thcfe pafFages of his here mentioned : did not this Author know that upon thefe very paflTages of Saint Paul^ the Ana-baptiftsandSocinians, as vile herctickeg as Ebion and Cc-rintht4S^ and fiA}ollinarisy for their blood have gone fo farrc, as not onely to overthrow the obfervation of the Jewifn Sabbath, but the fan6lirying of the Lords day alfo. The opinion

7 he Moralitie of the fourth Commandement ^

nion of the law ceremoniall {landing dill in force ( which indeed was the opinion of the hcretickes mentioned ) is 1 con-fclle, a dangerous point> andfiichas not onely ieemed (as this Praefacer niinceth it, out of what degree of wiidome or providence I know not) to confirnie the Jewes in their imrc" dptlitie^ but indeed jnftly might confirme them 5 nor onely occafion, but jiiftly caule alfo others, to make quellion of our Saviours comming in the fleQi ; not fo the obfiervation of the feventh day to fanftifie it/or ought this Author hath hitherto manifeftedj or throughout this preface of hlsdothmanifeft ; and the fanftifieation of this dayisapparantly commanded in the moral law fpoken from Mount Sinai.And thofe Chriftians who a long time kept this feventh day holy as well as the Lords day, had no opinion of any danger at all in this their obfcrvation. And it ftood the ancient leathers upon to op-pofe the obfcrvation of the law ceremoniall. Yet what faith jiufiin againft the(e hcretickes, to whom this Author in the firfl place refcrreth us? All that hee delivers againft the Ce-rinthians in reference to this particular is onely this : They fay that wee ought to beecircumcifed^ and that other like precepts of the Law are to hee obfarved, I tranflate it for the benefit of the common people. Of the Eblonites thus^ They obferve the carnall commandcments of the Law^ to wit, Circumcifion of the flejh and the refl^ from whofe burthens wee are freed by the new Teflament, OiAfpoHinaris and his fcft this way^ ex//^-fiin hath juft nothing : but T)an<tu4 who collefts out of o-ther Authors alfb the hercticall opinions of the ^ApoIUnarifis in the laft place writes thus ef them : <iAfter the lafi refur-^ reSiion ( fay they) Sabbaths , CircHmciCton ^ lewiJJj dtjfe'-rence of meates^ and all other legall ceremonies flyaU have ^lace, yea alfo there fial! bee a Temple amongft us, And is not this wilde ftufFe, in reference to the fanftification of the Lords day, now in queftion amongft us?

Now let the Reader judge with whatmodefty it is avou-chedj That Hence it wai that Irenseus, Juftin Marty r^ Tertulli-aUj^^WEufebius, dqe ajjirme for certaine^ that never any of the P atriarches before Mofes Law did obferve the Sabbath 5 D. Pri-deaux (aith not that Hence it was ; neither hath this Author given the leaft evidence hereof. Sure lai*, that in thofe Patri-

arches

arches dayes Chrill was not as yet come in the flcQi^ but rather to come long after their daycs ; and confequently though it be a dangerous courfe in theie dayes to lay any ground ot fuf-picion that Chrilt is not ah'eady comcj but as yet to come; yet this was of no dangerous condition at all in the dayes of the Patriai chsjbccaufc in their dayes Chrift was not come^but to come long after. D. Pridea^tx begins with Tertnllim by this Author tranflated thus,/^^/^ thcm{{dXx}ci he in a particuIarTraft againft the Jewc5)*r]fwr me if they c^i/t, that Adam ever kept the Sdbhath: or Abel ivhcn he vjfcfrd unto Cjodhii accepted facripce^ kidre^Hrd thereof; or that Noah /^p/ the fame, when he was hn* ' fed in preparhg; the Ark^ againfi the De/ti^^e^ or finally that A-braham in offering^ hkfonne Ifaak; or that Melchifedech in execution of his Yriefl-hoodtooke notice ofita Now I appeale to every fober mans judgement, whether to put the Jewes in thofc dayes to (hew this, be to affirmc for certaine^ That never any of the Patriarches before MofeS Law didokferve the Sabbath, It is tru^ indeed, we have no particular relation of the obiervation of the Sabbath in that Bookeof (S'^w^y/j-, and this Tertullian knew full well 5 and againe it is as true that there is no teftimo-ny of ought to the contrary. In the Booke of Jsfuah in like fort there is not any mention of the obiervation thereof (any more than in the Bookc of Judges^ of Ruth y of the two Bookes of5'^w/^(f/Jbutrather (bmething to the contrary^to wit,in the fiege of Jericho^ and marching round about the walls oflericho fevcn dayes together. But yet in gcnerall wcreadein Cjcnefs, that when God had finifhcd all his works in f\yi dayes, and rc-fted the feventh^ he therefore bh^edthe feventh day andfanftified it', and whether this hath not greater evidence, that even then God ordered, that that day (hould be fanftified, than that the meaning fhould bcjthat therefore God ordered this two thou-fand and certainc yeares after, I appeale to every Chriftian to judge betweene us. And if God did then order it, which could not be otherwife than by command, how could Ad^tm be ignorant hereof 5 and if he knew as much, how improbable is it, that he and his, at leaft Abeldind J?«i7/?',and his pious pofterity fliould not obferve it > And if a time had not been (et apart even in Adams daycs for divine fervice, how improbable is it, that C^^in and Abelf^xxXd concurre at the fame timcjin bringing

The Moulitieofthefounh Commandement^

ifig their offerings unto the Lord; and if not at the fame time, how could Cam difccrn that Ahels offering was refpefted and accepted of God, when his was not > Yet for certainc, it was obferved before Mofes LaWj if by the Law wc underftand the Law given on mount Sina, as appeares manifeftly Exod, 16. And withall it is thereby evident, that from the beginning of the world untill that time, the diftin(^ion of the ycare into weekes was obferved, otherwife it were impoflible to know, which day was the feventh in correfpondencie to the feventh from the Creation, (fave by particular revelation whereof we reade nothing ) now that being unknowne, the reafbn of fan-difying the ftventh day by an holy reft, drawne from Gods reft on the feventh, that is, the laft day of the firft weeke from the Creation had been utterly void, and nothing at all agreeable. And this diftiniflion of time into weekes was obferved from all Antiquity by the Gentiles, as hath been confirmed by Walkui and Rivrem^Wixh the helpe oiCUfidif4i Salmafiusy that learned Antiquary 5 and likewife that the feventh day was a Fefti vail even among the Gentiles. And albeit divers others of the Ancients are alleaged to the fame purpofe, as affirming that the Patriarches didnotobferve the Sabbath, as namely

Ecckj. Hip* t . y^^^^^/^^ ^jr ffj^ Sabbath^ as rve have not. And Ifffiin Martyr in '' ^ his Dialogue with Trypho the ]cw^{ayin^^Herct of ore there were

Lib.^.ciip.io. goodmcn that fleafed God^ though they kept not Sabbathes, And IrenAtu in like manner, thus, Abraham himfelfe without Cir-cnmclfion^ and obfervation of the Sabbaths, beleeved Cjody and it Fi.l Orthd. ^'^ impfited unto htm for righteoufnejfe ; and laftly ^amafcer?^ Ub.j{. cdj).z4. ivhen there tvos no Law nor Scripture of divine injpifation^ nor Sabbath confe crated unto God, For as for Bede (alleaged by P^-reriti4 to that purpofe^ in his Btxameron) I find in that place nothing andverable thereunto. Now Hofpinian is of opinion that thefc palTages of the Ancients are to be under ftood of the rigorous obfervation of the Sabbat h among the Jewes; I adde, or in reference to the other Sabbaths commanded in the Law of Mofes ; or laftly in reference to the manner of fblemnizing them among the Jewes, who we know had a peculur S icrifice ordained for t~he Sabbaths 5 and this I prove by thefe reafons. Firft, they deliver this as a. thing well knowne; for they take

no

is JiiU in force to bind Chrifiians. 'l 3

no paincs to prove it. Now confidcr, what ground ceuld they have for the cii'tonie of the Patriarchs before the Flood, efpe-cially confiJering that the teftimony oiMores^Ge^j,2*'^» isYar b:tter evidence tor the keeping of a weekly Sabbath, in a mo-rail way only, than any they could bring to the contrary. Sc-* condly, then againe, could they have better grounds for the pradlife of thole ancient Patriarchs both before, and after the Floud than the Jewesthemfclves? I prefume none willbe To immodeif as to aflirme this;and if they had any fuch evidence, it ftood them upon to produce it, efpccially in dealing againft the Jewes. Thirdly^rhey deliver this as a thing undeniable by thejewesthemfelves, with whom they dealcinthis particular : but the Jcwes had no fuch faith, as to belecve that the ancient Patri irchs never obferved the weekly Sabbath. For none are of this opinion but (uch as ihinke that paflage Gen, 2- 3. of Gods blefling the feventh day and hallowing it, was not delivered of that preient time, as if then God oruained it (hould be {anftified, but only by way of anticipation for the time to come. But this was not the opinion of the Jewes, Manajfeth !^f«//rWa moderne Rabbin, in his booke intituled The Re-conciler,Cofici/iaror,-^ccording to the argument of that his writing, which is to reconcile places of Scripture, in (hew dila-greeing; and that upon enquiry into all the Rabbins both ancient and later 5 m his 36. Queftion upon Fxodpu^ writes thus, as out of the opinion of the Ancients 5 chofe words^houfiaU rememher that thou wafl ajervant in F^iypt^ oblerve how he expounds them; Ac ft diceret^ cogita in lE^ypto, Hbifcyvieh.ts^ ett^ am ipfo Sahbatofer vim te coaflum adUhorcs-^ 44 ifhefhoulci. fay^ thinke ( roith thy felfc^ that in Bqypt where thou fervedf}^ thotc vpafl by force ccnflr'Ainedto labour^on the very Sabbath : Evidently manifefting not out of his ownc particular opinion, but as out of tht generall opinion of their ancient Rabbins, that the Sabbath and the observation thereof was a duty in the very dayes of the Patriarchs.And in the end concludes thus: Jgitur ^Deiu benediUus cupiens Sabbatum, cuju^ fanHimoniam tantU dficumentt6 approbaveraty in ^etenfumab omnibus coii^ decern pr^* feptis iHudinpruit, cjuo fcientes pracepta (f.tern/i effr^ etiam hoc /»• ier ea habendum intctiigerent. Therefore the blejfed God (it is fit I (hould tcanflate it for the bcnefk of the common people) dejt-'

*"' rina

14 7he Moralitie of the fmrth Commandement^

ring that the SMath might bee ohferved for evet of aU ( whifi fmUitj by fo many docftmems he had commended, placed it in the dialogue (that it made it one of the tenne Qommandements ) to the end that' knowing thofe precepts to bee evevlafiing ^ they Jhofild underfiand that this Commandement alfo was to be aa^ compUfljed amongfl them. And indeed Tcrtullian himfelfe pro-fefleth that the Jewes were of this opinion^ as Rivetns ob-ferves out of his booke againft the Jewes, thus tranflated, god from the beginning did fan^ife the feventh day, refting from all the workes that hee had made, and that thereupon Mofes faid unto the people y Remtmber yee the Sabbath day to fanBifeit. Amd therefore when Mercer faith concerning the meaning of thefe words. Cjenef, 2. 3. Hebral ferereferunt in fntHrum : the Jewes for the moft part referre it to.the time to come : he is to be underilood of the later Jewes 5 but of this more (hall be (poken ere wee part from this feftion. 4 Fourthly, not one of the ancient Fathers is allcaged by our adveriaries, delivering his opinion upon that paflage, Genef 2. 3, to (hew what hee conceives totee the true meaning thereof, which yet is the onely ground whereupon our do6^rine is built concerning the originall inftitutionof the Sabbath; and feeing it contains a meaning atfirft fight manifeflly contradiftious to that which they affirne, as wee interpret it of the weckely Sabbath, without reference unto the Jewifli manner of obfcr-ving it :»therefore in this cafe it Itood them upon to take notice of that place, and by fomc faire interpretation vindicate themfelves from fiifpition of contradicting the expicflc Word of God. 5 Tertulhan himfelfe jMftifies our doftrine, namely, that God firom the beginning fanftified the feventh day, as Rizetm (hewcs out of his fourth booRe againft Marm cion^ cap* 12. where hee fayth, (^hriftum ipfum Sabbati diem, benedSEiione Patris dprimordio fanElum benefaEliont fua effcere fanEliorem^ That Chrifi himfelfe made that day more holy by his well doing on that day^ which by the bencdlBion of the Father was made holy from the beginning, ' So that TertulUans meaning in the pkcealleaged to the contrary, cannot bee, that the ancient Patriarchs (imply obferved not the weekely Sabbath, but onely that they obferved it not after that manner the jewes did 5 and that the like interpretation muft bee gi*

YCii

ven of the pafTages allcageJ out of other of the Ancients, 6 For further proofe whereof, ohCervcth^t Theodora^ albeit on the 20, of E^'.'k^^I hee faith in like manner that God pre-fcribed unto the Jcwcs the fabbatlcall vacations^, Vt hac civilis adminifirationis ratio peculiarU a, Gentium cjuidem eos diflingHe" ret inflittitii : that this peculiar adminiftratiou might di-ftinguKh them from the cuftomes of the Gentiles : yet iValUns (hevves that the fame Theodoret in his queftions upon Gcncfis, 2)i/7er/^4. doth manifeftly declare, that even from the beginning of the p^cep- f- 44. crcation3 God did ordainethis day to reft and fanftification. As who having created the creatures in C\x dayes, by the reft of the (eventk day manifcfted the creation to be perfedled ; like as in (even dayfls hee concluded the whole circle of dayes. And that by bleffing the feventh day and fanftifying it,he de-claredj^W«<?» iUnm diem inmilem pmahat adcrerndsim^fedad ^uietem'accommoddtHm fiatmt. The meaning whereof in effect is this, that hee did not thinke that day unfit to have any thing created therin^ hut onely it woi hii^leafure to orkaine it for a day of refl. The fame Author (hewes C^rjfoftome to bee of the (ame opinion in his i o. Homily on Genefis, whofc words in Latiwe he rcndreth t\\ViS^Iam hinc ah imtio doUrinamhanc nohii infmuatDeus^' erudiens in circulo hehJiomsdx diem unum inte* grurp fegfegandum , (^ refonendum ad fpiritualem operationem^ Now from the beginning (jod^infnpiates this inflrtiSiion ^ teaching that in the circle of the weeke one entire day is to hee fesjue" fired and imployed on [pirituall a^ionr, Thefe authorities in my judgement (hould bee of the greater force, for as much as they deliver their opinion by way of intcipretation of Gods Word, and (hat according to the plaine litei all meaning, and that (ijch as whereunto every Chriftians confcience, not fore-ftallcd with pre;udice, is prone enough to yceld by reafon of the native e/idence of the words. For they denote an cittern ill a6:iC)n and tranficiit, not an internall and immanent in God, ( all of which kinde arc eternall) which externall aftion is the dedication of the day to holy ufes, which cannot bee imagined to bee done any other way ( as I fhould thinke) thert by commanding it to bee fanfti-fied» The fame Author (hewes Auftin to have becnc of the fame kdgtment, writinc thus, }Vhcn Ood CfinElifid the feventh y^u^afl^epifl*^.

t6 Tk^ Moralitieefthe founh Cemmandement^

day^ becaujethreonhee re fled from all his work^s^ hee did not deliver ought concerning the Faft or T)inner of the Sabhath: nor afterwards^ when to the Hebrew people hee gave comwandcm$nt for the obfervationofthedajitfelfey did hee mention ought as toHchingthe receivingor not receiving of food : vnelj comman^ dtment is given concerning mens vacation^ from their owne or from fervile worses, which vacation the former people reviving 06 fii fhadow of things to come^ in fuch manner refled from their workes a^ now wee behold the I ewes to refi. Hee citeth al(b Theophilus Tatriareh of Antioch a moft ancient writer in his {ccond booke to Autoljchtu writing thus^Furthermore,4s touching thefeventh whichamongfl alpeople is celebrioWymofl men are in great ignorance. For this day which is celebrious amongfl all is called the Sabbath • if a man interpret in Greeks^ it » called Septimana ; by this name all men call this day^ but the caufe of thi4 denomination they k»ow not. Now what was the cau(e hereof in his judgement, but the Lords refting thereon as the (eventh, after hee had finifhed all his workcs in fix dayes^ and thereupon blclfing it and (andifying it, whereupon it grew to bee a feftivall day generally amongft all } Tertullian though alleaged on the other (ide, yet hath bcene^ialready Ihcwed to bee of the fame minde, in this particular with Chryfoftome and Auflin, Adde unto thefc Epiphanim har, 51. Sabbat urn primum efly e^Hod ab initio decretum efl ac diflum d JJcmino ivmundi creatione cjuodper circuitum ab eo tempore uf^ que hue juxta feptem diei revohitur. The firfl Sabbath is that which the Lord from the beginning ordained and fpake in the creation of the worldy which by revolution from.that time to this^ according to the circie of feven dayes returneth, ^thanafiHS , ^ alfo upon thole words of our Saviour, ^/i things are given to '^ * mee of my Father, diftinguifhethbetwecnethe Sabbath day^ and the Lords day; affirming the Sabbath day to have been the end of the fii ft creation, and the Lords day the beginning of the {ccond creation. Btdn in his Hexameron profeflcth, that the reft of t^€ fcventh day after fixe dayes working, femper celebrari folebat^ was alwayes wont to bee celebrated : If alwaycs,then before the children of Ifraels comming out of ^gypt, before Abraham, before the flood^ even from the beginning of the dayes of Adam jthe firft of men. Addt unto this

the

the received, and moft currant opinion of the Jewes, by the teftimonies of Philo and Jofephw vouched by WalUw^ rphilo io his fccond book o't Mofcs writing thus^ Qtiii facrfim ilium diem, ferfinauUf hebdomadas recurrentem nonhonoratl who doth not honour thai holy day, according to the weekely revo^ lution thereof ? and hee delivers this not of the Jewes onely, but of the Greekes and Barbarians, of inhabitants of Mayn-land, and Hands, thofe of Europe, of Afia, and of the whole habitable part of the world co the very ends thereof. lofephtu /.2. againlt y^/;/?/^«,profeiIing that there is noCity of ©rccians or Barbarians,nor any Nation,to whom the cuftomary oblcr-vation of the levcnth, whereon the Jewes relied, had not reached, Addeunto this the teftimony of two Rabbins, mentioned by Brought on in his Confent of Scriptures acknow-. ledgiug this, and another Rabbin 'sMt^gtAhyTeter Martyr upon Gencfis, both cited by Mafteri?/VW^ 5 >/^f/i/in his answer to Mafter Breerrvood. Give me leave toadde my mite al-fo of mine owncobfervation. The92. P/^/w<?haththistidel A T^falmeand Song far the Sabbath. TheChaldeparaphraJfc hereupon writes thus Kn3^"> K^V hv IlK^^)? ta^K ^^K '^*^ ^^'^W'S t<naT2? ^ praifeandSong^ n hich Adam (the frfi of men) (poke on the Sabbath day; manifelHy evidencing that in the received -opinion of the Jewes in thofe dayes, Adam (anSihed the Sabbath. Rabbi David Kimchi tcftifies the lame in his Commentary upon that Pfalme, to be the do-^rine delivered in their DaraOi, namely, that Adam the lirft conceived this PlaIme after h^e was created on the Sabbath day, and that afterwards he finned, and (b prophaned the Sabbath. So that notwithftanding all the bjufter which thii" Author makes, this fourth Commandement may continue morall nevei thclefle. And fure I am, Irenctm puts this Wffc-rence betweene the words of the Decalogue ((b he fpeaky and confequently expnngeth not, but rather includeth the fouith Commandement) and theceremonialllavves, that Decahgi ^^ . verba^ the words of the Decalogue fpoken by God him/elf unto ^''^' *^* ^''^^^' all^ doethtrefcre continue in li^' manner wifh ta, receiving ex^ tenjicn and augmentation by the comminq- of C^rifi in the fleflj, ^ but nodijfolution* "But the precept of bondage (fo he calls the cerermnials ) by themfdves hee commanded unto the people by

E ^Jitofcs

, ^ 7he motalitie of the feurth Commmdement

Mcfes^fitfor their infirnEiion and Mfciplwe. And Doftor ,.zyfndrewesl2Lm{uve^ To great a Prelate in oiir Church, denies all ccremonialitie thereunto, fave only To farre as may juftifie the change of the day, and in reference to the rigorous reft of the Jewes. And Az^orita confefleth (as before hath beene al-Icaged ) that after fix dayes worke, one day (hould bee con-fecrate to divine fcrvice is a thing rnoft agreeable to reafbn. Yet I know none that accounteth this a Dii^atc of nature fim-ply, as this Author would fainc obtrude upon us 5 but rather with Chrjfofiom^thxt God by creation hath taught us as mwch, and now God hach gone before us herein, wee conceive it to bee nioft agreeable to reafon. And D. Field did profeflc as much upon acknowledgement of the Creation ^ as Mafter ^BrodeccnkSith* 5, If all talke of obfervation of the Jewifli Sabbath vanifhcd

not till the dales oi Bede^it was 700. years firft in the account of "Beliarmirte. And of any rcfolutions made by 'Bede or Da-mafcen hereabouts, in D. PridefixfeB^ 2, 1 finde no mention. Yet I thinke it likely enough, that both they and Pr<?f<7p//« might eafily contrive as many refolutions hereabouts, as cither Theodoret upon the twentieth of Szekie/^ or Eftphaniiu againft the Ebionites; for neither of them in the pla<;esmen-tioned^make any refolutions on this pomt at al. He grantsih c Lords day to have bcene inftitutcd by the Church trom the Apoftlcs dayes, which latter claulc is an ambiguous phrafe. Foii it may bee applycd to the dayes aft«r the Apoftles. If in ^*^^'* the Apoftles dayes, then undoubtedly it was inftituted by ths Apoftles, what meant hee then to (ay it was inftituted by the Church, and not to bee (b ingenuous as to confefle that it was inftituted by the Apoftles ? How lar off is he from acknowledging it to have beene inftitutcd by the Lord f yet Athnnafiia openly profefleth thus much, Olim cene frlfch ho* minibus in Jummo pretia SabbatUm fuit^ quam^ qnidem folen-'. nit at em T>omintu tranftnlit in diem ^otninicum. Heretofore with men of old time the Sabbath day wasirr^eat price : yvhich Fefiivitie truly the Lord hath tranjlated unto the Lords day. And Cyrillm his 12. book on lohn^ chap^ 58. confidcring the Lords appearance a (econd time on the eighth day, Thomas then being pitfentj and upon coniideration finding it to have be^nc

the

ci

the firft day of the wccke, concludes thus : Tf^re igiit^r fanSi<t Cofigregatiopes die oElavo in Ecclefiis funt, 'By right therefore holy Congregatiom in the (^hurches are made on the eighth day^ meaning thereby the firft day of the vveekj that is the Lords day: and as hee conclndeth thus, fo undoubtedly his opinion wasithe Apoftles themfclves did conclude in like.manner.

Now albeit much had beenc cfFefted for the abroga* ^. tion as well of all fuperftitious fancies about that d^Lj, as ofthcdayit (clfe (thatisofthcjcwifh (abbath) by the labours of the Fathers fore-mentioned, and particularly of "Damnfcen and venerable Bede among the reft ; yet there comes in an exception (omewhat of the nature of a fixth finger; and that is^ Saint C7w^j tells us notwithftanding how JomeinRomewerefofHperfiitioHsirtthu kinde^ that they would neither Tvorkjif on the Saturday^no nor fo much as "wafh upon the Sunday, So little cftcftuall were the labours of ^amafcen and venerable !5^(!/f J that they could not prevent thefiiperftiti-OQs fancies of fome that lived an hundred yeares before. For Gregory by Bellarmtnes account dyed in the yeare of our Lord 504. and Damafcen lived long after the yeare 731 • and ^<r^^ was living in the ycarc 731. as 'Bellarmine obfervesout of his fifth booke of H//?m<« ^«j^//r(?«>f. Who would dcfire an adverfary ftiould betray more weakenefic than this Author ? but wee fee manifeftly whither he tends, and no marvell if God (mites him with the fpirit of giddincfle and confufion. His quotation of Cfrcgory (ccmes to bee the fame with that which wee finde in the decrees Tie confecrat, dift, 3. cap, Perveuit. Now whereas this Prsefacer relates it as of the fame perfons, it is farre otherwife in ^regory y for apparantly the relation in Gregory is concerning diflPerent perfbnf, for thus it runnes, Pervenit ad 'me^ &c. Relation U madti unto mee, that certaine men of a perverfe jpirit havafowed amongfl you fome corrupt do^ine contrary to our holy faith: fo oi to fnrbid any wor^e to he done on the Sabbath da): theft men ive may yvcll cnll the Prea" chers of Antichrifl. Then hc (ets downe what (hnll be the pra-ftife of Antichrirt at his commifcg, namely to command the Sabbath day and'the Lordfdny both to be kept free from all workj* And why the Lords day ? to wit^ becaulehe meanes to imitate Chrift 5 and therefore will conforms himfelfe to the pra-

E a aife

^Q J he moralitie of the fourth Cemmandement

ftifc of Chriftians, in celebrating the Lords day 5 his words are thefe j QhU enim mori fi & refmgerefimnUt^ hakeri w ve^ nfratione vpiif diem DominicHm ; that iSj ^ecanje he counterfeits himfiife to die and rife againe, therefore he will have the Lords day to be had in veneration. Where by the way ob(crvc two things; 1 The praftife of ChrilHans in Gregories daye8,to keep them-(elves trom all worke on the Lords day. 2. ThatAndchrift would imitate Qhrift, as in pretending to dye and rife againe: fb in commanding the Lotds day to be kept holy. A flhrewd evi iencc that both Gregory, and the whole Church in thofe daycs, were of opinion that the Lords day was of Cbrifts in-ftitution 5 which Antichrift perceiving would conforme thereto, the better to promote his owne counfailes. Now the rea-fon why he would command the Jewes Sabbath to be ob(er-ved alfOj was i^.^^^* /><?/>///«?» JniaiK^are compellet, ntexteriorem ritH!nrevocet^& fibiJtidttortitnperfidiamCHhdut'*^ therefore r(?// vuh Sabhatum. He will have the lerves Sabbath ^c'ft alfo^ com--feJUng the ^eofie to ludaiz^e^ and refioring the outward ceremonies of the Law^ thatfo he may bring the lewes infftbjeBion unto hifn^ alfo» Then he makes mention of another relation •, Aliud^uo-Cftie ad meverlatHm eft 5 Another report was brought unto mee ; and what was that ? Vibisaferverfis hominibtis eg'e prjcdicatum, tit Domini CO die nullus debeat lavari: That fome ferverfe ferfons preach amongyou, that on the Lords day none ought to be wajhed» This is clearly another point, maintained by other persons, different from the former^ which yet this Prefacer confounds into one. And marke it vjt\\that none ought to be wafhedXzsdXU on the Lords da) 5 which this Author tranflates thuS; No norfo much as wafh upon the Sunday. What not fo much as wafli their hands or their face ? here indeed were ftrange fiiperftition. I willingly profeflc I was not a little moved at this his Tranfla-tion,nothing anfwerablc to gregories refolution,which is thi?; If any deftre to benvafhedpro luxuria & provoluptate, that h^out ofaluXHriomdifioftttonandforplcafure-^ we doe not permit this to be done on any diy. But if the bodies neeejfity require itt we doe not ferbid this on the Lords d^y. Now I doe not find that any man ufcth to wafh hands or face out of any luxurious difpofi^ tiouj neither doe I know in what fenfe the necelfity of tlic body can require it. For the neeeffity of the body in thisplacc^

'>y Is jiill in force to bind Christians. z i

ftems to me to be (poken in reference to the recovery of a mans health, requiring no time to be negleiied. Hereupon I am verily perfwaded, that by Lavari in (jregory,i%to be underftood a mans going into the Bathjwhich may be done out of a luxurious drfpofition, and meereiy forpleaiiirc. Then againe, the nccelllty of thebody may require it^ and according tothe(c different cafes it is by Gregory both permitted on the Lords day, to wit, in cafe of neceffity^and denyed on any day^in cafe it be done only to fatisfie a mans lufts. Apd I find a great difference rn the Latine phrafe^betwecnc Lavare to yvajlj, and L:.^ vAri'tohc wajhed^ and that out of Varro his eight booke of the Latine tongue. For the aftive is of u(e,when a part only is wafted, as it is rightly faid, I wafh my hands and my feet. But the pafiveisinufeonly when the whole body is walhed,asin the Bath- ^t^re & in 'BdneU non refle dicurjllaviy fed Uvor, wherefore in the Bathes it is not tvellUid^ I have wafjedy hnt I am wa/hed. And accordingly runnes that in 7«^«^^^^5 Sat,2. Nee pueri crednnt nifi qui nondnm <zre Uvantur, The Scholiaft interprets this of Infants, quia, pueri non dant Balneaticum ; for the quadrant which was the ufuall fee to bee paid of them that made nfe of the Bathes, was not exafted ot liich. Hence is that ^\iT2i(t^ Mercede Uvari^ togoe into the "Baths paying a fee-^ and dumte quadrante lavatum^ in Horace^ to the fame pnrpofe.

ThefecondSeSiion.

But after in the darker times, as it is thought by fomc, prcfice* Peter de Bruisy the founder of the Petrobrufians ( he was burnt for herefie 1126.) began to draw too deep on thefe lees of Judaifme, which here our Doftor intimates in the (eventh Seftion, where hejoynes the Petrobrufian withe he Ebionitc?, who indeed were Jewifti in this point.

2. And pofTibly from the remainders of this do6lrine, Ful-CO a French Prleft, and a notable hypocrite, as our King iO-fW^compted him, lighted upon a new Sabbatarian (peculation, which afterwards £///^f^;«/, one of his aflbciates, d'lC-pcrfed in England. I call it new, as well I may. For whereas

tl

J he m<rtaliti€ of the fourth Cemmmdement

Mofes gave commandcment to thejewes, that they fhould (anftific one diy only in the week, viz.. that feventh whercoa God refted : They taught the people that the Chriftian Sabbath was to begin on Saturday at three of the clocke, and to continue till Sun-rifing upon the Mjnday morning: During which latitude of time, it was not lawfull to doe any kind of worke what ever j no not (b much as bake bread on Saturday for theSundayeseating; towafhordrylinncn for th^ mor-rowes weiring. Yea, they had miracles in ftore, pretended to to be wrought on fuch as had not yeelded to their doftrinc, thereby to countenance the (iiperftitious, and confound the weake. And which was more than this, for the authority of their device, they had to (hew a letter (ent from God himfelfc, and left prodigioufly over the Altar in Saint Simeons Church in Golgotha : wherin the Sabbatarian dream was impo(ed for-footh upon all the world, on painc of diverfe plagues, and terrible cominlnations, ifit were not punftaally obferved. The Anm 1101.1 letter is at large reported by Roger Boveden ; and out of him, as I fuppofe, h"^ Matthew Paris: who doe withall repeat the miracles,wherby this doftrinc was confirmed.I adde no more but this, that could I either belceve thofe miracles, which are there related: or faw I any now^ like thofe to countenance the reviving of this ftrange opinion ( for now it is received and publifhed) I might perhaps perfwade my felfc to entertain it. Exam* ^^ feemes this Author is not of their opinion, who thinke

thofe times wherein Yeter de Brnts live J,about the yeare 11 a 6. to have been darker times than the dayes of Gr^gQrj-^ though fome paffe fiich cendire on thofe times, acconpting them times of darknefle, heeis more wife than to concurre in opinion with them 5 and it is a part of his wifedome (as it feemes) to affedl, that the world (hould take notice of fo much, namely; that he put* it upon fome only to cenlure thofe times, as times of darknefle N ow_ who are cholefbme? not Papifts I pre(iime, butProtfcftants rather 5 and what true Proteftant can he name that thinkes otherwise ; we have caufe to feare that too many for their advantage, can be content to veile themselves under the'vizard oFProteftants, when in heart they are Papifts. neither is it polTible, (I (hould thinke ) that any other but (iich, fiiould think* any better of thole timesg than as of times of

^knefie.

Is fiiU in force to hind ChriSiians. ai

darkneffc. It is very likely, this Author Is not of^opinion,that the man of (inne is yet revealed, or any fuch time the Apoftle pxophecyetfi of 2 Th^fi, of giving men over to illufions to belcevelyes, for not receiving the love of the truth. I much doubt whether hcbeleeves th.tRome isthewhoreof Baby-lon, whereof Saint John fpeakerjb, Revel.iy, though he profel^ fcthofthat whore of Babylon, that it is that City, which in his dayes did rule over the Kings of the earth: yet in tbac which be accounts light, he can be content to concurre with dUvifty'm denying the morality of the fourth Commande-ment, as touching one day in (even to be fanftified unto the Lord. But whatfoever this Peter de "Brnis was, whom he pro-feffeth to have drawne too dcepe on the lees of Judaifine, hec avoucheth noteftimony hereof, but only D. Pridemxhis joy-ning the Petrobrufians with the Ebionites, SeEl.j, Now Hofp- • nian profeileth that which is direftly contrary, of the Petrobrufians ; as whom he joynes with the Anabaptifts, maintaining Fefios Jiies omnes ad ceremonias ludAorum^ertirtcre^f^ Prop-terea nullos ejfc debere apud (^hriftUnos\, quttm ceremonU veterii Teftamemi omnes C^rifii adventu fintimfleu^ & ideofubUt^e^-J^uornnt etiam fententU Anabaftifid hodie fuffragari videntur, Xhat all HoUdajes belong to th^ceremonies of the lewes^ and that therefore none Juch are to be ohferved by Chrifiians, feeing aU the ceremonies of the o/dTefiament arefu/fiUed^ and abrogated by the commingof ^hrifi* Andthe Anabaptifts now adayes Jeemetobe fif the fame opinion. In the third. Tome of the Councels (et forth by 'Bumns, and 2. part, there is an enumeration of his opinions in ^^t particulars, and that,a5 it feemes by the clofc, out of VetrHs Cltiniacenfs % not one of them is any thing a kin to tho(c Sabbatarian fancies, which this Prefacer infifts upon. Petrus Ciuniacenfts^ as it (ccmes, was the man that moft oppo* fed this Petrpts de Bruis^ Againft his errors he wrote a book in forme of an Epiftle on thefe points, i. Of the "Baptifme of children^ 2. Of the Authority cf the booke of the A Els of the Apo-files, ^.Ofthe'authorityoftheEpifl-lesofSaintTsLHL 4. Of the HHthority of the Church, 5, Of the amhcrity of the oldTefla* ment, 6, Againe^ of the baptifme of children, 7. Of Temples^ Chttrchs^ and Altars. 8. Of the veneration of the holy C^o^e. • p, Of thefacrifice of the Majffy and tfthe truth of Tranfubfian-

E 4 tiAtion,

tiation, 10. Of prayers ferth^deceafed, n. OfpralfingGodhy Bjmnes andmuftcallinflrHments, Thus EelUrmins relates the heads of that difcourle of his ^ not any of which, for ought I perccive/avourcth of any fuch Sabbatarian fancie^as this Aik thor driveth it unto. At length I got into my hands BMothc" eaf/uniace»ljs, and therein the writing of/>^rr;« C//^y?;4r<?;?/// againft the Fctrohrtifians, Lf pon all which, one Andreas ?aer-cetartHs Tufonenfis^ hath written ccrtaine notes, wherein upon thefe words in the Preface Contra harefes Petri de "Bruis^ hec writes thus \ Of this Peter of ^ruis who^ave name to phe Petro" brufian^heretlcjms, no mention is found^ neither in the hiftorians^ '^ho write thefiory ofthofe times^ nor with them^who then.or a lit* tie after^ contrivedthe Indices of h^refes and herefiarches. zAl-phonffis a Cafvro {as I thinki) )^^ f^^fi^fi^ who after this our Ah-^ • thor^ rememlred him^ liL^.'y , Baptifma, h^eref 5, and writes that Jje was a French man of the province of Narbon, Although Bernard thefbnns of Guido writes that T^^f Galixtus the fecond^ in the ye are 112S. on the eight of the Ides ofjpfne held a Q^uncell at Toloufe with Cardinals, ArchbiJhops^Bijhopsand Abbats of the -^Province of Cjothia^ gafconj^Spaine^and hither Br it any,In which Conncell, amongfi other things ordered there^ all thofc haretiques were damned and driven out of the Chnrch^ who counterfeiting ^ fhew ofriligion^didcondemne the Sacrament of the Lords body and bloody the Baptifme of children, and alt Scclefiafticall Orders^ and the bands of I aw full marriages, <iAll which her efie s as invented by Peter Bruis, and propagated by Henry hisfuccefmr^ our Peter in this Treatife of his dvthpurfue^ So that this whole lioiy (ecmes very obfcure 5 and yet the two latter points mentioned by this Andreas^ I doe not find to be any of the opinions laid to the charge of Peter "Bruis by thofe that were contemporary with him. For Petrm Clnmacenfis reduceth all hishereiies (as hec calls them) but to thefe five heads. I. He denyesthdt children -before they come to the age of underfianding can be faved by the Sacrament of'Baptifme^ and that another s faith can profit him^ who cannot^ufe his owne *, becaufe by their opinion^ Mot another mans faith but his owne with ^aptifmefaveth him^ the Lord prc" feffing, that whofbever fhall beleeve^ and bee baptized^ h^ejhallbe f^ved J but whofoever will not beleeve floaUbe damned, 2. That there ought not to be any fabric}^ of Temples or Churches, that

fuch

ftich AS arc-m^fie^ ok/^ht to be throwne dnvne-' that holy places for* prayers are not ncce\fit^y for Chrifiians, becaufe as well in aTw veryie ^ in the (^hrtr<:hyU well in the Market-placebos in theTem" pie ; befpre an Altar^ 'or before a ft able Goidoth heare being- called upon, and heareth ihom wha ate • worthy, 5. He cemr/tands holi croffes to be broj^i in peecss ahdburned, becaufe thereprefentation offuch an inflriiment^ -whereupon Q)rift wxs fodrrefully tortured^ inrid cruelly Jlaino, is not worthy of any teener at ion or' fuppHcatioK '; but in revenge of Qkrifts toy ments m Tdeath^to be difaraced with all m'Anner ofignoTmny^ and to be hew en inpeeces withfwordf, and burnt with fire. '^, He doth not only deny the truth of the Lords body and blood daUf^ and continually to be-offered in the Church by the Sacrament 5 bu;: determines it to be Altogether nothinrr^and that it ought not to be offeredfmto Cyud, . <y. He mocks at thefacrificef^ prayerf,almes, and other goad workes, which the fait hfuH'thMai^f living performefor thcfaithfull that are departed^ andrnaintainef that they are nothing profitable to one that is dead. Now in all this I find nothing at all that favoureth of any Jev/ifh opinion concerning the oblervation of the Sabbath* And more than that; when I confider the matter of thefe Articles for (he mo'fr pai t,and the coiir(c of thofe times to'make wor(e of their opinions (who fpake or wrote againft the (uperftitions of thofe times)then there was jurt caiifej begin to fufpeft that this Peter oiBruis might be an honeft man, and more orthodox than they who procured his death. And is it nofe wonderous ftrange, that none of the Hiftorians of thofe times (hould make any mention of him ? And that may be the reafon, why we findc no mention at all made of him in the Bookc of A6ts and Monuments. And Philip Mornay in his myflrrium inicjmtatis^ Fdg.io^p^io^. makes an apologie for this Feter de Bruis^ as being a pious man, and thereupon hated ^ and finally martyred by the Papifts.

2. Of any Sabbatarian fpeculation (as this Frefacer calleth it) that Fulcoihe French Prieft lighted on, this Author gives no evidence. For as for Roger Hoveden, 1 doc not finde, that he attributes any fiich unto him. He writes much in his com-mendatioHj as that The Lord magnified him in the fight ofKinas^ f 0/.448. ;^?^. z and gave him power to give fight to the blind, to cure the lame^ the hlind^ and others of their difeafes. That Harlots and Vfurers^

were

Z6 The Moralitie of the fourth Commandement^

were by his f reaching takett ojffiom their /ewdcofirfes. That hee foretold the Kings of Frmce and En^landy that except they gave over their hoflilitj thefooner^ one of them fljould flfortly dye of art evilldeath. But of any Sabbatarian (pecwiation hee was addi-ftedimto I finde no mention. It is true. King/J/VW^ Tome-time called liim fimply Hy pocrite^not notable Hypocrite^^^s xhh Author exprefTeth it j affe6ling rather to fpeafee with a full moiithj than according untoplaine truths Andisicmuch^ Kings take liberty to call men as they think goodj efpecially when they are provoked by iltm^es King Richard was by this Prieft, as appear^s by the ftory which is weJl worth the relating, toobferve both the present wit of that King, and the liberty of Prieft s with Princes in telling them their faults in thofedayesof yore. For on a day that Prieft Fulcoc^nnclb mne, Rich<ird^ and in very bold manner fpake to him thus : / (ell thee 0 King as from Almighty Ged^that thou make jpeed to be-fhow in marriage thofe three wretched daughters^ that thou haft^ leftfome worfe thing befall thee. Thou Hypocrite^ cjmth the Kin^^ thefs^ lyeft againft thine vypne hcad^ for I have no daughter at all. Truly I doc not lyey quoth the Friefi^foras IfaiJ, thouhafl three wicked daughters^ one of them is Pride, another Covetoufneffe^ the third Luxury, When the King heardthis,'he called his Earles and Barons that were about him, and faid, Heare the udmoni^ tion of this hypocrite^who faith 1 have three wicked daughter s^and eoTnmands me to marry them. Therefore I beftow my Frideupon 'the proud Templers ; my Covetaufnejfe upon the Afonkes of the Cifiercian Order ; and my Luxury upon the Prelates of the Ghur» ches. W ho though they profcfled fingle life, yet as Mr. Moulin obferves in a like cafe of popifli Priefts, did not profefle continencie, they might be luxurious enough, and that not only in wayes naturall,but in wayes unnaturall alfb-This was a biting anfvver of the King, which the Hiftorian no way liked, and therefore he cryes out in a poeticall ftraine, O nimis indigo mtr/imiferis inferre cachinnum. But throughout no mention at all of any Sabbatarian fpeculation that Fulcow^s poflefTed with. Indeed oi EuHachius^ who was one of bis followers, we reade afterwards,/?]. 457*/?. 2. what wonderous workes were wrought by him, and what were the efFe^^s of his preaching among them, nafnely, that In London ::nd dinars other

places

places in En^and^ they vflouldm moreprsfum^ to m^^ks ^^<? Lords dayes their mirk$t d,ijes. And that in every (^hurch there Jhotild be a lampe^ orfoma light httrning continttafly before the Lords bo^ dy i a>idthat Citizens and others wonldhave an Alm?s vejfe/lup' on their table^ to lay afidf therein Tome pro vi/ion for the poore^ And that hereupon the Djvill raifed up againft him fome Minifters of iniquity, who/aid ftnto him, It is not lavpfull for thee to put thy fithe into anothers httrvcfi ; to whom heanfwered, Th? hcfrvefl is great^ btit the Ubottrers are few. Therefore the for efaid Abb At being thus rebuk^ by the min'tft-ers of Satan^ hee would no longer trotibh the Prelatj fff England with his preaching, bat returned unto his o:vne h^mein Normandy from whencshee cam\ Seven leaves after this, we find in the fame Author, to wit, foL ^66. p, 2» That this Ahbat of Flay returned into England^ and preaching the fVordofGo {from City to Q^tie, forbade all to make the Lords dayes their market day es, Forhefaid that this (^ommande^ mant for obfer vation of the Lords d^y came from heaven. So that this fpeculation of his wasdominicall rather than iabbatari-*n. And the mandate concerning this^ is there (et downe at large, pretended to have come from Heaven to Jeriifalem^ and to hive been found on the Altar of SainttS'/>^?o>7in Qolgotha^ which whether it were feigned by him, or by others, and received by him on the faith of others, the Author fpecifies not; But at the en^ thereof he fhewcs how that this Predicant com* mingto York,was there honourably entertained by the Arch-biOiop, and Clergie, and whole people of that Cicie; and albeit theft things, you will fay^were afted in times of darknefTe^ yet this Prefacer fcemcs to be of another opinion, though little plea(ed wich Enflachim his Sabbatarian fpeculation. Here alone is mention made of the bounds hefet to theob(ervation ofthe Lords day, namely, that it was to continue from Saturday three ofthe clock in the afrcrnoonc, untill the Sun-rifing on Munday, in which time he would have them doe nothing but that which was good, and if they did, to amend their errors by repentance. A very reafonable motion in my judgement ^ and if he had extended it to all the dayes ofthe weeke, yea, and houres too, I fee no caufe why for this hee fhould be cendjred either as an hypocrite, or hereciqne. But as for the ftriftneffe of obfervation here mentioned, as namely, That

' iur'int

d^< riy^ thcfore^mdyti^y^.^ k ^4<- mt laT^pffdll to dae Any kind of wcrk^ y^hatevcr^m fsotfomuclpits to h^kc brefdfor the Smdajeseatings to ■wupjor dry linnenfor the morrowes wearing, I finde no fuch thing prescribed by Sptfiachim^ in the reladon made by Roger Uovidett; and it Parifieyifu hath any fuch, furely hee tooke it i)oiciK<>i Roger Hove df^i'y fipnijwhomyft this Prefacer af* firmes he tooke that wHjclrhe writes hereof. Nay it is dired-ly contradid:ory to the Tenet oiEuftachius^ as who determi-neththe obfervation of the Lords day to begin at three of the deck in the afternooneof the Eve preceding, in which time is found fpace both to bake bread for the Sundayeseating, and to walhor dry Unnen for the morrowes wearing, if the weather hinder not. And as for the extenlion of the dominicall obfervation thus farre, in refpe(^ of the bounds thereof; I find no other do£Vrine preached by Euftachipis, than by the Lawcs pf the Kings who governed this Land, was ordained long be-fore,ev£n before the conqueft.For not only King Ina cOmmarv A6fi (^ MofU ded, That^^o mdn lay or fpirituall, free or bond^ jhould labour on fol.ii/^col.i.(^ the Sunday : and Sdward the elder with C/j/thrum the Dane^. foi 71 J. col. I. pade a law againfi all labour ^buying a'/idfeH'wg upon the Sabbaths '^ *• Itern^fur no execution to be done on the Sunday : but amongfl,

ping Edgars lawes, one was. That the Sunday jhould be kep ho-^ ly from-Saturday at ncone, till Jliunday in the morning. Kin^ Qa-Kutm alfo commanded ceUbration of the Sab bath fiom Saturday at ncenc^till Munday morning, for bidding markets^ hunt ingSy labour s^ and (^ouri'keepings during the faidjj^ace. And it ieemcs to be the generall pradliie of Chriftendomc to allow (or command rather ) a preparation for the (anftifying of the Lords day; as appeares by the obfervation of Evening prayers^ the day before,warning whercunto is ufiially given at three of the clocke, by the ringing of a bell, or as in fomc places efpecial-Jy in the winter feafon, an houre (ooner, and fchollars accordingly give up fchoole, and prefent themfelves at Evening prayer. And we commonly account Saturday to be halfe ho-\ liday, and warning thereof is ufualty given at noone by chi-

ming the bells. And whereas we reade Sxod, 31. 15. Six daycs fialt thou doe thywork^, and the fj£venth day V^^Z^ f^S^ Schindler renders it Sabbathum Snbbathuli^ and interprets it' thus ; Sahbathkm is from evening to evening^Sabbathulum is that

whklf

yfhich of tht prdfane daj u added a4 a little Sahhath* And as for the ftrift abftinence from drelfing of meats on Saturday, which this Author imputes to Enflachr^^ as his dodrliic,biit without all ground that I know : We are fo farre from any liich Sabbatarian fpeculation, that none of us (in my knowledge) doe think It unlawful to drcfle meats on the Lords day. And wher-as the Prefacer addes that they had miracles in ftorepretendedto he wrot4ght on fucha^sh^d notyeuldcdto their do^ri'/tCy thereby to conntenancc the fupdrflitiom and confound the weaks. What one of an hundred in reading this would notimagifie^ that Enfia" chiM wroughc thefe miracles for the countenancing of his former ilriftneflfe; whereas yet on the contrary, neither doth it appeare,that he taught or obtruded upon them any fuch (iri^-nelTe, preaching oncly againft marketting on the Lords day. Neithe ■ were thole ftrange accidents which here are called miracles, any miracles wrought by him: But the Monke, Ro^er oi: Hoveden writes. That the L'jrd leftu C^rifiy yvhom wee mpifi obey rAther than men ; rvho by his Nativity^ RefarreElion^and Advent, and fending the Holy <^hofl itpon his ^ifcipleSy did ad" vancethis day,which we cah the Lords day.anddcdtcAted (as) mofi celebrioHi 5 (hewed miracles of his power ^upon fometranfgreffors of the Lords dxy in this manner. On a certaine Saturday after three ofclocke, a certaine Carpenter of B ever lac ^Oi he was making a wooddenpeg, contrary to the wholefome admonitions of his wife,fell to the ground, tal^n with a paljie. The like (lory followcth of a woman; which this Author^according to the Monks phrafe, is content to call Miracles.Now when we heare of as ftrange a thing as this to have fallen out not long fince in Bedford/hire; as namely,a match at Foot-baIl,being appointed on the Lords day in the afternoone; while two were in tlieBelfrey, and one of them tolling a bell to call the company together, there was heard a clap oi thunder and lightning^ (ecnc by (bme fitting in the Church-porch, as itcamethorow adarkelane towards the Church, andfldflit in their faces who (ate in the Church-porch, and feared them; thence it went into the Church, and turning into the Belfery, tript up his heeles who was tolh'ng the bell, and ftmck him llarke dead; and the other with him blafted in fuch manner,*that (hortly after he dyed ; we doe not call this a miraclc,though we count i t a remarkable judgement

of

JO The Mora/itie of the fourth Commandement^

of Godj> and fuch as jdcfoves to be confideredj and fcrioufly laid unto heart by all, to admonifh them to take heed, that they be not found in like manner profaners of the Lords day. In like fort when upon frefh relation we heare of the like (port at Foot-ball on the Lords day, at a place called Tidworth, after Evening pray er in the Church-yard, and that therein one had his legge broken, which thereupon gangrened, Co that forthwith he died thereof 5 we doc not call this a miraclcj only it calls to onr mind that of the Prophet, The Lord h^thfe done his marvellous works^ that they ought to be had in remembrance. And we find that fuch like judgements have been obferved by Chriftian Emperours, thereupon moved more (Iridly to give in charge the ob(ervation of the Lords day, as Ludovicm Pius by name,as xhysfDiJUcintHs cjuofdam in hoc die opera ruraliaex-ercetes fulmine interemptos^ qnofdam artuum comraUione mult a-toSyquofdam vijibili igne ab/umptos.,fubito in cinere refolHtos^pa" naiiter occubuijfe^ Vroinde neceffe efi^ utprimum Sacerdotesy Re-geSy ^ Principes^ cunEiique fideles huic diei debitam obfervatio-nem atejue reverentidim devotijfime exhibcam ; We have kl^owne fame bufiedin workes of husbandry on this day^ to ha7)e beenejlaine with Ughtningyfome punijhed with the contraction of their limbes^ fome with vifbkfireccnfumedy on a fudden turned into ajhes^ and fo to have feripjed^ as by way ofpunijhment, Wherefore it is a ne* cejfary duty that in t^e firfi place Priefis^hen Kings^ Trinces, and ullfaithfullperfons^ mofi devoutly exhibite due obfervation and re^ verencc unto this day. The Other miracles mentioned by the Monke are of another nature; as of a cake bakt on the hearth on Saturday after three a clockc in the afternoone, and how that part of it re(ervcd to the morning, and being then broken^ blood came out of it^ and another of the like nature; and two more. I fay, thefcare olRoger Hovedens relation, not of Eu-' flachius his preaching; whom the Monke relates to have been in great eftecme ot the Clergie in thofe dayes, and to have prevailed much with many of the people, though for the generall he could not bring them off from their marketing on the Lords day. Yet what arethcfe to be talkt of in comparifon to tho(e which are comprifed in two bookes of miracles, written by Cltmiacenjis ? and albeit thofe times may be accoufUed times of darknefle, in comparifon of ages fore-going, yet this Prefacer

is ready tp mike anfwcr, that thacisbuttheopinior>of fome. But whereas hee fakh, That this ftraytge ofmion is now revived an^puhliJJjed 5 firft I deiire to know his meaning. For as for a preparation to the Sabbath, and that to begin from ab<;ut three a clock in the aftcrnoone, the whole Kingdome obfcrves it; as for the i\n^ ob(ervation thcreofjhcrc mentioned, I have (hewed that Suftachins fpeakes of no fiich thing. If hee did, what is that to thoife who fufcr for landing for the ftrift observation of the Sabbath, againft thole who would have the Lords day, at leaft in part to be a day of fports and paftimcs*^ Can he (hew this to be their opinion > If he can, why doth he not > And if from three a clock on Saturday in the afternoone, people doe prepare for the Lords day, and abftaine from (iich workeSjdifpatching both their baking bread, and other works in the morning, what danger or detriment is hereby likely to ari(e either to our faith of manners >. What danger either to Prince, Church, or State ?

The third SeSiian.

But to proceed. Immediately upon the Reformation of Pjrcface* Religion in tlic(e Wefterne parts, the Controvcrfie brake out a frefh ^ though in another manner than before it did; For there were fome, of vjhomC^lvh fpeakes, who would have inpitjib,!. f((f' had all day es alike, all equally to be regarded 5 (he means the u* ^ Anabaptifts, as I take it) and reckoned that the Lords day, as the Church contmued it, was a Jewifh ceremony. Affirming it to crofle the doftrine of Saint P^ui, who in the text before remembred, and in the fourteenth to the Rojnans did feeme to them to cry downe all (uch difference of dayes and times as the Church retained. To meet which vainc and peccant humour, C^vU was ftiine to bend his forces, declaring how th€ Church might lawfully retaine (et times for Gods ferviccj without infringing any of Saint Pauls commandements.

But on the other fide, as commonly the excelTe is more exorbitant than the defeft; there wanted not fome others, who thought they could not honour the Lords day ^ufficiently,un--lef^e they did affix as great a fanftitie unt9 it, as the Jewes did

unto.

J 2 IheMoralitieof the fourth Commimdement!^

unto their Sabbath. So that the change feemed tobe onely of the day; the (iipcrftition ftiil remaining no lefle JcwJ(h than before it was. Thefe taught,as now Ibine doe, mcrahm ejfe uni" lhid,[c£i,i^. us diei ohfsrvmonem in hebdomada, the keeping holy to the Lord one day in ifevcn^ to bee the morallpart of the fourth Commandement: which dodlrinc what elfe is it (fo he proceeds, as here the Doftor Jo repeats it in his third ic£tion)then in contempt of the Jews to change the day 5 and to affix a grea* tcr fanftity to the day, than thole cverdid. As for hiinfeifejfo farre was he from favouring any fuch wayward fancic, that as Jehrj Barkl^j msikes report, he had a confultationoncej^tf tr/iK/-^ ferenda folenrntate D^mwica m feridm quint am ^ to alter the Lords day from Sunday to Thurfday. How true this is^I cannot fay. But (lire it is that Calvin tooke the Lords day to be tin ecclefiarticall and humane conftitution only, ^uem vcteres in locum Sabhati jubrr.guirHnt^ appointed by our Anceftors to fiipply the place of the Jewifti Sabbath, and ( as our Doftor tells us from him in his levcnth fe6tion ) as alterable by the Church at this prcfent time^ as firll it was,when from Saturday they tranflated it unto the Sunday. So that wc fee, that Qalvin here refoWes upon three Conclufions. Fn ft, that the keeping holy one day in feven, is not the morall part of the fourth Commandement. Secondly^ that the day was changed from the laft day of the wecke unto the firft by this authority of the Church, and not by any divine Ordinance: And thirdly.that the day is yet alterable by the Church, as at firft it was. Exam* '^^^^ ^^ length this Prefacer obferves, that look upon what

Scripture pafTages (bme did contend the Jewifh Sabbath to be ceremoniall, and accordingly to be abrogated by the Death and Refurreftion of Chrift : U pon the very fame 8;rounds o-thers contended againfl: the obfervation of all Holy dayes, evenoftheLordsdayalfojasifihatwerejewifh. Thisisthc courfe of the Anabaptifts^unto whom TVulUus addes theSoci-nians; and Hofpinian the Petrobrufians. By whataiithoritie the Lords day was introduced, O/i//;^ difputes not. He faith, hiflit.lih.z.c.^. Dominiciim diem vet ere s in locum S abb ati fubftituerunt -^ Ihe fi^.-^4' ^indents brot^ght the Lords daj ivito the flace of the Sabbath^ an^

Lahm* in i. AX ^^^^ ^y ^^^^ ^y Afoflkprefcrtbc'dte the Corinthians^ivherein they Jhofild lay apart Jomethingfor the relieving of the Saints Ht lerH-

fahm

fiilem\ r^As the day qno facros conventpu agebant , yohereonthty

kept their holj meetings. And thac which moved the Apoftles uh,x,t,%,G^^

to change the Sabbath to the Lords day, he fliewcs both in 54.

his inftitutions thus ; for feeing in the Lords Refurre5lion is

(found) the end, and fulfilling of the true reft^ which the eldSah*

hathfljadowed-Jhy that very dayyvhichjet an end to thofejhadowes,

(^hriftians are adntonijhednot tof}ickjo the Jhadowit^g ceremony ,•

and upon the Epjftle to the Corinthians in thefe words,'''^•^•^'^''•f'''

EleHm autempotij/imptmi^ies Dominicus^ cjuod RefurreElio do^ ^ *

mini finem legis ttmbris attulit ; The Lords *J)ay was chief eh

chofenjuecaufe the Lords Refurreilion didfet an end to the Jha-

dowesoftheLaw, And in the words immediately preceding

he expreflcly profefleth that this change was made by the

Apoftles,though not fo (bone in his opinion, as C^ryfofiome

thought 5 who interprets that, the firft day of the wecke, of

the Lords Day. And Cjr///long a^oe upon confideration of

our Saviours apparitions on thatday, and then againe the

eighth day after, makes bold to conclude 5 that Jure igitur cyrilUnhinJi.

fanEla congregationes die o^avo in Sccleftis fiunt. By iright it.

therefore holy ajfemi^lies on the eig-hth day are made in the

Churches* _

2 Ob(ervcbytheway this authors (pirit, heaccomptsic more exorbitant to thinke, that the obfervation of the Lords Dayisprefcribedunto us by Divine authority, or the religious obfervation of one day in (even, then to maintaine that none at all is to be fet apart to religious worfhipby Divine authority^ And to this purpofe he premifcth a generall rule, that commonly the excejje is more exorbitant then the dcfeH: ^ yet I never heard, that prodigality was ccnfured as worfe then covetoufncfTe^inoppolition to liberality 5 or rafhnefle, ac-comptcd worfe then cowardlineflcjin oppofition to fortitude : or (uperftition worfe then prophanencifc, in oppofition to true Religion* As for the JanBity of the day in Cahins phrafe, which this Author calls SanQity affixed to the day ; (hall I (ay thisPrefacer underftands it not ? it is incredible-more likely he is to pervert'C^/x'/W plaine meaning ;not out of cxcefTe in the way of fuperftition , but out of a lefle exorbitant defe6l. For the fanHity of the day , in C^lvins language iSjW hen RcUgione quadam feriando^ myfleria dim ccm^

F wiendatA

34 ^^^ MaTAlitie of the joutth CommAniemnt^

€ommendata rcoolere fe fomnUbant^ by refting in a religious manner they thought as it were dreaming , that they obferved certaine myfteries of old recommended unto them. As appeares in his iiSi,'^^. Of the 8. Chap, of his (ccond booke of inftitutions; and fuch indeed was the fanftity of the day in the Jewifh obfervation thereof. This religion , this holinefle Calvin will have to be at an end ; and that the ApoftleC?^/. i. and ^^/fiijf,2.di{]:uted againft tjiemwho would have that holineffe, that religion to continue itill : not againft them, who will havp one day in the wceke (et apart, thereon to reft from tnanuall workes , as they are avocations from holyfinJies and meditations. And in the former ca(e, he doth not fay^as this author in a mincing manner feyneshim to fay ^ towit,that So ths changefesmedto be only of the day^ but in plainc termeSj that this fvere no other then to change the day , and that in con" tumely of the lewes '^fiquidcm manet nobis etiamnum far myfierii in (Uebui fignifcatio , ejua, apud ludaos loeum habebat , if fo be there yet remaines y9tth us a myflerious fignification equally i» the dates^ fuch.as had place amongfi the lewes. Now this caution nothing cbnccrnes any of our proteftant Divines, who mainteine the obfervation of one day in feven as neceflaryj in refting from manuall workes, onely as they are impediments to the fervice of God. Nay that one day in (even was obferved by the Jewes for any myfterious fignification conteyned therein, or by the Patriarchs either,or by <iAdam himfelfe, in whofe dayes even from the firft^thefeventh day was fanftifi-ed, that '\%^{tx. apart for the fervice of God, in the opinion of This is to bee Cahin^ to this day, T never heard or read. This latter claufe underftood o'i'm ["alvin ^ which containes the condition, whereupon this' one day in fe- c^enfure of hispaflcth upon thofe that fo ftand for the obfer-r" ^^Qj^Q^^fr vation of one day in feven j this Prefacer flily concealeth ;; eJ. For as for though CalvinscznUivche notpaffed abfolutely, but merely the refl of the upon this Condition. Thus indeed to ftand for the necefTary feventh pre- obfervation of one day in feven, namely, as conteyning fbme cifely ^'^^^^^ myfterious fignification, 'wercto exceede the lewes in agrojfe l^vlbecne ^^^ ^^'''^^^^^ fi*P^Kft^^^^^ of a Sabbati/me, As touching the ob-myfleiious. ftrvation of fome time fet a part for Gods holy worlhip, and Se^* 32» fervice, C/i/t^i« profefTeth that the fame necejfny Uethuponus ChrifHans ^^for reliefe whereof the L(frd appointed the Sabbaths

to

to the lewes y and that it f leafed onr mofi frovident and tender Father to provide for our necefftt^^no lejje then for the neceffny of the leives^

Now it is apparent that God commanded th« Jcwes to fct one day in fevcn apart for the fcrvice of God, and doth it not manifcftly follow hcrehcnce,that the Lord would have us al(b fee apart one day of the weeke for his (ervice ? And C/i/t/w concludes that Sedlion thus, jvhy then doe voe not obey that reafo'n ^ whlchwe fee to be impofed upon us by the will of god' ? And therefore WalUus faith that Calvin delivered not thefe words , whereupon this Prefacer grateth fo much, ^againfl his own Colleagues or f cUowes in the reformationjWith ,, whom he never contended in this argument, but again ft ccr-3, taine Papifts& fchoolemen,who thoughtjthey had provided ,5 fufficiently for themfelves/or Ghriftian liberty, and for the 5, edification of theChurch ; by teaching that the taxation of ,5 the feventh day as ceremoniall was aboliQied,& yet that one 33 day in feven, and by natiiethe Lords Day,was to be obfer-5/ved, after fuch a manner, and tofuch an end^ as thejewcs 3, obferved their Sabbath: by which Doctrine, way was o-^jpcnedto fuperftition in this dayes obfcrvation. His words J3 are plaincly directed againft fiich when^he (i{ih;Thtis vanijh 5, the tojes of falfe Trophets ^ who popped the people informer „ times with a lewifh opinion.hnd againe, ^nt that is no other thing then in contempt of the Jewes to change the day , andin mindto retaine the fame fan^ity of the day : if fo be there re^ maines unto us, (^ to wit by their opinion) an equallmyfierious fi^nifcation of dayes , to that which had place among the fewes. Now faith WalUus, This agrees not to be fpoken of any of tht reformed <y but of Sophifiers and Tapijls, who urge new my• fitries^ ayidnew fignif cations ^ and holinejfes in their holy daies^ as it is well known, Bellarmine lib. 3, cap, 10. of the veneration of Saints writes againfi our Divines , that the feafts of^hrifii^ ans are kept i net only in refpeSl of order and policy , but alfoby reafon of a my fiery • and that holy day sore truly more holy and fiicred then other dayes ^ and a cer taine part of Divine wor/hip^ This Pi efaccr is content to make ufe oilohn "BarcUyes report concerning Qalvin , namely that he had a conftdtation once de tf anfferendafolennitate dominicainferiam qu'intam 5 of troH"

F 2 fating

plating the domlnlcall Colemmty unte th Thnrfd^y, Had it beene unto Friday 3 which is the Tmks^ fcftivallj then it would have wondroufly well ferved Rayndds his turnc in hisCalvino-turcijmm. For it concerned that author to inquire diligently of all Cdvins courfes , that ftood any way in conformity with the courfes of the Turhes : neither doe I thinkc there could be deviled any more remarkable then this. How true this is this ¥te^2iccr cannot fay , but whether he doth not licke his lips at it I know not. But it is apparent, he would have the Church endued with fuch authority, as to change the Iblemnity of the Lords Day, to any day inthewceke, and conlequcntly even to Friday ; and Idoenot doubt but pretence of reafbn might be deviled for it by politique heads, asnamcIy^toholdtheTT/ri^j in better correfpondency unto Chriftianity. Now if C/e/i//^ had at any time aeon (ultation hereabouts ( which cannot be underftood of (^alvins fingle and proper conftiltation with himfelfe 5 for then how could the relator be privy to it without rcvslation 5 and we commonly iay^ that three may keepc counfailewhcntwobea-way ) (urely there were many that could give teftimony hereof, towitasmaay^ aswhofc heads he ufed in this con-(ultation. And who would not expeft^ that fome one of thefeatlcaft, ftiould be produced to teftifie fo much either by word or writing ? As for ^^^t/^j he bath his name ah urfa ungula^from the cUwofa'BeAre 5 give we him leave to bee a biter, a tearcr. His father was a man of fome note and learning , and one that had the opinion to defeive well of Kings by his booke Contra monarch machos ; and thereby he endeared himfelfe to King lames , being alio a Scotchman. But King lames might thinke better of him then there was caulcg all things confidcred" For he maintaines, that in two cai^s Kings may ceafe to be Kings, and to this acknowledgement he finds himfelfe maftercdinpart by a rule of the civill Lawj ^ and he was a Civilian) which is this^Servus habitus pro dereliUo may choofe anew Father, At the firft reading I wondered at the Doftrine it felfe, being of an harfh accent, and dangerous confequence ; and much more in confideration of the rcafon given 5 which by interpretation and accommodation may draw a very loog tayle after it. And it may feeme

ftrangCj

ftrange, that none have talcen any paynes either to refute it>, orclecreit, I meane in publique. Yet I fpeikc itoncly in reference to the compaOc of mine ownc reading. In private It may befomc have dealt upon it, and my (elfc in particular, when I de«lt in my Sermons upon the thirteenth to thei?<5-m.ins. I have been often urged to fet forth thofc Meditations ofmine and to make them publike ; but I have alvvayesrc-lifted the motion, they being but homely SerironSj accommodated to a Countrey auditory, neither doe I fin le my lelfcthat way fitted tor a better audience ; I can take fbme paynes in writing controverfies, but I cannot take paynes in making a Sermon,and when I have taken moft 5 I findelhave leiTc edified my people, though perhaps better pleafedmy felfe. Yet having not long fince undcrflood of a Court di-flinftion of Puritans 5 namely that (bnie of them are good men 5 onely they cannot conformc to the ceremonies of the Church ; but other there are, who though they doc con-forme, yet areantimonarchicall Puritans: Thisconfidera-tion hath taken a decpe impreflion in me, and brought mc to debate with my (elfe, whether it were not fit to publifh thofe poore Meditations of mine, if for nothing elfe, yet to vindicate our reputation, who at the pleafures oftoo many arc opprefled in the World 5 and to reprefent to publique view. Our QoHYitrejf.ith conctrn.ng Mon^chies, For if we be reputed antimonarchicall , no mervaile if (bme courfe be taken fooner or later to roote us out. And this I might make a Prodromus toagreaterworke,inanfwerto a booke entitled Dens rsr Rcx^ a peftilent piece of worRc, and as it is thought written by one barefoote aJefu!te,conteyning a refutation of a Cf rtaine book of one of our divines infcribed god and the King written by Dod\or Mockefi^ a booke fo well pleafing to King James^ that as we have heard, his Majefty thought fit that children fhould be catechized in it. This being afterwards tranflated into Latine by Doctor Harris, now Warden of the Colledge by Winchefter , hath beene now many yearesa-goe, andvered by a Papift who conceales his name, and that in a very unhappy manner. And a wonder of wonders it may (ecme, that fo vile a piece hath pafTedfoIongunanfwered ; efpecially coniidering that heretofore great Bifhops chaplcns

F ^ were

j8 The ^oralitie efthe fourth Commmdement^

Chriftiaia aflerr^blies on the Lords Day are o^ Apojlvlicall afhtDivins traditwri* And obferve I pray how Bifhop <*yir.» .^rir>r^j pleadcs for Epiicopall authority, as by Divine right, in his anfwer to the fir(t Epiftle o^ Peter Moutin, <*An€fl iipofloHcHmfaBtimallquody ]uremnapDftdllco ? ApoftulicoaH" tern 5 id ejl ^ ut e^o interpretor^ Div't/io* Nee enim aliijuid ah apsftolfsf^EhMm^ non dlH:ante hoe iis ffiritn SanEio & Dlvino, Is there anyfaEl of the Apoflks , by right not apoflolicall ? T^m by apoftolicall^ that is ( as I interpret it ) by Divi/ie.Far neither was there any thing done Sy the ii^pofiles , which the holy and divine Spirit did not dlElate unto them. Shall this be of force fortheinftitutionofBiOiops, and fhall it not be of force for the inllitution of the Lords Day, as by Divine right^But put theca(e it were fo in every particular of Calvin^ asthisPre-facer avoucheth 5 how comes it about that our adver(aries pradlifctochoakeuswith theaathority of^^/z'/Vi f (hall we be urged to yield to the authority oiCdvin;^\\o arc rcproch-ed ufiially as C^lvinifts and fb nicknamed ? In my time of being in the Univerfity, we heard by credible relation, how in one of the Colleges, qaeftions wereict up to be diiputed ^ontra loannem Calvinptm ; and t4iat difputations of that nature were fometimes concluded in this manner, Rdinquamtis Calvinumin hifce facibm ; and we commonly fay, there is no fmoake without fome fire. No longer agoe then at the aft in Oxford^ lalt fave one,/^-^v«? 1^34, I htdLtdCahinifisv^ck' onedupamongftPapifts^Pclagians, Arminian?, Puritans, as fedaries at lealt,if not as Hcretiques^ by him that preached the aft Sermon on the Lords Day in the aftcrnoone; and is it fit, that we (bould be pregravatcd by the opinion oiC^lvin^ a man whofe memory fecmes to be hated by men of this Pre-facers (pirit/o as few men more >

The fourth SeUion.

N.Either was hee the onely one, that hath (b determined. For, for the firft^thattokcepeholy one day of (even, is not th&morallpart ofthe fourth Commandement, our

Doftor

is fit// in force ia bindChriflians. j9

Doftor hath delivered in thet bird fcftioa , that notTofiatfts onely, but even «>^^/^jW/ , and with him all the khoole-menhave decreed upon it. Nor was there any that oppofed it in the fchooles of Rome, that I have met with, till Cata-r^«;^ tookeup Arracsagainft Tofiatus : affirming, but with iliruccefle, that theCommandemcnt of the Sabbath wa3 imposed on ^dam in the firft cradle of the World , there where the Lord is layd to blefle the feventh Day , and to ran(flifieit.

2 AsfortheProteftant fchooles jbefides what is affirmed 2*

by Calvin^ and fecondcd by the Djftor in this following difcourfe, this fccmcs to be the judgement of the Divines in the low Countries. Francifcpu Gomarus , one knowne fuffi-ciently for his undertakings againft Arminians publilhed, f\n. 1628. a little treatise about the originall of the Sabbath, and therein principally canvafed thefc two queftions, Firft whether the Sabbath were ordained by God immediately upon the Creation of the World > Then whether all Chriftiansare obliged by the fourth Commandement, alwayes to (et a pare one day in (even to Gods holy worfhip^ both which he determines negatively r

And E>o6tor Rivet one of thefourcprofeffors in Leytien, 5, although he differs in the firft, yet in the fecond, which doth moft concerne us Chriftians , they agree togttlicr : affirming alfo joyntly that the a^ppointing of the Lords Day for Gods publiquc (ervice, was neither done by God himfelfc,nor by his Apoftles, but by the authority of the Church > For fe-conds, GomArnshxln^^mVatahlHs^^n^^ fVolfgangusLMufcu*' //<J ; and BSvet voncheth the authority of^our Dodor iierc. For fo Gomarm^ in the aflcrtion and dcfenfeof the firft opinion againft this Rivet, De qu'ihm etiam cL& doElijf, Do£Vor Prideaux in oratione de Sabbxto confertfonem extare , eodem jff* dicio(hy Rivets information) libenfer intelleximus.

I will adde one thing onely, which is briefely this.The 4,

Hollanders when they difcovered Frctum le Morirc An. 1615. though they obferved a moft exaft accompt of their time at Sea ; yet at their comming home they found, comparing their accompt with theirs in Holland, that they had loft a day; that which was Sunday to the one,being Munday to t he

J he Moralitie of the fourth Commandement^

that which was fignitied by the Jewifh Sabbath he alcribcs to the Refurrecflion. ^nd Doftor Andrewes Bifhop of Winchc-Iter in his fpeecb delivered in the Starre Chamber in the cafe of Tr^iJ/b" profeffeth that 5 It hath ever beenetheChftrches doBrinc that C^rifl wade an end ofaHSahbaths^ hj his Sabbath inthe^rave. That Sabbath {faith hc^ was the lafl of them. And that ChrirtsRefnrreftion brought with it a new Creation , and a new Creation requires a new Sabbath. And hec alleageth Auftin Ep. 11 p.iaying. The Lords Day was declared to (^hriflians bj Chrijl his KefurrelUon , and from thence began to have itsfeftivitj. But that at this time Calvin ftiould thinkc it alteriible by the Church, no colour of proofe is brought; and moft unrcafonable it is, for any to conceave the Sabbath to be as alterable now, asinthe ApoftlesdaycsitwaSj when fr(5ni the Saturday they tranflated it unto the Sunday* For that alteration depended upon a (econd Creation, as both Biftiop <iAndrewcs obferves, and that out of Athanaftu de Sabbato & circuma/ione And Bifhop Lak^s Was of the {ame o-pinion^as his difcourfe in Manufcript yet to be feene doth ma-nifeft. So that unlefle this Prefacercan devife a third Creation 5 and maintalne withal! the reft on the Lords Day to bee as ceremonial! , as the Jewes reft on the feventh Day was, there is no colour, why the Chriftian Sabbath on the Lords Day, fliould bee as alterable now, as the day of the Jewifh Sabbath was. As for the 5. conchifions which hee faith ^alvin refolves upon 5 the firftwhereofhee faith to be this, that one day in ftven is not the morall part of the fourth Com* mandement , I fay5 Calvin avoucheth no fiich thing 5 and WalUus ftiewes , that generally the friends of Calvin maintained the contrary ; between whom ncverthelede and Calvin it was never known that there was any contention her-abouts. And already I have fhewed how unfhamefaftly this Prefacer abufeth Calvin'm alledging one halfe of his fentence, and leaving ihc other part quite out, (b making Culvi^ to deliver that abfolutely, which he affirmes onely conditionally. The fecond refolution which he obtrudes uponC^/t/Xis^that the day was changed from the lafi day of the weej^ to the firjl ^ by the authority oft he (^hfirch^ and not by any divine ordinance* It is true, Calvin fayth not, that the day was changed by divine

ordinagcej

ordinance^ neither doth he fay that it was changed by the cm>nmi>it authority of the Church; but in plaine tcrmes protcflcth that c^.^j c^, ci{, tlie Apoltles changed it in one place;and that admonition was i6. given For the change of it, by theconfiderationofthcDayof Chrilis Pvedirreftion in another, to yN\x!Jnftitut. lih, 2,cap.S, Seftflj^.Now let every fober confcience confider , whether that day which was firft ordained by authority Divine, the apoftles would alter by ledc authority , then authority Divine ; efpccially confidering that Chriih redemption of the World, is the rcftauration of the World ; which is as a new Creation ; and as the Lord refied tfie feventh day from the workes of Creation 5 (b the day of ChriftsRefiir-redion, was the day of his reft from the workc of redemption^ fb that ftill the day of the Lords reft is the day of our reft 5 not indeed the day of the Lord our Creators reft, that ccafing as being ceremonially as before hath beene Chewed out of Doftor tXndrewes ; but the day of the Lord our Redeemers reffj which brought with it a new Creation, is now the day of c-iir reft. And who was nearer or dearer unto Calvin then BezA? whofe words upon i^fT/e-/. 1,1 o.are to this effcft. He calls that the Lords Day, which Paul calls the firfl of the Sabhaths I (^or^ \6.2.& ylHs 20.7, on which day it appeares that even then were made the more frequent ajfemhlies by Chriflians^ like as the lewes came together in their Synagogues on the Sabbath Day • wherby'it maj appear e that the fourth precept offan^ifying the feventh day^as touching the day of the Sabbath and legall rites^was ceremoniall'^but as touching the worjhip ofGodJs oft he morallLanv, nnalterable^ and perpetually to continue in this life. And that day of the Sabbath continued in force from the creation oftheWorld^te the day ofQhrifls RefurreEiion , which being as it were another Creation of another fpirituall World {as the Prophets fpeake) then for the Sabbath of the former world or feventh day^was ajfumedthc firfi day of this new fVorlJ^ the holy Ghofi without doubt diEl at inq^ thus much to theApoflles,h% for the third & laft refoluti5 which he pins upon Calvins fleevf ^namely that the day ofrcfl to befan^ Eli fed to the Lord, is yet alterable by the church as at frfi it was • neither that firft alteration is by CV/r//«fayd to bem^ide by the church^hut expreflcly by the apoftles;&they admonifhcd hereof by the day of Chrifts rcfurreftionsand Be::.a profeflcth that our

Chriftiao

other. Which of necelTity muft happen as it is calculated by geographers , to thofe that compalfe the World from Welt to Eaft,as contrary, they had got a day, had they fay led it Eaft-ward. And what Ihould thefe people doe when they were returned? it'they'muftranftifieprecirelyonedayinfevenjthey mull have fanftified a day a part from their toher Countrey-men, and had a Sabbath by themlelves ; or to comply with with others muft have broken the morall Law, which mull: for no refpeftsbe violated; See more hereof at largein Carpenters Geogr.p,237, Ex^m» That Calvin hath any where fo determined this Prefaccr

hath not prooved, but fhamefolly difmembred him^ thereby to make him to deliver fomething abfblutly which he delivers onely conditionally, and that in oppofition unto Papifts, whowill have the Lords Day to be kept not onely/<>r order and policy fake, btit by reafon offome myfiery ; and this Calvin profeflethtobejcwifti. <»^^»/»^ his words are thefe ^ H^-here aliqHodtemptis defHtatum ad vacandumDivinis, caditfuh pracepto tnorali : fed in qnmtum in hoc pruepto determinatur jpeciftle tempHs in fignum creationis Mundi ^ fi(^ ^ft prxceptum ceremoniale. To have fome time deputed ( wherein ) to reflfor things Divine, falls finder the morall precept, Bntforasmtich as in this precept is determined a fpeciall time in figne of the Creation of the Worlds fo it is a prdcept ceremonial/. Where I doc obferve firft^ that this ccremoniality is apparently a(^ €ribed to the fevcnth day , and that confideved as affgneoj^ the (Creation , and not to one day in feven. And this indcedf-may well be the concurrent opinion of Schole Divines. As for nAbnlenfs ^ of what authorityis he to preponderate any one of our Divines ? nay^ I appeale to every humane con« (cience, whether no mor« be morall in this precept, then to fet fome time apart for Gods fervice. For what ? is it nothing , materiall , whether we fet apart for divine Service, one day ^ inaweeke,oroneday inamonth5orone day in a yearc, or one day in twenty yeares 5 or one day throughout the whole courfc of a mans life ? what confcience can be found £q cau-teriate as to juftifie this 1 1f fo, then let him proceed and fay, it is nothing materiall whether wee confecrate unto God ©ne hourc in a day, or one boure in a wceke ^ of one hourc

In

in a roonthjor one hoiirc in a yeare^or but one hourc throughout the whole courfe of a mans life. So that I preiunie every fbbcr man by the very light of nature, will be driven to con-fefle that not only fome time ought to be (et apart For Gods wor{hip(as the Schoolemen commonly teach) but that a convenient proportion of time ought to be dcftlnatcdunto this. NovvIetreafbnitfeNe judge, whether anymore convenient proportion of time can be dcvifed for this then the proportion of one day in (even. And herein let us oppoleex/^t^r/;// to ToflatHs (liToflatu^ doe oppofe the morality of one day in feven^which is more then I finde ) a Papift to confront a Pa- jnmim.nn pift;who plainly affirmeth, Ratiom maxime confentmeum i i.c^p.i. ejfe.that it is mofl agreeable to reafon, that after fix workadayes one day Should bee confecrated. to the fervice i?/'(7^i; Efpecially finee God hath difcovered unto us that this is his good plea-fure, namely that one day in fcven (hould be conlecrated unto his fervice. Firft, that we might not be left at large to our own hcartSito proportion out the time for Gods Service, Secondly, for the maintenance of uniformity herein amongft his people 5who being left unto themfelvcs mighty and in all likely hood would have run different wayes. And that God hath from the beginning manifefted as muchj WalUm hath fliewed out of Chryfofiome in his 16, Homily upon Genefis, Now even mlUjifcn.tk from the beginning Godinfinuates unto us this Doflrine , teach* SMm, ing that in the circle of the -n eeke , one intire day is to bsfegrega* tedandfet apart for fpirituall operation , and to the fame pur-pofc are Qemens AlexandrinHS^Eufebitts, Theodoret^ and Au" guftine allcdgcd by him. Catarinus is in this place brought in quite againft the hayre 5 feeing it is not herein, that he is {o nvuch as pretended to oppofe Toft-atus, but rather as touching the originall inftitution of the Sabbath. Yet why he fhould fay that (^atarinus hath herein had ill fucccfic, I know no reafon (neither doth this author once offer to give any) e(pc-cially confidering that the very Romifts doe acknowledge^ thatthe Sabbath was inftituted immediately from the Creation. Their words arc thefe 5 T"/?^ Apofiles and faithfull abro'in A^c.uio. gated the Sabbath which was the [eve nth day andmade holy~day : fir it the next day follovring being the eighth day irf comptfrom

the Qreation not onely otherwife then was by the Law obfer-

ved^

4^ "^^^ ^ e^r^j/zV/V 0fthe fourth Commandement^

ved hnt flalnelj otherwife then was frefcrihed by God himfilfe in * They mcane the * fecond Qcmmandemem ^ yea andotherimje then he ordained in the third, but thefirfl Creation^ rphen hec fanSlified frecifely the Sabbath 1>ay^ indeed It is the ^nd not the day following. Rivet us cites diverfe Popifli authors °"" ** affirming the fame with Catarinns^ contrary to the opinion of

Tofiatm^Sind notwithftanding Fererim his concurrence with Toftatm I no lefle then fix Papifts oinott^Steuehm Eugubintu in Qofmo^dta adca'p*2*Gen*Gilbert ^enebrard in his chronology at the firfi yeare of the World. Jacohtu S^lianm in his ^Annalls of the old Teflament at the firfi yeare of the World , and the fe^ venth day. Who expounds alfo Tertfillian,vf\\o is pretended to be of the contrary opinion. (Cornelius a lapide on the 2. cap. of Genefis^ Emanuel Sa, And laftly Ribera on the Epiftle to the Hebrerves czp,^»Num.%, So that it feemes Catarinus did on this point oppolc Tofiatui with very good fuccede. Neither doth the Doftor on whom this Pretacer relies, Ihew any fuf-iicient caufe ofrejefting Catannus 3 or bring ought fufficient to juftify Tofiatff4.lt is tvaCyTofiatus brings divers rcafons for the confirmation of this opinion,and I have nocaufcto 4Arfsi|ii but they were an (wered by Cataninus vjh o oppofeth him herc-inincither doe I finde any exception taken againft his anfwer, either by the Prefaceror by Doftor Trideaux himfelfe. And therefore I might content my felfe,fceing nothing but Tofiatm his authority is propo(ed,to anfwer authority with authority: yet I am content alio to confidcr his realbns as they are proposed by Ptreriwm

THE

THEFIRST

DIGRESSION,

WHEREIN.

!• Anfiperis made to T'oftatus hU arguments propofed ^ by Vcrcriui^to proove that the ohfervation of the Sab-

b^th Wdf ordeyned by God immediately from the

Creation, IL HerewithdllthequefiionisdifpHted^ whether Adam

fellthefirfi day n>herein he was Created*

|H E firft agrument of Toftatw propofed by Pererim is to this cfFeft , the ohfervation of the Sabbath had been fuferfluous to ^dam and Eve^ fi^if^g nothing then could have called them arpayfrom thefervice of God^ to witythtj being then in the ftatc of innoccncy. To which I aniwer, firft that herein is fuppofcd fomewhat whcr-about there is much queftion, namely that Ad^m fell not be* fore the feventh Day. Yet Tererit44 profefleth that it was an opiyiion well l^owr.e, and confirmed by the consent of manj^ani thofe noble and illttflrtopu authors 5 that Adam fell the firfi day rvherein he was created* This fay th he. fetmts to have been tht ofirtlon of Irendus'^ and (^yrillus and Epiphanius are cited as approovers of it. He addcs,that Mofes BArcephat in hi» book*

of

^ 48 7h^ Moralitie $fthe fourth Commandement^

of Paradice both proovcs it 5 and avoucheth it as the opinion of many others, and efpecially ofThJ/opems in his oration, which lie wrote of the tree of Life, and ofEphrem in his Com* mentaries upon Gewefis, and oi Jacobus Sahugenfis in his o-rationofChriftsPaffion. To whom may bee adjcd , faith Ferer'ms . Diodorus the Bifiop of Tharfis^ a^s he 16 cited in the chaine of inter pretirs upon Genefis ^ upon thofe words of the third chapter3 we do eate of every tree in ParaJife, Tofiatus himfelfe as this anchor writes, was foraetimes of thefamcopinionj though afterwards he changed his minde ; and conceaved as more likely jthat Adam fell on the Sabbath Day ; w hie h Tere-rius approves not, though that was the opinion of the author of the Darafh amongft the Jewes ^ as David Kimchi vfrkcs u^onthditTfal»Je^ whofe title is, J pfa/me for the Sakbath j and that fo by (inning he profaned the Sabbath. This opinion of T^p/^^/if/and the Jewes, "Pereriuf doth not approve : but the reafon he gives for his diflenting from them, inmy judgement is very weake. For that it runnes, becaufe the Lord %leffed that Sabbath D ay and fanBified it .^ refting from a/I his rporkes which he had maaejtherefore it was not agreeable^that on that day, fo fevere a judgement of the Divine vengeance [hould be exercifed. Now I fay 5 this realbn is very weake. For wc commonly fay^the better day 5 the better deed 3 and undoubtedly the Lord is holy^^s in all his workss ^ {b in the execution of ler.o.E 4. condigne vengeance. In this he delights^ as in the execution of

mercy. And it is ufually the Lords courfc, even on the Lords Day^to recompf nee the wayes of the wicked upon theh' own heads 3 in the profanation of his Sabbaths. Secondly, it may feeme ft range, x}a3XTererius (hould ferve himfelfe with thisrea(bn5 namelyjoff^*? Lords bleff.ng the feventh day And fanBifying it , feeing he profeflTeth himfelfe to be of Tofiatus his opinion^interpreting the(e words by way of anticipationj and referring them to the giving of the Law upon Mount Sina. Others were of opinion 3 that-^</^2W continued as long in Paradife, as Chrift lived here on Earth. But this opinion Fererius thinkes no way probable. Others dcvifed a continuance of Adam in Paradife for the fpacc of forty dayes, an(wering to our Saviours fafting forty dayes 3 but this he fayth hath no (hew of probability,His own conjcfture is^that

Adam

AAam fell, and was turned out of Paradife that d^d^y /enigfic after he was created: a«d the grounds of his con/ecl^ure are \\\ my opinion , as frivolous as any. As faft, when fie faith that eight dayes fpace was fuflicicnt to have experience of the happindfe of that ftatc. For why not as ^yvcll foivc dayes raorcorfon^edaycsIelTe ? nay rather, by continuance in t^e lamcftate, we grow icffc and Icife fenliblcofthehappincfFc thereof. And the liappinciTe of a (late is beft known by the contrary, according to that rule, Care»d3 magls ijfinmfr,iendo

heconceites between Adam and Chriit,as Wj^ isthoj^ghtof mmj to have been conceived in the Virgins wombe- on the fixt day ff the wetke^ and on the fame d^.y of the weeke v,is indeed crHcifiedHponthecroffe-^ whofeeth not that this convcnicncy bad been found as well on that day fortnight, or on that day threc-wcckes, andfoin Infimtum, as on that day feiight? Asridiculousappearestobc hispr^tence of complying ihus with the antients, whofe opinion was^that -Adam fcH the fame day wherein he was created, which he would apply to that day fenlght after. For why not as well to that day three weckes after, orthatday amonthafter^and kin Infinitum^ But lee us confider Pererins reafons whereby he undertakes " to (hew the unlikelihood of ^»/4»»/falling the firftday. The hrft 18 drawn from the forme o{ tyfdams temptation, thus ^hd'iru not eate of every tree of paradife? whic h fuppofcth as he jaithjthat they had already eaten of every other Tree in Pa-radifejand Eves anfwer,he iaith/cems to confirm this in dy^ in^wceate ofthef^mt of the trees in the Garden rSut rf the fruit of the Tree which i* In the mids of the Garden^ ^e eate not ; what is the meaning of ^^/^ff, but this^we are wont tt eate, quoth f^rerius. Yet forthwith he himfelfe enervates this intcrprc-tation,confcflingthat the meaning may be this, It is iJwM for Hs to eate. And I willingly confefTe, thatnoargumencip. pcarcs to me fo plaufiblc as this.namcly that they had formerly ufted of every fruit of the Garden bcfides this: for it fecms very hkly,that not till then they were wel prepared for fatans temptation. And itfccmes unlikely they would offer to tafte of the fruit forbidden untiU they had tafted of all the reft-then indeed and not til then,thc commendation of that as ofa

^ more

JO 5^^^ ^jralitie of the fourth Commandement^ .

more excellent fruit then any of the reft, might the better allure them both to touch and tafte. But sls fcrerius propofeth it, it hath no force; for as much as he corrupteth the Text, theDivells words being not fucU as thefe , tvhj doe yes not e^te of every tree of faradife ? but running thus 5 Tea ? hath God /aydyecjhallnoteate of every tree in the Garden f or as ^ifca-tor takes it for a conclufionof a larger difcourfe ; yeainai much AS G od hath faid ^ ye fhall not eate of the fr nit of every tree tn the Gardeyj^ fo giving a rea(bn to proove what he objected, namely that God envyed their happinefle* As for the rea-fons which before I hwivegiveuj they may be anfvvered thus. If the benefit of this fruit had been of the fame kinde with the benefit of others, and onely in degree o f excellency above them^then were it no way likely they (hould begin with this. But feeing it was pretended to be of a farre different kinde by Satans fuggeftion,' not fo much for fatisfying the appetite of fcnle, as for fatisfying the fpirituall de(ire of the Ibule in knowing good and evilt, which the very denomination of the Tree given by God himfelfc did fairely intimate; and this being cunningly improoved by Satan to be a Divine condition , in making them like unto God 5 this confideration might well allure foTtbwith without all further ftay tohave experience of other fruit- Secondly why might they not have tafted of the fruites of other Trees, without any ncceflity of nature urging them, and yet without any luxury at all, but only to acquaint themfelvcs with the condition of thofe good Creatures which God had provided for them? Yet agaiji confi-deringthatthisexperiencemadeto no other end, fhouldfo fenfibly have brought home unto them th.e goodnefle of God, in that (late of holineffe and integrity ^ that it would have exceedingly confirmed them in theirobedience to God 5 and made the motion of the Serpent at fir ft hearing diftaftfiill, and to choofe to be like unto God in obcdience^and thereby in conformity to his holy will, then in forbidden knowledge. Andbefidesg the tafting of all fo foone, can hardly be juftifi-cd from Luxury or waft. : therefore I reft in my firft anfwer* Tererius his next reafon caryeth a great deale of flicw, but in fubftance lefTe forcible. Certainly the making of the beafts of the Earth J andofman,might be done inasihortatimeasit

pleafcd

is Jit// in force to bind Chrijlians. ji

pleafed God to have it ; efpecially confidcring the opinion of{bmcantknts,that all things were made togethcr,and that ill a fhort (pace; fo mans placing in Paradife, and the beafts brought unto him by God, might be fbone difpatched : and (iircly Adams naming of them coft him no ftudy;and undoubtedly all this was done before the creating oi Eve • fo that all this might be done before noone, and (pace enough allowed for the Divells conference with Eve^ and his (educing her, and her (educing f^Adam. The making of them aprons to hide their nakednefle carycth the greatcft (hew of requiring longer time; but he who wanted not wit tS'namc the beafts fo congruoufly to their natures, wanted not un-derftanding to cover thcmfelves with fig-leaves. As for the D jftors alleaged by him for his opinion; I doc not finde that any of them is expre(re, or by con(cquent dired for that, whereunto they are alleaged ; but the inferences made from their wordes arc mterely conjedurall. For when hee write?, th^it Iofiph in the (irft bookc of his antiquities;and 'Baft/ in his Homily of Paradife ; and Damafcert in his (ccond bookc of orthodox faith and lO/Chapter. feeme to h of this opinion^ his ground is only this, bccaufe as he (aith/^r; tvrite that the Serpent in par adife didoften come to our firfi parents and conveyfe mth them very gently and familiarly ^ and that thereupon the Blvell tool^ him to inveagle the jV.omnn. Now this is but a conje<f1:urc of theirs ; neither doe they fay that be was wont to confcrre with them; yet all that they fpeake of may very Well be fulfilled in afewhoures* That which to thispur-^oCe he alkagcth out of<^ufiindeclvit,dcilil7, II.* r. ai. is Onelythis, The <*y4'pple on the tree forbidden^ we are to Believe it to hefuch , as the reft of other trees^ which now they had found to be without hurt ; hence it (eemes P^^r/^/would inferrc, that before the Divells temptation they had tafted of them all; but ^uflinsCpccch isindefinitCj and verifiedjift calc they had tafted bucof(bme ; and Fve might have tailed of (bme, ^dam of other Come ; If it be further urged , that Auflrn delivers it as a reafon to (hew how hereby they were made more pliable to yield to Satans temptation : I anfwcr that by tailing fome, yea and without tafting any, they might'be wellafTured they might be tafted of without hurt, excep-

G 2 ting

"5 JL 7 he moralitie of the fourth Commmdement

ting tliJt which God had forbidden them jand the tafting of all without liurc was no tolerable realbn toperfwadcthat in like manner they might taft of the forbidden fmic without hurt ; the Lord having profefled unto them5that In the day they did eate thereof^ thejfiould die the death. Pcrerius addes that tAuflirj in his twentieth Bool^e of the Gity of God,and ^6, Chapter , doth not obfcurelj give to underftandy that albeit he thought /idam contirtHcdnot long m paradifi , yet that he continued there longer then one day. But I finde no (iich thing in the place quoted by him. But I gueffe the pafTage he aimes at, is^hat wherein hee difcourfeth of thofe.words of the Prophet Malachj LMaL 5.. And the fdcrifice ofludah and /r« rufalemfhall pleafe the Lord as in the dayes of old y and in former jetires 5 and he inquires, what time that is. which is fignificd hy this phrafc, ^ in the dayes of old , and in the farmery cares. An i'firft he faith , that perhaps thereby may be fignificd, the time wherein our firft parents were in Paradife. And to this-he rcferrcs that of Efay Sf,6^, According to the dayes of the Tree of life 3 fljall he the life of my people. And who faith hee, knowes not, wliat that place was where the Lord planted the. Tree of life 1 But then to the contrary he difcourfeth thus, // 4^ man fljaH fay thofe dajes of the Tree of life to be the dayes §fthe Church of ^hrifi which are now current , and that C^rift

hlmfelfe is prophetically called the Tree of life • and that thefe

frfi men lived not any yeare^ in paradife , from mhence they ivere fo foone e'^eEied ^ that they hegate no fonne there^ and that there* fore that time cannot he under flood hy this phrafe of Mai achy ( as

''^ in the dayes of old and former yeares ) ■ • I p^ffe by thir

^uefiion: totwit, of the meaning of the Prophet Malachj, Now had ^uftin fimply fayd that our firft Parents continued; notmanyycaresin Paradi(c,therc hid beene fomecolour^ar if he thought, Adim had continued fome few yeares, or one yearc tt Icaft^ ioParadife, But neither doth Aujin dcli^fcc this as his ownc opinion, but as the difcourfe cf others; and that to prooYC that the words mentioned in Malachj^ cannot denote the time of ^^4«j/being in Paradift 5 for as much as they fpeakc of many yeares j but ^^^ continued not. yeares in Piradifc, which is proved by this, that he was driven from thence before he had begotten any fonne ;which

Is jliliin force to hind Chriflians^ %j

if k be referi^d to the conception of a'cliild, as i n reafon rt fermestobe, who (eeth not thac one day, or a night might have fiitiiccd for that ? So chat all things conljdcredjthis ph\cc rather makesagainft Prrer'nM then for him. I3 like (brt, that which he allcageth out of G'r<r^«?r; is onely this, thtic Mnn'm partidij} w^is accfffiomed to the words of God ^ and c g?tv erfed with the fpirit of the hlc^ed Angclls ; fiippoft it were ^o , and wich God himieifc, fo long as he continued in the ftateotintegri-ty ( yet I hope they will give way to the temptation of Sawn ) yet how little or Itow long that time continued is n:,t fpecified. Conlider we now the reafons to the contrary, delivered partly by VererUis himfelfe , p irtly by D3fl:or Willetxx^^nGencfs, Who on the third Chapter of that booke propofech them in this order. Firft , the AngeUs that fell^ prefentlj <^ficr their Cre^.tioitfinned^ ^j our Savi^t^r f^ith ^ th^t the D ivell did not ft and or continue in the truth Ioh» 8.44, Her, -unto Ari[llnconfe?itrth , Fa^MS cnntinuo fe a luce veritatu 1,1-zrrtit 5 as foone as he was made , prefectIj he turned afde frcm the light of the truth \ So it is likely that nt.vi alCo And indeed the inference from Angels'to m?n in this particular^ ieemcs to proceedc from that which is Icfle likely to that ivhich is more likely. If the angells of themfelves fell fb (bone, hov; much more lively is it, that both Satan would let himfelte with the firi'l, to tempt them, and being tempted lefleftrangeit is that they fliould fill. But concerning the angells defe6^ion, it doth not follow , either by our Saviours phra(e, or y^^/?/^/phralc that either of them believed they tell To (bone. But whenfoever that was propofcd unto them, which was the triall of their obedience ; had they approoved of it and (iibmitted unto Gods Will, that had beene or thereupon undoubtedly had followed their confirmation, as it was u na them that ftood ^ and their not approoving it, their not fiibmitting unto it was their finne in part, though according to their fpirituall nature, it might be in the highcft degree of ftomach and pride 5 like as their approbation there-or who obeyed was in an high degree oFzealeand humility. y/^/w;7/?xprofc(Teth it tobemore profitable, and more agreeable to the (ayings of the Saints ; that the Divell finned anon ^^^^^^1']'^^' after the hrft inftant of his Creation. Secondly , Doftor ' '^'^'^^^

G 3 fViilets

The MoraliiieGfthefvurihimmandement^

jTtHets ieconJ argument is this.; Opir Sdvionr faith that th^ Devillwas a manherer from the begimwg^ mt of tin JVori'i^ hnt of mans Creation , therefore at the very firfl he'fet nfod them^ But that phrafc from the begmmng doth not tie us to any ftaeh cxad calailation. Thirdly , the fHbtihy of the- Dhnll doth inftnaate as much , yoho would then ap.Hlt th: m , wh^n they were fenft able to refift , before they by experience were confirmed iu their obedience. In this Icon fcfle there are two paniciilirs of very momentous confideration. P'iri% the Deviilsiubtilty to fet upon them 5 before they were pofTflcd and taken up with wUi holy walking with God. Sccondly^that continuance in an h<i»ly walking with God could not but confirmctheiTi, and make them more liedfaiUherein, having as yot no principle of the flefliin them to make rdlllance, and to rufpecl every motion that (hould anfe to withdraw them ^romir. Fourtf " cafi

of, left he aft

temted to retHrn^, This reafon my palate doth notrelifh To well; the more 2^<3'i?« (hould be tormented wi.th the !o:Te ofparadiftjthe better it Ihould be for him in n)y ;udgenifnt, rather then worfe. And as for attempting to reiurne J cannot conceave how he ihould be (b vaine as to prefume to evacuate Gods judgements^ and then againc of any fuch para liie after/ii^Wibmrfh men t rhercnce , wee read nothing. Fi't'y, And it is chare ( C\kh Doftor PVlllety^y the Serpents firfl onfet^ hath God Cayd ye fhxU not eate of every Tree ? that they had nut yettafttaofa/iyfrfiit^ but at the very firft^ the forbiidenfruit yvas ofered, before their afpetite hadbeene ferved-siith any other. But firft I doe not finde, thatthe Text mentioned hath any fiKh importment; Secon'^ly, this fuppofeth, that the rait of other fruits would have beene apt to hinder the courfc of Satans temptations ; but how Hn refpeft of giving fo good content and fatisfaftlon, yea but this fatisfaftion was no o-ther then to the feniiull appetite ; but the Tree foibiddeiirj the very name of It ( whence Sntan tooke advantage to promote his temptation ) (eemed to promife fatisfaftion in a far different kindcjuamely tothefpirituall appetite of the miade. 6. Adam (faith he j had not yet eaten of the Tree of life^ as it

is^ill in force ta hind Chrijlians, j 5

16 evident vcrfe 21, But if they hiid/f.iyed.inj time i>j p^rraMJe it is not ttfilik^ly^ but they fljould have taftcd of the t) ^t of life it being in the heart rf p^radife. This at firll feeiiied Co nic very confiderablc ; but upon after thoughts not To. F'pr certainly it aHTureJ not lifs, but upon obedience and therefore without obedience the talHng thereof ( if acceifible in that cafe J would have Hood him in fmall ftead. 7. Likewifc, (aith he, feeing prefemlj after the^eation they were bidden to ercreafe ani mkiiplj J it ts no (fhcr /iks but the man fyouLl have known his wife in paradlfe , if they hjid flayed there fb long, and fo th?y fjould have gotten children without fn. This rcaibn is not to bedefpifed ; akhougli coftay a day or two in Paradi/ewas not to iby there long. But confidering th it then they might company together vviihjut: all finne To much as in thought, orcircumftanceofaft, (the want whereof makes even afts naturall \\\ this condition of ours , fhamefull unto us ) why fhould they deferre the propagation of mankmdc; efpecially confideringthat the child conceaved in the (lue of innocency fhould have beene without (inne. 8. The eighth realbn is in effeft the fame with that of Broughtons ; If Adam had not fm^ ncdthefirP^iiiiy , the Lion had eaten Grajfe -, this in my judgement is a molt infipid reafon.Firll, becaufe God had ordained, I hat all beads at the firft fhould live by Grade c^^;?.!. 30. Secondly, In the arke o^Noah, Lions mu(l haveeacen Graflc or Hay^or elfe have ilarvcd, they had no power to prey upon their fellow p;^flengers, Thirdly, if Lyons and Beares at firft had lived by pray, even after Adams fall, what had become of the reft of Gods Creatures, Imbelles dam^t cjuidnifipr^da fumus ? Laftly it is well knownet^at in thefedaycs, in new England, Beares doc live by Grade, and their flcfli for mans meate is accompted better then Vcniion p. Never any man on Earth^Qhrifl only excepted , k^pt th- Sabbath without fm : ths Apofllefaith , he that is cntred int» his r'.fl hath alo ceafed from his own worh^^^ God did from his^ Hebr*\ IO. // is the refi only of(fhrifl , where there (hall be a ccjjlniui from all the w^rks effin. But that reft which Adum fhould have k^pt in par.viife was not Chrifts refi : therefore he l^pt no refi there with utfin, he fell then befare the Sabbath. This argument I confeffc ftemes to be very ponderous and favoury, as built upon the ApolHes

G 4 dlicourfc

dircoiirfeHf^. 4. But the propofition is not fufficiently proved For to ceafe from a mans owne workes ( as they are taken from (iniVes) is evidently competent to none but fiich as have formerly finned , which canni t agree to (tylcLimm thef^atcoFinnocency. Yet it cannot be denyed , but that ^i^/^w^ continued in innocency and without iinne until! his fall* And To long refkd from finne, though not.in Chrid, £ive that to reft fiom (inne ruppofeth ««he precedency offinne. But albeit this were granteGl^, it fblloweth not that he fell before the Sabbath ; for he might fallen the very Sabbath, which was the opinion of the author of the Jewes Darafh, MCi^mioncd by Rril?yiDaviJKimchi on the 92. Tf<dlm.\ 10. That place lafllj maky to this parpo^c^ ?Jaime 49. 13. ftAd&m iGcitjed not cue yuq^ht in honoHr ; for f'o are the rp eras if they ho properly tra'r: (luted ; the word is ^>t which jlgrdjies to lodge or ft-ay all nigln : and thpis diverfe of the Rabbins doe expot-md this place cf j^ddm'^ And he quotes liabbi Nathan. R, Menachem^and Miuras Tehillim. It cannot be denied but this place is very pregnantly appliable unto y^^^?;^, as the firil and chiefellob-jcftonwhonuhis truth is verified 5 as being in the chieFeft honour that ever man had on E?jth , Lord ofall^iie World, and the Father of mankinde 5 and placed inParadife^and the verbe properly i^gnihes pernoflare , to continue a night. Onely it is of the future tenfe, which yet to bcare the fignifi* cation of the time paft is nothing ftrange in the H-brew, tliough it hath not alwr.yes V^pt converfvum, the figneof fi{ch converfion. And the very word Adam is hereexprefied, 'and we are very apt ufiijlly to accommodate imto Adam without all reference to this cueftion^ or confideration of the pro-priety of the Hebrew word fign](ym^perno[lare. But let us re-turneto that from whence we nave digreffed. Be it fbthat %Adafv continued in his integrity until! the end of the feventfi day ; doe we not rend exprefTely, G'^?2.2.5. that Godtooke the rrfan and ptit him- in the Qarden of Eden, that he might drcffe it and k^cpeit •, therefore God had worke for h^m to doe, even in things of this World as well as hee hath fo*i' us. And TmC'inGrn. CMartin Luther ^to^e^tth as much ; Itfollowes from hence c.i. -v. 3. faith he, that if Adam had Hood in his innocency , yet he fhould

hd've kept thefcvemh day hoty , that is^on that day he JtHuldhaiie

tanght

Is fill I in fine to hind ChnSiians. ^m

t/!vjrht hi^- childi^e?9 , ami childrois cbiUreH , what was the -^Ul ff Gddandvifhere'in his ivorjhlp did ccnfift , he fh-^uld haveprd^^ fed God , given thjnkj a^d offered. Ok ether dajirx he pionid h^Vf tillc d the ground y looked to Lis CattelL hrV'^ Sctnt ecerm treads in Lffihers (ktps .^ creatine^ upon tkiC Commandement ofthe Sabbath. Why then fhoisld it be thought fiiperfluous to ordaine {«>nie dayes for die works of this World ^ and one day for the fcivice of-God ? And is it lifcefy that Eve was abom the fervice of God^vvhen the Diveil afl^uilted her ? was fheenottoo neare the forbidden Fruit ? it was within her fight, and the Fruit within her reach. 2, They urge that T^' cation froTK Jcrviie. vrorhes iv^s then in vr.ine , feeinv nothlnT could then he Uhortous and troulrlefome Pinto him. Janflver; 'tUoijgh it were no p.rine to him to keepe the Garden and drefle i-t ; yet this muft needs take up his thoughts whi^e hee was about it, and many a Gentleman in th^fe dayes finds leffe imployment then Adam had 5 wiH it therefore follow that the ©biervation of the Sabbath is iiiper-fluous ?

3. The third reafon is , that if this Comntandement were then given,it fiepfld oblige ali men » hat it is flaiyie that th^ Gentiles never churved it, neither doe we readc theT^atriarchs did. I anfwer, there is no fonndnefle in all this. For touching the Gentiles, we have no Hittory before the Flood, nor tifl a long time after ; in which fpace of time ^ this Do^rjne of the inffitution of the Sabbath beirjg carried oncly by gitradition , might eafily bee obliterated. The Scriptures Divine are the moft ancient Records in the Woi Id ; but it followes not, that becaufc the Scriptures doe not Record how thr^atriarches did obferve the Sabbath, therefore they obferved it not ; but much rather , beCaufc, the Scriptuires Record , that The Lord hleff^cd the Jeventh ^ay, and fanEiified it , therefore the Patriarchcs did ob-ferve it. And the truth is , iintill the comming of the Ifraclites out of Egypt , wee rcade not of the ChurCh of God any where hut in finglc Families. Neither doe wee readc of the Patriarches before the Flood or a long time after that they kept any Dayconfecratc to GODS Service ; will it therefore follow , that thofe holy Patriarches

j8 The ^jralitie of the [ouxtbCommmsiement^

archs did (ec no time at all aparc for Gods ervice 1 yet is It generally acknowledged as by the light of nature, that fomc time ought to be fet apart for Divine lervice. And formerly I have (hewed out of Manajfes'Ben Ifrael, chat whereas the Lord enjoyning to the Ifraeiites the obiervatioa of the Sabbath, bids them remember fW they were fcrvants in Egypt ; this the antlent wife men among the Jewcsdoe ap-ly in'this manner, Cogita, in Sgjftouhifervkbas ^ eiiamip'l) Sabbato per vim te coaElum adUbores ^ thinki r/ith thj felfc^ how that in Egypt ivherethonfervedft , that by force thou wafi con^ . firainedto worke^ even on the Sabbath. Sothattheobfcrvation ofthc Sabbath was a duty even in thofe dayes. Obierve farther that in the fourth Commandement, the Jewes are charged to looke unto it^not onely that their children and their -£crvan*sdidobfcrvethe Sabbath, but alfo, thsflrangerthat ypxs within their gates. Now the(e kinde of Grangers commonly called Strangers ofthegatc, and thereby dKHngoiOied from Strangers of the Covenant ; were fuch as were not cir-cumci(ed, though accompted Profelytes in the firftdegee. And on them was ufually impofcd no other burthen, befides the obfervationof thcfeven precepts of Noahy as Sphwdler obferves upon the roote •'^*. Wliich (even precepts o^Noah are alforeckoned up by the fame Schindler in the roote nu 5 and albeit the oblervation of the S.ibbath were none of th^m cxprefle ; yet in as much as the Lord gives exprcdc charge that the flrangers within thnr Gates {hould obfervcthe Sab-batlvtieemes it was comprehended under one of them-. And, therefore foroe thinke it was comprehended under that which was called^=3^'^^"5 ^<f;^£?^/^/<?'Z)d'/; that is, the wor/hip of no other God, bfft the (l^eator of Heaven and Earth '^ and by name, my worthy friend Mafter Jofeph Alede • as I have leeneina Manufcript of his touching the interpretation of the word otSojj.tyoi in the A^s • and hereof he gives this reafon^ namely that the obfcrvation of the feventh day was the badge of this, namely ofworpnpping the Qreator of Heaven and Earth , according to that 5 the Sabbath is a figne between me and yopf^ that I Jehovah am your Godjbecaufe in fix dayes the Lord made Heaven and Earthy the Sea and all that in them is, and re fled the fsvemL Now if the oblervation of the Sabbath were ; coropre-

comprehended under the leven precepts ot Noah ^ undoubtedly ic was in terce, and praclrile ajnoniicit ihe Patriarchs, and tiuit (lotonly aJter, but bctoic the'flood ^ lor undoubtedly they all vvorlhippcd the Lord God Creator of Heaven, and Earth. 2. We have notable evidence for the obfervati-on of the Sabbath Day,even among the Gentiles. And fi.iijthe diitinftion of th? whole courleoftitne into vveckcs, forthp antiquity thereofisrciTiarkablej and now lately jtiltihedby RiviiH6 2i2^Aw\iQomAruiy^\x\\ ijceat variety of leirnedobfer-vation , and ih.it efpecially by CAt/^-^i/^/ Salmaftm that renowned Scholar and Antiquary , one of them who with great inlhincc ur^cd Rlvetm not to fuffer 6' !>;??.2a-;^/ to pafTe unan-fweared in this point. It is true , as Rivets obferves, thyt Qattfabon writing' upon Suetom-u 1.1^* 52. and upon thelc words, [Jio(r-yyics the Grar/imxi'i^vn tvas wont to difpate at Rhod-. .r onthcf S^bhath , /jr^y/vrfpr/:'"his Opinion, t\\.}X the obfirvatio}7 nf wak^s yjuwa dtycs ^enrrulfy receavtd , Tr.rc not commo^Tly recede' vedbefore thed^.yes of Thcod>fius , though he Gont-eiTethj that long before ic was in i\(q among the Grecians, efpecially thofe o^Afia, Yet Rivet makes it good, and that out o(Tcr~ tfiUian^ tha" l>ng before.it was in u(e among theLitines. loarjries T'hilopo'^i'.u in his Commentary upon the Hiftory of the CreatiOKi^a book commended by Photws in his Bib/iotheca iib.j cap.Xi{ and lately fet forth at Vienna in Af^ftria^\vv\tt% thus ; (»-//'/ men doe ar^ee in this ^ that there are [even dzyes onl) ^ ivhlch by revolHtioiiin themfclves doe complete irhole time^ whereof what rcafon can wee give, b.it that which Mofes gave? to wit.that in fix dayes the Lord made the World, and rcfted the feventh. And (^Itrnens Alexandrinus and Eri'ebitii prove the I'ame out of Homer ^ U^o^ou vf/xap iTrh , )^'*StiJIa€-ftti fltTOS'Ttt, The feventh day was that ^ wherein 'all things ive^e finifhed • and out o^(^Mmachfis^ a nd out of Linfts in diverfe pafTages to the (ame purfe, as Rivetns hath (kewed in his an-fwcrto Gomariis. And further, that in the French Kings library , there \^a Chronology of George SyncellHS,from ^/fdam to Di^cl(fa ;whcrcin Sa/majifn obferves, t-hat the computation of times by weekes was before the computation of times by moncths and yeares^vas found out by Alholoiets ; and that the ancient fathers dillinguidied the fpaces of times

only

©nly by weekes r and that the Cddi^an Aftrologers having ob-ikTVtdthe CGurfs of the Sunne ^ Moons ^ ^nd other planets were ^hef^rfr that befiowedonthe fevsnd:ijcs of thd wjekj the names / of the planets ; and that hy the telUmony of an antient author Manuicript. Zoroaflres and Hjftafpis were the authors of thefs dewonfrrations, 'But that this circuit of feven dzyes tvM i^ufe befon Zoroajfres andthefirfl authors of Aflrolo^j, ^ut the Jewes kept themfelves as to the diftintlion of times hj weckes^ fo tQ call the dayes by their order , th: frfi, thefeeond ; and thra

■ theT^ytha^oreansdidthe /i% and called the prfl daj of the

79eeki /-tiet lik^ as the Hellenift-i called it fJ-t'^^ u tgjv o-al^BaTtsu In the yeare, i627.There was (et forth a book at Venice(gts the fame Doctor Rivet writes ) iiatitled Thefaur^u pr^c^ptorum Ifaaci AtidL ludAv ; in the firft part whereof and I'^y, precept touching the Sabbath , he writes to this effeB , that the holineffe efthatfacred day is fo well known , that it were fuperfluous to fife many words in the explication thereof ^ feeing it is found to have impreffion in the very hearts of the Heathens themfelves ; hecaafe there is none that knoweth not , that when l^is highneffe to whom -none can approch^ hmlt this wonderfullfrarne^ he refted on the feventh day, * 2, And thus ere I am aware, I am fallen upon the holineffe of the day, acknowledged generally by the Heathens themfelves as this Jewifh writer conceaved. Theophilm Antiochenm an antient Father in his fecond booke written to (i/^i^fo/;'^:^ , acknowledgeth the celebrity of this day amongft ail men, though the reafon thereof was not fb well known to moft; to ivit as.drawn from Gods reft on that day after he had created the Wov\d,Ttrtulitan alfo acknowledged the Heathens to folemni2e the feventh much after the fame manner that the Jewesdid ; confirmed by the learnod oblervation o^Iacobns Godefridus , notwithftanding £bme exceptions made againft it. And that this was the praftile of the Romans he4)roves farther out oiTibullus and Oz/i^namc-ly that they did feriari reft on the Saturday as the Jewes did. And Manajfcs Ben Ifrael in his 35. queftron upon Exodus writes thus, A^^ Agareni quidem , Veneris diem religiofiffme Culentes quern Alginna vacant ^ Sabbato nomen^fuum cripue^-runt: hauddubih it a providente T>eo^ ut omnium animis aternl" tas ejpts imprimsretur. The very Agarenes, mojt religioufly ob*

fervifig

Is fiillin fora to lind CWtj^um, ,^ -^

fervi^g the Friday s which ibey call Alf^anui , have taken from the Sab hath its r,ame : doubt Uf^e Godfo^priViding^ that thf. eternity thereof Jhouldhe imffririted in the minds ofAllme^ ; Belike as a tefthnony of Gods reft from his workes in the Crca-tion, therewithal! to maintainc an acknowledgement of Ood the Creator. More then this, Salmaftt^ acquainted RivetM with Ibmc collcftions made by the- forementioned Gsorgitis Symelltu out of ccrtainc apocryphal! bookes, one whereof is called ai^tt^ >^ricri;, the liiUgeneration ^ the other ^^^ A^«f/x,, the life of Adant^ in nhich the OHthor ohferves through many weeks 5 that thefeventh day was a day afrefi'^andthM he concea-" ved the author of that booke to have been a Jtw , tranfiated by, fome Hellenift , who,makes mention of the Lords Day : And Doctor IVillet allcageth r^i/(? calling thcicventh day Trou'^n^s; «»?tJ; , a felHvall of all Nations. So little ncede have wee to ftickc upon that mBeftod^ UJhiAnt U^hi^ «f«j, the f?venth,ds^^ An holy Jay'^ which (bmeobferve to have becnc (poken, not of the fcvcnth day of the weeke, but of the fcventh day of the moneth rather, wherein Apollo was borne ( which yet is al-leagcd by ^/^W(?«r and J?;j(/^^/'/« as for the leventh day of the weeke) what is wanting herein , being (b plentifully fup-plycd other waycs. ) And whereas Gomarm being convift-cd of the evidence of this truth , betakes himfelfe to a new eourft, as to (ay that this pra£ti(c of Heathens was taken from thcJeweSj and not from the ancient Patriarchs 5 Dodori?/-vetHs brings a nianifelt place out of Jofefhw to refute tba^ conccite of his ; As whoprofeflTcththatthiscuftomeofthe Gentiles had beene ik fAa*y» long agoe. And how unlikely is it 3 thatcjtherthe J5'^/>fM«/j orthe Nations bordering upon the Jewcs ftiould take this from the Jcwes , wh<n we cpn-p iiAtv Solitnm inter accolas odium^ as Tacitm oblcrvcs, theac' cuftomed hatred between borderers ; cfpccially between the feed .at., efthe fVoman^and the feed of the Serpent *• and how diftaftfuU ^iCor,LiA. the things of God arc unto natural! men-, even folijhneffe unto them, neither c^n they k*fow them^ becnufe they are fpiritually difcerned* And Horner^ and Linus , and QalUmachus , fetch the fcvcnth day from the very Creation ^ as whereon the making ofall things was finifhcd. I come at length to thq fourth Argument.

Si The M oralitie of'thefounh Commandement^

44 Jf the Patriarches had obferved the Sabbath , Mofes rconld

have mentioned the religious obfervation thereof by their an* ceftorS) to encourage them,I anfwcr i. it is not Hkely they were ignorant of the pra^iife- of th<;ir anceftors. The Chaldee pa-raphrafeUpon the Pfal* 92,.fuppbfeth Adam to have beene the author of the T/a/m that is intitled for the Sabbath, 2. If for Gods fake who delivered them out of Sgypt^ they would notobfcrve it, neither would they obferve it for their anceftors fake. 3. Udofes makes no mention of their anceftors pra<aife irrfettingapart any time for the fervke ofCod; (hall , we therefore deny that by the fuggc^ion of light naturall fomc time is to be fet apart for this ^ i. The Fathers profejfe that no other foft'we frecept was given

to Adam then toabflein from the Fruit of a certaine Tree. I an-£wer, (^hryfofiome iprokffeth expreffely , that from the beginning God hath (hewed that one day in the circle of the wecke is to bee fet apart for (pirituall operation • Likewise the teftimonies of ^^/7^«^/«^ and Epiphanipu are exprede for the acknowledgment of the inftitution of the Sabbath immediately from the Creationjas before hath becnc (hewed. Indeede both as touching the (citing apart of fome time in general! for Gods ferviccjandthe proportion of one day in (even in fpcciallj is more then poiitive. 6* ' ^iznnes teavh that before Chrifls comming the Gentiles inight

vbtai^efaivation bj obferving the morall X^, and the La vp of n(ttHre<y with fome light of Divine faith ^ and fupernatur all af-fiftanceofGod, lanCwer. i. of what reputation thofe Divines heefpeaks of, de(crve to bee with us, let every Proteftant judgc.«.yct wee knw that the Gentiles might have evidence enough of the hdlincflfc of the (eventh day ; and that God left not himfelfe'withoutwitneire in this^even to Heathens is fo notorious 5 that we may juftly wonder ^ to obferve how the monuments of the dignity of the feventh day were fo ftrangcly prefcrved among them.3. Yet where teftimony iuf-ficient was wanting not oncly for the particularity of the dsiy, butforthcproportionoftime* wee doe not hold thefc tobemorallfoabfolutely, and in fudh a degree, as to fay that failingin this alone in fuch a cafe (hould prejudice any mans falvation j though we fay with C^yrjfoflome that God

by

by the ftory of the Creation hath (ufEciently manifefted that one day in the wecke ought to be fet apart for Gods Service 5 and with Axioritu the Jefuite,that it is moft agreeable to reafon^ that after fix worke dayes one day intire and whole ihould bet conftcratcd to divine worfliip.

2. From PapiftsthisPrefacerprocccdcstoProtcftantSjand 2

tells us that thisjeemes to be tke jndgement of the Divines in the Low-Cofintries ; £or proofc whereof he produceth none but GomarM and RivetHs • both which are well knownetobc oppofite in the point of the originall inftitution of the Sabbaths And as touching the morality of one day in feven^both fValUu^ and Thyfim two profeflbrs of Divinity in the Univer-fityofXcj^^^jare well known to differ from them both ; and Hjfenipu a low Coiintrcymah too. As for Calvin^ I'have already flicwcd how l« makes nothing for this Prefacer; and that they catch advantage from him moft imreafonably by dif-membring him. WalUm (hcwes the fame to be the judgement of Martin Luther , namely, that one day in the wceke at leaft ought to bee con(ecrated to Divine Service ; and out of-^f-lanethon^ that all the cerenloniality in the fourth Commande-ment is retrained to the obfervation of a certaine day, that which rcmainesbefides therein commanded continuing mo-rall.* Bf^^ likewi(e affirmes that the fanftifying of every fc- "^inAp^i^jQ^ venth day as touching the Service of God^ is of mprall obligation and unrcmoveablc. The like ;*^^//<e^ (hewcs to have beene the judgement o^Bucer^ Teter Martyr^Zanchyylnmus^ Virettu Calvins CiDWe^gut/Danafif, Antonitis Fajns^ Matthias Martinws , and in a manner all that have written upon their Belg'ckCatechiCme. By this, the Reader may confidef the modcfty of this Pf Acer , whenhee profcfleth that, it fcemes to bee the judgement of the Divines in the Low-Countries, that one day in fevcn to be fet apart for Gods (blcmn worfhip is not of the morality of the fourth Gommandement* But WalUns proceeds and flicwes the ^-^m^ to have been the judgement of Vrfinns , and ^Parapis of the Palatinate ; of Alfiedins •ProfefJbr at Herbcrne 5 together tvith Lansberfipis siud'Fejftfs BommfHs^Mtn:\mt3Limt)g the morklity' of one day in fcven, Co bee conlecratcd to Divine Servke. Atid in thi clofc pro-fdflTeth 3 hee could adde the tcftimonies of many Englifli i and

S4 ^^^ M^raMtiejfihe fmnh OmmMdemem^

ifisd Scogtife Divines, who ei-^r have becne accorapted Or-Sbodo^j^ wmuxnn$ in fudgcmcnt with the former onthk

^^^"^^ taftofallcoiilid^^ what Is Gomarus hisownc opinion ^

m4.l€m 4= ^Q jyjg^ ^jjj^g lyg j|j.g n^t fo precifely bound to this proporti* onisfdmej buc cbat wcc may allow a better. T/a« condition jsf Div/ff^ worjhif (faith he ) commanded in the fmrthCtim-^ m^ndement requires th^ not only certaine ^aye^ Q for order and for Qods better fervice fake ) he obferved, hfit aifo thatfn^^ ^ient dajes he ohffrvei 5 it cannot be inferred frQm this that God hdthnot defined a certaine day t$ hs , thUit it is indifirent .whe-^ fher we maks ^hoyce «fone in fifty 5 or if* an hundred^ or one in a /ff&5# r/?o^;j;i Then proceeding to define wbat arc fumcient 5 heg ^cknowledgcth that the dayc8 ftt apart for this miift Ijee ei« {her as frequent or more frequent ^ then one day in fcven.'And in this anfwer of ^/w^^r;^/to an argument of fT^/Z-e;!^/made Ey^mMciUg fQi-the morality ofone day in feven doth jS/'Z'^^/// reft | name* h^»' Jy thaf to us who are eajed of the burthen of lewijh ceremonies^

$hedayesconfecratedto^ivine Service may be more^ they may potbefeyver. And ad de5 of his own , that we cannot in charity require f>f our fervants the iabour x)ffo many dayes ( to wit of fix.J yoithout fofne reft, As for the (econds which this Pre* facer faith (jomarm brings, to wit Vatahlus , and Wolfgangus iMufculHS, thisisnothingtotheprefentpurpofc. Forthcfe ;irc not brought in by him in the point of the morality of one day in feven, but oncly in the point of the originall in-ftituaon of the Sabbath ; but this is his jugling courfc to mcndicatc fome (bcw of authority to fervc his turne where fiib-ftanccfailcthhim* 9* 3. As for the Hollanders who in If availing about the

World Wcftward had loft a day > that is, came to obftrvc our ;Chriilian Sabbath one day too late | when this Prcfacer ^skcs hereupon, i^hat Jhould thofe peop/e 'doe when they were returned ; I will not aniwer by advifing them to travaile the World over againc Eailwardjthat they may finde the day which tbcy had ioft.j by travailing round the World Weft^ ward ; much leffc that thcjr (hould renew their travailes the fame way till t(icy had loft fix daycs more, that fo their Sab* bath might C9«^^iirce with the Sabbath ©f their Countrey^

mm

men at home: but according to the particulars propofed by ScB^ J*

him i naHiely to concurre now with their Countrymen a day

before their time 5 that fo they might make amends for that time which they had loft, if any ncede oi amends, and not rather for uniformities fake.For when in the dayes of Jcpjpiah the Sunne {landing ftill one day was a3 long IS two dayes, yet this was nothing material! to the altering of their Sabbath^ much lefie when the Suhne went backe lo. degrees in the diall o^AhaZy while King Hczrchiah reigned. No (bber man I thinke will lay, the morall Law was broken by this^ though one weeke in Jojuahs dayes contained more time by i 2. houres, then any former wcekc, and another weeke in King Hf<,fc^;//?/7/dayes was found to bee many houres longer then his fcllowes*

H THE

66 SeSi. 5,

^<^^(<^S&Sii<S*i^^iS»i^\i>!i'-§!iiiiiiS»

m f.'.

(!A.^ aZ @MJ^ a*.3l« -sAEaks <tt.

THE SECOND

DIGRESSION

CONSISTING OF TWO PARTS.

I. In making goodDoBor Wallaeus^A/V argnments for. the mo^ulity of em day infeven 3 againji the anjwer of DoUor Rivetus.

II. Inanfrvering o^Do^or R.ivetus^/V arguments dire^-* ed againfl the morality of one day infeven*

O W whereas Doftor Rivetm about the ob-fervation of one day in (even as necefTary, differcth in opinion from his two Collegiies Doftor ThjftHs , and Doftor WtUn^ , and not (boneIy,butdirc^s himielfe (after Go* marm^ to take into conHderation the arguments propofed by Doiflor WnUm for th» morality of one day in (even , and to accommodate an anfwer thereunto : I thinkcitfit, not to omit the difcuffion of that anfwer of his 5 and that in fuch fort that I may carry my felfe correfpon-dcntly to his ingenuous behaviour herein.

Thefirft argument of lyiiUus is this, ifh^ the force and analogy ( of the fourth Commandement)it he not rightly colleH^ed thatoype day off even is to be confecrated to Divine worfhio^then no certaine uumher or circle ofdaycs-'can he limted (to the for e* faidfHrfofe ) hy any Divine free eft , feeing in no other freceft

k found memim^yf any ^t her number ; ani therefore it pjall he ScEl. <,

I^t^ffil/toch. 'jc Ather a thirtieth dnjy or a fiftieth dtty mthom ' —

trunfgreffidn oj any ^Divine freceft. l^ttt this, is ah furd. This argument is of great force ; confidering the difference bet-weene proportion of time allowed unto Divine Service j and ihe difference of the day 3 keeping ftill the fame proportion. For every niafter , from the greateft Prince to the meaneft houfholder expefts that his fervant (hould be profitable unto him, and accordingly hee expcdsa ccrtaine proportion of (ervice to bee performed by him 5 as namely a good dayes worke for every day;a good weeks worke for every weeke.And in every trade it is well known by them that are feen€ therein, wherein confifts a good dayes worke ^ whereof whofbevcr failes, he is aceompted but an idle and unprofitable (erv ant; but fo the worRe of the day be done, whether he^ laboureth more in one houre, then in another, he regardeth not. Such in like manner is every ones coiifideration of a weckes worke. So likewiie as touching the fcrvice of God, it is nothing materiall as touching the fubftance of Gods fervice what day ofthewcekeis fct apart for that. For whether we confider the advantagious nature of it for fetting forth the glory of God who is our maker; and as we came from h im (b we mult be for him, Rom. 11. 3c Heh, 3. The (upreame efficient being ever of duty the fupreame end ;" or whether we confiderthe profitable nature of it to our ownc (bules in comming acquainted with him, both touching his nature, touching his counfaile concerning us , and touching his will. For when we defpife him,we defpife him againfl our (elves ; and when wee provoke him , wee provoke him to the confufion of our owne faces ; himfelfc being nothing profited by our fervice, but our owne foules rather, though he be plsaled to accompt himfclfe glorified thereby : it being his glory to doe us good. This advancement of his glory and our good is no more promoted by fetting one day in a weeke apart for this then another. But betweene the proportion of one day in a weeke , or ORC day in a moncth, or one day in a yeare ^ there is a vali a«d momentous difference. For we come to the knowledge of Ck)d, and of the mytteries of godlinefle by fmall degrees;

H 2 and

68 The, Moralitie ^fthe fourth Commandement^

Sc&.^ <• ^"^ ^" thewaycs of holin'efle wc clamber as it were up an high

— 1—L- and (leepe hill ; and our life is a wayfare , our condition is

the condition of travellouvs •, nay our life is a warfare, arvd theDivell and his angells of darknefle goe about continuilly like fo many roaring Lyons> and hungry Beares/ecking whom they may dcvoure ; So that wetravell to Heaven as it were by dennes of Lyons , and over raountaines of Libbards, And will any wi(e man f^y that it matters not much in this cafe^whether we acquaint our felves with the Armour af God one day in a wceke, or one day in a moneth , or one day in ayearetoarmeourlclvesagainft fuch ghoftly andwatchfull enemies I Secondly, confidering that it was never knowne that any mafter from tlie higheft to the loweft. Was fo foolifh to leave it to his" fervant to cut out what proportion offer-vice he thinkes fit, wherewith to fatisfie his mafter for his keeping, and for the wages which heexpe<flethat his hands. Thefcthings confidered; I fay this firft argument of DoAor TValUtu is of great evidence and force, and therefore it is to be well weighed and confidered what anfwer either Dof^or RivetHi or any other doth make unto it, and what fatisfafti-on it gives. Now the anfwer that hce makes unto it pro-ceeds not in his owne name, but in tbe name of another, to wit,inthenanxofC7i?»;^«|f, and fuch as concqrre with him.

To this they anfwer ( faith he ) that it is vo inconveniettce

. that there us yro certaine yitunber or circle ofdajes defined for Gods

fer vie e ^y any precept. It is enough that the nature of pub liqiie

worfhip y in genet all comprehended in the fourth Qommandement^

doihrvcjpiire that n^t only certatne dayes he ohferved ^ but that

the number of them he fuffcient alfo , nor fewer then the right In^

fiitution of the (^hnrch^ thefalvation ofmen^ndglorj of God doe

reejutre^andthat God hy not defining it^ hath not left unto us a wild

licentioufncs hut a prudent liberty,^ <»And therefore that it cannpt

he differredto one day in ti^enty , or thirty , much lejfe to one of a

thoufand,

2* 2. Over and above they note ( (aith he ) that from the

Tjtorallreafon of precept it is gathered what number ofdayes isfuf^

feientfir divine Service ; namely tha$ feeing we are eafid

^ft'he hnrien of ctrtmomes ^ Tvhereof the Ifwcs were Hst , and S^A X

yet God recjmred one ddj infeveti to he i^pt holy hj them^ vrt .!

fjtay ^ msre freejuent in Divine offices^hnt oh^ ht tuit to beie^e : hnt jet that Q 0T> hath not precifely tUd ChriHmns to Any^ thatu ^ as/tak^it^ to a»ydayinthfiveel^^VfhcrcxsitBiOUld he to any proportion of time, otherwilc it is nothing to chc present purpofc.

3. Doftor Rivet'M addrs this of his t)wnc, that fVhercAi this alfo is morall that Jome refl he granted to fervants and labour^ trs^in charity the labour for fo many dayes cdnmt be ex ailed of them without feme nfl, •To chislTcply, Heccwe have acknowledgec!,that not only f->mc time5btit ^^t*i* fil(b a fafiicient proportion ot time is to be fct apart for Grods publiquc fcrvice , and that by the very light of nature; for that I cone cav€ to be his meaning, and not with reference to the precileComniandement commanding it but with reference unto it as it is morall, and fo acknowledged by light of nature. For it is apparent that the Comnlandemcnt in re-<]i:iring a (cventh doth therein require one day in (even, and noc leave it at randomc, what proportion of time , but defines it. 2. I appealc to every mans conlcicncc, and that as guided by the very light of nature fo farrc as it may be /uftly thought to be incorrupt, whether it be not more fit the Lordhimfelfe (hould (et downc what proportion of time he thinkes (iifficienc, then that the definition hereoffhould be left tothefervant, and that for theieconfidf rations, i. If it be left unto man, how improbable is it that all the Nations of the World (as Chriftians are or may be found in all ) will -concurrc in jtidgcmcnt, and if they doe not, who feeth not what a way is hereby opened to mifcrable diftraftion and con-fo^ion 5 confiier what Socrates hath written of different rites in keepdng Lent, and in obferving holydayes. 2. ,Ifit be left to man, it is very likely that little enough will be thought fufficient, fb burtbenlbme unto fleih and bloud is:Gods Service ; and the major part in moft Nations ( if not in all ) even of the beft ( as is to be feared ) is not truly regenerate. For as our Saviour tells us chough many be called yet but few

H 3 arc

Sefi K ^^^ chofen. 3. upon this he concludes it may not be diifes red

*. Z?* — to the twentieth d^y ; yet iris well knowne that "Bremif-is hAih

profefledlt may be differred to the fourteenth uponLezuicw^ 35.8^ 'dS DoCiov Townde aiieageth him. Now if fb great a writer hath beene of opinion that from the icventh it may ^ be put off to the 14^^. why may not another rife npand maintalne that from the fourteenth it may bee put off to the twentieth/o dangerous k istoforfakethat light which God hath given us in his Word 5 and by way of divination, huni: after a new light of evidence in the counfailes of our owne hearts, fn the light of my confcience it leeme's moft abfurd, that it fliould be left to the fervant to cut out what proportion of fervice he thinkcs good unto his mafter.

a. It is well that both he and GonjAry^ thinke we arc bound to cut out a better proportion of Gods Service then was pre— (cdbed to the Jewes rather then a worfe : yet T^rent'tpu as great a writer as any of thefc, thinkes otherwife, as wee have heard.3. doth only our frcedome from the yoke of ceremonies requires this ? and not much more» 1. the love of God revealed unto us in Clirift in the daycs of the Gofpell. 2. the encombrance of Gods Truth with errors, and herelies.and tho(e very dangerous ones. 3. and in a word the (brong op-pofition that in thefe daies of the Goipell is made , and will be made more and more as the end of all things doth approach, both unto faith and holinefle. It is noted to be the linne of Ghriikndom not to receave the love of the truth .a the.f 2^ And of thefe latter times Tau^l hath propheiied , that men ftiduIxJ be Severs of pleafures more then lovers of GoJ. 3. as for this opinion of Gomarus and RivetH4 • I am glad they arc £b farre convidcd of truth in this argument as to profefle, that Wc ought to kccpe holy rather more dayes then fewer; Buc why then doe not the ftatcs o^ Holland under whom they live Cifthey be of the fame opinion j mate it good bypraftifc> And the French-Churches alfo 5 But they want example in antiquky for this. Whoiecthnot that this is delivered oncly to fcrve turne53nd hclpc at a dead liftjwhen no other way is o-pcn to (hift off the Argument ? 3. Andlai'ily whereas he^aitfs.( vihhGtUvh ) that after

Co

So nianydayes (towitafter fix, for no other number^as Sefi^X,

fpecifyed ) reft nnift bee granted tofcrvant^onthefcyenth •

doth not this evidently convince that that day muft beeotir Chriftian Sabbath ? P'or what ? {hall the mafters keepe one and the (crvantsanother ? or ihall the fervants not give them*' l^lvcs to the (ervkeof Gad on the day of their reft, bcitra-* thcr on the day of their labour in the workesof their proper caHings ? obfervc I pray how at every tiirne die light of Gods direftion doth meete with qs, to keepe us in the good wayef of the Lord , if we will not wilfully-fhutourcyesagailrtftitJ Now let that (eventh day which is our Chriftian Sabbath bc^ well obfcrved, firft - and then let the ftates take what order they ftiall fee good, for the obfervation of another day al(b* Yet we finde by experience^that hardly are men able to main-' tainea poorc living by labouring hardly fix whole dayes iri the wecke. I come to the (econid which Rivetm recapitulates in briefe thus.

2. It is drawn from the nnmher of fix dnjes allovpcdfor rcprk^i v:>htch number cannot conftft y nn/effe it he tet minated in reft^ and in cejfation on the feventh. To this Kivetus anfwereth 5 rhxt t he fx dayes of lahoHr are in reference tb the feventh of ref^^^ the determination of which fe^ienth day heing non* taken away /t man may worke^nany day y fo long as fomedaj he chofenfwhe^ ther hy Divrne coriflitution or humane ^ and reafonable difyoft" Hon ) for Divine Service, which may he infuch fort^ that fewer dayes fia//be left for worke.ElMConMcr* Refp&ff i

What more reafbnable difpofition humane , then that which is conformable to conftitution Divine ? now it is apparent that God required of the Jewes one day in (even 5 neither was it ever knowen to bee abrogated ; the particularity of the day is abrogated5not the^roportion of time^ground wc have for the one by the ceremoniality of it, no colour of ground for the otherjnor did ever I ihinke any manfethil wits on workc to dcvilc a ceremonialitie of one day in fcVcn.'

2. But what? (hall the morality ofreft granted to (crvant», be altered alfo under the Gofpell ? did Calvin ajiy where teach this ? may not mafters cxafl as many dayes worke of their (crvants under the Go(pcll as under the Law ? hath not

H ^ Cbrift

^i The M^raliiie of the fourth Ommmdement^

SeB . \. ^^f i^ defcrved at the hands of I'ervants to bo as fcrviceabic

* ^*- to their mafters as ever 1 LaiUy arc thefe daycs of the World

fuchas wherein a labouring man may mamtainc himfelfc,

by the labour of five dayes in a wceke as well as by the la-*

Ibour of fix .? A long time I have found it obferved by traf-

•fiquers ia the World , that nothing is m6r« cheapc then

mens labours ; a notable evidence bow unprofitable (er-

Tants wee have beene unto God, and therefore liee makes

the labour of our hands andlweateof our browes to afford

very unprofitable ftrvicc unto us. Can the(e Divines make

the World more favourable to crafts-men, and bring their

commodities in better requeft then they are ; if they could,

let them then change, the morality of fervtnts reft , and

for one in (even allow them one in three, or fourc, o r five ;

their mafters will bee the more eafily brought to entreat their

confcienccs to condefcend- Oc if Kings had power to make

the commodities of their pwne Country more worth, and

the commodities of other Countries leflc worth ( which

upon due confideration will bee found as needful! equally )

then place might bee made for this. Till then let us bee

content with ^i</i'/W/-morality of the fourth Commande-

mcnt in reference to (crvants reft, namely one day after fix;

and therewithal! confider whether our Chriftian Sabbath

mud not bee confined to that day as the onely day of reft

forfervants ; and I hope wee fhall not tbinkc it fit to allow

one Sabbath for the mafters , and another for the fcr-'

vents.

^^The thirdu dr^iivnefremthe exdmpUsofthe^poftles MJtdthe apoflolicall ^hftrch^wh^ in place of the (lewes ) Sdh* hdth , dhferved the firfl daj of the ypeeke withont .variation : therefore yJ force of the frecefi^one day in feven is to he 0b' ferved fitlU Never any hath heene found to change this ; therefore that r^hich hath heene l^pt from the heginning of the YYorld^ and JhaH continne tq the end , is to bee taken for fuch as by the Analogy of Gods Commandement bindj aB

To ftiis i?<V^//« anfwcrcth y that tht eonfequence is not

firme:

men.

£rp,e 5 f>r as much as Cbrifiiavs okf^rved the L^^'^:f Setl. J.

T-rrLitwilelydoneof them, Ictt by a greater change they mkhtoffend the hy^^s. And that it might be a fr« monument oftheir maintaining the weekly remembrance cfChuttsRe.

^""nerrayeth they did it freely ; bnt of things freely/f.^. done without any confcicnce of duty obligmg, it was • never knowne'that fo univerfall » <:o«^"J«"«„j;^'/°""^ a, the obfervation of the Lords Day. Nay Ph.lofophers obferve that things freely done at often come to paflc to the contrary, hjn. ,hen it was free f.r them to obferve one day infourteene as well as one m fcven, as «..«/>«. profefl-eth, and confequently as well on^ m twenty,wh.ch Lw«. denies. Nay it ftood them upon to change the ob-fervatioi.,left men by univerfall and perpetuall praftife might £e ^firmed in an opinion of the "-effity ^f that wkcji is not necelTary. It is apparent that astheLordsDay under the Law was on« day' in feven , So the Lords Day m the Gofpell was and (till i. one Day in.feven. And both himfelfe and e;<w<»r«. are driven to profeflTe, that we may not allow a leffe proportion then one in feven to Divme wor-fhlo And I appealeto every confcience , to ,udgf .^y the viry S of nature ; whether the Lord rcqu.rmg of the felts one day in feven to bee confccrated unto him, it doth not manifeftly follow that wee Chnftians can al-lownoleflTe then onein feven ; and whether ,t bee not ht that the Lords Day Qiould bee our holy Day ; and as for tl e allowance of more in a weeke then one , let them per-S their owne Churches thereunto firft , and then . will bee time enough for us to hearken unto «heni. And what (houldmovethem to iUuftrate the memory of Chnfts , Refurreaion weekly > whereas they contented themfelves ' JJith a yearely iiie^oriall ( if at all they obferved any Lh ^ *ef his Nativity, Paffionand Afcenfion, and fending downe of the Holy cihoft. Why doth hte not ccnCder that tSy ofthe weeke onely whereon Chrift rofe is called the

*^^4 ^^^ i^oralitie of the fourth C^mmmiement^

SeSi. 5. LorJsDay in Scripture, whereon fohn the beloved Difciple —.--——- received from his loving Lord , and mafter,tliat Divine revelation of his concerning things to come.

■ ^Jfthe nnmber of [even ,( th^t is^he obfervation of one day in fiven ) in this (^ommandement be changeable y then.as ccremo^ niall, orasfoHticall: not as ceremfmall ; for then theChi^rch ought not to cbferve it. Nor as politicdU ; for in themorall Law ■ . precepts politicail are not given* hndto this /^/V^f/^/anfvvereth, that the obfervation of the feventh day is ceUmoniall : and that the Primitive (^hptrch kspt it not , neither did the Pri-; mrtive Church keeps it ^ nor doe vee hepe it 4s ceremoniall ^ hut another .feventh day , for Scclefiafticall policy fake, not civilU Kefpon, When hee falthtve kfepe another feventh d^ 5 heimpJleih

that by the (eventh formerly mentioned hee meant that particular day of the wceke which the lewes kept ; and that wee ipdeed acknowledge to bee ceremoniall ; but in this interpretation oifVa/UuSyhcc manifcftly corrupts his advcrfaries argument, which is plainly direfted againft the ceremonia-lity of one day in (even indefinitly confidered , and not a-gainft the ceremoniality of the lewes feventh. Yet when he faith the Primitive Church did^and we doe kecpe a fevemh^but not as ceremoniall 5 hee fpeaks to the point ; but his words following have no coherence herewith: fo that hee may feeme to (huffle miferably in this , affcding to decline that which he is not able to anfwer. But take wee him at the beft^ he mull: fay that the obfervation of one day in feven was ceremoniall, if hee fpeakes to the purpofc. Now let him (hew us if he can, the ceremoniality of one day in (even, and how Chrift was the body of it; nothing more common then to affirme that the lerifes Sabbath was ceremoniall hand overhead, without anydiftinftion of the fandificationof the day^and the reft ; much lefle diftmgui(hing bctweene the reft of one day in feven , and the rclt of the (cvcnth. At length I found a faire way opened for the explication of the ceremoniality found in the reft on the feventh day. • But as for any ceremoniality in the reft of one day in feven ; never f 11 hinke)any man fit his wits on workc to dcviic ihat.Laftly,

after

is fill I in foKt to bini Chrifiians* ^-

after fiich a ccremoniaiity » dcviied, wee will confcrre whcr J*^^ ^

ther in rea(bn (uch a thing ought to bee ftill obferved as was L/1

oeremoni ill unto the hwes - and why may wee not as well obfervc circiinicition wi h the Eihiop'tAns^ who obdTve it only in conformity toChrill, who was circumciled ?

Now becaiife Rivetm brings arguments aUb to thecon^-trary,to prove that the oblcrvation of one day in (even, under the Gofpell is not nece(rary,but fieeiit is fit we (houldcon-fider them alio to prove what force is in them.

If by force oftheCommandement a feventh day is to be /jy-^,^^^ j^ kept, thf n tliat day is to be kept which the Conimandement hath dehnedjwhich is the Sabbath of the/n)^f/. Refpon,

To this I anfwer by denying the con{equence,and not contenting my felfc with a bare deniall, I prove it to bee incon-fcquent. For whereas God in commanding the feventh hath therewithal! commanded one in (even , andV/ithall fpeci-fied which of the (even ihall bee refted on and fan£tified unto hisfervice : If it may bee made appeare that ths pan:icularity ofreil on the feventh day be abrogated j and no colour can bcbrcKightforthc abrogation of the proportion oftime,to wit,of keeping one day in fevcn ; it will evidently appearc hcrewithall, that this confcquenceof Doftor i?/wr^/^ is un-fbund. Now this wee prove to bee moft true ; fora(much as the Jevfes reft on the ievcnth day was cercmoniall prefiguring Chrifts reft on that day in his grave ; as both the fathers of old and modcrne Divines both PapilfSjand Proteftants, both Luthcranes, and Calvinifts have acknowledged ; but never any man was found to devi(e a cercmoniality of refting one day infev^n 5 they may as well give themftlvestodevifca cercmonality in the (etting apart of fomc time in gcnerall for Gods holy worftiip and (ervice.

2. Now thi^ puts me in minde of another way clearely to dc-monftrate the inconfcqucncc oiRivetM his argument thus.If it will follow that in caic wee arc bound to fuch a proportion of time by vertuc of this Commandcment, therefore Wee arc bound alfo to keepe thefevcnthday : Thenit.will follow as weH, that becaule wee are bound to (et apart fbme time for the (ervice of God by vertuc of this Goraraande-

raent

SeM, C -racnt { asalLconfefflc ) ithcnefore mtMc hcmnd nKoto kecpc • *■ ' ■■ ' tfiich.a proportion of time as is kcrc fpccificd , and the feventfi

day,alio which is ihcrc pardculatcd; For like as God doth not command iuch a propoition of time iti (pecialljbut by com-iinaiiding the obiciratioH of the fcyenth day 5 in like foTt fldtihcr doth God Command a time in gencrali tobec fe Apart for his fctvice , but by comtnanding of (uch a proportion of time in fpcciall , and fuch a Day in p^i-ticular. Rher, 2. 2, His Second argument runncs thus: if the obfcrvation of

every fcvcnth day bee moral] it muftbce knowne by light of nature, but fo it is not. Therefore it is not morall; and feeing it is not politicall, it muft becceremoniall 5 and therefore doth not oblige by force of Law morall. To this ranfiver

^^/f'*. -LctbutDoaori^tWwftrctch his wits to defcribe unto

tiswhat cercmoniality can poflibly bee devi/ed in the obicF-tipn of one day in feven ; and when hee hath dcvifed it^I dare appealetohisownc/udgementand confcienee for theappo-bationofit- .For I doe not thinke itpofliblefarthewit of inan with any colour of realbn, to device a ceremoniality to be conftituted in the obfcrvation of one day ii> fcvcn^fpeak-ing of It indefinitly as wee doe, the body whereof can bee found in Chrift ; for of fiich ceremonies wee fpeafce » that as fliadowes are co. flee away when the body comes in place.

2, Neither doth it follow that bccafifc it is not morall nor politicall, therefore it is ceremoniall; for (bme will fay that it L is poiitivc as touching the defining of fbmc pafticular nc-ccflarily required to tht performance of a morall duty.As for example,not to go further then the matter io hand for inftance; it is generally confeflcd 3 to be a morall duty L^na-turallinftind, that (bme time is to bee fet apart for Gods fcrvice; but of our ielves wee are to (eeke of the proportion of time ; it is fit for none (b muchasforGodhiraiclfeour Creator,and confequently our great Lord and mafler to define what proportion of time fhall be allowed for his Service; now this they call pofitivcly morall, as belonging to the execution

Is fiill in force to bind ChriSiians. ^-j

gF a morall duty. Yet indeed not fo much a circumftaiice Se^» C

thereof in proper fpccch as the fpccification of: thcgencrall — '■

concerning thecircuniftanceoftime.

3. Yet to draw nearer to the morality of it 5 what ? (hall 3*

nothing bee morall that is not knowneto bee (b, by light oi nature, for what I pray V is not our nature now corrupt ? nay hath not i^frifiotle profelled that matter of morality is not capable of demonftration ^ but onely of Tri^cLvoKoyU per-fwafion ? Nay how is it knowne by the light of nature, that fome time is to bee fet apart to the worfhip of God chut made us *y but upon prefuppolition that God is knowne to bee our Crcitour ? and is this knowne by the light of nature ?Ho>v came ex/r//?<?Y/<? then the greatcftPhilofophcr that ever was, and hiswholefchoolcj how I fay came they to be ignorant of it ? but upon prefnppofition of the Hiftory ofthe Creation knowne imto us, Doftor/'«7^ fpares not toprolefJeas Mafter^r^^^reporteshim, thatbylightofnatureitisknown , that one day in (even ought to bee confecrated to Divine Service? Yet I am not forward to /ay fo much,burrathcrwith (^hryfofiomg^ that now from the Creation God hathmani-fcftedthatoneday in a weeke is to bee apportioned for his fervice; and with Az^orim that it is moft agreeable to rea(bn,7».'?if«'-^'^»'» * afterfixdayesofworkc, to fet apart one to his fervice. And'•'•^•^•*' » feeing Go-1 did require fuch a portion of time to bee confecrated unto him under the Law. Undoubtedly and by the very light ofiiature it is cleareandevider^^jthatnolefTcproporti* on of time can wee in confcicnce allow unto him under the Gofpell.

3. I come to his third argument which is this, the neccffity 5-

ofonedayin feven cannot confift with that liberty which the Apoftle intimates, (^ol, 2 16. Let no man judge you in meate and drinke 5 or in tht part of a day, or of Sabbaths, which are fhadowes of things to come. Which they explicate by a fimilitude. As nature requires meates and drinke, but Chriftian liberty is not tied to choife of meates accord ing to Mofcs his Liwcs : fo reafon dicl^atesthat fomctimeisto be (et apart for Gods publique worQiip,but the Gofpell freeth us from the necefficy of the lervifi Sabbath.

To

jB The Mora/it ie of the fmrth Commmdement^

Se£i,$. To.this I aiifwer.

Ke/pori, ^- ^y granting the conclu'-ori j for the lewijh Sabbath

Chriftiam obferve not. a. birt one day in ie\-eii they alwaycR have obfcrvcd, a manifeft evidence that they never conceaved this to be any impeachment to their ChrUtian liberty. And no marvel! J for they manifeftly perceaved that God required this proportion of time under the Lav/ , and from the beginning of the World; how much more (hould we be carefull to performe no lefle under the Gofpell ? And indeed reft on the feventh day did pregnantly reprefciit before hand Chrifta reft that day, and that day alone full and whole in the grave-But as for any ceremoniality to be found in the fpccial] proportion of time^ to wi^ as one day in feven , never any man devifed any ceremoniality therein more then in the time in generallj which all confeflTe by the very light of nature is to be consecrated unto God. So that we have no need of Do{5lor Rivetm , his anfwer to hclpe us in the folution of this his argument. And whereas he conceavcs our Chriftian liberty to be impeached if any proportion of time be obfervedof neceftity by force? of precept, and of free choife. l. This is as much as to iay that our liberty is impeached, if wc iufFcr our Lord and mafter, to preicribe unto us his fervants what proportion of lervicc we (hall performe imto him ^ and not rather have him leave it to the fervanttocut out unto him as little, or as much as he thinkes good, yet we do not deny-but he m.ay allow untQ bJm more;all that wc ftawdforis; that we ought not to allow him lefle under the Gofpell, then he required under the Law; and then he required from the beginning of the Woiid. 2. I marvell that Do<?lor Rivetus doth not obferve how herein he contradifts bimfelfe; for hatb he not formerly refted in this anfwer of (jomartii, that by ver-i tue of the fourth Commandcmeht, we muft allow imto him dayes fiifticient for his iervicc;and that thefe dayes muft b& x?ix\\^xTrcciuentiores then Rariores i^ more rather then fewer ; and if it be no prejudice to our Ghriftian liberty to be tyed, and that by vertue of the fourth Commandtmenti, to allow unto him a better proportion of time , for his (ervice,then that of one day in feven 3 how can it bee prejudiciall to our

Ghriftian

isfiill in force to bind Chrijlians, jg

Chriftian liberty to allow umo him this, and that by vertue <y SeEi, %^ the fourth Commandemcnt. .

. Now whether Do<^or Rivetw his anfwcrs t© the ^^P-'^' Riyct (xpficaf nicnts o{fVal'\em , or iiis ownc arguments to the contrary bee d^c, /-. j8^. * oFany force to hold him to that opii»ion which he conceaves coLz. to bee Cahirs in oppofition to the Doftrine delivered by WaliAta ^ I am con ent the indifferent may judg€ 5 as alio whether tlK two caufes mentioned by him fortheob(€rva« cion of the Sabbath contained in the Commandcment, doth not infer the third aUb which RivetHs oppofcth, namely the proportion of one day in /even. And that this is as free from all colour of cercmonialky as any of the other two. The firft was that (bme time is to be fet apart for Gods Service; now this gcnerall is not commanded there but as contained in the Ipeciall 5 to wit^ tlie proportion of one day in (even. Both of them being equally contained in the particularity of the (eventh day in that Commandement exprcffed. And as for the morality of reft to bee allowed to fervants after fix dayesoflabour^thisdoth clearely draw with it theconfine-menttjfthe time appointed for Gods Service to the propor-tion'of one day m ieven^unleffethe day ofrcii for fervarits Oiat not be the day contecrate.i to the exerciles of piety. And I much wonder that Doftor Rivetm a man of ilich judgement, and perfpicaclty doth not obferve this. The only way to helpethis a noma' y is in plaine termes to profeflethat fbme t^[\h to be allowed to fervants by their Mailers, but in what proportion, that i^not defined, but left at large to the plea-fureoftheir Mailer?. And as for ceremoniality in the proportion of one day in fcven, never any man devifed any fuch thin^ m ire then in the fetting apjrtoffome time in gene-rail for God^ Service 5 all confclfmgthi^itobeaduty known by the very light of namre. "^ut I doe not findc that Calvin hath any other m'^aning then that we are not (o tied to one day in feveni, but that more time then this may be con(ecra-ted to Divine Service ; which as T have difputed before/o now I am the more confirmed herein , Doftor Rivetm mani-fcfting this to be his opinion alfo, as well as it was the opinion of Gomarm j For inithis he refts^as may appcare by hi J

anfwcr

So 7!^^ moralitie of the jmrth^Cemmayidement ^

SeSl K 3^^^^'^^' ^^ ^^^ ^"^^ argument of Doctor Wa'Um. Neither is^

,__ 12L^ it true that Calvin did ceniure them who fimply maintaincdj

that the obfervation ot one day in the vveeke dothftillre-maineas moral!; but that fb maintained it as in reference to fome myfteriouslignification; a;^ Dodor WalUy^ hath mani-fefted, and the w^rds immediatly following in Cdiindoz evince,which are the(e 5 but this is no other thing then in ~ contumely of thej/e^w^^j- to change theday^and in heart to re-taine the fame hoiineflc of the day. Here commonly the alleagers of ^<«/^^Vi to, the (ameintent that Dodor Rivetm doth, ufe to make a period j as {^Calvin delivered this abfb-luteiy; whereas C/^/z^w propofeth it onely conditionally,as ^ppearcs by the other halfc of the (entence thus. If (b bee there remaine yet unto us a fignification in the dayes equally myfterious, to that which had place among the leives. And though I marvell not at others who dealing in this argument 'dii^mtvi\htt Calvins (tnttncc , fb to make him to deliver that abfolutely which hee delivers onely conditionally ; yet I cannot fufficiently marvell that Rivetm of rough improvidence (hould do fo too, cfpecialiy confidering the goodi paincs that Do^ox fVaUw hath taken to clcare CalviiesxriCdr.. ning in this point.

Neither is Mafter/^^^^'-fZ^w^ 3 in hiseffigiationofthetruc Sabbatifiiie , of any fuch authority as to counterpoife the concurrent teftimcnies of (b many of our Sngllpj Divines to the contrary 5 not to fpeake of the multitude of outlandifh Divines whom Dov5^or WaUm mufterethup, concurring in the fame opinion , and whereas hee faith as Doftor i?^'^'f/■«/ reports hini^that fome great men, ivho vehemently contend, that thcperpetuall fanftity of manners doth require, that one day in feven fiiould be celebrated, have more authority then reafon ; I may bee bold to fay thatthey who with him have hitherto oppofed the Doctrine we njaintaihe, what authority they have I know not, but as for their reafons, they are of fo hungry a nature 5 that hereby they manifcft that nothing butatfcjftion and their private ends they have, to beare them out in this. And whereas I doubt not but Rivet hs hath brought on the Stage the beft re4fons hee could pickc both out of

Mafter

mdi^tv Robert Low ^ and out of Cjomarui'y let every indifferent Sc^ K

perfon judge ofthem as they d^ferve; though I verily thinke * ? V

that nothing but his affefti-on to Calvw^to hold up his credite, and reputation hath carried him all along ; and yet either my fclfe, and fVaUm myftake Calvin^ or liivetm mi(erably myftaketh him.

But as for ourrea(bn,wc call all the World to judge of it; God did require one day in (even to be fet apart for his pub-lique (ervice under the Law ; how much more doth he require as good a proportion of time under the Gofpell ? Nay from the beginning of the World he hath required it, and to this day both/^B'f/, and Chnftian 6'^»r//(r/have oblervcd the (amc proportion. AgaineGod in his morall Law hath required this, and that not as ceremoniall, never any man hitherunto having fet his wits on worke todevKeanycere-moniality herein ; neyther was it ever knowne that God abrogated this proportion of time to be allowed unto him for his iervice 5 therefore it continucth ftill as a morall Law to bind us, and fliall continue untill God him(elfe fet an end unto it: now let matter Lowes reafons be compared with thefe in every indifferent confcience, and let them have that authority which they delerve, becaufe being well conceited of the ftrength of his reafons, hee fenfibly complaines of his ^

want of authority. It feemes Pope <iAlexan(Lr thttWud was a man of more authority then reafon. For hee maintaines in C^^pJicet, de feriisy as Dodor Rivetta relates it, that both theoldandnewTeftament have in fpcciall manner appointed the Seventh day for man to reft thereon , and hee takes it out oi Smrez. de religMi. r* 2. but/?<Wr«^ cannot-affent unto him, i[ he delivers this of any morall inftitutt'on 5 yet that it wasfo appointed by the fourth Commandement unto the/<fT?7^'/it cannot bee denied ; and that not as ceremoniall; for we have feene how odly Rivctpn hath carried him-felfe in comming to fpeake of the ceremoniality, For to make this good hee flycs to the particularity of the leventh day ;andifthe ceremoniality thereof, bee enough to inferjc the ceremoniality of fuch a fpeciall proportion of time as of one day in (even ; it may (ufficc as well to conftitutc a

I ceremonia-

2£ The Moralitie of the fourth Commdniementl

SeEi^K, ceremoniality in the gcnerailjnamcly in this that (bme time is

— 1 --■ to be fet^parc for Gods Service, which yet all account to bee

inorall by the very light of nature.

If ^i^wf/?; hath no better argument to prove that the Be-calogHesLSgivenbytMofestothe Ifradites doth notpertainc to us but onely fo farre forth as it agrees with the Law of nature; then by inftancing in the Sabbath, which the Cfw- -^;V<?/were not bound to fan^ifie : it ftands Rivetm upon to oppofe him as much as any, who maintaincs that the Law concerning the fanftifylng of the Sabbath was given toAdam^ i^nd.who brings divcrfe authorities to prove the obfervati-cJn of it generally by the Gentiles 5 This I fpeafce upon con-fideration of his reply to Gomarus taking exception againft ^ (bmewhat in this argument delivered by him in his explica-

tion of the Decalogue. But I hope the morall Law (hall be fufficicnt to binde us Chriftians if no other way, yet by this argument of proportion. If God required of the leaves under \ the Law that one day in (even (hould bee fet apart to his (er-vice : how much more doth it become us Chriilians to allow as good a proportion of time for his fervicc under the Gofpell 1 This I (ay (hall fufficc untill Kivetus anfweareth it, which never will be, for he as good as confcfleth that we are bound to allow God for his fervice 5 rather a better proportion of time then a worfe. And as for Do6:or PrideauXy I nothing doubt but he will cleare us from Judaifme in arguing thus; as who Seft. 7. profefleth that if they ( againft whom he difputes ) required no more, but the Analogy, the equity or the rcafon of that Commandemcnt , we would not flicke to yeeld unto it. And whereas Kivetus addes that the argument which hee annexeth fcemes to him of great weight, namely that hee who ftickes to the Commandemcnt mu(l exa^lyobferveit : And that therefore into the place of the ieventh from the Creation, no day is to bee (ub(tituted. But this argument I have anfwercd before, all for the moft part grant fomc ceremoniality in that Commandement ; now if reft on the (eventh be found to bee ceremoniall, but not the reft of one day in (even in an indefinite confide ration 5 it will * foUoW hcrchcnce 5 that the fevcnth muftnot beobfervcdas

accompli (hed;

is fit// in forte to hind Chrifiiansl J j

accomplifhcd in Chrift ; and that the- proportion of time ^^Q ^^

is ftill to continue, as indeed by'cxperienceweefindeitveri- *2l^

ficdincach. For the observation of the fevcnth isceafcdas prefiguring Chrifts reft in his Grave, but the obfervation of one day in leven ftill continueth unto this day,

NextforthefecondThefis, that the aheration of the day ?''«!'^^^. is oncly an humane and Ecclefiafticall conftitution , the Doftor flicweth in the firft Sedlion, the generali con(ent of all forts of Papifts , Jefttitcs , Canonifts , and Schoolemen ; of fbme great Lutheranes by names , and generally of the re-nionftrant or aArminUn Divines in their confeflion ^ whofe tendries in this point, wee may conceave with realbn, not to bee different from the DoQ:rine of the 'Belgicke Churches, in that foure profeffors of Lejden, in their examination or review of thatconfedion , have pafled them over without note or oppofition. To thcfe befides are added diverfe of our own, EtenoJirismnpdHci^ as hee fpeakesit in the general!, that is, as I conceave his meaning fuch as are neither of the Lntheran^ nor of the (»x/r»^/«M« party : of which lince hehathinftan-ccd in none partiailarly, I will make bold to borrow two or three teftimonies, out ofthe tractate of gomarm before rc-membred. And firft hec brings in 'Bullenger , who in his comment on the firft of the Revelation , calls it Ecclejldt con-» Juetfidintm , an Ecclefiafticall Ordinance , and after addes, Sfonte Ecdejia:, rtceperunt ilium diem. The Church did of its owne accord agree upon that day ; for wee reade not any • where that it was commanded. Next Vrji»w telling us, that Grod had abrogated the lem/h Sabbath, addes prefcntly, that hee left it free unto the Church , Ali^s dies eligere , to make choiftofany other day to bcfelefted for bis (crvice : and that the Church made choyfe of this in honour of our Saviours Refurreftion. Zanchius affirmcs the fame ; NuUihi Ic* gimm Afoflolos.&c, We rcade not any where, (aith hee that theApoftles did command this day to bee obferved in the Church of God ; onely wee finde what the Apoftlcs, and others of the faithfull u(cd to doe upon it , Liberttm ergo r<r-UcjHerunt^ which is an argument that they left it holy to the difpofitionoftheChurchi e^retius, Simlfr, David Par^uf^

84 3^^<? ^oralitie of the fourth Commandement,

znd'Bmeriu^ which arc all there alleaged, might bee here -prodiired, were not thefe drfficient. Addc hereunto the general! cor.lent of our Englifh Prelats, the Architeils of our reformation in the time of King Sdward the (ixt 5 who in the Ad: t)f Parlament about keeping holy dayes have determined thus, together with the reft of that grand aflfembjyj viz. Neither is it to bee thought, that there is any certaine time or definite namberof dayes prefcribed in holy ScriptureSjbut that the appointment both of tiie time, and alio of the number of the dayes is left by the authority of Gods Word, to the authority of Chrifts Church, to bee determined and a(^ (igned ordei'ly in every Country, by the difcretion of the rulers and Minifters thereof 5 as they (hall judge moft expedient to the true (ctting forth of Gods glory 5 and edification of Gods People. Which, preamble is not to be underftood of holy dayes or of Saints dayes onely, ( whole being left to the authority of the Church was never queftioned ) but of the Lords Day alfo : as by the body of the Aft doth at full appeare. Exam. ^ In this SeEliorty the Prefacer makes a greater bluftcr by farre then in the former. For to except againft the proportion of time 3 as of one day in (even to be (et apart for the fervice of God in thefe dayes of the Gofpell 5 is fb unreafonable a" courfe J and that not onely in the judgement of a Chriftian confcience, but even in the judgement of a naturall man, • that I cannot eafilydevife any thing more unreafonable. For whereas all confefJe that by the very light of nature fbmc time ought to bee fct apart for the fervice of God ; and not fo onely,but that a fit , and competent proportion of time is to bee confecrated to holy ufes, as (jomarus acknowledgeth, though one of the mofl eager oppofers of the morality of the Sabbath, that hitherto have beeneknowne. Albeit this convenient proportion of time cannot bee fo convincingly concluded upon by the light of nature ^ astodrawalltoaii unanimous confent thereunto ; yet after God himfelfc hath gone before us herein by hlcfflnq^thefeventh daymdfanBifjing h ; and that upon the ground mentioned both Gcn^i,, and in the fourth Commandement 5 henceforth as C/7rjy^/^w<?ob-

ferv^hg

isjiill in force to bind Chrijlians. g ^

fervethjGod hath m niifefted^that one day in fevcn is to be (ct Se& ^ apart 51 may fay confequently ,that one day in kwt[^ is that Jnt * ^

proportiootcinie which is to befanflifiedtoGods holy wor-fliip and lervice j and ihat God hath now manifeikd as much ever lincethe Creation.And(herupon as I iniagin) AzoriwthQ Jefuice in his inititutions is bold to conclude, that this course is moil agreeable unto reafon-Now if the Lord under the Law did require (iich a proportion of time to be iequeilred from profan u(e to Divine^at the hands of the lewes j can it enter into the heart of a fober man, that God fhould require lefTe of us Ckriilians under the Gofpel],then he clid require of tKeJewes under the LawtOr that God hath npw lett it to the liberty of the Church, whether they will fet apart the proportion of one day in Icven or ieffc, ro bee fpent in Gods worfhip ? If wee confider the fervice of the day , as whereby God is honoured, undoubtedly God hathdeferved more .lervice at our hands under the Gofpeii 5 then hec did at the hands of the Jew:s under the Law; for as much as the love of God to maa-iiinde was never fo revealed in former times, as in thefc latter times ; So God loved the ?^orld that he ^ave his oyily beq^ottei 'Sonne ^ &c. And hereupon undoubtedly it is that our Saviour profefleth , that, from the time oilohn the Baptifi ^ the Kingdome of Heaven (uffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. To fuch an height of devotion hath the Love of GodmanifeftedinhisSonn^ inflamed his true fervants; according to that oi John , JVe love him hecaafe he loved usfirfi, Againe if wee coniider the fervice of that day, as (iich wher-by ourfoules ar^ profited and promoted in faith and holi-neflc, never was there more need then in thcie dayes of fanfti-fyinga better proportion of time unto God Service, rather thenaw^orfe 5 and that in each refpcft. For the truth of God was never fo encombred with oppofi^ions before the comining of our Saviour in the flefh as it hath beene fince. No heretiques ( to fpeakeof) were knowne to trouble the peace of the Church, in thofe former times in comparifon to the multitudeofhereficsthat havcBeenebroached fince, and began to bee fet on foote in the very dayes of the. Apoftles 5 Saint P^?//profeffing that even then the my If ery of iniquity

The McYalitie of the fourth Cmm^ndement^

didworke. And whereas Saint ^etcr telh us that falie teachers fnould come privily bringing in damnable herelies even denying the Lord that bougU them -Saint /W^ tells them to whom hee vvriteSj that fnch were already crept in turning the grace of God iato wantonnefTe . and denying God the onely Lord^ and our Lord Jeius Chriii. And Saiat John after the fame manner 3 littk children ( faith hee) it is the laft time^and as you have heard that zy^ntkhrifi (hall come, even now there are many Amichrffts, And no marvaile; for as much as the niyfteries of godlineffe concerning the Trinity o^'per-fonsand incarnation of the Sonne of God ( whereat carnall wits are fb apt to ftumbje ) were never fo punftually and diftindly exprefled in the books of the old Teftament^as now they are particularly delivered in the writings of the Apoftles ■ and Evangelifts,

So that had wee in thefe-dayfes two Sabbaths in a wecke indeed of one , all Were little enough to inftruft our people, and ilrengthen them agamli the oppofitions made by men ef carnal! mindes, and thereby to keepe them in the right way of Gods iaving truth. And no lefTe nccelTitie is there for the keeping of them in the wayes of holinefTejfach is the degenerate condition of the World ; Long agoe it is that the fevere judgcmenr of God, had its'courfe in giving men oyertoilludonstobeleeve lies, and all for not receiving the love of the truth, as much as tofay for the profaiiencfJe of the Chriftian World, in not mal-^ing it theircarctowa^ke worthy of their calling , worthy of the Gofpell ; whcreunto the Apoiile fo off en exhorts ChriiUans. So that if at any time it were requifite to (et one day in icven apart for the fer-vice of God j lureiy by the very diftate of common reafbn, it is moil requilite in thcfe latter dayes of the Goi'pell. Efpe-cially conftdering the rage , and fury of Satan inqppoling the Klngdome of Chrift more now than ever, becaufe he knoweth hee hath buta (hort time. As for the alteration of the day (the fame proportion of time flill continuing) from the fevcnth to the firft day of the weeke, that 1 confeflc willingly (eomesnot atfirlt light to have the like evidence. But whereas this Freiacer contends for the alteration of the day.

as

asonelybyanhumans and Ecclefiafticall conftitution; ob- SeB,<^

lerve that not one of the ancient Fathers are mentioned by

him for the JQlHfying of this, though divers are referred unto by liim, as,againli the inftitution o^ the Sabbath from the Creation. But wee have divers of the ancients bearing witnefTc to the Divine inftitution of the Lords day, to come in place of the fevench.As tirft iy^rhanafius HomiU de Sememe, Olim certe pri/cis honiinihti-s in fummo fretio Sabbatum fu'iTy cjHomc^uidem foLemnitatem J^orrAmts in diem Dominic urn trar:-' finlit. Heretofore truly the Sabbath was in great -price , -ivith men of old time ^ which folcmnity the Lord bath tr an fated u.-no the Lords Day^ Auftine hachdivcrs other paflagcs to the fame purpolede civitatedei. Jib. 22«cap. ult. Dominicm dies velnt oBavHS £termts , cjui Chrifti RefurreElione facratm ejl ^ Atev namnonfolum Spirit ns^ verum-.tiam cor per is recjuiem prafi^U" rans. The Lords ^ay as the eighth etemail which was facred by Chrifis Refurreilion , prefiguring an eternall refl ^ not of the Jpirit onljjytit oftho' body alfo ; and in his Ep, 1 1 ^»ad lanuarinm^ The Lords *Daj is declared not to the Jewes^ btit to Chrifiians by the Lords RefurreEiion, and from thence began to haz^e its feftivity^andde verbis y^p^fioli Sermo, 15. The Lords Refur^ region promifd unto us an eternall day , and hath ronfecrated touijhc Lords Day ^ which is called the Lords^ b: canfe the Lord rofeon that day ^ and de Temp- Serm. 2^1. The Apoflles arrd Apoflolicall men, have therefore ordaittedthe Lords day to be kept with a religious folemnity -^ bccaufe on- that day our redeemer rvfe from the d:ad^CyriL in Joan.lib* \ 2. cap. 58. From Chrift prefentii ghimfelfunto his ApolHes on the eighth dayjwhich heeinterpret^thofthefirftday ofthe weekcjConcIndss there-hence that by right therefure holy Congrega'ions are kept in. the Chnrches on that day. And as WaUu4 obferves, the celebrity of this day Eufebias referres to Chrift himfelfc in thefe words , Wha ever prefcribed to all the inhabitants oftheJVorld "*

either by Sea or Land, that me-ting together one day in the weeke^ they Jhould celebrate the DomJnicall fefiivity, Addc ^^^^;^^ ^ . ^ tothistbatof C/rf^pr^ mentioned Seflion the i. Nay yltha^ o^HtitAi^r-j, nafwspts further, and (hevves the equity of it in proper- All things arc

tion to the new Creation compared with 'the old ; The end S"''^" to mc of

I 4 ^^myFachcr,.

In his fpeech ifitheStarrc chamber, againftJy^A'.

. Tbefe Thefes of his Were written as it feemes in op-:: portion to

IheMoraltttcofthe fourth Gommandem ent^

ofthefirfv Creation was the Sabbath ; but the beglmmg of the (econdQreaiure lithe Lords D ay , wherein bee reytewed and re' fayredtheold mnn» Lih^ as therefore informer limes he Kvould have the Sabbath day to be !^pt , fo ive l^epe holy the Lords T)aj as a monument cfthe beginning ofthefeco';d Creation, And this proportion is apprehended bj^^eza alfo, on tht Revelation the firft Chap.and lo. verfe. 1^hat Sabbath day ( faith hee) continued from th; Qreation of the World to the Lords reftirreEli-on 5 which feeing it is as it were an other Creation of another fpirituail World ( as the Prophets jpeake ) then for the Sabbath of the former World ^ or feventh day was a^umed ( and that undopibtedlj by the Holy Ghofi ft^ggefiing this to the Apofllcs ) thefirjl day of this new World ^ in which not the corporallor cor^ ruptible light , in the firfi day of the firfi World was created: but that heavenly and eternall light did fpring unto-us. In all which ^^^^ doth exa8:ly treade in the fteps of that ancient Father <iydf[hanafius ^ and concludes that the affemb'liesofthe Lords Day ( which Jtiftine exprefly makes mention of in his (econd ApoiogetiiimJ^r^ of tradition apoftoUcall and truly 'Divine. And after him Do(flor ay^ndrewes latC Bifhop of Winchefler, whomDo£tor H^//now Bifliop of J^Arr^r^rfomc where calls the Oracle of thefe times upon the fame ground, maintaines the equity of bringing our Lords Day into the place.of the Jewifh Sabbath.

The Sabbath f faith hee) had reference to the old Creation., butinChriflwe are a riew Creature ^ anew Creation^ and fo to have a new Sabbath* And againe, It hath ever heene ^he (fhurches doBrine that Chrifl made an end of all Sabbaths by his

Sabbath in the Grave. That Sabbath was the lafi* of,them, .

And that the Lords Bay prefently came in place of it. And for the confirmation hereof brings in that of Aufltn Ep, ii^ ad lanuarium : The- Lords Day by (^hrifls RefurreBion hath beene declared unto Qhriflia'^s , a'ad from that time beqaji to have its ffli-i^ity. Doftor Z^%j Bifliop of ?fV/// maintaines the fame Doctrine after the fame manner in his Thefes de Sabbato^ thef 27. Man having finned , and fo by fi>we abolifyedthefirft Crea^ tkn'Dejurey though not defifto 5 God was pleafed by Chrift to mal(ea new inftauration of the World, 2^, He(a4 the Scripture

fpea^f

fpeak^s ofChrifis redempticnsy mti^e a nerc Heaven and a nevf ScEi. X^,

Sarth. OId things fa^ei then awaj^and fo all things were made ■■ —■

ytewt 29. ICea ever) man in Chrtft is a n^w Creatptre^ 3©. As Godthenwhenheendedthefiy[t(^reation^madeaday of reft ^ and fanSifiedit: ^l. So did Chrift when he'endc^dhis7vorkeymadea day of reft, andJanUified it, 32. Not altering the proportion of time which is eternail , l^tft taking thefirft day of [even for hpi portion , becaufe ftn hjidmadc the [eventh alterable* But a man may ealily perceive whichcr this Prefacer tends, and fuch as arc of his Spirit. The Rhemifts upon the firil of the ReveL and lo.vcrfe doe obferve that the^poftles^ a?id the faithful I abrogated the Sabbath which was the (eventh day , and made holy day for it , the next day following^ being the eighth day in compt fromthe Creation ^ and that without all Scriptures^ anA Qom-mandements of Qhrift that we read cf:yea (- which is more) not only otherwife then was by the Law obferved^ but plainly other^ wife than was prefcribedby God himfelfe in the fecondf^omman^ dement ^ yea otherwife than he ordained in the fir ft (freation when, he fantiifiedfrecifely the Sabbath day y 4nd not the day following, Sufhg-'eat pQwer d:d Chrift leave to his (fhurch , and for fuch caufesgavehe the Holy ^hoft to be refident in it, to guide it into alttruthes , even fuch as in the Scripture are not expreffed. And ifthe^hurch had authority and inspiration from God^ to make Sunday ^ being a worhing day before ) an everlafting holy day^ and the Saturday that before was holy day^ now a common n orl^ dayy why may not the fame (fhurchfrefcribe and appoint the other feafts of EdLdcr y Whitfontide^ ChridnuSy and the reft'>fir the fame warrant foe hath for the one ^ as Ooe hath for the other ^ Now to this Dodor F«/)(:^ makes anfwer after thii manner. The Apoftlts did not abrogate //;<f Jewifti SabbathJ^ut (florift himfelfe by his death , as he did all other ceremomcs of the Law^ that were pgures and fljadowes of things to come , whereof he waj the body, and they were fulfulled and accomplifljcX in him^ and by him. And this the Apoftles knew both by the Scriptures^. and by the IVord of C^t ift 5 and his holy Spirit, 'By the Scriptures alfo they knew that one day of feven was appointed to be obfervedfor ever during the World ^ as confecrateei and hallowed to the publike exercife of the Religion of God ^Although themeremonlall i^eft ^ and pre"

fcript

Se£i, K^ fcrij>p day' according to the L^'fi^ rvere abrogated hj the death of

Chrifl^ Nor? for the prcfcripticn of this day before any other of fc^

ven ^they had without d'mbt ehher tlje exprejfe commandemcnt of Chrijl before his afcenfionwh^.n he gave them precepts concerning^ theK'm^doms of^^d^'and the order ap^. government of the Churchy Afts T ,1»or eljs ths certain^ dlr-eUion of hi* Spirit^ that it Wcti hii -ivill dndpleafure it Jhould be fo^andthat alfo accordi/ig to the Scrip-t fires. And obferz>e how in the words following he falls in upon the fame reafon of the chaytge of the- day which of old was nrentlofied by Athaiiafuis(/^->rw?^r/y rehearfe^herein by ^tldifDoFicr AndrewSj '^ 'P.LaS'c^as I have aircidy ihtXwod.Seeiyig thtre is the fame reafon of JanBifying the day tn which our ■ Saviour Chrifl accomplifJoed cur redemption^ and the refiritHtlon of the world by hi^ refurreliion from dcath.that was of fanSlifying the day in which the Lordrefled from the creation of the world. And after many lines nothing neceflary to be recited, he comes to the comp.ari(bn made be-tweene the Lords Day and other Feftivalls, faying : Although the Church in dayes or times which are indifferent^ may take order forjome other dayes or times to be folemniz>ed for the* exercifes of Reliffion • or the remembrance of ChriJ^s nativity/refurreElion, afcenfon, or the comming of the holy Ghoflt may be celebrated either on the Lords T>ay, or any other time: yet there is great difference between the authority of the (lourch in this cafe, and the prefcription of the Lords ID ay by the zApoflles for the fpeciall memory of thofe things are indifferent of thsir nature, either to be kept on certains, dates, -or left to the difcretion of the Cjovernoptrs of the Church, But to change the Lordf Day^ or to k^epe it on Mun-daj^ Tuesday^ or any other day, the (^hptrch hath no authority. For it is not a matter ofjndifferency, but a necejfary prefcription of (,'hrtf} himfelfe^delivered to Mf by his Apofihs, And' agajne, tx\ the next place : The cauf^of thus change^ it was not our eflima^ tion, that either we have, or ought to have of ctrr redemption be^ fore our creation^ but the Ordinance pfCjod, who, asfrfl hefanEli^ fed the rejl from creation for the glory of that wc-ek^: fonow di[o he fanB ifieth the day of thereflitution of the world for his glory of the accomplifhnient of our redemption^ Thus wee have not onely authority Humancjbut authority Divine for the alteration of the Day 3 and^hat by the teftimony of more Bi-

(hops

ihops ancient and late, than this Prefacer makes (hew o£,^eSi. t,

amonglt tarre meaner names. Yet he doth immodeftly abufc —

Doftor Pr-dc^Hx in putting it upon him, that in the fifth SeQion, he mainta'inesthe alteraticn of the day to be onely an hti-^ mane and Eccl^faflicull irifiitfftion. For^in that Seftion^he onely oppofeth'them, who would derive the Divine authority (v^'hich they Hand for) of theakerationof the Day from the old Teftament: but as for thofe who derive the Divine authority thereof from the new, they, hee confcfleth, doe carry thcmlelv^s herein more warily, the other more"weaVly^ and them alone hedifputcsagainit in that Se<Stion. In the fixth Se^ioHj he comes to the deriving theitof from the new Telia-ment; and firft he challengeth thcm,who boafl thn they have found the iniii ution of the Lords D^y in the new Tcitament expreflely, to (iewthe place. Then in the often difputations of our Saviour with the Pharilccs about their (uperiHtious ob-lervation of the Sabbath Day, he demands where is the leail fufpiiiion of the abrogation of it; or any mention that the Lords Day was inftituted in the place thereof? And indeed, the time hereof was not yet come; onclythe death of Chrift fetting an end to ceremonies. Then he demands whether the Apoftles did notkeepc the Jewifti Sabbath ? noWj I doc not find they di J, although they tooke occafions of their meetings I on that d^iy to difpute with them, and to inllruft them in the Faith of Chrift. Then he demands, whether the Primitive Church did not deiigne a? well the Sabbath as the Lords Day to (acred meetings ? I find in Baro?$ms, that Orthodoxl Oritr.^ ^^J^'^^"' ^' ulc'fdid^ and the occafion alfo, to wit, in deteftation of thc'^ ^' 5i7-M<irciomtes '^ yet without any fuch refpeO", it had been nothing ftrangCjConfidering, that even now adayes Saturday is counted halfe holy day ; and that the Jewcs had a preparation for the Sabbath, in iuch fbrt^that on their behalfe, Af4g,''fif^ made a refcripr, that no Jewcs (hould be compelled to make. good their fiiretilhips (as much to fay, they (liould not be Biron.tom.i* arreifed) either.on the Sabbath dayes, or after three a clocke l'^^* ^^^* of the day going before* Hereupon ^-^which is yet a very weake ground in my judgement)he laith, that Papilh infei i c, that the Lords Day is not of Divine inftitution; he doth not

make

^ 2 The fyMoralitie of the Jour tb Commandement^

SeB r make any fiich inference himfclfe, Ytt notwrthi%ndin§(ht" i^^^lj^ confedeth that) even in the Church of Rome, Ayicher^m^^, Panormitane, %Anqjl:u and Sjlvefler (all which this Picfacer conceals very jiidicioufly for his ovvne advantage) have ilout" ly fct themlelves againit thefc luke-warme Advocates, ici af* firmation of the Divine authority ot the Lords Day. And I find, that ^^Gvlm in his iiiititutionSj makes mention of them to the fame purpofe, and addes, that Sjlvefler profeflethj^^rwc effeopinionemcommtinem, that this is the ccmmon op'wmt. And aftCL'this, Doftor Prideat^x in that S^-ftjon, di(put€sforthe Divine in(Hcution thereof, rather than againft it. After this he takes notice of Pauls faft^ A^s 20.7. and difputes there-hence for a cuitome to celebrate on the firft day ©f the weeke their publike meetings j and confefleth, that the Father^ and all Interpreters almoft^ doe fo conceive it : though withall he profelTcth hee fees not how from a cafuall fa6t f (b he cal-ieth it, upon what ground I know not) afolemne inffitution may be juftly grounded \ yet that which went before, in fomc oppofitionwhcreunto this is delivered) pleaded not for a fb-lemnc inftitution, but for a cuflome oncly; although upon due confideration, it may be found, that fuch a cultome (if that be granted) could not otherwii^ proceed originally thctn from a folemneinftitution; It is enough if they, ordained that on that day the Churches (hould be alTembled forpubllque worship 5 which e^j?^y?^« cxprefleJy profefleth, as formerly I have fhewed, neither dotK it appe.\rc in reafon how it could be otherwife^ fuch aflemblies being univerfall and {q continuing to this day : Is it credible fuch univerfall agreement fhould come to paiTe cafually ? if it did, yet their continuance of it without dillike, doth manifefl their joynt Apoftolicall approbation^who wc knov/ were guided by the Spirit of God: and even in their time was the firfl day of the wecke, called the . Lords Day. So that in all this I find no incoherence, much lede notable. Indeed, inthefirff of the Corinth, chfip. 16* 2. he doth not order that the firft day fhould be fet apart for Godsfervice, but rather fuppofeth it, and that not onelyat Corinth* but in the Churches of GaUtia: how improbable is k that this uniformity fhould be among them, unlefTe it proceeded

cecded from fomc authority fiipcriour to the Churches thcrti- SeSf,^^

fclvcs; then comming to confider the denomination of the-

Lords Day, and conckiding it to be the firft day of the wceke^ and therewithal! concludmg that lixth Sedion: thefcventh Scftion he begins thus; what then > Shall we affirme that the Lords Day is founded in Divine authority ? and anfwcrs the qucftion thus: For my part (without prejudice to any mans opinion) I aflfent unto it, however the arguments like me not, whereby the opinion is fupported, and fo he proceeds in pro-lecutingofthat which was affirmed by him, in the hft place, concerning his privd* diflike of fome particular courfes taken tojuftifieit. Heoppofetbjlgrant, expreUe inftitution j but if by juikonfequence it may be deduced, it ferveth our turne, both in the generall and in particular at this time and in this place^todifcoverthe immodeftand unreafonablc carriage of this Pr^facer, who would obtrude the contrary opinion upon Do^itor Prideaux, ?.s it were, in defpite of him; And indeedj it is thought that hee owed him a fpight, atid to pay that heeowedhim, hee came to this tranflation. But herein the Doaors honour is eafily preferved in the defpight of this Prc-facer; yet fee a greater degree of impudcncy in this Prcfla-ccr. For he puts upon the Dudor, as if hee had (hewed the alteration of the day to beonely an humane and Ecclcfiafti-call inftitution, by the generall confent of all forts of Papifts, Tefuits, Canonifts and Schoole-men of feme great Lutherms /'^rmjnfiitut, byname, whereas it is plaine, thathcmentioncthmorePa-^''^'-' '•»• ^•^• pifts maintaining the Lords Day to be of Divine inlHtution, then oppofing it. And amongft them that mamtaine it, one, to wit, Sylvefter, profeflTeih it to be opimonem commnn'm< not one avouched as affirming the contrary. And as for'the great Lutherans this Author fpeaketh of^lovingto fpeake with a full mouthj they are but one, and that "Breyjtiw, who is faid to affirme it to be a civill ordinance, and not a commandement of the Gofpcl; a very ftrange phrafe (in my opinion) to call it a civill ordinance 5 the ordinance being in force many hundred yeetes before the Church of God had any civill gbvefrt-ment of their own, and being in the Apoftles day cs how could it be leffe than Apoftolicall ^ undoubtedly^ not fo much civill

SeSi K asEcclefiaftlcalL Wee grant willingly we have no expreflc __-__J!jLl--> precept for it, yet yf/^//w is bold to fay (as wee have heard) that zAfofioUfanxerHnt, yet Gomarm allegeth no paffage out oiBrentitu to this purpole. But MeUnUhon ever (as I take it) accounted of better authoritie than ^rentim, profefleth, as WaUvu reports him^that confentanenm efl Apoftoloshanc iff am oh caufam mntaffe diem^ in plaine termes afcribing the change of the day to the Apoftles: As for the Remonftrants, what authority have they deferved to have with us, who are fo neerc akinneto the^y^ri^/Vi;?/, who uttterly profefle againft allob" {ervation of the Lords Day.But the foumprofefTors'^of Leiden, have pafled over this of theirs without note or oppolition. And was not ^4/^^/^ one of the foureV yet what his opinion is himfelfc hath manifefted to the world;yeajand hiscollcgue, Thjjlus alfo, yet no caufe had they to oppofe in this, when the other profeffed it to be a laudable and good cuftorae, according to the pattcrne of the Primitive Church; and can the Primitive Church exclude the Apoftles, and not rather include them ? And is it probable, that the Primitive Church prescribed it to the Apoftle', and not rather the Apoftles to the Church^ Ti/enw cslUs it Eccleft<z confuetudimm^ not de« nying it to be inftituted by tbe Apoftles, nay^clfewhere h<e afhrmes this, or rather that it was inftituted by Chrift him-(elfe. So little caufe had theft profeflbra to quarrell with this phrafe of the Rcmonftrants, having weightier matters in hand wherein to oppofe them. What iiBullenger call it Ec" clefiaconfHettudinem'y (b doth Tilentu de pr<ecept, 4, Tkef 2 9. yctThef,2^, he profeflcd it to be not onely obfcrvcd by the Apoftles, but that it may (eeme alfb to be inftituted by Chrifl himfelfe: ^ullen^er (dith^fpome receperunt^ to wit, in oppo-fition to an exprefle Precept, as appearcs by that which immediately followeth 5 Non legtmus earn nllihi preceptavfy yoe doe not reade it any tvhere commanded^ Vrjlnt alleged in the next place clearely profeflcth in the very place quoted by gomarnsy that God it is who hath abrogated the obfcrvationof thefe-vcnth day, but he addes, that he left 'it free to the Church to choofe other dales, which(Church) upon a probable caufe, chofe the firfl day, which was the day of Chrifts rcfiirrcdion.

Now

Now what Church was it but Apoflolic^t Ecclejia^zz Pdr<f.m SiSl. r.

uponZ/^r/mwCatechilmeobferveSj p.^<;5, "Pro liber tat eftbi l-2l

'A (^hrifto dortata frefeftima die elegit diem frimptm propter pro^^ hahiUmcaufamout of the liberty which Chrifl hath given them infleedofthefeventh day chofe the fir ft day of the week^ , by rea^ fort of A probable caufe , toivlt-^ becanfe on that day Qhrtftrofe^ hy whoferefurreEiion^ the ffiritnall andeternalt reft is inchoated Km.i*^. in us, and p. 666, Afoftoli ipfi mtttarnnt Sabhatum feptimi diei. The ayi'pofles themfelves changed the Sabbath of the fe^ venth day. By the way touch we a little upon this, that, Firft, this was done in reference toChrifts re function : {o Calvin acknowledgeth in reference whcreunto this day had fbme prerogative above the reft, to wit in the way of fitncflcgforholy nfe, bccaufc of the worke of God on that day. Whence it is evidently concluded, that the Apoftlcs^did not thinkeit indifferent, therefore though it were left to their liberty, in as much as no Commandcment was given to them thereabout for ought wee reade,yet by the (pirit ofGod,they were dircft-€d to make choy (e of this day, and that in reference to fuch a worke on that day 3 as the like on no other. Not that the fanftifying of a reft on this|day would make us more boly, then the fanftifying of a reft on any other day : but onely in reference to fome fpcciall worke of God on that day : upon whichconfideration the ancient Fathers doe generally infift; and Bifhop Andrewes, and Bifliop Lake after them doe joynt-iy rely^and not Be^Laonely, Secondly, That both Vrfne and Parafcs call this- a probable reafbn onely : now give me leave to infift upon this, and try whether I cannot Ihew that this reafon is more then probable. And that firft ^ P^/d-mn". For let us foberly confider how came it to pafle that not oneiy the day whereon Chrift rofe, but anfwerably hereunto the Day of the weeke , to wit , the Erd Day of the iveeke 'wasaccomptcd by the Apoftles ^ and (b commonly called -theLords Day ; and generally knowne to Chriftians by that name: otherwift S. John had not beene Co well underftood in his Revelation chap,i,verfAoJs it not apparent thatChrifts rifing did ever after give the denomination of the Lords Day, ■tothcfirftday of the weeke ? Againc the day ofChriftsPaf-

iioti.

j^6 The MoYalitie of the fourth Co mmarJcirurit^

Se£i^K. paffionupon the CrofTcjis not called the Lords day; and why .—— * the day of the Refurreftion rather^ furely becaule S. Panl

Kom.x*^, ^ith that C^rifl rvas declared mightiij te he the Sonne of God

by the ffirit of finBification in his Refurre&ioufrom the dead.-Hereby then was he manifefted to be the Sonne of God 5 the very Lord of Glory 5 and is not this reafon more then probable, whyicfhould bee called the Lords day > Secondly confidcr , that day of the moneth or that day ofthcyeare whereon the Lord rt>fe 5 wee no where iindethatitwasufu-ally called the Lords Day, but onely that day of ihe weeRe; ^ ' not the day of the weeke wherein hee alccnded into Heaven, but the day of the weeke wherein hee rofe. Now the Jewes Sabbath was called the Lofds Sabbath , the Lords holy Day> fy: 58. 13. If thoH fhalt turneAwajthy footefrom mjiSMath from doingthy will-on my holy Day. Hath the Lord a Day under the Gofpell ^ but no Sabbath, no holy Day > what an un-reafonableconceite were this ^ that hee (hould have an holy Day,one in every weeke under the Law; and none under the Gofpell ? Now if the Lord hath a day that is peculiarly called his under the Gofpelljand that day is in the Scripture ftyled the Lords Day ; I appcale to every Chriftian confcicnce, whether the fandifying of this day as holy to the Lord,ought not by more then probable, yea even by neceflary reafon, come in place of the fanftify ing of the feventh day as an holy reft to the Lord in the dayes of old. Otherwife we (hould have two different dayes in the weeke, the one called the Lords Day, the other the Lords holy Day ; or no holy day at all though wee have the Lords Day. Laftly confider the very definition of a thing probable, which JSriftotle makes to be fuch as (eenies lb in the judgement of moft, or in the judgement of moft of the wifeft, or of fbme few provided they are wifer then the reft 5 but the fandifying of the firft day of the weeke to the Lord, that is, the Lords Day to the Lord, hath feemed fit not to (bme of the wifeft onely in the Church of God, but to alljeven to all theApoftles, yea and Evangehfts and Paftors, and teachers in their daycs and to the whole Church, for idco. ycares fince ; and fhall wee call the reafon moving them hereunto onely probable ? 2, yet all

this

Is ftillinforce to hind Chrifliam. ^j

this is hut a pofldrhri, which yet for the evidence of it, I pre- Scff. r fumcmoft iufficient for the convifting of every (bber & Chri- ^ * r * ftian confcience of that truth, to the dcmondration w hereof it tends; I come to give a rea(bn hereof a priori. The firft creation in the wi(cdome of God (who proceeds not merely according unto probable reafon) drew after it a Sabbath day, the (eventh day where on God refted. But if God vcuchCifcth us a new creation in the fame congruity, may wee not juftly expert a new Sabbath > Now, the Aportle tells us plainly, that old things are paflcd away, and that all things are become new, 2C<?r. 5.17- and this he brings in upon ftiewing what Chrift hath defervcd at our hands, in as much as he died for us, and ro(c againe, verf. 15. the end whereof was this, that he might be Lord both of quicke and dead, Rom. u, 9. and concludes, that whofoever ii in Chrifi^is a nenv creature^ 2 ^0^.5. 17. And how are we in Chrift, but by faith ? Cfa/.2, 10. And what is the objeft of this our faith ? let the fame Apoftle an-fwer us, IfthoH confejfg with the mouth the Lord Jeftu, and he^ lieve in thine heart that God raifed him from the dead^thon/halt be faved: fo that this faith in Chrifts refiirreftion, is to us the beginning of a ne\y creature. And Chrifts refiirreftion Sedft" iius calls nafeentis mundi primordiftm. And Athanajitu (aith, That as the Sabbath was the end of the firft creation; (b the Lords Day is the beginning of the fccond creature. And this is it that Bifhop e^«?rfM'<'i and hx^op Lake doe worke upon for the celebration of the Lords Day as by Divine inftitution. But I am cot a little (cnfiblc of (bane appearance of incongruity rifing hereupon. Almighty God did not thinke it fit, that the firft day of creation ftiould be our Sabbath, but theforenth fromthecreation,as whereon himfclferefted J but in the fccond creation, the firft day is made our Sabbath. To this I anfwer two things 5 the firft is this: if man (honid not reft unto God till the (econd creation is finifhed, hee (hould not reft at all in this world. And (he fixe dayes being the daycs of Gods workejthe feventh was the firft of mans worke,which God would have to be an holy worke moft convenient whereby to take livery and feafin of the world. For, albeit God commanded Adam to drcfifc the garden and keepc it, when

K he

fig The Sdoraiitie ^f the fourth Commandment^

c,.Cf ^ he placed him in it 5 yet it is nothing probable it had need of

^ ^ ' \'_ d el!i -.e; To ipone as it was sriade 5 and no mention of reft com-

m.indedatthetirrt; onelyitis (aid, that becauie Godrefted that diy from all his works, therefore he blefled the (evcnth -dayandran(^ifiedit. This I deliver to fave the exprcflion of Athan^fius. 2. But in my jadgement, thereisanexaelcon-gruity betweeiic reft and reil in each creation. For^ as God refted the {eventhday from the workeof creation; foChrift ^ refted the firft day of the weekc from his worke of Redemption, which was the meritorious cau(e ot the new creation-For Chrifts dying3 and continuing under the power of death, foracertaine time, f may juftly reckon as one worke of Rc-<Icmption ; in which time hee fuffercd ignominy, not onely from the reproach of the world, but from the weaknefle of his iervants faith, whole voyce was, weethought it had been he, who AUit^* JJyQtildhave r£ deemed IfraeU

Asior Zanchy, in the place cited by Gomarw* heeconfef-

(kth, hnm'diem ex traditione Apofielica ejfe^ ^ Optimo jure ah

Sccleftaretentum^That the Lords Day k {to he obferved) by Apo^

flollcall tr adit ion, and by the befl right retained by the Church —-

thisthePrcfacerinhis wifedome omitted; indeed hee faith,

5/^ no where reade that the Apoftles commanded it: but Jcft it

free; but take with you the rcft,//^ liber urn,ut omnino ipfe dih

fanCtificandpis jity nijicharitas aliudpoflulat* In fuch a manner

free, that omnino, undoubtedly the day it felfe ought to be fanEli-^

fiedj unleffe-charity require otherwife, I conceive his meaning

is, and the meamng of all that life this language, that wee arc

to keepe it by no other obligation (not of fpeciall comman-

demejit) than the reafbn of the day doth minifter unto us, it

being the day that the Lord hath made, joyfull to Gods I

Church by the redirreftion of Chrift from the dead 5 and in *

this fcnfe they % it doth not bind mens ccMifcicnces, to wit, as

a Precept doth, whether we know the equity of it or no. And

it were very ftrangc, that Chriftians in keeping any holy day

intheweeke, (hould not make choice of the Lords Day for

that, without anycxprcfle commandcment. <t/4retius faith

no more than that Chrifiians changed the Sabbath unto the

Lords "Day ^ and can any man doubt, but that the Apoftles

were

Is fliilin force to hind Chrijiiansl ^g

were meant hcccl>y?For which is moft likely^that the pra(5lice ,^£^ ^ and judgement of others was a leading caule to theApoftlcs, -—1^ or rather that the judgement and praftife of the Apoftles was a leading caufe unto all others ? Simler hath no more but this, thcithccaih itthecufiome of the Chftrch, Co doth TilenuSj yet he firopofeth it as /%/;' to 'have had its infiitutioH from Chrifl. Tardpu m the very place cited by gomarns, altiibeth the change of the day to the Apoftolicall Churchj and exprcflely faith, that the Apoftle commanded the Corinthians to meet together the firft day of the weekc^and make their coll^ions. I wonder the Prefacer omits (^tschlinHi, was it bccau(e that whlchmthers call cortffietudinem Ecc/cfia, hee calls conftiett4di^ nem Apoficlicarn ? In the laft place,5^r^r is named by the Prc-facer, but gomarus is well content to omit what is delivered by him. But to the contrary, I will not forbeare to ifet downc what I find in his booke De Regno Chrifii, Ith. i,cap,i i. For having formerly defcribed what are the true workes of holy rcfts, added upon the backe of it 5 Faproptery For this caufe the Lords Daj was coyifecrated by the zy^poflles themfelves to thefehin^ofaltions, fVhieh orlinance oftheirsQnftittitumht calls it) the antient Qhurches ohfervedmofl re/igioujljf . Then he fhews the cau(e why they changed the day : i. The firft rcafon given is, to tefiifie that Chrifiiofjs are not obliged to the Peda-^ogie of lAoCts law: 2. The Ctcondis^to celebrate the memc-' rj ofChrifls reffirreSlion^ which was performed on the firjf day- of the weeks* So that not one of the Authors mentioned by him makes any thing for him. And if the paflages of the fixe mentioned by him, and related by Gomarm did make any thing for him; we have no lefle of the ancient Fathers to the contrary, as namely, Athanafins, Cvil, Fufebius, Auftin lately mentioned, to whom adde Sedulins operisPafchalis^Hb, 5. cap, 21. The glory of the etemail King illuflrating (the firft day of the weeke) with the trophy of his refurreElion, frlmatt^m cum religione concejfum di^rnm cenfnit retinere cnn^orum^ thought good it Jhould have the priwacy of all day es granted unto it with rsligioff: that is, with an holy celebration thereof. Adde unto him Gregoryy mentioned in the firft Seftion, affirming that Antichrift affecting to imitate Chrift, (hall command the

K 2 Lords

ICO The ^otalttie of the fourth C^mmdndement^

SeEi K ^Q^^s Day to be Vcpt holy. Addc to theft the univcrfall con-^ *^ ftnt of Chnftendomc in antient times 5 for when the qucftion was propofed unto them, as ufiully it was thus; "^Donsinicum fervaft't ? Haft thou kept the Sabbath ^ their anfwer was this, ChrifiianHSffumy intermittere noftpojfftm: YoX^Brentitu alleged by him to little purpofc, let mec reprefent what Gerard th^ Luther arte writes of our Chriftjan Sabbaih in his common places, torn, ^.pag, 1^6, Eft SahbatHrn (^hriftianum^ ejmJHXta Apoftolornw conflitutionem dies hehdomaA^ primm puhlicis eccle^ ft£ congrejfibtis deft mat us eft. Our Chrlftian S ah hath is that wherehj the firft daj of the T»eeke is deftinatedto the puhliejue af* femblUs of the Church, hy the conftitution of the Apoft^. See how plainly heereferres the celebration of this day to Apofto-licall conftitution: and pag, 148. he (hewcth the analogic between the Jewes Sabbath and our Chriftian Sabbath, con-fifting in two or three particulars : i As on the fevcnthday God refted from the fix dayes worke of creation, in remembrance of which benefit, the Sabbath was inftituted in the old Teftament: fo in thefirft day of the weeke, after Chrift by his death and palfion had accompliftied the myfterie of our Redemption, he returned glorioufly as a conqueror from the dead, in remembrance of which benefit, the firft day of the weeke is celebrated in the new Teftament. 2. As in the old Teftament the Sabbath was inftituted, that it might be amcmoriall of their deliverance out of Egypt, Beut. 5.15. So in the new Teftament, the Lords Day is a memoriall of our fpirituall deliverance out of the kingdome and captivity of Satan, procured unto us by the refurreftion of Chrift, a type whereof was that deliverance of the children of Ifrael out of Fgypt. ^. By Chrifts death and reftrreftion, were abrogated Leviticall ceremonies and legall ftiadowes,amongft which the Sabbath is reckoned,C«>/.2.iy.Therfore the change of the Sabbath into the Lords Day, is a publique teftimony that Chriftians arefrced from legall ftiadowes, and that difference of dayes, which in antient time was ordained. Addc to him ai^feianchthon, alleged by WaUus^ pag. 265. affirming, that the Apoftlcs for this cauft changed the day, that in this particular they might give an example of the abrogation of

the

is fit// in force to hind Chrifiidnsl lo i

the cercmoniall Lawes of Mofaicall policy. As for our SeU^ K,

PopifivDivines for which hcreferresus to DodioxFrideanx^it ^*-- —

is apparent that more of them arcalleagcd tor thzjusdhirjum^ oft he celebration of the Lords Day, then for the contrary; & one o^themesilvefter by name,profe{reth exprefly that his opinion, was the common opinion which was for the Divine inlHcution of it. And AK^orim the Jcfuitejas hee proief-fechica thing moil agreeable to reafon.that after fix worke dayesoneintireday fhonld bee coofecraced to Divine wor-fhip; ib withall faith that it is moft agreeable to realbn that the Lords Day (hotald be that Day.

Adde unto thefe Sixtus Senenfxs^ but that which they ob/eft B'MoihMj.p. ( faith hee) concerning tlie Lords Day not as yet inftituted 6o^,C0lj» in the time of fohn, is moft falfe, the con(ent of the whole Church difclaiming it , which doth beleeve the folemnity of the Lords Day was appointed by the Appoftles themfelves in memory of the Lords Refurreftion : concerning the in-ftitution whereof by the Apoftles AtiftinStr. 25. 3^ temp, tedifyeth in theft words: therefore the Apoftles themfelves, & Apoitolicall menjappointed that the Lords Day (hould for that reafon bee religioufly folemnize i^becaufe on it our Redeemer rofe from the dead. In the laft place come wee to our Divines. Now Bucer I have already ftiewcd to ftand for us rather then for him. 2. And Calvin cx^redy acknowlcdgeth that the Apoftles did change the day. 3. Bez^nupon Re. i,v, 10. hath an excellent pafiage to the lamepurpoie. For hee confiders Chrifts re{urre<5lion to bee as it were a fecond creation ot ar World fpirituall, and thereupon doubts not but thatthefpiritofGod did fuggeft unto them the change of the (evenlh day into the Lords day, as to bee con fee rated to Divine Service. 4. /««/«/ on Gef7, 2. writes that the cmCc ofthe changeofthe day was the refurrc^ion of Chrift 3 and the benefit of inftauration of the Church in Chrift. The com-n-:emorarion of which benefit fucceeded to the commemoration of the Creation,not by humane tradition, bui; by the ob-fervation of Chrift himielfc, and his inftitution. 5. Tifiator^ on E.V0/.20.10. It is to bee obferved that thecircumftance^ ofthefeventhday,in celebrating the Sabbath is aboliftiedby'

K 3 Chrift 5

101 ^^^ moralitie of the fourth Commandement^

S^Si K Chijft 5 as who for that day ordained the firft day of the *^-—wcekcj which wee call the Lords Day, and that in remembrance of the Lords Refiirreclion performed on that day. AnduponX//i^.i4.''7.2. He makes this obfervation,'S;'^?^-

cajion ofthU (lory . it is fit: to confidcr what wa^ the religion of the Sabbath in the new Teflament , and what place it hath at this ^ day among us Chriftiayis , and how it is to be obferved, Atidfirfi

we muft hold that the Sabbath is abrogated^ by Chrifts comming (IS touching the feventh or 1 aft day in the week^^ and that in the •place thereof is ordained the frft day ^ which we call the Lords ^ayy becat^fe on that day the Lordrofe from the deady andjhewed himfelfe alive to his ^ifciples^ and divers times Jpeakif^g with them of the Kingdom of God: aodfo by his own example confecra-^ tin(i that day to (fhurch a^emblies , and for the performance of the outward fervice of God, The reafon of the abrogation ts , be--captfe that ceremoniaU reft obferved in the Law , was a type of that reft, which the Lord made in his grave ^06 is perceived by the words <7/Paul C0L2. i5.17, Now of the Apparitions of the Lord, S. Johnf^/^^^J"Chap.2i. where he fh ewes how firft he appeared^ to them g-athered t ogether on that very day whereon he rofe. And againe eight dajes after. Now that in thefe dayes he fpaJ^ unto them of the Kingdom of God Luke (hewes^^dis 1.3. Whence it was undoubtedly that the Apoftles obferved that day by the Lords or*

dinance-^ to k^ep their Scclefiafticall ajfemblies thereon ■ as it

appeares they didK^s 20.7, & I Gor.-16, 2, nAndhence it was without doubts on tht Lords day John wm in the fp'trit andre* ceaved the Revelation. To the fame purpole is that which Dodlor WaUus alleagcth out of Pifcators •

Aphorif! iS. It may be doubted concerning the Lords Day^ whether it be appointed by God for his fervice in the New Tefta-^ mentm My opinion hereof is this ; although we read no exprejfe Commandement concerning it, yet that fuch an inftitution may he gatheredfromthe example of (fhrift andhis'Difciples, For on that day whereon the Lord rofe from the dead Qt her "fore called the Lords Day) he /hewed himfelfe alive to his Dtfclples , and fpal^e to them of the Kingdom of Cjod, And^AxA on that day in anaf" femhh of the faithfull met together to ceUbrate the Lords Sup" fCTi preached to them on that day, A&s 20f7. and that the Chri-

ftians

Jlrans ai Corinth were wont to meet on that d^j for pftl^licjue Scft. ^,

■prayer^ appear es j Get. 16* 2. Noiv it cannot be doubted but .-!—

Paul ordained that d.aj amorj^ft th'^m , 04 nljo the manner ofcele* brat in 9 the Lords Supper^ and that according to the (^ommandc^ ment afChrifl. Maih. 28. theUft^ Tcachthem (jo wit, as many Oireceavethe (jofpell)tok^epaltthofe things which I havecom-' fnandfduntcj/^u. On the Lords Dajf a/ o John was in the fpirit, and in thefpiritfaw and heard the Revelation concerning the ft ate of the Chptrch that was to.come, Apoc. I. J 0» whence we may g.f ther, that event hr/I he reft ed to holy meditations, fuch as became the Lords'^Day^ Thereisnot apaffagc in all this but oFgreat weight, an 1 very confidcrable. 6. As for Doftor i'W/^upon the ke^\, 10. I have rcpre(ented him formerly at large; that for the prefcription of this day before any other of the feT^cn ^ they had without doubt ether the exprejfe (^ommandement of Qmj} before his ^fcenfton when he gave thtm preempts concerning the Kingdom of God^ and the ordering and government of the (^hnrch Afts 1,2. or elje the certaine direBion of his fpirit y that it woi his will^ andpleafure that itjhouldfo be^ and that alfo according to the Scriptures, And obferve how hee falls upon the fame reaibn that Athanafius , an,d the ancient Fathers inlilt upon;, Seeing there is the fame reafon ef fanilifying that day , in which our Saviour (^hrift accomplifljed our redemption%and the reft it ut ion of the fVorld by his refurretlion from death 5 that was offanEli^ fyingtheday^ in which the Lord reft ed from the Creation of the World,'jX>Q^QV <*Andrewes in like manner Bifliop of PVinche-fter in his Starre Chamber fpecch in the cafe of Traske ; hee fiot onely profefleth, that the Sabbath had reference to the old (Creation , but in Chrift we are a new Creature^ a new Crea-tion^andfo to have anew Sabbath ; and that this new Sabbath is the LordsH)ay declared unta us by the refurrcBion rf Chrift, for which he alleageth Auftin Ep. lip. ad lanuarium' But al(b for the confirmation of it faith it is deduced plainly by pra-fti(e ; adding that thefc two onely the day ( ofthe vveekc whereon Chrift rofe ) and the Supper^ are called the Lords, to Jhew that the word Dominicum is tak^n alike in both. Nay hee goes farther 5 as namely to alleage not onely pra(5life but precept alfo for it 5 from the firft of the Epiftle to the (^orin,

K 4 cap.6,2,

i04 3n&^ Moralide of tf)e fourth Commandement^

Sc£l^K. ^^P' ^^''^' ^°*' ^^^^^' the Apoftle there doth expreflcly con-

- * (Htute onely an order for collc(flions for the poore on the day

ot their meeting, yet as P/fc^r^r oblervcs, ic cannot bee denied but that undoubtedly as touching the time oftheir meeting they ^^"cre therein ordered alfo by S. Tau/y as they were about the manner of celebrating the Lords Supper. And accordingly, Tarxm in the very paflage alleaged by Gomur^u^ doth take that place of i C^r.16.2. to notifie, that the very time of their meeting there rpecified, was by the ordi^ nance of S.TW.

Dollar L^ki BiQiop of Bath and fVells^ in his Thefes de Sabbato, Thef. 34, The Apoflies direEled hj Chrifis not only examplfylpHt fpiritalfo, obfervedthepime^witneffe in the A Els, S. PauljS. "^ohn in the Revelation, 38. tAndfrom the Apsftles the Cathclicjue (^hurch uniformly receivedit^ mtnefe all Ecch" fiaflicatl writers, 39/. And the Church hath reeeaved it not to he Uher<z obfervationis , as if men might at their pleaft4re accept orrefpife it ^ 40. bnt to be -perpettially cbferved to the fVorlds end. For a^ God only hath power to apportion his time : fo hath he power to fa out th? day that he will tak^ for his portion. For be is Lord of the Sabbath^ 8. Mailer Fox upon t^x Rev, %, v. 10. profeffcthjthat the ©biervation of the Lords Day doth Niti authoritate inftitutionis Apoflolica^ depend upon the antho-rityof^poflolicaflinfiitutivn,^, ^ilxus dijfert, de Sab. p. 172. we conclude (£aithhee) thidfirfldayoftheweeke^ was by the Avofilesput in the place of the Sabbath, andc ommended to the Church , not only by a power ordinary , competent to all paft<yrs for the ordering of indifferent rites in their Churches • but by afinguUrpriwer alCo 5 as who had the overjight of the whole Churches 5 and who as extraordinary LMiniBers ofChrifl , were by the holy Ghoft^ put in tfufl^ that they might be faithfutl ^ not only for ths delivering ofcertaine precepts concerning faith ^ and manners , butaFo as touching ^upright ordering of the Church : thdt fo it might be made known to all Chriftians every where what day i^ the weeke was to be kspt 5 by vertue and Analogy of the fourth Commandement^ lenfi di^erifton thereabouts and(^con* fecjHent'j ) confufim might arife in the Church of ^od: and to this purpolc hee alleageth Bez^ before mentioned j and C7^/-

lefifis

lefiHi^CalvinsCiOWt^dtpn Fxad^^^* This ordinance^ to wit^ Sc^t ?•

that the Lords T)^y jhonlihefubfihuted in the fiuce of the Sab" ^ ■

hath ^ yvehavereceaved ( faith hce) nstfrom men j?Ht from the ty-^pcft/es ^ that is^ forn the Spirit of God^ivhcreby they were governed: nnd ^fter he had proved this out ot three places of Scripture, <iABs^oq. i (^^cr.162. Re.i,\0' intheeiid hee, addeSj For although we are not tiedtotheohfervatiott ofdayes yet this nejeffary order mufl be obferved^lenft conftifion Jhonldbe bred in the Chnrck io» Fayus Calvins fucceflbr alleaged alfo by Walxns difp11r.47.in. q. precept. Inftiy therefore may we fiy^that the <*y^poflics by thj leading of the Hdy Ghofi for the [event h day of the Law ^ fubfiitntedthe firfi duy of the w^el^^ -which wa^ thefirfl in the Creation of the firf fVor/d. I l.Hyperius in. I. Cor. l6. i. 7'hefirft-dayofth'?wcekeinmem6ry'ofthe Lords Refurretiion was called the Lords Day , the obfervation of the Sabbath being tranflated thereunto through th^i command of the Holy Ghofi by the Apoftles, 12. A^idc Unto thefe Maftcr P<rrJ^«/maintaining the (arae. That which he delivers of the Parliament in the daycs of King Edward the fixt, in that preamble of theirs concerning lioly dayes , as left by the <iuthorityx)fGods Word to the authority of Chrilis Church, by thedi(cretion of the Rulers , and Miniilers therof, as they Hiall judge moft expedient to the true fetting forth of Gods Glory, and edification of the people 5 I (ay that this fhould bee underftood not of holy dayes onely, but of the ' Lords Day alfo, is a thing moft incredible; neither doth hee offer fo cite any parcel 1 thereof to juftific this fo bold an affirmation ; oncly hee fayth, that by the body of the a(^ i'" doth appeare; but what that is in the boiv of that aft whereby thisdothappeare, hecvcry judicioufly conceales. How improbable is it,that Bifhop Andrcwes would have oppoud this Do(flrine in the Starre Chamber , if a Parliament of Prelates, and that in the dayes of King Edward the lixt^had maintained it. For hee profefTethjthat thefe two onely, the Lords Dayjand the Lords Supper are called the Lords J to fhewthat

Downicnm is ali'^e to bee takcninboth and takes upon

him to fhew that in the very Scripture , there is found a pre-.cept for obfcrvation of the Lords Day ; And Bifhop Lak£

in.

Sc3 K ^n like manner pro£c{feth that it is noxTLibera obfervatlonl\ *^* biitneceflarily to be obferved. Doctor Fulks anfwer to the Rhemifli Teftamcnt was fet forth in the dayes of Queene Blizaheth ^ and dedicated to hsrMajefty,thercinon iJ<?. i. v^ i6, hath bee delivercd5that to change the Lords Day, and to lieepc itoB Munday, Tue(day or any other day,the Church hath none authority. For it is not a matter of indilferency, but a neceflary prcfcription of Chrift him^elfe delivered to us by his Apoliles, Was bee ever queftioned for this ? or was It ever knowne that the ftate of this Land excepted againft it 3 forcrofllng the Do(?lrine of the Church manifelled in a preamble to one of the Afts of Parliament, which I prefume was never yet repealed ; but leave we him to live on his own juice^and to pleafe himfelfe in his holinelTe.

A

is fiili in force to hind Chrifiians.

'"- Ml) (A^iO) (9iil <9i{^'¥tJ (9^Tri0 <sr/:*>'t)

107

^''■^f^M£%&

^.

_ _ ^aT.Smi aC *C3M> <»C3m> iic5^s> *cf «>

A THIRD

DIGRESSI ON

CONTAINING A CONFERENCE

With D. JVaUus about the Divine authority of the Lords Day*

Come to confider (bmewhat in WaUus^ whofe differtation of the Sabbathjfrom the firft hath hked mee fo well, and the fpirit which it breathes throughout ^ that I doe notaffeft to differ from him ; bat rather heartily delire there may bee little or no difference betweene us, and I hope in the end there will be foimd little or no difference of importance betwecnc us, efpecially in this point of the inftitution of the Lord Y^dC^ whether it be divine or humane, and as for the originall inftitution of the Sabbath^namely as from the beginning of the World, and as touching the morality of one day in fevcn 5 therein I concurre with him really and aff^^c^ionately.Andas touching the quality of the inlHtution ; I approve his learned paines in vindicating thofe three places of the new Teftament, ABs 20.7 i Cor, \6, 2. and Kb. 1,10. from the interpretation that feme give of them, to qiiafh the evidence which they import for the obfervatlon of the fitit day of the' weekc,common]y called the Lords Day, even in thou: primitive

Io8 T^^^ moralitie of the fourth Cemmandement^

St£i K. "^'itiveand (\poll:olicaII diyes of theChriftian Church. And

^ l2-L-,I Joync with him, pag. 167. in admiring, chat after fomany

accurate prejudices of the reformed Churches, concurring in the (ame tranflation & interpretation of thofe places which wc fimbrate 5 yet (ome (liould be found to take fo unhappy paines, as coquafh the Evidence of them which they (eem to us plainly to import. A manifeft argument in my judgement,that thcob-fervation of that day, as in place of the Jewes Sabbath, in the very day s of the Apoftles.dolh even convince their confclcnces, that it can favour of nothing lefle than Apoftolicall inftituti-on; which> becaulc they doe impugne, therefore they defirc to impugne the ufe thereof as nothing fo antient as to be received of the Apoftles themfelves. For confider, I pray, how fliould the converted Jewes come to change their Sabbath, if not by order from the Apoftles themfelves, whofe doftrine it was that Chrift came to (et an end to all ceremonies ? And as for the fubftitution of a day in the place of it, that all did joyntly concurre herein without any dependanceof fomc upon the judgement of otherf^what ftrange ftrength of convifting evidence muft there needs be in the re(iirred:ion of Chrift, to draw them hereunto farre beyond Almighty Gods refting on the feventh day from his worke of creation ? What could be devifed to inferre greater morality by the very light of nature than this, which fhould be fo forcible to move all to concurre herein, and that with the firiL But if they received it, fome from others, how improbable it is, that the Apoftles fliould receive it from the Churches, and not rather the Churches from the Apoftles ? Then confider, we no where reade of any diftercncc here-abouts among the Apoftles, counting 7aul amongft rhcm, who received from the Lord after his afcenfi-on into heaven what he delivered unto others. How then came ittopafle, that they all fo throughly, and at the firft, agreed herein ? h\ as having received it from the Lord, then the cafe is cleare, that it is of moft Divine inftitution : But if onely as drawne hereunto by the coniideration of Chrifts re(Ijrre£lion on that day, being guided by the Spirit of God infallibly to order as other things, fo the time of Divine (ervice, to prevent tlie danger of division and confufion upon juft ground; even

this

isfii/l in firce to bindChtiflians. lo^

this is enough to manifcft the ftrength of evidence which the SeB, K Lords refuriefUon carriech with it, as to convincelthcm, fo to.. '^* appoint, and to convince others of the reafonablcncfle there-of, feeing all Churches did fo univcrfally and fo earely yceld thereunto, and liiice that time (b conftantly perfcvered therein. The refurrcftion therebre of Chrift, is nothing inferiour to the Lords reft on the feventh to draw us to the ran(5lifying thereof: And the Apoftles ordering it in this manner efpeci-ally as his extraordinary Minifters, is anfwerable to the Lords Commandement for the (anftifying of the feventh, efpecially that very commandement by jjft analogic having force alfo in this : And albeit IVaUw faith no more,/?*f^. 174. of thole three places', (i^<^/20.7. i CV. 16. 2. Apoc. 1.10, than that the whole Church reformed hath conftantly gathered there-hence 1>iei Dominica ufuw, the u(e of the Lords Day : yec both pag, 183. he doth manifeltly imply the Apoftles to have inftituted it, where he faith, that <!]uei ah ipjts Apoftollf inJIitutA nonfunt, fiich things as have not beene ordained by the Apoftles, were never in that manner obfervcd in all Chriftian Churches throughout the world, as the obfervation of the Lords Day. And before, pag* 172. he concludes, that the fifft day of the wecke was by the Apoftles fubflituted in the place oft he feventh, and commended to the Church, and that potcftatcpigHlariy by fingular power 5 and as they were extraordinary Minifters of Chrift, put in truft by his Spirit, to be faithfull in giving Precepts fmarke this well)notonely touching faith and manners, but alfb de ScclefKz kvra^'^, c^re&o ordine, for the vfielI ordering of the Church^, and that in this particular, vphM day of the weeke is to be ohferved by force and ana-logie of thefom th Commandement, to prevent dljfention and con" frtf on among the (^hurches. And I am verily perfwaded, that as many as ftand for the Divine inftitution of the Lords Day would reft fully fatisfied with this. Auflin, I am fure, who is alleged by WaUvu in the firft place, as maintaining it to be of Chrifts in.ftitution, writes thus of it, Serm, de temp.2'y i. Domi-nicum ergo diem eyfpofioii (^ ApoftoUci viri idea religiofa folen^ nitate habendum fanxerunt, quia in eadem Redemptor nofier a mmmsrefHrrexit: this being premifed, let us come to the

confide-

SeSf , <. confideration of that whichiie delivers abeut the juftification ———^ hereof, from Z^**^^. 152. where he acknowlcdgeth that among the ancient Writers and OoAorsr of the reformed Church, there have beene fome \)^ho hav^ Veferrcd the celebritie of thi» day to the fad and inftitution of Chrift. At the firft^by C^rift^ fati in this place I underftopd Chrift apparitions to the ApofWcs, as they were afTembled together on this day. But upon better confideration and portder«tion of the paflages alleged by him out of Anfline and ^n/, 1^ thinke rather that by Chrifts fa6: he means Chrift refurreftionjor perhaps^btoh the one and the other. For the (entence taken out o^aAufline hath reference to the one^ and that ou*: o^Cyril, to the other. And Doftor Lake Biftiop of "Bath and JVells in his thef, ^6.de Sab^ ^^f^ireferres unto both; thisfirft day Chrift fandifiednot onely by his refurreftion, but by fundrie apparitions before his afcention, by (ending them the Holy Ghoft. But the latter feem to depend on the former. And thereforejthat learned Bi-(hop in his defence of that Thefts 36.writes thus: I fay not^that the jlpofi/es imprinted af^y holineffe upon the firfi day of the rveeke, it woi (fhrif^s refurreElion that honoured that dayy which I fay the ApofllcsweretorefpeSi,notarhitrarilyy but ?tecepiri/j,yoft may perceive the reajon in my Thefts "^ you cannot ohfervefrom the he^ ginning of the world any other inducement to the inflitmion of feafls but Gods worke done on the day. Now, neither Anftin nor Cyril fpeake of any inftitution made by Chrift. Eufebim^l confefle, doth intimate (uch an inftitution, and Gregory t]xQ great, and fo doth Athanaftus (ceme to exprefle as much, and ^fj^//////after him ; but I am apt to conceive that they meant no other thing hereby, than that the confideration of Chrifts refurreftion by the fuggcftion of Chrifts Spiritj (houldmovc theApoftlesto ordaine and eftabliOithe celebration of this day unto the Chriftian world. Junim^ in my judgement, fcemes to have no other meaning, when he profefleth the caufc ofthe change ofthe day to be the refurrcftion of Chrift, and the benefit of inftauration of the Church in Chrift; it is true, he faith afterwards that th e Lords Day fucceedcd the (cventh, (Chriftiohfervatione atque infiitutOy by Chrifl cbfervationand ordinance ^, but I underftand thereby no other ordinance than

is

is fill I in force to bind Chrijiians. j j I

is bcfpokcii by Chrifts rcfiirreftion on the day and ebfervari- Se£l t

on of the day. For anon lie tells uSjthat the Lords Day was ob —

Icrved, ChrifiifMo, exemph, infiitftts^ ty^'peflohrHm, ^ veU^ ri6 Eccleft€ obfarVAtioneconfiiintiffimk ; by Chriftsfa^^ example, and by the ordinance of the Apoftles ; unlcflc inftitnto there, be to be leferred to that which goes before^ and ought to be diftin-gui(hed from ApoftolorHm which comes after by a comma, .though it be not. But let this be the opinion of/»wV« arid Pifcatpr, which, perhaps, we may meet with (bme more evi-dcncc for than hitherto: Neither doe I fee any neceflity of ^xprelfing concerning everything they taught, that they received it of the Lord 5 Neither doe I thinke tit toconciude^ -that whatfoever they ordered, they ordered by Gods Com-mandement. Eut confider, there is a great ditferencei^etween things ordered by them ; (ume were concerning particulars. Others for the Church univerfall. Some ordered by them for a ccrtaine time, other things to continue to the worlds end. The ordinance of the Lords Diy 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 r generally hath conceived it, as an ordinance of the Apoftles ' intended to continue to the worlds end.

The ingenuity of Mafter 'Terkins h to be commended, con-fciUng ingenuoufly, that hee propofeth his arguments not as neceflary, butiis probable, onely to inferre the inftitution of the firft day of the weeke to be obferved by Chriftkns in place of the fevcntb, I would thofe that oppofc him would carry themfelves with the like ingenuity : nothing inferiour is the ingenuity of Dofltor WuUH4,yag, ij^.profefling that this opinion touching Chrifts infticutjon of the Lords Day, feeing it hath (b great Divines as favourers thereof, is neither to be ac-culed of novelty3 nor cafily to be de(pi/ed as falfe, provided, that they thcmfelves doe not propo(e it as neceflfary, but as probable, nor inveigh agalnft fuch as are of another opinion or condemne them. Now, let u3 iice u^on what grouids he preferres the fecortd opinion, making theinftitution of the Lords Diiy to depend upon Apoftolicall authoritie before it. Thcreforej firft he urgeth, that the Apoftles have given no cx^

prcfle

SeB K preflecommandcmcnt as being charged thereto by Chrift, *^* norChrifthimfclfe. In biiefcjthus neither Chrifthath any where in Scripture commanded it, nor doe the Apoftles any where fignify that hec did: I anfwcr, the Apoftlcs doc not j ufe to fignify that what they deliver in particular was given them in charge by Chriit 5 foiiietimes they doe,b«t this extends not to the hundreth part of that they doe deliver. And it may bee by S,/<?/?«/calling it the Lords Day, compared with that which our Savioar delivers in the Gofpell, pray^ that your flight bee notin the Winter, norupon the Sabbath day ; and with the denomination of the Jfewes Sabbath called in the Old Teftamcnt the Lords holy day, wee (hall iinde fufficicnt intimation erf Chrifts inftitution. Efpecially Con-fidcring that the queftion is but of the circumftance of a particular day", not of the proportion oftime;and withall the analogy ofthc day of Chrifts Relurredion to the day of the Lords reft from C eation. And whereas the Dodor further faythjthat it leemes n>t likely that Chrift fliould not command it, if he meant to binde us to the obftrvation of any day, asapartpf his worftiip andftrvice : Now I wonder what the worthy Doftor raeanes to thruft in the circumftance, as a pan of gods Worjhip. If the Apoftlcs might command it as he thinkes they did, yet not as a part of Gods worlhip ; why might not Chrift command the observation of that day, yet not as a part of his worfhip ? I am not pcr-fwaded, that when God at the firft fanftifyed the feventh day, hee made the obfervation of that day a part of his worfhip* And ii is ftrange that the circumftance of time (honld bee an homogeneall part of Gods worftiip.

Firft 5 it is true, the reft on that day commanded afterwards might bee, and was as a cererpony preaching fome-thing unto them. All that is to bee coniidered in time pertaining to Gods Worfhip is thi proportion of it ; as whether one day in a weeke bee moft fit 5 or one day in a moneth bee fufhcient 5 and this is of momentous con-fideration , whether wee confider the advancing GODS Glory thereby, or our owne good, in a greater or lefler proportion 5 But the particularity of the day in fcvcn whether

firft

Is jii/l in force to hind Chrijliansl H ?

firft or laft or middlcmoftjthis confideration in my judgement .^'eSlf r

is ofno momentiOnly for the avoyding of didention, & con- ^- !^

fuiion we have neede of authoritative fpccification, and that Goddid not define at the firft without congruous rca(bn, to ftili ail motion tending to alteration j and if we have as fayrc evidence under the Go(pelI for our Sabbath, as the Jewes iiad for theirs 5 wee are by Gods goodneffc as much freed from diflenfion and confufion as they, and nothing the more in-^ gaged in fuperftition, as making the obfervation of the day a part of Divine worfhip ; which never was but in the way of prefiguration of fomewhat in Chrift,which kind of pedagogy is now quite out of date^neither is there any place for it in the oblervation of the Lords day.

Dodder fVaUns his (econd argument is^bccaufe thofe places cfScripturc,/?(?w.i4. j7^/.4. & Coloff.2, in which the A-poftic takes away all difference of dayes can hardly bee reconciled with this opinion, or if Chrift himfelfe not by example onelyjbut by an ordinance commanded unto his Disciples the obfervation of this day, it cannot bee imagined as it leemeSjthat any liberty fliould now remaine in the ob-fervation of this day 5 for that which Chrift hath determined is not left under Chriftian liberty any more then the ob-iervationofthefeventh day from the Creation was left free to the Jewes 5 when God not oncly by his example, but al(b by precept ftparated it from all other dayes to his fervice. To this I anfwer , i. I finde- no liberty at all left to the Church to change the day, by the Doftors ownc grounds, for hee holds it to bee invariable /7.168.

Secondly 5 Hee profefleth the change of the day cannot bee attempted without the greateft fcandall of the Church, p. \6^, Now what fober Chriftian would affect liberty to bee fcandaIous?3. others who acknowledge the obfer-vation of the day by Apoftolicall inftitution 5 and with-all to bee changeable and left to the liberty of the Church, doe withall maintaine that the Apoftles did not command it as extraordinary Minifters of Chrift •• but Doftor fVaietis fAj2, acknowledgcth the inBitution of it made by the Apoftles as Minifters extraocdinary, 4. theDodorpro-

Se£l K ^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^ Apoftlcs were entruftcd by the Holy Ghoft '^L ^tn give precepts concerning the gopd government of the Church'j and that in this particular cafe, to make knownc toallChriftians every where what day in the weeke ought to be kept holyjand that by.vcrtue and analogy of the fourth CommandeiHcnt, and withall to prevent diHenfion and con-fufion amongll the Churches thereabouts. 5. and laftly hec joyncs the precepts concerning this with precepts concerning faithj and manners 5 and this hce doth without (peci-fyingany the leaft difference ; nay, the word precepts is once proposed as fubfervient indifferently as to faich , and manners, (b alfo 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 fanftified to Gods Service. As for the places RomA^, gal,2, & C^i^if' *• I anfwcr^thatif weemadethc obfervation of the day as it denotes a eircumftance of time, any part of Gods Service, or for (bme myftcrious fignification contained therein, then indeed wee fhould carry our felves in contradiftion to the places mentioned: but feeing we obferve times onely out ofrefpc<ft to order and policy, which is necef* ^ iary for the edification of theChurchjand God having always required one day in feven to be fet apart for this, even when there was not fo great need, nor had God manifefted his love to mankinde in fiich fort as in the(c latter dayes 5 and of our felves wee are to fecke, of the particularity of the d ay under a ^t proportion of time from the beginning of the World rquired, and hereupon were we left to our ownc judgements, away would bee opened to miftrablc diflenfion and confii-fion; what caufe have wee to bleffe the Lord for marking oue a day to us with (Iich notable characters to make it our Sabbath , and to honour it by his appearance amongft his A* poftles when they were affembled together both that day, and that day fenight after ; as alfo by his Apoftles to commend it, and eftablifli it in fuch fort^ that for 1600. yeares the obfervation thereof hath continued unto this day ? which orderof the Apoftles doth carry pregnant prefumption that it proceeded originaHy from the inftitution of Chrift. The necelHcy of the Church Chriftian requiring the (pecification

of

ofthcdayforthe preventing of diflcnfion, and confufion SeSif. C.

as much as ever the ncceffity of the Jewifh Church required

the like; and over and above by reafoji of the fourth Coni-mandement wee have now better evidence to conclude there-hcncethe observation of the Lords Day, by the congruity that Chrifts Rcfurreftion hath to the Lords reft from Creation; better means I fay to conclude ours, then they without a Commandcment to inferre the obfervation of their (cvcnth: forftill the day of the Lords reft is made the day of our reft.

Thirdly, that which is alleadged in the third place, that both ancient and late writers doe maintainc that wee celebrate the Lords Day, not as any part of Divine worfhip 5 nor asabliblutely neceflary. For the firft of thcfe wee willingly grant;for as much as wee conceave the obfervation of the 7*. by the Jcwcs was no otherwise a part of Divine worfhip, then as it was a ceremony and fhadow, the body whereof was Chrift prefigured thereby : and it is wdl knownethac noChriftiansobierveit in anyfuch Notion. But the obfervation thereofwee hold to bee ablblutely necefTary, and Co doth Doftor H^aUtu in holding it to bee invariable . and that it cannot bee altered without the greateft (candall. And Doftor Lake Bifhop of'S^f i^,and PVells profefTeth it to bee not, lihertt obfervationis, but ftecejfari^e. And if it were free, then not to ale this freedome at all doth manifcftly give way to fuperftition in taking that for a thing necefTary which is net, though not as touching the (ubftance of Gods worftiip and fervice, yet as touching a circumftance thereof, fuch as is the circumftance of time. As for exprefle precept , if hec meanes a precept expreflely written, no man (I trow ) ever ftood for that, but if hee meanes a precept given by Chrifts exprede charge to his Apoftlcs, no man that I have met with, faith more hereupon, then Dodor JVaLtm fcemes to afBrmc bimfelfe 5 \x\(2iy\n^l\\2itthejwere entruflcdby the Holj Cxhoft as extraordinary AfiriiflerSy that they fljotdd bee faithfyJl ad tradenda^rxceptaf to give pr^ceps of faith and manners ^ and of the q^ood government of the Churchy and rhht order ^ arid particularly in this that might be known to nil what day in the iveekf rvas to be fet apart for ^ods fervice ; both by vertue and anor

L 2 logy

116 The Sioralitie of the fourth Commandement^

SeSl K ^^^J ^^ ^^^ fourth Commandement , dnd to prevent d'ljfeyjjton, * ^_L . and confufion among the Churches*^ Neither doe we acknow-

kdgeany other celebrity of the day then this; and therefore doc no more affront Bierome then Doftor fVaUns himrelfc. As for feftivall dayes in Socrates , and Nkephorw , I fee no caufe why as touching that they fpeake thereof, the Lords Day(hould bee comprehended under them; and as for apo-ftolicall precepSjConcerningthis Doftor VVaUm is as exprefic as any. And it is not credible to mee^that the Apoftles ihould make fuch an invariable ordinance to the Church , and not bee verily perfwaded that it was the Will of God the Father , and of God the Sonne it (hould bee (b : whether manifefted by Chrifts particular charge unto them 5 or by comparing Chrifts ElerurreQ:ion with the Lords reft from the workes of Creation. Ocherwife in my judgement they had never called that day the Lords Day,

Fourthly > he excepts againft the argument drawnc from Chrifts Refurrcftion ; denying that therchence it followes that that day was to bee confecrated to God. But herein hee oppolcth all the ancients j neither doc 1 thinke hec can al-leagc any one that doth not hereon build the obfervatbn of the Lords Day • which nuiverfall concurrence doth mani-feftly argue to be more then ^tohzbh: Auftin sLsTValeas allcadg-eth him.profeflcth not as his peculiar opinioD,but as he took it generally received without contradi8:ion:^W Dies Vominkus Chriflianisrefttrre^ione Domini decUratui cfi ; and that re* fiifiitatio Domini confecravit nobis diem'DominicHm, And A-thanafius plainly takes notice of the analogy it hath to the fourth Commandement;(and analogyDodor WuUus grants, and I wonder hec takes no notice of it here ) by comparing the fecond Creation with the firft Creation ; and fo Dodor Andrewes Biftiop oifVinchefter profeflcth that the new Creation requires a new Sabbath, cfpecially feeing the old muft bee abrogated as ceremoniall; But the analogy I confeile may be differently fhaped 5 aAthanaJim fhapcs it thus, that the Jewes Sabbath was the end of the firft Qreation 5 and that the Lords Dayiia beginning of the fecond Creature j to wit, as the day of Chrifts refurreftion ^ in reference whereunto the

Apoftic

Apoftle faith, 0Id things arc fa^ed, behold, all things are become .C^flF ^ ntTv. And I conceive rea(bn to jiirtiiic ^thmmfms, in making ^ * ^ ' the beginning of the new creature to be our Sabbath, anfwe-rable to the end of the firft creationjto wit, becaufe the fecond creation hath no end in this world : Againe, Adam2\\<^ Eve were made but the immediate day before the leventh, and the Seventh he was to fpend in rejoycing in Gods works 5 (b Chrirts death was the worlds redemption 5 and irnmediately after, to wit, with Chrifis riHng, it was as tit we fhould Sab-batize with God for joy of our Redemption. Ocherwiic the anaJogie (which Dodor/f^^/^///grants, but doth not explicate) may be conceived thus. The feventh day of the weekc was the Lords reft from the worke of creation, the firil day of the weeke was the Lords reft from the work of redemption, in the morning thercot riling from his grave 5 and in refpect of Chrifts refiirredion on this day, what colour hath any other d ly of the weeke comparable hereunto, to make it fit to (land in competition with this. Yes, faith D. WaUus, the Thur(day may, and that in conlideration of Chrifts a(cenlion on that day ; yet Doctor iVaUus well knowes, that that day of the week was never thereupon called the Lords Day, either by the Apoftles, or by the Churchjas the day of our Saviors reftirredi-on was. Againe^eonhder Chrifts refurrec^ion and afccnfion are to be computed but as one compleate motion; fave that he was to ftay fometime by the way here on earth for the confirming of his Di(ciples faith, and giving them commiilion for preaching the Gofpel, and order to wait at Jerusalem un-till they were endued with power from on high to carry the glad tidings of falvation all the world over. So Chrifts dying and continuing uixlcr the power of death, is but one worke of Redemption. HcconfeflethjChat Chrifts refurreftion afforded an argument to the Church Apoftolzcalljto prefer this day before all others(very welljeven before the day of his afcention) for religiousa(Iemblles,as al the ancients teftifie^But it follow-eth not thereforcjthat Chrift by this his faft did inftitute the fame day to the fame end. Now, this is a very ftrange phrafe, by his faft oa the day to inftitute the day to iiich an end. Tis well knowne fafts doc not inftitute otherwise than as thcre-

L 3 from

J I g The moralitie of the fourth Cemmandement^

S^'Ei t fi'ommay be concluded that Cich a day is to be kept; and iti __i__ll^ this fen!e he doth as good as confeflTej that Chrift by his faft, did iiiftiiute; for the Apollolicall Church did hereupon pre-ferre this day^ as "he confcileth all the ancients doeteftifie. And did they not inferre this there-hence aKb, as moft agreeable to the Will of God ? Do6lor iVaUm proceedcth thus : So God in th<f creation of the voorldrefiedthe fcventh day 5 but un^ lefe God had propofed this refl of his as an ex Ample ^ and confirmed it by precept, never had the Qhurch of the old Tcftament beene hound as from heaven to the weekjy ohfervation thereof. To this I anl wer,that the like may be faid ot the obfervation of one in fe-ven; yet feeing Go'\ did comand this proportion to the Jews, without any new commanderaent, we can inferre that (urcly Gad requires as good a proportion of us Chriilians. In like manner,fceing God commanded unto them the day of his reft from creation, we without any the like commandement, may better inferre that Chrifts rcfting day from the worke of Redemption ought to be our reft, than they could, that the fcventh day ought to be their reft. 2. Man could not polfibly have knowne how many dayes God was creating the world, fb to know what day he reftcd, that they might conforme unto him in their reftjunicfle God had revealed it unto them^but luppo* fing God had revealed it, and withall had called it his holy day, and itwere knowne unto them that one day in the weeke rittift be (et apart as Gods holy Dayjin this cafe I appeal to eve*-ry Chriftian confcience whether thi s were not lufBcient to conclude that furely the day of the Lords reft, being his holy Day, ought to be the day of our reft, and our holy day. Now, thus the cafe-ftands with us Chriftians; we know what day our Saviour ro(e, having finiftied the worke of mans Re« demption 5 we know the Jewes Sabbath is abrogated 5 wc know the proportion of one day in (even remaincs ftill to be confecratcd as an holy day to the Lord; we know the Lord prefcribed to the Jewes for their Sabbath'his refting day from the creation; which is called his holy day : And in like manner we know, that under the Gofpel, the firft day of the weeke being the day of our Saviours re(urre£tion, is called by Saint lohn the Lords Day 5 as for Eiftcr and Pcntecoft, the

cafe

cafe is nothing like; thofe feftivalls being not of fingic day cs, SeEl. %^

but of whole weeksj once in a yeere, yet this proportion wc —■—-—■

find betweeiie chem and the weekely Sabbath. There arc in a

yecTc ievcn times (even weeks, and a fraAion lefle than halfe a

(even; fo that the memory of the creation was feven times in

a yeere celebrated more than the memory cither of their deli*

verance out of Egypt, or, of ihcir reaping thefiiiitsof the

land of Canaan, the one fatre ftirmounting the other, yet

their Eaftcr bce^an the day of the yeere whereon they came

out of Egypt. And Doftor Lake, BKhop of Bath and Wells,

Thf.^l de Sahhat,^VQh&t\ l\\2itCjod fets out the day by the

tvorkshedothonthedayy.thework^ I faj done, doth difference a

day from n day : and Thef 43.. Now then, when God dot h a?iy

rentarkahle worf^, th,>H will he be honoured with a commemoration

Jay for that worke. If the work^ c oncer ne the whole. by the whole

Church'^ and ^y a party if it concerne apart: and Thef!44. And

hu IVUl is underj^ood often by his Trecept ; bnt when we have not

that, the prafiice doth guide the Church, 45. This is a Ca hoUaue

rnh.obfrvedin the inftitution of all Caere d feafts,both Divine and

Humane, ^6» The worke of the day is the ground of hallowin<T

the day, whether it be wefk^ly, monethly, or yeerely, as particu^

lars evince in Scripture and hiflorj. The very light of nature

doth give teftimony unto thiSj as appeareth by the common

practice of the heathens; as rogive fome inftance hereof, what

is the originall of the oblervation of the Fryday^as a feftiv^ill

day amongft Mahumetancs? (urely this;on that day Mahtmet

fled from Mecha to Jethrib, and fb that day is accounted the

firft day of his kingdomjand from thenceforth it was ordained

to be the firft day of their ycerc and of thtrir wecke. So then

the Will of Godj in the judgement of this reverend Divine, is

manifefted not onely by Precept, biic by his Worke. And yet

I know none fpeakes more of Precept in this particular, than

Do<^or WaUus^ as I have often alleged him,^^^. 172.

Fifthly, I grant lunius went too farrc, in affirming that Chrift did oblerve the fame every wcekebetwcenc his refur-reftion and afcention; but neither doth the contrary nppeare by Scripture"; undoubtedly thetwo firft he did, and it is not manifcft that the three following he did not j and though

L 4 Cyril

1 a O 7"/?^ Moralitte of the fourth Commandement^

SpEI K Cj^'^ inferres here-hence the rcafomDknefleof ourClirJltian ' ^^ alfcmblies on this day, yet wee doe not; but as Doftoi' Wdms concludes that which hee concludes not from any onepiacej butTrom many places together, that do wej Neither isitany thing to the purpofe that \}od(.ovWaUm obferves ofChriftsappearingon other dayes^as M.2i.24.once3which was at a fil"h meeting. And as little materiall is it, that at fiicli other times cf his meetings he fpake of the kingdome of God, Sixthly, On like fortChrift (ending down the Spirit on his Apoftles on the day of Pentccofl, hath not fo much force confidered alone, but onely in a conjunct conlideration with Chrifts refurreftion on that day : And like as after his death he arofe on that day manifefting hiraCelfe mightily thereby to be the Sonne of God, lb after his afcenlion into heaven, .he came downe by his Spirit on that day, the feventh^firft day of the weeke after his refurrc^ion, manifefting thereby as ?eter fignifieih that he had obtained the difpenfation of the Spirit, Wc doe not fay the Spirit was on the day of Pentecoft fent downe,becaufe it was tke Lords day; But being {tx\x. down on that day, as the Law is confefled to have becne delivered on that day, this tends to the marking out of that day more and more, formanifeftatlonof the power of Ghrift. That day they receiving power from on high by the dcfcending of the holy Ghoft upon them, whereby they were inabled to preach the Gofpel. And that day of the weeke which is (et apart for Divine fervice as our Ghriftian Sabbath 5 as that day whereon the Holy Ghoft doth ordinarily come downe upon his fer-vantsintheminiikrie of his Word, and celebration of the Sacraments, and putting up of our joynt prayers unto him for the fan^ifying and edifying Ghrift body which is the Church: and even in this refpe^ that day hath a farre better congruitietotheday thatistobefctapart for Divine fervice, than any other day in the week befides. The day of his a(cenfi-on he departed from them as touching his prefence corporall, but on the day of Pen tec oft he came downe upon them as touching his prefence fpirituall 5 and fo he doth ftill in our Sabbath excrcifes on the Lords day, though not in fo extraordinary a manner, yet no leffe efleftualJy to that edification and (anftlfication of our (bulcs, Scventhlyj

is jiill in force to bind Chrijiians.

121

Sevcnthlyj And whereas fonie urged that if Chrift himfelfe SeSi, C had not inititmcd this day after h.s rcfiirreftion, the moft ~^

Primitive Church (hould have beeneleft deftitute of a certaine day ofGodswcrOiip, tovvit, from the time of Chriftsrcflir-redionto the Hrft c^nfecratingofthe Lords Day, which they take to be abfurd, and 1 contede, it feems unlikely that the Apoftles tocike upon them to order ou^ht untiil they received theSpiiiton the day of Pentecoft, that being the day they were to receive power from on high, to execute the com-niiifioii given them. Mat, 28. 19. to teach ail nations j till which time they gathered no Churches. For the ftrength-ning the former reafjn, it is added; Than thejewes Sabbath was now abolifhed by Chrifts death and refiirrciftion. This I doQ not deny, but the Apoftles might very well be ignorant hereof as yet^as not having received the Spirit as yet; yea,&: after the receiving it^we find chsy challenged Peter for going to the Gentiles to preach the Gofpel, AHs 11. to this argument Tome anfwer, as yVaitus faith^that the daies between Chrifts afceniion and the comming downe of the Holy Ghoft upon them, were fpent in continuall meetings of the Apoftles and other Difciples. But from the day of Pentecoft^the Lords day thenceforth obferved. This anfwer reachcth not unto the daies interceding betweene Chrifts redirredion and his af-cention. And when I confider Biftiop Lake his difcourfe, grounded^ as he profeflethj upon univerfall obfervation (and which I find no rcafon to reiift) namely, that the worke of the d.iy commends the day: If ever any day deferved to be feftivall toany,furely theday ofoiu" Saviours refiirrc^tion deferved to be fciiivall unto them, to rejoyce in the Lord thereon, according to that of the Pfalmift, This is the day which the Lord hath PA^w.i i8.'24, made Jet us be g/ad and rejoyce thinin; the ancient Fathers accommodating the place thereunto. The two verfes immediat-ly preceding, carrying in the forehead of them a manifeft relation unto Chriftasthe proprietary of their meaning. 22' The ft one which the bmldtrs refnfed, is become the he Ad of the corner, 23. This is the Lords doiyig^ and it is marvellofis in onr eyes,. Now when was this manifefted, namely, tint theftone which tfje htiilden reffifed became the head of the corner, but by Chrifts

rcfurreftion

rtt The Moratitie of the fourth Commandemenr^

SeB K Reftirrcaiion from the dead, being thereby mightily declared *^' to bee the Sonne of God. Rom. 14. and was there ever worke more marvellous in the eyes of Gods Servants , then the RefurreAionotChrift , efpecially confidering the dif-confolatc condition ofhis Difciples > Luk: 24*21. JVe trujied ithadleenehf^ that fijoM have^delivered Ifrael, The women departed from the Sepiilcher,though with feare, by reafon of the confternation receaved from Angelicall prcfence, their countenance being like lightning , yet with great joy by reafonof the newes they heard from them of Chrifts Re-furreftion ^ upon the noife whereof ( for they were commanded to carry word of it to his Difciples, ) the Apoftles as it feemcs were gathered together ; and in the evening after hee had (hewed himfelfe to his Difciplcs going to Eman^^ Chrift prefented himfelfe in the midft of them. ^ Eight dayes after they were met together , and Thomas with them who being abfcnt the time before^gave out fpecches of peremptory incredulity concerning his Refurreftion; therefore then and not till then alfo the dores being (hut, Chrift came before them^and calls un\.oThonfai to fee his hand.and to put his finger into his fide, Thefe apparitions ofour Saviour twice on thefirftdayof the weeRe might well adde fomewhat to the confirmation of them in the feftivity of this day ; and how-foever betwecne his afcenfion, and the day of Pentecoft they had their meetings ^ yet how improbable is it they (hould put no difference-betwcene fuch a feftivall and other daycs of the weeke. A fecond anfwer WaUm gives 5 namely that o-thers fay, that from the day of Pentecoft it was not neccf-fary that the Lords Day (hould bee obferved : but that at the firft the Apoftles together with the Jewes obferved their Sabbath not as a ceremony of the Old Teftament^ but as a free circumftance of divine worlhip, as for a while they retey-ned Circumciiion and difference of meats; which they gave over 5 after the ]ewes were found obftinately to refufc the Gofpell. So that in thefe mens judgements the Lords Day was no feftivall to the Apoftles, till by occa(ion of the Jewes obftinatcncffe, a proper occafion for the inftitution of a new feftivall. And give mce leave to differ from them in yoking

Circum-

is fit I I in force to hind Chrifiiatts,

IZJ

Circumcifionand difference of meats with the Jewes Sab- SeSt^Kt

bath 5 neither of them prefiguring Chrift as to come, like as — * ---

theJcwesSabbath did, prefiguring his vd\ that day in the

grave; as the ancients have conceived it, without anycon-

tradi(flionthatlknow. Had they permitted facrifices for a

time, their comparifbn had bcene more congruous. I fee no

reafbn to withhold me from conourring with eyfufiin , and

in him with all the ancients,for ought I know to the contrary,

that 1>ies Dominicus RcfttrreElione Domini declaratw efi (^hri-

ftianis^dr ex illo coefit habere fefiivitatem fuam , yea with the

very words of Scripture Tfd, ii8. 21, The flone which the

builders refufeJi is become the head of the corner 25. This is the

Lords doin(r^ and it is marvellous in our eyes. 24. This is the

day which the Lord hath motde we will rcjoyce and be glad in it.

Neither is it credible to mee that the Apoftles were ignorant

ofitorof itsapplicatiougto the day of Chrifts Redirreftion,

from the very day thereof. Herefbachins upon theie words,

Hxc dies cjuamfecit domimts. They are (faith hee) the words

ofthe people exulting in the Kingdome oi David , molt of

all ofthe glorious Rcfurrcdion of Chrift, which of all others

was moft glorious to mankinde: as whereon Chrifl redeemed

us in a triumphant manner , from the Tyarnny of Satan,

and from everlafting death , and reflored unto us everlaft-

ing righteoufncffe. ^Amoblui interprets it of the Lords

Day.

Eightly, the lafl argument, and which hee acknowledgeth of greatefl moment is that, which is taken out o^'zyfpoc. i. lo* Where the firfl day of the weekc is called the Lords Day, whence tht y conclude, that it is ofthe Lords inftitutio^iAnd indeed Diftor Andrewes Bifhop oi IVinchefler in his Starre Camber fpecch profefl[eth,that this denomination is given onely to the firft day ofthe weekc, as called in Scripture the Lords day 3 and to the Sacrament of the body and bloud of Chrifl, as called the Lords Supper, and that to fhew that the woi'd Dominicum ( the Lords ^ is to bee taken alike in both. In the fame fenle wee call the Prayer which our Saviour tauaht his Difciples the Lords Prayer. But let us hearc irMus hisanfwcr,ibat we may confidcr it. This confcquence

(faith

tiz

J he Moralitk of the fourth Commandement^

( faith hee) is not necelTary/or Ic may bee called the Lords^ not onely that which is of his inititiition, but even thatwhich is made to the remembrance, orinthehononr ofhim, orfor hisworfhip, as che ancients fpeake, as the altar of the Lord, and feaft of the Lord are often To called. And th.it in this fence it vvastakeaofthe ancients it appeares by this, that the ancient Fathers both Greel^ and Latine^ c^lkdTempks by the name oi Dominica^ and Kupia^ft. That which wxeiirge is the language of the Holy G hod, now throughout the holy / Scripture,it is not the language of the Holy Ghoft^tocall cither Altars the Lords Altars, orFeaitsthe Lords Feafts. but fuch as are of the Lords inftitution.Neithcr doe the fathers(in my obfervation Jcall the firft day of the wceke the Lordsday o-therwife then in reference to Chrifts Refurreftion, as the caufe of thcfeitivall nature thereof.Temples indeed they call Ku?w.t* as coniccratcd to the Lord; but the denomination is not to diftinguifh it from other Temples ; as the Lords Day hath its denomination to diftinguifl: it from other dayes. But the day of Chrifts Refurredlion being called the Lords Day not as fuch a day in the yeare, but as fuch a day in the weeke, this to my undcrftanding doth manifeftly infcrrc the fiic-cefHon of it into the place of the Lords day of the weeke amongftthejewes. Both ancient and moderne Divines doc hold it lawfull to confecrate other dayes to the fervice of of Godjfuch as wee ufually call holy dayes. But never any man ( I thinke ) was found that durfe call any of them Diem dominicum the Lords Day. Adde to this,wherefore doth our Saviour fay^that the fonne of man is Lord of the Sabbath, but plainely to conclude herence, that hee can difpenfe with itj hee can abrogate it^and bring another into the place of it ? and nqne hath power for this but hee who is Lord of the Sabbath:

Laftly, when he faith^ pray that your flight be not in the winter nor on the Sabbath day,what is the rea(bn hereof, but religio Sabbati'^. 2S dX\ confeflc the religious obfervation of the Sabbath-^2^ndL did they underftand any other religion of the Sabbath but as from Divine inftitution > Now the time concerning which our Saviour delivers this, now about the dc-

deftrU(ftion

dcftruflion of the Temple by Titw^ after that no other Sab- SeSi.^^

bath but of the Lords Diy^vvas generally cftablifhed in the. '-— -

Churches.

Laft of all/or the third, andlaftconclufion, that ftill the Tref, Church hath power to change the day our Dodor in the 7, SeElion^ bringeth in ^'Bulliyigcr^ Bucer, Brentim , VrfintfSy and Chemritius.alii/cjifiertofl}is vjithd'wers others not named particularly^as they are which thinke no otherwife thereof chcn (^Jvin did;, and (hewes by what diftiri6lion Sptarez^ though otherwise no friend unto the men ^ doth defend their Doftrinc.

Now as the doftrine was, fuch alfo is the praftife of tho(c men and Churciies, devoid of any the leaft fuperftitious ri-gour,eftecmingittobeeaday left arbitrary , and therefore open to all honet^ exercifes and lawfull recreations; by which the mind may bee refrefiiedj andthefpirits quickened. Even in Geneva it (elfe according as it is related in the enlargement o^Boterui by Rohdrt John]on , all honeft exercifes, (hooting in pieces, long Bowes, crofiTebowes , &c. are u(ed on the Sabbath Day, and that both in the morningj before and after Sermon; neither doe the Minifters findc fault therewithall, (b that they hinder not from hearing of the word at the time appointed.

Dancing indeed they doe not (uffer ; But this is not in relation to the Sunday , but the fport it lelfe, which is held unlawfull , and generally forbidden in the French Churches : whichftriftnefTeaslbmenctCj confidering how the French doe delight in dancing^ hath beene a great hir-derancc to the growth of the reformed religion in that Kingdome.

The Doftor indeed faith, that C^lvw^ullengcr^BHcerm^ BrenUHi , Chemnitim , Vrfine and others of the reformed -^•^•^^•' Churches affirme, that ftill the Church hath power to change the Lords Day to (bmc other ; but hee neither cites their WordSjUor quotes any place out of their writings* And as for C*l/^'/V;,whom this Prefacer propofeth as chiefe, and the reft as thinking no othcrwife thereof, then hee did ; I make no doubt but the paflage in (^nlvm is inftit, 2. cup^.fe^}, 34.

wheie

1x6 The Moralitie &fthe fourth Commandement^

SeSf.6* ^"^^^^^ ^^^S he wnttth^Ne^fic tamenfeptenariHtn nHmerum mo-— ror, Ht e]U5 fervitHti Ecclefiam afiringerem, I doe not fo regard

the nnmher of feven ; ols to tie the Church to the fervitude there^ of I which confidered in it felfc, might intimate thatin his opinion, ]^t is inditfcrent whether wee keepc holy one day in fevenj or one day in foureteene; but the words immediately following doe manifeft his meaning to be farre otherwilCj as namely jthat we are not fo tied to a (eventh^but that we may fb-lemnize other dayes alto, by our holy alTemblies. Fer thus it folio we?, Neji^ enim damnavero qui altos conventibus fuU folenr nes dies haheant* I condemne not them that keef other dayes holj: will any man fuppo^e that fome there were, well knownc to Cahi>7,Mgho kept other dayes iblemnjand not the Lords Day; and that thefe men ^-fi/^«» would not condemne? AndGoma^ m^,who is moft oppofite to us in this argumcnt^profefleth^that feeing not onely a timcjbut a fiifficient proportion of time is to be fet apart for Divine fervice, therefore we muft now under theGoipeJj allow rather a better proportion of time for Divine fervice than a wor(e. And inthkalfo^/t/^f^ refts, in his anfwer to the firft argument of JVaUw, contending for one day in feven, as neceflarily to be allowed to the wor-mteg. chf, (hip of God. For "BuHingtr, I know not where to feekc that lib-uapAi. which the Dodor aimes at. As for "Bucer, I have (hewed before out of him^that the Lords Day was by the Apoftles them-felves con(ecrated to Divine aftions; which ordinance the antient Churches obferved moft religioufl/jand that one of the chief caufes hereof was^that they might celebrate the memory ofChrifts refurre£l:ion, which fell out on the firft day of the weekc; of power to abrogate this day left unto the Church he faith nothing, but to the contrary ratherj that all they who defirethc reftoring ofChrifts Kingdome, ought tolabour,that the religion of the Lords Day may be foundly called backe and be of force. Tet (faith he) it t6 agreeable to our petj to fan-Bifie other fefllvallsalfo^ tQ the commemoration of the Lords chiefework^SywhercbjheferpSlei our redtrnpion as the day of his incarnation, nativity, the Epiphany, the pa/pon. the refurreBi" oiu afccnfion an\ Pentccofi. And the pkce which Doctor Rivet fxpiic. dccaL pag, 189. c'oL 2. allegcth out u ^'Bncer i n Mat, 1 o.

to

is fill I in force to hind Chriflians.

to prove that he maintained the day to be alterable, is nothing to the purpofe, and as little doe they makeforit which hee ailcgcth out oiMtifcHlus, To find out what Chemnitius faith hereupon, I turne to his Examen of the counfeli of Trent, con» cerning fcftivalls; There^*«^^. 154. W.2. lie (aith^ that Chrift, to {how that he kept the Jewes Sabbath freely, and not of nc-ccflitic ', againft the opinion of nccelfityj touching the abrogation of the Mofaicall Sabbith, hee taught both by word and deed. By word,in iaying^that the Sonne of man is Lord of the Sabhath ; and by his deeds, as in healing on the Sabbath day, and defending his Difciples in phicking theeares of come. Now, hereby I take it to be manifefl, and acknowledged by Chcmnmus that none hath power to abrogate the Sabbath, but he that is Lord of the Sabbath. And feeing even Chriflians were to have their Sabbathj^s appearcthby thofe words of our Saviour, fray that yonr flight be Hoi in the. tv inter, nor on the Sab^ bath day, which, is delivered of the time about the deftru-ftion of the Temple by Titus ; at what time Paul had fufFcred martyrdome divers yeeres before, by whofe writings it doth appcare that the Lords Day was kept in place ofthcjewes Sabbath, both by the pra«^ice of the Apoftles, and the Churches of Galatia and Achaia, as Chemnitius ackno^ledgeth fromthcfjrceof thofe place?, AEls 20.7. i Cor, 16, 2. and jipoc, 1.10. in the next columneit foUoweth, that the Lords Day was the Chrlftian Sabbath^and fo to this day continueth, and confcquently, that none hath power to alter it, but hcc that is Lord of the Sabbath, which is Chrift himfclfe, it being aaordingly called the Lords Day. Therefore if any pretend thatChrift hath delegated this power of his unto the Churchy it ftands upon them to make it good,Biit Chemnitius proceeds, fag, 155. co/.T. and fhewes how the Apoftles at the firft tolerated their weak faithj^«who without fuperftition obferved dayes Mofaicall, Rom,i^, and that fuch as were ftrongcr in faith, after the abrogation of the old Teftament, judged all dayes to bccquallin thcmfclvcs, and none more holy then another. We willingly grant as much, and addc the rcafbn hereof; to wit, bccaufc the holineflt of the day preferred before his fcl-lowcs confifted in forae myftcrious fignification which had re-

fercncQ

128 • 7 he Mora line ^ the fourth Commandementl

SeSl 6 Terence unto Chri ft as to come; all which kind of fhadowcs,, the body being corne, arc now vanilhed away. Hce proceeds^ faying. The Apoftles alfo manitefted by their example that in the new Teftament it was free to come together, either every day, or what day foever they thought good, to handle the Word and Sacraments, and to the publique or common exer-ciies of piety. So the Sabbath day, and other feftivall daycs they taught. All this wee willingly grant, but here-hence ic followeth not, that one day of the wecke was not of more ne-ceflary obfervaf ion for the exercifes of piety than another-Farther (faith he) that they might manifclt that the exercKcs of Ecclefiafticali aflemblics were not tied to certaine dayes: they daily perfevered in the doQ:rine of the ApoitIe«, and in breaking bread5/^(^.2. and 5.and 1 Cor.'y Now we willingly acknowledge that we Chriftians are not fo bound to one day in the weekc,as namely ^to the Lords Day, as that we may not -have our hply aflemblies more often than once, butonelyfo, that we may not keep them lefle often,nor omit ihe celebration of the Lords Day: like as the Jews might not omit the celebration of their weekely Sabbath, though fometimes many daycs together!befides were kept holy by them, bo weChniUansaI-» fo having our Sabbath as Our Saviour fignified we fhoifld have .when he faid, Prnj thatjmrflight he not in the Winter^ nor ci$ the Sahhathdaj ; which Sabbath of ours, wee kecpe on the Lords Day;'though we may keep other days holy,yct we may not omit this; and if any (hall take upon them to alter this Sabbadii,^ ive may be bold to demand of them e^m warramo^ by what warrant from the Lord of Sabbath ? But C^tmnittHs. proceeds thus : Novoy-rvhereas afterwards the falfe <iy4^oftles did fo tirqe tho(e free ehfervations of the MofaicallSahbath, 4.nd other feaflsy 06 hy /aw,and with opinign ofnecejjtty, as to condemne their confiiences who obfervedthem not^ l^aul forbad the obfervation of them. . All which we willingly acknowledge, but that hereupon they began firft to ordaine another day in the weeke for their Ecclefiafticali aflemblies and exercifes of piety, which yet Ghemnitius proves not^ I leave it to the indifferent jto judge'; by comparing his opinion with thatof s^/^/zW, who profclfeth, as (^hcmnititu well knew^ that the Lor dsT^ ay was de*

dared

dared tint 0 (^krijiians by the LordsrefurreElion, and from thenc^ Scfl f^

began to have its fiftivity ,A\t^td by Chemnit'u^ himfcifej^r. 156* ! 1

efpeci-illy coniidering the reafon moving the hercunto^which Chemnitins conreffcth to. have been on thatday the Lord fofe from the dead.And feeing ftll fcllivalsijas Biftlop Lake obfervcg, have bccne obierved in regard ot foine great workedoneon fuch a day tor the goodof man^whether ever any day brought

» forth a more wonderfqll 01' more comfortable workc to mankind than the firft day 6f the weekc. Which was the day of oiir Saviom'sre£urre(5lion ft*om the dead, ilct the Chriftiarn world judge. This day Chemnititis faithjfeenisto be called by Saint

{ /t^^;? t he Lords Day, ychich^afpellaiion all anticjMty did after-' wards retawe and ufc : yet notivithfia>r.dl^^(fi]ih he) we doe not reridth4J: the /ippfiUs didimpofe apon ma^iti^nfcir/iees in the new Tefi.iff^ent the obfcrv^Jton of that-dayjpjany Lafp 6y Precept^ hft the ohferv.atipnw^free., for orderf^ke. Let IfS duly weigti arid

, Gonfider this^ together with the rea&ns following : Calvtnc diftinguiiheth the ob(ervatian of a; day for order fake, and the obicrvatioA ot* a day for fome ihyftcrfeus figniiication fake i h^iiQketnnlffmxhxis difttnguiihcdj we would have fubfcribed tl^eratwto, and confcfledj chat noW adayes wee obferve no day ifi\' any rayfterioiis (ignificairon (ake, but oncfy for order fak€»: And thus under the Gofpel wee are freed from obferva-%iq^ iof:4^W3 foil my ftcries (akc^. not free from obfervatfon of one €Xj^d^mAiy id the wcckc for order fake. As for his pbra/e »fimpofi?ig the ohj'ervAtiffk of the Lsrds d.i^j upon mens cenfcUmis^ xi\i% phrafe is moft improper andunfearenablcj in this cale; \% isonely proper and feafonablein caft the thing impofed be oi aburthcnfQme nature, like unto that Saint F^^tfrfpeakeaof, (V-^^J 15. 10. ^ying, Row th.e.rcfore, rvhy tempt jee god to lay Ayok^ontheDifciphs fteck^s which neither our Fathers nor roe y^reAhk to beoYe f Such indeed was the yoke of circumcilion • which provokedZ//J/)^r^ (according to Common opinion) driven to circumcifc her (bnne to fave her husbands life, to throw the forersfein at her husbands fccr calling him a loloody husband for urg^ing her theieunto* But what burthen is it (lave unto the flelli) to rejoyce in the •Lordjtofabbatiac with him, to walke with hixB in holy meditation^ Was it no

M; burthen

i 2 o The ^otalitie of the fourth Commandement^

^ppl iC burthen to the godly Jevves to confecvate one day in feaven

''*"' _ L- to the excrcifes of Piety under the Law 5 And Ihall it bee a

burthen to us in thetime of the Gofpell \ Or can it beccon-ceaved to bee a greater burthen unto us to kecpe our ChrUiiaTi Sabbath on tlie Lords Day, then on any other Jay oF the weekeV was there ever any day of the weeke mariic OU'unto us with a more honourable or more wonderhill wojke to draw u$ to repyceinthc Lord thcrcon^ then the firft dajr of * the weeke whcteon our Saviour roie; by his Rcfurreditori to bring life artd ir)?niortaUty to light ? yet we confefle we reade-of no Law nor Preeept for this in the new Teftanientjbuc, we rcade that ever under the Gofpell wee muft have a Sabbath I tooblerve, v^^^/'. 2 4' 20. And wee know,and ChcmmiHS knew full well ,that it belongs to the Lord of the Sabbath to change itjand confequently to ordaineit , and that it was changed, and the Lords Dayobferved generally in the A* poftics dayes, none that I know makes queiiion of ^and how \ could thi- bee,but by the Apoftles ordinance; and is it likely they would take upon them this authority without a calling ^ And why ftiould that day of the weeke ( and not that day' of the yeare ) bee called the Lords Day, if not for the fame u[e under the Golpell that the Lords Day^ was of under the Law 5 efpecially that day under the Law. ( which was the Jewes Sabbath ) being nowt abrogated > and laftiy wee finde it manifeftly fpoken of the day of Chrifts Kt^xxtrtSAotifP M: J 18.24. This is the day that the Lordhath made ^ letui rejoyce andbegUdin /^:yet laftiy.wherasC/7i?w?;?K?W^ill have'^it free, and hee hath already manifeftcd that hee fpeakes of it in this (enfe, as not to be fb tied to this day,but that we may obferve other daycs ; wee willingly grant that in this fenfe it is free. Now let us confider his reafoh following. For faith hee, if we dfre freed from the Elements ^-^^hich by God himfe/fe in the oldTeftnwent ■ivereDrdaim.d^ and commanded, how fhouldwe be tyed by the decrees of men ? But alas this rcafon of his hath no proportion : the Elements hee fpeakes of were but (had-dow^s the body whereof is Ghrift, and nowChrift isrevea-' ledjthey were wont to bee called not onely Mortna but mcr» tifenu Yet ^hc obfervation of one day in (even ftill continues

to

Is jiill in force to bind Chrijlians. j ^ j

to bee the Commandement ofGod delivered not to U^fofes^zs Va[l < ceremonies wercjbiit by word of mouth proclaimed on mount Sina 5 and naturall reafon (uggeQs unto us that wee muft allow unto Gods (erviceas good a proportion of time under the Gofpell, as hce required of the Jewes under the Law. Now if one day in fcven mult bee fet apart in common reafon, wliat day is to bee preferred for this before the Lords Day, the day ofChrifts reft from the workc of redemption hi fufFering the forrows of death;as the day of theLords reft from the Creation was appoinred tothe Jcwes for their Sabbathj And this Reflirredlionof Chrift bringing with it a new Creation 5 Shall wee preferre the Saturday ihe Jewes feftivali before it, ftiall wee prefcrre the Friday the dayof theTurkcs feftivall before it ? fhall wee atfecl power and liberty to make any other day in the weeke the Lords holy day, i ather then that the Word of God commends unto us for the Lords D^y in the time of the Gofpell ?

This I (iippoie may fuffice for anfwering the reft alfo, wheiifoevertheir fuffrages fhall bee brought to liglit, fori prefume none of them hath (Iiyd more then Chcwnititis hath done. Az,oriu4 the Jefuite profefleth of two things in this argument, that they are moft agreeable to rcafom Firft, that after fix worke dayes one entire day (hould bee confecrated to God, 2. that the Lords Day (hould bee it. Do^or Ffi/ke inanfwcr totheRemifhTeftament profelfeth that to cha-nge the Lord^ Day and k^efe it on Munday y Tuefday , oranjothtr day , the Church hath no aptthority. For it u not a matter of in» differ e'lKj^h Pit a necejfarj prefer if tion of (^hriji himfelfe delivered tc Hs by his<*Afofilis. This was piinted in the dayes of Queen Sliz^beth and dedicated unpo her Majetty ; what Biiliop as gouernourinthisChurchofi:«e^./«.'^hath ever beene known to take exception againft this 1 Do^ov c^ndrcwes ( B (hop oi Winch^ ftcryin his ftarre Chamber fpeech in the Cafe of Trasl^^voitStththat the Sabbath (to wit of the/fj^'f/) hud reference, to the old Creation , hut in Chrifi tve are new (frea-tures^Q As the AfC'flle S. V2iu\ fpeakcs^ a new Creation, and fp to have anew Sabhath, And tkis\\z i^kh tsdtduced plainly, J. LypralHfe^2f by precept^ that thefe two OKclyythe firfi day

7 he mora tide of the fourth Commandement^

SeSl ^ ^f ^^^ y^^^ks, a^d the Sacramem of the Supper are called thf

* !^-^ LerdSy to pjew that Dominicum (the Lords) isalik^ to hetak^n

in both: So that give pov/er to the Church to alter the one, and you may aS well give power to the Church to alter the other. He (hewes alfo, it was an ufuall queftion put to Chri-9C\At\%y'^ominicHmfervi!iftif Haft thou kept the Lords Day? And their anfwer was this, Chriftianus [urn, imermktere non po^um, I am a Chriftian, and I cannot intermit it. Laftly, he allegeth the Synod of Laodicca3C^».2p .acknowledged in that of Chalcedon, 135. that Chriftian men may not Judai2e, , not make the Saturday their day of reft, but that they are to worke on that day, giving their honour of celebration to the Lords Day. Do6^or Z^i^,Bi(hop of Bath and Wells in his Thefis of the Sabbath—39. 'The Church hath receivedit (the Lords Day) net to be libera obfervationii (of free obfer-vation^ as if wen might at pleafure^ acceft or refufe it, 40, ^t4t to be perpetually obferved to the worlds end: For, 04 God onely hath power to apportion his time: fo hath he power tofet out the day that he will take for his portion. For he is Lord of the Sab» bath, 46. The worke of the day is the ground of hallowing the day, whether it be weekely, monethly oryeerely, as particulars evince in Scripture andHiftory, 47. No man can tranjlate the work/, therefore no man can tranjlate the day. This is an undoubted rule in Theologie, Adde unto thefe lunius and 'Pifcator, who maintaine the (ubrogation of the Lords Day into the place of the Jcwifli Sabbaihj to have beene made by the ordinance of Chrift 5 and Beza acknowledgeth it to be traditionis ^po-^olicA e^ vere divine. Doctor Brownde in his Treatife of the Sabbath,//'^.!. pag,^j. having recited the opinion of//^;?/w, referring the inftitution of the Lords Day to Chrifts ordinance, as who rofe from the dead on that day 5 addeth here-f unto after this manner. Like unto the which, beeaufe nothing

can ever fall out in the world comparable unto it in glory and power ; therefore this day muft continue in his frft honour of fanElif cation unto the end of all things, and no day be fet up like to it, or it changed into any other day, left the wonder full glory of that thing be darknedy and the infinite power of it weakc ncd, I mcfine, the glorioids and mighty worke of our reiempti-'

0:1

Is filllin force to bindChifliani. 'J?

on which by the fanElification of this Sahhath is commendedun- ^^ff^ g

to ui, and we hy keeping that holy ft ill, doe commend it to our ^ !

pofterity. And thh u it that is alleged as a reafon of the ob" fervatton of this daj in the Apoftles conftitutions: It ^ ^^^^^^ co»H, Mp^p, the Lords 'bajt becaufe it declares unto us Chrift crucified and /. 7^ f, 37. raifed up afaine, and it is worthily commended to he kept <w the Lords Day, that wee might give thankes unto thee, O Lord Chrift, for allthefe benefits: for, fay they^ there is that grace be flowed upon us by thee ; §lua fua magnitudine omnia beneficia obfiurat, which by thegreatneffe^ and, as it were, by the bright" nejfe of it doth obfcnre and darken all other. So that though the day was once changed upon thefe conpderations,nay,they being fuch as they be^ it could ^not but be changed: yet forfomuch as the /% caufe can rever be offered unto men tJ move them to enter into this ( conftderati'^n,therefore the day muft not onely not be changed any more, but it m^ft not fo much as enter in mens thoughts togoe about to change it. And therefore I doe fo much the more mar* veil at him, who faith. That the keeping holy of the Lords Daj is net commanded by the authority of the Gefpel, but rather received into ufe by the fubliejue confent of the Church : And a little of" ter; The obfervation of the Lords Day is prefitable, and not to be rejelled; but jet it is not to be accounted for a common-dement of the Gofpel, but rather for a civill ordination. And that the Church might have appointed but one daj in ten, or foureteene for the publique reft and Gods Jervice. LafUy^ Matter Terkiyis maintaincs the fame ( not to mention Doftor fVillet^ and that by divers reafons, in his cafes of con(ciencCj> which, becauft they arc modeftly anfwered by Doftor Rivet, in his commentary upon the Decalogue, I thinke good in this pUpe to take them into coniideration.

Mj

The mofatitieofthe fmrth Cemmandemen^

,V. ,^_.^.^>iT^^^_ ,._ <i^->-ft, 0^-^"^ ---^-^^ ^-^^-^

ML

■%k'£s> %)^-^s %k Ai^ %ki^

9 a.C3>«

AFOVRTH

DIGRESSION

MAKING GOODM-PERKINS

Kis Arguments for the Divine inftitution of the Lords

Dayg againft the anlwer made unto them by

Doaor B,lVEr>VS,

_^ Heir firft Argument faith he, is taken from the Verkins, £0!} B^S appellation of the Lords Day ; I (uppole,

iiuth Mafter T^erkinSj it is called the Lords Day^ as the laft (upper of Chrift is called the Lords Supper for two caufes. Firft, as God refied the feventh day after the creation, fo Chrift havingfinidi^ed the workc ofthe new creation, refted on this day from the work of Redemption. Secondly,asChrift did (libtHtute thelaft dipper in roome of the paffcovcr, ib hce fubftitnted the firft day .of the w^ckd in roome of the J^we^ Sabbath to be a ds^j fetapart td his owpe worftiip. To this Rivet. Anjw, Dodor Rivet anfwereth after this manner. Firft, hee denies that there is the (ame reafon ofthe Lords flipper & the Lords Day. and that for two reafons 5 firft becaiife we have a mani-feft inftitution thereof, and Chrifts Precept for the obierving of it. Not fo of the Lords pay. Secondly, if there were a Precept for keeping the Lords Day, yet wereitEcclefiafticall and fo mutable. For men may chooft daics for the worftiip of God,as touching the particularity of this day or that. But the inftitution of the Sacraments is of Divine authority by the

confent

confcntofall. Tothislrepliethat Doftor R'n;etm corrupts S^St. (5.

us anfwer in the propofing of it; for he (ayth ^—j-le reafon ot" the Lords Supper, and of the ^ *

Mafter Te-rkir.s hi not the fame is the

day whchwcc call the Lords Day 5 but fiippofeth, and that nioft modellly^that cither of them being called the Lords, they are called fu in the fame Notion.That like as the Lords Supper is Co called becaufe he inftituted it;{b the firft day of theweeke is called the Lords Day^becaufe hte iaftitiitcdthe obfervation of ir. And this Doftor Thy fun collcgueto Doftor. i?/ZTr^Ar maintaines as well as MafterT^r^'^j-, and Doctor ^Andrtwcs Bifhop OilVinchefier in hisfpeech againft Traske ; laying that borh thefcjto wit the firftday of the weeke, and Chriil laft Supper are called the Lords, to fh^vv that 'Domini^ cum f the Lords) is alike to bee taken in both. For what reafon can bee given why the day of Chrifts Refurreclion, not according to the day of the ycare wherein heearofe^ but according to the day of the wecke wherein hee arofe, fhould bee called the Lords Day , but_to fignific, Firft, that it was to fuccced in the place of the Lords Dayunder the law,which was the Jcwifli Sabbath* 2. And that It was the good pica-lure of God and not of man ^ onely that it (hould beeconle-crate to his I'ervice. For confider , wee have many other dayes conlecrated by the Church unto Divine fcrvice, which yet were never called the Lords Dayes 5 And the Lords Day and the Lords fealh in riic' Old Teftamerit, and in the language of the Holy Ghoft are no other then fuch that are of the Lords inftitution. Secondly, Dodor \^urr«i omits the mainc force of Mafta- Perkins his argument, or at leaft (lightly paflcth it over, which is tfiis/ _^s ^od refied thefeventh day after the (^reation^ faChriji: having ertde^-the worke cf the neiv (/reationrefteddnthi}'dayfrom his -rvorke of redemptions Atha-Yinfipii of old confidcrs a firft and a fecond Creation 5 and (o accordingly a firft and a fecond Sabbath :our Saviour him-{^{q. fpeakesof a Chriftian Sabbatli, Math,2^,20,znd what fhould that bee buttfieLords Day under the Gofpell ?, And Be^A and l!/;iiiti and Bifhop Andrewcs worke upon the fame. And I wonder that men fhould thinke the Sabbath fhould bee altercd.andaitbther brought into the place of it by any

M 4 other

13 6 The ^oralitie of the fourth Commandement^

SeSi S ^^^^^ authority then of him who is Lord of the Sabbath.

L-^ And as BiQiop Lake ob(erves in all feails both Divine and

humane that wee reade of in ScripturCj the worke of the day Was the grotsnd of hallowing the day. And never was known tothe Worldaraorewonderfull worke in the way of grace, and mcrcyjthcn Chrifts Refurreftion from the deadjmanife-ftingthsrcby thcredeisnptionofthe World as then wrought by him H^w doth Chrift take upon him to alter the Sacraments but as Lord of the Sacraments ^ and apparently he ' flaewes that upon the lame ground hee takes upon him power to difpenfe or change the Sabbath, as hee is Lord of the Sabbath. But what is his ground to deny the parity of reafon here ? meerely his ownc prejudicate conceit that the obliga" tion of the Lords Daj^is not fo great as the sbfervation of the Sab~ batkT]AC contrary whereunto ((aith h^omnes refngimas we all avoyd. But who and how many are thofc all ? what one of the ancients can hee produce to have thought as hee thinks ? Hee may as well fay according to the current of his private opinion y that wee under the Gofpell are not as much bound to the obfcrvation of one day in (eaven as the Jewes were under the Law. It is true, that rigorous reft enjoyned to the Jewes wee utterly difclaime as well as hee 5 againe the circum-ftance of the day wee make no part of Godi worfliip nor to haveanymyfteriousfignification, as the Sabbath had to the Jewes. Wee acknowledge no other ufe of this day then for order and policy fake 5 in which cafe wee judge it farre better the Lord (hould prcfcribe it ^ then wee unto our fdvcs, Icaft if there were twenty daycs in the weeke,therc would bee twenty differences amongft Chriftians about the fetting apart of one day in the weeke for Divine Service.

Ferkiff^i ^* Matter "Perkins his (econd argument is this, The Church

(?f Corinth every firfl day of the weeke made a colleBion for the t9ore^ I Cor. 16.2.^ and this coReElion for the poore in thefri" mitive Church followed the f reaching of the fVord^ Prayer and the Sacraments as a frufte thereof Afts 2.42. and fiuicom* mands thcGoimxh% to doe this as he had ordained in theQhurchesof Oalatia: whereby he makes it to be an AfoflolicAU,attd therefore fi ^Divine OrcUmnQe, Tea that vfrj Text doth in fome-part

mani-^

manifefl thus much^that it is an ordinance and inftitntion ofChrift SeSt 6

that the firfl day of the weeke Jhenld be the Lords 1)ay, For ~- .

Paul commandes nothing but what he receaved from C^rtji;

To this Doftor Rivettu alledgeth the anfwer of Doftor «• ^^^ Prideaux, demanding how that we contend for his inferred v^'f,^ ' hcrehencc \ we anfwer, the^enerall praftife of the Church in ^^ ^ * the Apoftles dayes argues it manifeftly, that this order Was eftablifhed by the joynt^onfent of the Apoftles ; othenvifc it is incredible it Ihonld have beene fb univcrfally receaved, and perfevered in as it hath beene to this day .Secondly,wher-as the Jewes Sabbath was by divine authority, the abrogation thereof and fubftituting another day in the place thereof could bee done by no Icde authority then Divine; which alfoweeconceavetobee faircly repreiented by the denomination of our ChriftianSabbath^S. lohn calling it the Lords Day. Secondly, he (heweth what 6'ow^a-^ anfwereth hereunto ; but this anfwer himlelfe taketh ofFin this very place in part, and much more in his reply to Gomarm. But thefe places being granted to denote the firft day of the weeke in the Apoftles dayes fet apart to Divine Service 5 hee fayth it followes not herehence that it is called the Lords Day, as dejli^ Katedto Gods Servicey much leffe that fo it was by Divine ordi^ nation. Yet WaUiis thinkes it his fafeft courfe to fay tis called the Lords Day as deftinated to Gods Service, as before wee have heard, (b to avoyd (as hee thinkes) the implication of Divine Ordination. But to him I haveanfwered before* AndDoftor Rivetm in my opinion doth not wel confider that notthedayoftheyeare, but the day of the weeke, whereon Chrift rolc,is called the Lords Day by S. lohn. Like as the Sabbath in the Old Teftament is called the Lords Day: which which if he had, and withall confidered how ftrange it were for us to iet any day in the weeke apart for the excrcifes of Piety rather then the Lords Day 5 I am perfwaded hee would not have contented himfclfe with this anfwer. For certainly many other holy dayes hamfbeene and are fet apart for Divine Service, yet never were called any one of them the Lords'day.

He talkes of a bare cuftomc of the Church^for it j a thing

in-

1^8 77?^ Moralitie 0f'the fourth Commandement^

Se£}^6. incredible that both Jcwes and Gentilts throughout all Na-

— 1-1 lions fhould fo nniverfally concurre Vv'ithoiit the guidance

of (bmeauthorativc conitltution or ibme [ e lerally convincing evidenceby the very light of common Chriftian evidence or both. And as for liberty left to the Church hereabout^ic (eemethrounrcafonabie unto my poore judgement , that if it were, it fhould become us by earneft and hearty prayer to feekeuntoGod to take that liberty from us and bee piealed himfelfe to guide us by fome manifeft ordinance, to prevent diflenfion and confufion ; yet v/ell fare Doftor Rivetm ; hee will not have this liberty extend any further then provided that fome reafon and neceflity ihould urge the changing of the day 5 for in the next columne heeprofcffcththatafuf-ficientcaufe of the change and abrogation of the day cannot bee given. The obfervation of other dayes and particularly ofthe Sabbath as well as the Lords Day by ibme in the Primitive Church, is no evidence at all , that it was indifferent unto them, whether "they would obferve the Lords Day or no.

Perk^ The third argument Rivetpu omits: the fourth is this. That

which Wits frefiq^ured^in that it was frefig!iredwasprefcrihed:But the Lords Day^was frcftguredin the eighth day ^wherin the children ofthe lerres were cirCHmcifed-—therefore it was prefcribed to be kept the eighth day. This the ancient Fathers^by name Cyprian and Auflin have reafonedand taught, '.^^j : .

Rivet,Anfw. To this Dodiot Rivett^s anfwcrs by denying^ ihe "afiump-tionsindfiiyin^^thai no probabU reafon can be brought to prove that day ivas prefigured by the eighth day nrherein children were circumcifed*

Reply, And indeed that day beingthe eighth day after birth doth

not (o conveniently denote the ftrft day of the weeke. But

Maffer Perkins his argument hath another part farre more

pWncipall drawne homPfaL 118. 22.25 24, Which Doftor

"^/wr?^ relates after this menner* , ; '

Terki "' ■ ■ '^^^' "^^y ofthe R ffnrreBi^fj^ds prefignred by that day^ wherein

the Stone which the bptildcrs rtfufed was made the head of the Corner, "But that day was the Sabbath Day, therefore by the Sabbathwas prefigured the Lords Day*

'" " To

To this he anfwers, by denying that the Sabbath day was ScEi 6 thcday wherein the buildersretufed that ftone;Fo?-f/;^^m^^/, . -' L. Pharifes and rulers of the people did alrvayes rejeFi Chrifly and not P^'^''^(^f*Anf:v, theSiibbath day onely, Andif[hu^in and Cyprian before him apprehended ary ftich figure, that vpm by rvay of accommodation onely, not that herein they achnoveledgedany proper fqitre,

Foranfwerwhereuntollay firli; that Ma(ter/'^r/^'»/de- AV/j/y. livers not this fimply of the Sabbath day, but of the Sabbath of the new Tcftamcnt, as much as to fay, the firft day of the v/eekc whereon Chrjft ro(e; For this was the day wherein the itone which the builders refured,was made the head of the corner; and of this day the Prophet fpeakes, when he faith. This 16 the day which the Lord hath made Jet tu be gladandrejoyce in 'it. That like as the Jewes had caufe to make that day fedi-vall and to rcjoyce therein, wherein God advanced .O^W to the kingdome, who was as afi-one, refit fed before by the builders : in like fort, Chriftians had as great caufe, nay, farre greater, to keepe that day feftivall, and to rejoyce therein, when God raifed Chrift from the dead, and gave all power unto him, and making him the head of his Church, as being now manifefted to be the fonne of God, who was before as a ftone r'cfpited and refufed of the builders, but as on this day was made the head of the corner. And not (Cyprian and Auftinox\Q\y^ but Ambrofe upon the P/almes fo underftands it, and Amobius alfo upon the PfalmeSjas Herefybachim ob(er-vcth. And Do(flor Rivctm is too blame in conftruing T^erkins in fuch manner, as if he fliould confine the builders reje(5lion ofChrift to the Sabbath day, whereof there is no colour in Mafter Verhins, but that which he infifts upon is this,that the day wherein Chrift (formerly rejeftedby thebuildeis)was made head of the corner,wasthedayoFChrifts rcfurreftion, and of this day it is faid by the P(almift, This is the day which the Lord hath made, let hs rejoyce arid, b^ nlad in it ; Which is moft remarkable for the juftification of our celebration of the Lords Day, as by Divine authority. Efpecially conlide-ring what Bifhop Lake, that learned and pious, and moft rationall Divine hath obferved, that alwayes the worke of the day is the ground of hallowing the day, and for prootc hereof

7 he Moulttie of the fourth Commandement^

of, hee appeales to the due conGderation of all feftivalls in " the obfcrvation thereof, whether Divine or humane. Malkr Perkins his words arc thefe (but I know not how Dodor RivetHs might be deceived by a mif-tranflation of them) The ^ay ofChrifls refurrMion tvos prefigffred hj that day wherein theftoyte which the huilders refnfed was made the head of the corner, P(al. iiS*24. andin that it vr.tsprefigured, it was appointed by God, For then it appeared to be true which PetcrfaidofChriJli that Cod had made him both Lord and Chrift, Aft. 2. 36. And whereas he faith the Fathers doe fo conftrue the place by way of accommodation, that hath place onely when the Text it felfe doth not (b accommodate it. But the Text it (elfe in this place doth manifeftly evince, that this is fpoken in reference to the day of Chrifts refiirredion. ,. Thelaftreafonof Matter ^erl^nf is this: God is Lord of

I erkins. ^.^^^ ^^^ feafons, and therefore in all equity, the altering anddif poftng thereof is in his hands, and belongs to him alone. Aft. 1.10, Times andfeafons the Father hath kept in his own hands. Againcj Chrift is called the Lord of the Sabbath. And Antlochus Epi-phanes is condemned by the Holy Gho/^, becaufe hee tool^e upon him to alter times: *Beftdes that, DsLnitl faith, it is god alone that D«».7.r5. changeth times andfea/ons, Dan»2. 4. Now, if it he proper unto god as to create, fo to determine and difpofe of times, then he hath not left the fame to the pow^r of any creature* And therefere, as the knowledge thereof, fo the appointment and alteration of the fame eitherln generall or particular, belongs not to the (^hurch, but is referved to him. The Church then neither may nor can alter the Sabbath Bay . Rivet. Anfw, ^^ ^^^ "^ -Rive^"S anfwereth, that the words of Daniel touch^ ing the change of times and opportunities, are delivered in reference to the periods and changing ofKingdomes ondLMonarchies, as af-peares bj the argument of the Prophecy, j^^^l And no more doth D. Rivettu deliver in excepting againft

^ •^' his annotations: for as he acknowledgeth M. Perkins fcripto^

rem modefliffmum, a raoft modeft writer 5 fo he carrycth him-felfemoft modcftly towards him. But I hope without any breach of raodefty, I may profefle/that 1 find no accurateneflc in each of his allegations, favc onC| namely, that wherein

Chrift

Chrift profeflech himfclf Lard of the S^bbathjand it is enough Se£i ^

for the prelentjthat God lelei ves to himielf power of ordering _L^.

times for his fei vicej yet it cannot I edeniedjbnr God hath lett power to his Churchjiipon good occalion, to fet fome time a-part for exercife of piety. But whereas it is apparantjthat God himfelfe tooke upon him the ordering of the time for the Sabbath, and accordingly Chrift calls himfelfe The Lord of the Sabbath; as he ?conltiti]ted it^ (b none but he can abrogate it, and ordaine another in the place of it. Now,vvhereas D^Rive-ttif fatth, that hee hath left this power unto his Church,* it ftands him upon to prove it. VVc hnd our Sav iour fuppo(eth us Chriitians to have a Sabbath afrer his refurreftior, A^attl-^ 24.20, as well as the Jewes had before : wee iiixl thai in the Apoftles daye-,the firft day of the weeke was fet apart for this; which could not be, but by the joyntconfentofthe Apoltles, wefindthatthcday of the weeke ('not the day of the yeere) wherein Ghrilt rofe, by Saint lohn himfelfe called the Lords Day, an evident argument^ that in his time it was fo generally received. We find that never any worke of God did give better caule to profefle,that The daj thereof wa^s the day that the Lord had made Jet us begladandrejoyce therein ; then the day wherein Chrift rofe from the dcadj and thereby was declared to be the Sonne of God, even that ftone which the builders refu fed to be made the head of the corner. And how ftrange is it, that the Church for 1500. yeeres fpace (hould no where offer to alter it; if in no other refpeft, yet in this, to manifeft that the Church is indued with fuch liberty and power, and to prevent the fuperftitious obfervation of the dayas a thing nccefTiry, if it be not neceffary. Laftly^if this liberty be ftill in the Church; in cafe they (hould exercife this liberty, what inconvenience would follow upon theexercifing of a lawful! liberty ? But in-finit inconvenience would follow hereupon: foj iee ng this liberty is equally communicated ro each pirticular Churchg it willfoUow, that itislawfuliforourEnglifhChuichtoififti-tutc the Munday, the French Church theTucfday, the flol-landers the Wednefday, the Germans Thurfday, the Dines Friday, the Swedes the Saturday, and the i^olonians the San-day I what an intolerable (caadall were this amongft Chri-

ftians^

SeSi €• ft'i^-"S* Thus our liberty opens way to revive the Jewcs Sab-* bathjOrtoconcurrewkhtheTurks, who make Friday their

holy dayjiiay^what fcandall alfoto all the Heathens throughout the world ? For,(iippofc that as the Jewes keepe the Saturday, and the Turks cheir Fryday; Co other hsathenifh nations according to their feverajl religions fhould divide the other dales of the weeke to be hallowea between them; each religion keeping to their own day moft exaftiy: When they fhould find no agreement amongftChriftians, what an intolerable fcan-dall were this unto them^to harden than againft the profeflion of theGofpel, when they fee fo little agreement among the profefifors of it ? And what (hould move us to affed liberty in this which opens a way to (uch diffention and confulion ; and not rather rejoyce in this, that to prevent fuch miferable in- j conveniencesj God himftlfe hath marked out unto us the firft day of the weeke to be the Lords Day 5 in place of the Jewi(h Sabbath, which was the Lords holy day unto them, by the moft wonderful and comfortable work that ever was wrought, even the refurreftion of our Lord and Saviour from the dead, thereby manifefting him to be the Sonne of God, and fulfilling that prophecie of old concerning the ftone which the builders refufed, and making him the head of the corner on that day ; all power being given unto him both in heaven and in earthj MattkzS, thus drawing us in the Prophets language to profefle and fay firft, Thi^ is the Lords do'mg^ and it is mar-vetlominourejss: and fecondly, to conclude there-hence in the words immediately following; This is the dctj -which the Lord hath madcy let m be gladandrejojce in it 5 this undoubtedly is our Chriftian feftivall j this day of the weeke, and not this day of the yeerc, f which is remarkable) being called by Saint John, The Lords T^ajy the day wherein Chrift appeared anto bimjand gave unto him thebooke oCRevelation^onzttn-ing the fecrets of his providence to be fulfilled upon the world for the time to come, even till his fecond coraming to deftroy the world with fire, and to hleffe m with .new heavens, and a new earth, wherein dwellethrtght^&fff leffe; the metropolis of which new world, fhall be new Jerufalcm, And albeit Doftor /?/-vetHs according to his piqus ingenuity which crownes his

learning

Icnrning and cathedrall (IifBciencieSj profcfCcth^ that vrhnt />/- Se6l 6

thcrto hath beene {fok^n by him of the choice and. pnjfible chani^e *

ef that day y her h,ith not to ayiy 'uch md ventilated ^ as to favour t he Ir profanrjfc who on holy d^y es and chicfcly on that day ^ which by fo univerjall a confcnt even from the beginning of (^hriflianiti hath beene confecratedto fnch r-fje ^ nealcUing Gods Service ^ not one/y refttfe to omit one day in profccttting worlds tending to the tfje of Ife urfnforall: btn alfoby unnecejfary aEiicns, as bypfra-fanffports^ flage playes-^ by ir.temperance alfo and riot profane the day ^ net withont reafon dedicated to the Lord, Yet whaC juftoccafion hereby may bee in all places and like enough is taken in nioft places by this doftrine of his who feeth not > For albeit publike authority in fome places hath bylavves countenanced the fblemnization of the Lords Day • for which wee of this land have caufe to bleffe God fo as I thinkc no Nation more 5 in'confideration of many Lawes one after anotherand by degrees made to reftraine abufes onthatday, as tending t J the manifeft profanation thereof ; and by none more then by that aft ofParliament in the firft of KingCW/<f/^ wherein all men arc forbidden to come out of their Parifhes upon that day aboui: anfy fports and paftime, evidently mani-fefting hereby (as formerly hath beene proved) that allfports and pallimesare prophanations of our Chriftian Sabbath ob-ferved on that day^and that in the judgement of the whole Parliament confining of the Kings Majcfty the head thereof, with his Lords fpiritiiair (all theBifhopsof the Kingdome) and temporaLtogether with the Hou(e of Commons;yet if once it (hall be receaved according to D. Rivets doftrine of the Sabbath, that it is in the power of each Church to (et apart what proportion of time they thinke fit for Divine Service,and what day they thinke fir, who perceives not that they may if they will, order it in (iich 'thinner, asthattwife a day they (hall come to Church, an^ \\\ ..ft of the day (pend as they thinkc good, either in the works of their calling, or upon their plea-uires:And whence all this zcale({b oppolite to holinefle in the ilTiie) proceeds I Know not, faveonely to uphold the credit of^ahin ; who profefleth that he doth not [o regard the num-her of feaven^ as that he would tie any to the fervitude thereof'^

and

144 ^^^ Motalitie af the four ih Commmiement^

Se£i.6* ?-nd yet I have endeavored to Qiew that neither this oor o-

— ther paflages taken out of his inftitutions, makes any tWng.

tor them. Andwithall it is a wonder to behold how this of ^aivin is taken up 5 and obtruded upon us, by them who o-ther^ife hate both the name and meaiory of Calvin, And aS for Y^odiotRivits honell and pious inftruflions as concerning the duties and our demeanors to bee performed onthisday^ we may eaiily perceive how little worth they are and how cafily they vanifh into fmoake , after that hee hath in the do(^rinallpart of the Sabbath layd fo unhappy a foundation, and that by fo poorc reafons and meane cariage ot hinifelfe, that as 1 verily thinke, throughout all his writings there is not to bee found the like. ,

For confider whether hee had any hop? to fet fo much a^ a face and outward ihfew of probability upon his diicourfe, imlcffe finl: he had manifeftly corrupted the adverfaries tenet, as appcares by his propofing it,^. 1.19.0/. 1.^7 thefe(i3kh he) and other arguments drawn frorn C'-mftian iihertyJt is fufficicnt/y deduced phat th^y whoJ^M^metl^e Sabhath day > not fo much to betaken away as to h triiJiflatednntQ fh^.Loifds%>a^^ayidfa changed y and ioje indeed thinks it wore holy^ (^th^n another day-^ and that not onelj in regard of ^din^tion , and Hfe,hut in ref^elh. offignification andeffeft doe crojf? ^ome withatit Chrifilm.(i'-. bertyy whichis fnoji certaineoftke Paftfis,, , ■ , ,,....

And indeed W^km makes it appears that ^if^z/^ writes^ herein againft the fuperftitioiijS Papifts. And did Riv^tus pp-pofethemonely it were Well;; biftt it isapparantthatheediA putes not fo much againft Papiftsia this argument as againft Proteftants , even (iKh as himfclfc. But can hee fliew of any^ of them 5 that they account the Lords Day more holy theii any other in refpeft of any myfteriousfignificavion(forloC^-: vin (peaks in this place) or effeflTundoubtedly he cannot, lf>-ohferve a ctay in the weeke only for order and policy fak^ Ecctefia^ //V^/Z.-myfteriousfignifications in dayes were peculiar only to the Jewcs* Only we thinke ii fit^that to prevent diflcnfion and confufion,God (hould marke out that day unto us tobeob-ferved, and not leave it ui !to us^nd fo hee hath 5 the Scripture calling the firft day of the weekc the Lords Day 3 and that upon

on (uch a ground as a greater was never knowne to ground a o^ci ^

feftivity thereupon con/ecratcd to the excrcifcs of piety ^even * ^'

the day wherein the ftone th^t was rcfufcd hy the builders wm made the head of the corner ; This was the Lords doings and it is and ever fl) all be Tnurvellotts in our eyes^ and gives us caufc to fa/ with the Ty^Aw//? thereupon : This is the day which the Lord huthma^ie^wewilireioyce and beglad in it. So that all the pa(^ fages in the Apoftlcs writings againft difFcrence of dayes are no more againll us then againlt Dodor Rivetns himfelfe. Now it is time to rctume to our PreflKer. I doe not finde that SnareK. undertakes to defend the Doftrine oiCalvin and Chemmtim ( fuch as here is pretended to bee their Doftrine / but rather oppofeth it. If fuch were their doftrine as this Prefacer would faine obtrude upon us,from the authority of the D. difcourfc which hce tranflatcth. For Suarez. pro-fefTeth, (^elebritatem Dominica diet haberi ex communi uJh e^ fenfu EccLefidt (^ in ipfafcriptura Novi teflamenti comrnend^m : that the celebrity of the day it had by the univerfill ufe and ienfc of the Church,and is commended unto us in the very Scripture of the New Teftament; I have endeavoured to jufti-ficitoutoftheOldTeftament alfo; and in exprefle tearmcs, that it is to bee unchangeable T^raBice & moraliter ^ prafti-cally and morally ; as Doftor Trideaux acknowlcdgeth^and withall expoundeth after his underftanding of it; and Dodor RizetJiS alfo affirnsirg thu i^nde of ffnch^ngeablenejfe to arifi frcm hence that nojuffciem canfe can be given of the change 0tnd abrogation of it. This Prefacer and fuch as are of hjs fpirit may doe well to dcale plainly, and to profefle that it fs in the power of the Church to make the Lords Day to ceafe to be the Lords Day.

From their Dodrine pretended by him hee proceedcs to their prafti(e, profeding it to bee devoyd of any the leaft (uperftitious rigour ;elleeming it to be a day left arbitrary^and therefore open to all lawRill and honeft recreations by which the niuide may be refrcflied, and the fpirit quickened ; as in Ge^: .'a all honeft cxercilcSjfliootingin pieces^ long Bowes, crofle Bowes are u(cd in the Sabbath day, and that both in the morning before and after the Sermon } And truly I doe

N not

14^ ^^^ m^^/i'nV of the fourth Commandement^

S^Ei n '^^^ ^"^^ '^y ^^^^^ P'^^"^ ^^ cen(iire them for any fuperftition _1_^2^ inihis. But this author takes liberty to cenfure them for fupeiftitious , who thinkc thefc courlcs urJavvfull on the Sabbath Day. I make bold to call the Lords Day our Sabbath ^ becaufe our Saviour plainly gives us to underftand that wee Chriftiansfhould have one day in the weeke for our Sab' bathj/^/^.24v20.aswelastheJcweshadjandfecondly becaufe the booke of BotnUks^TokGLCth, that Sunday is our Sabbath. NohUnon licet tjfe tarn diprtif. We may not be fo elegant as to cenfure them for profaning the Lords Day by the(e and fueh like courses. Yet the ad of Parlament, i. ^aroii forbids any man to come out of his Pariih on the Lords Dayjabout any iports and paftimes 5 which rcftraint tending to this end, namely to preferve the Sabbath from profanation^doth ma-nifcftly give us to underftand that to come out of a mans parifti on that day about any fports or paftimes is to profane the Sabbath : and (eeing as before J have (hewed,that to come out of a mans parifh on that day about (iich aworkeasdoth not profane the Sabbath 3 is not to profane the Sabbath ^ as toheare a fermon 5 or to fetch a forgcon or Phyfitian to a fick perfon in ca(e of necefiity ; but onely to come out of a mansownc Pariih about fuch a worke as doth profane the Sabbath 5 fech a comming out of a mans own Parifh on that day^and fuch alone doth profane the Sabbath ; hence it fol-loweth evidently that all manner of fports and paftimes on that day, are Co many profanations of the Sabbath in the ^ ' judgement of all the Prelates of this Kingdome, and of the

whole F arliamcnt.

Now let every ibber Reader judge whether my Ctlfe as an Englifti man have not better ground from ana6i: of Parliament to cenftre them o£Geneva for prophancrs of the Sabbath in the cafe here pretended then this Pra^facer from the pradife ofGe»evahy the relation o^Robert lehnfon^ to confwreus that doe miflike them herein (if this bee their praftifc) for fupeiftitious obfervers of the Sabbath ; efpeciallyconfideringthat heecannotfaften this cehlure upon fuch as my (clfr,but with-all hee muft pafle the fame, upon all Prelates of the King-dome, together with the Lords temporall, and the whole

houfc.

// fiill in force to bind Christians. s j^^

houfc of Commons. And as for the excrciles here mentioned, SeSf. 'J,

I findc them to fall won.droiifly (hort , of that which the *. '*

author avoiicheth ^ as namely,that they efteeme the Sabbath

toWc open to allho;7sfi exerciffs and Uwftill recreations • fori

make no queftion but in this Prarfacer his opinion there arc

farremore exercifes , and lawful! recreations then that of

fliooting which alone is here mentioned; and whereas fiich

things are permitted in the very morning of the Sabbath,

and afwell afore as after Sermon, I finde no thing anfwerablc

hereimtoin the prad^ife of our Church. Neither doe I finde

that the exercises here mentioned are (b much accommodated

to the refrefliing of the minde and quickningof the fpirit;as to

make their bodies aftive and expedite in fbme fundions

which may be for the (ervicc of the common Wealth. And

lately upon enquiry hereabout I have receaved information,

that at Cjeneva , after evening prayerjOnely the youth doth

pracflife (hooting in Guns to make them more ready, and

expert for the defence of the City^ which is never out of

danger.

They have alfo at foure a Glocke on the Morning both Service and a Sermon for their (ervants, and 2.more in every Church ; the one in the Fore-noonc, the other in the After-noonjbefide Catechizing the youth on the Sabbath Day; And Biftiop Lake wiflied that fuch a cour(e were general!, as is in his Ma^ftics Court , to have a Sermon in the Morning for thefervants on the Sabbath day. And I fee no cau(e todiflentfrom(7d'r^ri/;f^in fpecifying 4. particulars whereby t!ie Sabbath is not \{o\zttd.Parva^Neccj[ariHn:,Rt!f(iblica^ cum pietate. Undoubtedly hunting is as commendable as, ►(and more generous excrcife) then any of thefe, and the Kings Majefty though much delighted herein, yet never ufeih to hunt on the Sabbath Day Morning 01 Evening. And I ^

have caufe to come but llowly to the believing hereof, becaufe it is (^alvins Doftrine concerning the Sabbath, that albeit under the Gofpcll we arc not bound to (b rigorous a reft as the Jewes were, yet that ftill wee are obliged to abftaine from all other works^ as they are Avocamtnta afacrisjludiis cr rKedita-tionib:f4 , Avocations from holy ftudies and Meditations ^

148 '^^^ ^oralitie of the fourth Commmdement^^

C ft ^ aad their Minilters, I (hould thinke doc not well if they fai!c e^ .0^ ^^ minde them hereof, unlefTe both they and the people are fallen from C^/z//Vf Djftrine in this point, in which ca^q I fee no jnft caiife why any (hould choake us therewith, but give us as much liberty to diflent from him intheDoftrincof the Sabbath as they of G^«f^'^ take unto themfelves. Againe ^^^^iswellknowneto have profefledupon. Revel, i. lo, that the oblcrvation of the Lords Day is, traditions ApofloUc^ C^ vere 1>i^/W,and confequently that the day is not left arbitrary •, neither hath this author proved that the Presbytery andftatesofG'f;jf2/^5both Ecclcfiafticall, and policicall have committed any revolt or apoftacy thereto from 5c-t/« in this point. It is well hee acknowledgeth fomc recreation not fuflFered there,as namely dancing; but this hee Gy th they hold unlawful!, whichfimply delivered as by this author it is, is incredible unto mec 5 neither hath this authors word any fufficient authority to Jeliver mee from this incredulity : yet fome manner of dancing may perhaps bee generally forbidden iti the French Proteftant Churches. Thi^ flri^tneJfe-Q the Prefacer faith ) ^ noted hj fome to have heene a great htnderer to the growth of the reformed Religion ; which belike is advantaged fo much the more with us in as much as it is not hindred^but he quotes no author for that. As for the author he quotes, I have not hitherto found that hee hath^arrived to any great authority or credit in the World for the truth of his relatione. Neither hath the wifdome of our Church or ftate taken any contrary coar(e hitherto either by Statute or Canon to promote reformation amongft us ;. what they may doe hereafter I know not 5 when (lich fpirits as this Prefacer may bee fo fortunate as to (it neare the tterne. Whether the. French Churches have found it fo as this Geogr.iph^r is fayd to report I know no ;but for their judgment herein I muft. cxpcftuntilUhearemorctherof. SeB. jt

f^^f Which being (o ^ the judgement and pra^ice of fb many

nienjandoffuehfeverallperfwafions in the controverted point of the Chriftian faith, concurring unanimoufly together 5 the miracle is the greater^that we inEngland fhould take up a contrary opinion, and thereby ftparate our (elves from all that

are

arc called Chriilian; yet fo it is, I skill not how it comes to ^^[f -paflc but fo it is, that fome among us have revived againe the ^ * ^* JewimSabbathp thoughnot theday itfelfe, yet the name and thing. Teaching that the commandement of fan6tifying every feventh day, as in the Mofaicall Decalogue, is naturally morall and pcrpetuall; that whereas all things elfe in the JewifhChnrchwerc fo changed, that they were cleane taken away, This day (meaning the Sabbath) was fo changed, that it ftillremaineth; andJaftly, that the Sabbath was not any of thofe ceremonies which were juftly abrogated at Chrifls comming. All which poiidons are condemned for contrary to the Articles of the Church of England; as in a comment ontho(e Articles perufed, and by the lawfiill authoiityof the Church allowed to be publique, is moft cleare and mani-feft ; which doftrinalls, though dangerous in themfelveSjand different from the Judgement of the ancient Fathers, and of the greateft Clerks of the later times, are not yet haUe fo de-(perate as that which followcth thereupon in point of pra-^ice: For thefe pofitions granted and entertained as orthodox, what can wc elfe expcd, butfiich ftrange paradoxes, as in the confideration of the premifles have beene delivered from (cme pulpits in this kingdome, as vi^ That to doe any ier-vilc worke or bufineffe on the Lords Day, is as great a finne as to kill a man, or to commit adultery; that to throw a bowle, to make a feaft, or drefle a wedding dinner on the Lords Day, is as great a iinne,as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat J that to ring more bells than one on the Lords Day, is asgreatafinne, as to commit murther. The author which reports them all, was preftnt when the broacherof the laft pofi-tion was conventcd for it. And I believe him in the reft; the rather, (ince I have heard it preached in London, that the law o^CMofes whereby death temporall was appointed for the Sabbath-breaker was yet in force, and that who ever did the works of his calling on the Sabbath day, was to die therefore. And I know alfo, that in a towne of mine acquaintance, the Preachers there had brought the people to that pa(Ic, that neither baked nor roft meat was to be found in all the parifh for a Sundayes dinner throughout the yeerc. Thefe arc the ordi-

N 3 nary

Ko "^he mptalitie of the fourth Commmdement^

SeEl 1 "^^T ^^"^^^^^^"^^^^ dangerous do£l:r4n€S; and ^ainft tlie{e,and * '1^ fuch as thefe, our Author in this following Treatife doth ad-dreflc himfelfc, accufing them that entertainc the forinall dodrinalls every where, of no leflc than JudaifmCjand prcflfing them with that of ^ufiwy that they who literally under-ftand the fourth Commandement, doe not yet favour the Spirit: Section the third.

Exam, ^^P'^ fomewherc faith^that he who lookcs for miracles in

thefe dayes for confirmation of the truth, ^T/^^/;ft!W i/j/^/»ro(^/-^iumefi, himfftfe may goefor amortfter '^ he doth not fay; It is a miracle that men (b fhould doc. Men may be (bttiftijCven to admiratioujand fuch if this Prefacer provcs^we will not (ay it is a miracle:w^/V^,wonderful things may be wrought not only by the pracflice of Satan, but in the very courles of men, but God is he alone that workcth miracles* He talkes of ^«/tWf-moHS concurrenre of men of fever alt ferfwaftons otherwlfe in the controvertedj^olnts of Chriflian fahh^^ndthat both in jtidgemet^t findfraElice with him in his way j fee loves to (peake with a full mouth, and to make a great noi(e, as the Hogs in ^lian did^ when their owner ftiore them • which gave him occafion to ^y^hat there was a great d^ale ofery^hnt a little woolL And let the indififerent judge whether the wooll be an(werable to the noife this Prefacer makes. New, the men of feverall perfwa-fions whom hee avoucheth are Papifts, and Proteftants, and amongfttheProtcftants, both Lntherans^indCalvimfis, ^ni hitherto he hath fpoken of foure particulars; I dcfire the reader would take notice of the modefty of this author in each of them compared with the noife here hee makes concerning them 5 as if he were as much crackt in his braine, as hee who (landing upon the key at Athens, with a note booke in his . hands, fet downe every (hip that entred into the road as hiSj when he was not owner of any one of them. So I (hall make it appeare, that this Prefacer hath title to none of the fides he boafts of for the countenancing of his way in any one of the particulars mentioned. The firft particular is about theorigi-nall inftitution of the Sabbath; as whether God commanded it immediady upon the creation. This author denies the inftiir tiition of it before the promulgationof the law upon mounr

Slna;

Sina; And what ftrength of fufFragcs doth he bring for this ^^^ m amongft the Proteftants, whether Lmherans or Calvinifis ? * '*

Surely not one Lntherane that I know; but of others all that he avoiichcth by himfelfe are but Doftor Prideaux and goma-' rus, and by his afliftancc, Vatahlm and CMnfcHitd^s 5 on the contrary are alleged by fVaUm : i, Lnther himlelfe: 2. Zuh^ gliHS: 3. Cali'm: 4. B^z^i 5. "Peter Afartjr: 6. *Builw-ger: 7. Zanchlta : %»'Urfinus: 9, Gnalterm: 10. Areti-Hi: II. 'Bertramns: ii, t^ercerm: l^. Antonitis Fajus: 14, ItimM: 15 Zeppertu: 16. Martinim : 17. Alfledias. The fame is juftificd by Rimetfts, ^who vouchcth no Icflfe than thirty Writers of note to concurre in thisj Now let the indifferent Jadgc on whofe fide is the miracle this Prefaccr fjpeakes of, in his rhetoricall amplifications, on his fide, or on ours. Yet not one Englifh Divine is mentioned, either by fVaUm or RivetM amongft this number. 2. Then as for Papifts: Tofla-tfis indeed difputcs againft this opinion of ours^ but his rea-fons I have an (wered; and 6atarims a Popifh Prelate, as well as Alfultnfisjis acknowleged by this Author to oppofe Tofla" tt4i in this; neither hath he or Doftor PriJteaux undertaken to anfwcf him. Oncly this Prcfaccr,after his bold fa{hion,faitb, that CatarifjtiJ tooke up armcs againft ToftAtus with ill fiic-cefle, it hathbeenc manifcft that for ought doth appcare, C^-tarittuf hath had better fucccflc than T^?/?^?///; For Pererius takes Ttf^rff/^^ his part, yet all the Rhemifts on Apse, i, lo, doc manifeft them (elves to take part with CatarwftSf and go* maruj acknowledgcth as much of Marius* And Rivetus al(b allegeth t^aguftinHS Stemhus, Genehrardy lACohus SoUoftuSt Cornelius de Lapide, Smrnanuel Sa, and Ribera, all concurring againft Tofiatus and all Papiftj, yea, many of them Jefijitcs. Hereby let the reader judge of the modcfty of this Author; and on w hofe fide the feigned miracle is^on his (ide,or on ours: For it is manifeft hitherto, that the men heJpeAkfs of, offeve^ veraJlperfwaftons otherwifc, are by farre, more far us thdn for him. But it may be in this particular, h is glory i% that the Fathers are rather for his opinion than for us. B(jt upon what ground ? Is it from any evidence of Scripture ? nothing Ie(Ic, not one of them building hereupon ^ and as for evidcnces,they

N 4 bring

I < 2 T^^ ^oralitie of the fourth Commaniement^

C Q m bring none, favcth^t the Scripture doth not particulate, that Zf__LiL-. the Patriarches of old obfervcd the Sabbath, Yet it was not to be held a gencrall riilcj that ArgHmentnm non valet Ah autho" ritate negative'y the argument draw-e from authority doth uot hold negatively in matter of faft. Secondly, not onejy our Divines, as Ho^/W^« and f^/</^?^/, that the meaning of the Fathers is onely this, that the Patriarches did not obferve it after a Jevviih nianner,but lacohm Sdimns a Papiit affirmes the fame particularly of 7Vr////^M»; as Rkvetus. vouchcth him in hisanfwer to Gomarus.fag, 21. And it may be made 'dppa-rant from Terttillim himfelf^j otherwife hec cannot be freed from contradiction^ as who plainly manifefteth his opinion in our fide, as/?i^<?*^J citeth himj pag.2^. So that the Fathers alleged by our advcrfaries, being rightly underftood, make ^ nothing for them 5 yet we want not variety of Fathers making cxpreflely for us^and ag.:iinft them 5 and that grounding thcm-felves upon expreflfe Scripture, Gen, 2.^, therefore The Lord hiej[dci the feventhdaj^ and hallowed it, which our adveriaries have no other meancs to avoid, than by faying that it is fpoken by anticipation 5 according whereunto the meaning o^Mofes muftbethus; becaufe the Lord refted the fcventh day from creation, therefore he blefled the (eventh day and fan6dfied it, but would you know when? to wit,2ooo.and 4.or 5oo.yeercs after. And laftly, the dividing of times into wcekes, proved to be the moft ancient divifion of times in the world, received by all nations, and made a feftivall day thereupon 5 as many have moft learnedly proved it, doe juftifie the fanftification of the Sabbath to have had its beginning and courfc from the very creation. So that in this particular wee have on our fide both Scripture and reafon, and Fathers, and the opinion of men of fcverall profcflfion?, as this author prefleth it, both Papifts and Etoteftants, both Luthcranes and Calviniftsj and this Prefa-cer can lay no juft title to any one of them in this particular. The fecond point he hath infifted upon, is about the morality of one day in (even. For this he pretends, onely Papifts in the firft place, and not a Father throughout, (and as Chrjfofiome 80 the contrary hath profeffed, that God from the beginning hathmanifefted,that on thai day in the circle of the week muft

be

be confecrated unto hisfervice) much IcfTe Scripture- And Se^l.n itisapparantthjit God commAridedthat the proportion of——^ one day in fevcn fhould bee allotted to his fervice; and it was never to bee abrogated, nor ever did any man devifeanycc-rcmoniality therein. And to this day it hath continued in the Church of God. To Tojlitti^s wee have oppofed Az^orins thejefuitejproteffing that it is moft agreeable to reafbn after fix workedayes to confccrate one to Gods fervice. Addeto him StelUn^^on Luk£, jACohm de Valentin , & Dommicpu BA^»es.-^-—As for ax/^/^/W/j that which hee accounts ceremonial! in the fourth Commandement was expreded by him to bee rot one day in (even , but the particulating of the feavcnth day; But whereas he goes no farther in ilhiilratlng; the morality of this Commandement then in laying that fcm^ time mnjl befet apay tfor Godsjervice, I appeale to every mans confcience, whether the very light of nature doth not fugged that notoiKly fometimebut a convenient proportion' pf time ought to be confecrated unto God ; and when God iiathrnanifeftedthistobceone day in feavenundertheLawj doth not the very light of nature fuggeft, that wee (houldfin againft God if wee (hould not allow unto him as good a proportion of time under the Gofpell ? And further if the Lords Dayjbe of Divine inftitution amonglt us Chri(tians,is it n^Jt ftill the Law of God even unto us , to allow unto him onedayinfeven ? Now Doftor PW^^4;/a; himfelfe alleageth more Papifts for this opinion than for the contrary, and one of them, to wit, SUveftcr profeflith it is the common opi-nion,as Az^oriHs voucheth him. And as for Protcftants to fide with him hercinghee alleageth none but (jomarim and Rivet • it may (eeme by his carriage^that VatMus nd CMnrcttltis alfb arc for him in this, but that is untrue, they are alleagcd by Gomarta on the firil point onely as touching the originall in-ftitution of the Sabbath. Now Rivet is oppofed herein by his two Collegues,^^/.€;«f and Thyftiu ; and whereas he takes upon him to anfwer IVdtui his reafbns to the contrary, and reprefcnt his ovvne reafbns for his opinion herein; I have taken into confideration both the one and the other ; and I truft havercprcfcated the weakneffe of his diftonrfc through-mm out;

154 ^^'^ McT^itie efth^founk CemmanJement^

Stff.'J^ oiitjthQUgh otherwife a very learned and worthy Dlvine.Now "'"^"^—^—^ Waletii hathnat onely alicadged amoiigrt the Fathers C^rj/^-ftGim-yCkmensAlexanikin^^EufeMm ^A^H^i^ftiyie^TheodorerJ:>ut a multitude of Proteflant writers, maLtaining the morality ofoaeday mfeaven,3s Z/^rk^r, UMcUfiBhon, Cdvin, Bez^^ Bucer, Peter A'fa.rtjr^Zanchim ,Jmnm,firetpu ,D o-^hw^ FajHSy Martmim^ Vrfinmy Alfiedi'As.Lornfegwsi.Teftm Hommiui^hQ'' fides Englilh and Scotrifh writers, whom he might have produced miorethen enough: yea of Bifhops in this Kingdonie; as BiftiPp Babwgton^ Bifliop oAndrewcs.^x^ho'p Lak^^yca, and Mafter tioeker in his Eccleliafticall policy. Now let the readers judge by this of the modefty of this Prefacer in this par-; tictilar alfo^and whether the miracle (as he phrafeth it) be on our fide in diflenting froni others uureafonably, or on his rather. ?• The third particular is touching the celebration of the

Lords Day, as whether it bee by authority humane or divine rather: wee iay it is of divine ; bee will have it to be left arbitrary : yet was it never knowne,that any earthly Mafter did leave the proportion of fervicc, to bee performed unto him 3^ to the pleafure of his fcrvant; neither did God leave it thus from the beginning of the World untill Chrift,as hath beene proved. Yet this Prefacer will have it thus left unto us in thefe latter daycs 5 of which the Apoffle hath prophe-[ Tini,3. 4» cKdyXhditMen pjoM be lovers of -pleafure more then lovers of God, For this, he boafts of all forts of Papifts, this he begins withall 5 which was not wont to bee thecourfeofEnglifli Divines; yet hee belies Doctor Prideaux in this; who allea-geth more Papifts ftanding for the divine right hereof, then for the contrary ; and one of them ( as formerly I fayd) pro-feflcth that it is the common opinion. And Abortus the Je-fuite profefleth that it is moft agreeable to realbn, that as after fix daycs worhe one Jhould hee confecrate unto the Lord, to the Lords Day (hould be it. That many of our Proteftants Di-v'mcs call the obfervation of the Lords Daj^ Ecclefix confue-tudinem^nKd that it tvM left free unto the Church to choofe ano^ ther^ after the lewes Sabbath was abrogated.^ I have ftiewed how little all this makes for him, anfwering to every paflage

punftually^

pun^^Uviliy j, as they are alleaged by him. Fork is confcfled SeSt^n^

that the Church they tokeot was the apoftolicall Church; --

and the caulc moving them to choofe this day tvas the Re-ilirredion of Chrift , and whereas fome two of them call this Ci.tufAmfrobabUem'^\ hare difcuflTed that ^and prooved it to be more then probable. I h.we ftiewed withall how the ancient fathers ha^e acknowledged it, ioraeeScprcfTely divine^ iotnc cquivalently , and expteflfely apoftolicall conftitution or £andion,as Athandjim ( whofe rea(bn drawne from the con-griiity betweenc the firft creation and the fecond Creation by vertue ofChrifts death is remarkeablejand followed by many both Englifh and outlandilh Divines*

Atifliyj^Scdfd'ms , Gregory^^nd others; And with them the concurrence of our Protdtant divines 5 Bticer , (^alvw^^^za^ JuniHs^ P'lfcator^ Wolfitis^ Fulk^ againft the Remifh, Doftor yiyjdre'ivesh\(\[\opo(fVlnchefier^ Do(florZ^% bifhop oi Bath and H^e/ij^ in expcHlng it to be ohfcrvationis not liher<t^ but ?ie^ CfjfarU^ Mafter Fox^PVaUuSy F^yas^Hjperifts^Perkins, Brownde. By this let the reader judge of the modefty of the Prxfacer in this particular alfo ; and whether the miracle becon our fide in diflenting from others in an unreafonable manner, and not on his rather.

The fourth and laft particular is the mutability of the day ^.

which this Prefacer ftands for, we on the contrary profelllng kto be unchangeabk. Nowthercfolutionofthisfolloweth Bpon the refolutionofthe former; for this 5 onely names are produced both by the Prefacer and Doftor Prideaux. Yet I have endeavored to finde out C^emnniHS his difcourfe there-on,and enter upon a difcufTion thzTto^SBncer I arn fure^alleag-ed by Rivet^is nothing for this purpofe.Doflor/W^ direftly oppofeth it, E>oftor (^Andrewes, Doctor Z/^^above mentioned, Doftor Brownde,Y>odiOX ^ilUt^ Mafter Perkins. The Chriftian Church anciently being demanded whether they^ had kept the Lords T>ajy were wont to anfwer 'jlam a Chrifiiaviyl cannot intermit it. Befides I have fhcwed in rcafontheun-realbnablencffeboth of changing thcday^and the intollcrable fcandali that would follow upon it , and the unrcafonable-ncfle of not changing it, if it be not of divmc inftitution;coc-^ fidering

1 5^ y^^ Mora/it ie of the fourth Commandement^

SeR^n^ fidering how-prone weeiare through the continuall obfervati-* '^ pn thereof to conccave ihat to be a neccffary duty, and fo to be plunged into fuperftition^ ere we arc aware,!^it prove to be no neccffary duty*

In the next place hce tells us how that fo me amongftus huve revived againe the lewijh SMath^ thon^h not the day it felfe, yet the name and thing, teaching that the Qommande* ^ment of fanSiifying every feaventh day ai in the Mofaicall Dc" calogueis naturally moralland^eri^ttHall\ that whereas all things elfejn the le-aiJJj were fo changed, that thej were cleane to be done a.'way^ this day ^ meaning the Sabbath ) was fo changed^ that itftill remaineth: and lafllj , that the Sabbath was not any ofthofe ceremonies which were only abrogatedatChrifis cemming, ^11 which poftions are condemned for contrary t» the Articles of the (^hurch of England : as in a comment en thofe Articles ferufedand by the lawfptll authority of the Church allowed to be fHbliejHe^is mcft cleare andmanifeft. Here wce have a diftindli-on of* a Jcwifti Sabbath brought in , yet not the day 5 a diftin^ion contrived with fuch wifedome and perfpicacity as it feemes to exceed all humanedifcretion. For I verily thinkc that from the beginning of the Primitive Church there was never heard of a Jewilh Sabbath to be kept, any other then upon their day. The materialls are, firft that the name Sab-baih is retained 5 and well may it be in my judgement (though fome entertaine fublime reaches to the contrary ) if our Saviour have any authority with us 5 who advi(eth his Difciples tofray that their flight be not in the Winter^ nor on the Sabbath day ; which is fpoken by him in reference to the time about the dcftrudion oilerufalem^ at what time the Lords Day was come in place ofthc Jcwes Sabbath among the Chriftian congregations, and that by apoftolicall fubftitution. And in the very booke of our Homilies it is expreflely (ayd that the Sunday is now our Sabbath. And his Majefties briefes for colleftion fo ftilc it. And in the conference at Hampton Court it Was fo ftiled by Doftor Rajnolds , and the motion he made thereabout generally y eelded unto ; fo that the i'tate hitherto feemestobecenfuredbythisboldPrefacer. The next afper-fion is.that the thing alfo is revived. But what thing ? the

Jojyes

Tewes had peculiar facrifice both morning and evcningwhich SeB.^^

doubled the day ly facritice; this lurely is not revived. There , ^

were befides two things in the Jewilh Sabbath; the one was a reft, the other wasthsfanf^ifying of that reft; As for the reft if that were not, it were no Sabbath. Yel our Saviour calls it a Sabbath, our Church calls it a Sabbath, our State calls it a Sabbath. And Auftin calls us Co fuch a reft onihe Lords Day, as that therein we muft tantum Deo vacare, tantum CHltihns di-vinisvacare, onely reft to God, one)y reft for divine worftiip. And Calvin, who is taken to be no friend of ours in this CA^t^ profeflTcth, that we muft reft from all our works, fo farre forth as they diVQAVocamenta a faerie ftudiis, & meditanonibfds, avocations from holy ftudies and meditations, but not for arny tnyfterious fignification fake, and that herein confifts the difference betweene the Jewifti reft and Our Chriftians reft ; and I am exaftly of his opinion tor this: As for the fanftificati-on of this reft, Itiuft wee arc as much bound to the performance hereof, and that in as great meafure, and with as greac devotion under the Gofpel, as ever the Jewes were under the Law; And at the hearing of this Commandement as well as of any other, our Church hath taught us to pray. Lord have mercy upon ta .and incline our hearts to keepe this Law. Andl find it wondrous ftrange,tohcare,that fomcftiould not (paretopro-fefTe, that this was Oiuffled in they know not how; At length wee come to the particular charges : the firftis, that fome fiionld teach, that The Commandement of fanllifying every fc^ venthdaj, as in the C^ofaicali T>ecaiogue, is naturall, morall, and perpetuall: and Mafter Rogers is quoted for this on the Article,/^rr 7. hee quotes Mafter Doftor Bownde, pagj. Now truely, it cannot be denied, but that when the fourth Commandement is read unco us in oiir Congreg.uions, wee are taught to pray unto God, to (hew fuch mercy unto us, as to incline our hearts to the keeping of thi6 law. And both' mafter Roaers and this Prefacer are to be prefumed to have fubfcribed as well as others.and by their fubfcription acknowledged that this is nothing contrary to Gods W ord ; that we are as much bound to the obfervation of this Commandement as of any other, andconfequently to keepe the Sabbath, and doe no

roannoii

158 The Moralitie ^f the fourth Cemmamdemcnt ^

Sefi^'J. manner of workc thereon that may hinder the fanaifying

—^ -L. thereof. Now Mafter DoCtovBowrids words, (after hee had

cit^d Chrjfoftt m e fpeaking thus, lam hie ah initio &c. Here noi» even from the beginning god hath i/t ft mated this Do&rine unto HSy teaching us in circnlo hebdomadis diem pinum,that in the com" pajfeofaweeke, one/t^holeday isto befutafartforafpiritHallreJt mto Gcd^ are tke(e: Vnta aH which may be added, that for profe othat this Commandement is naturaU, morall, and ferpetuall ; that I fay may be addedwhich was pra5lifed among the Gentilesy and all the Heathen. And nowDo.Bowndes purpofe unto the p. 30, is to be proved only this,f ^^^ ^ Sabbath was from the beginning, and fill is to be kept, and that ia the proportion of one day in (even ; and after that proceeds to prove what day the Sabbath Qiould be kept; his words arethefe p. 30. Now, as we have hitherto feene that there ought to be a Sabbath day^ fo it re^ maineth that wejhouldheare upon rehat day this Sabbath foould be kift\m^ here he fhewcth that this is not left unto the Church, butprefcribedbyGodhimielfe, as who prefcribed one day unto the Jewes^and another day unto us Chriftians; but ftill one in fevcn: The fame was the opinion both of ^ellarmine and Mafter HookermW Eccleiiafticall policy. Whereas both Mafter Rbgers and the Prefacer fo carry the matter, as if by X^odiot Bewndes opinion we Chriftians were bound to keepe our Sabbath on the fame day whereon the Jewes were bound to keepe theirs, which is.moft untrue, though the fourth Comr mandemcntmay be indifferently accommodated to our Chri-Aian Sabbath as it was unto the Jcwifti Sabbath, fave onely as toucliingtbe reafon givcn^which hath expreflfe reference to the creation •, but our Chriftian Sabbath ftands in reference to the wQrkc of Redemption. Each is the reft on a feventh day after fix. daycs of labour, and as they were bound to fan£tifie their (evienth j fo are we bound to fanftific ours; and as that was refted on,and fan^ified in remembrance of Gods reft from the worke of Creadon, fo is ours refted on in remembrance of Cbriiis reft from the wor-ke of Redemption, fothat our day of reift is but tranflated from the day of the Lord out Creators reft, tortheday ofthe Lord our Pvcdecmers reft. And on this ground might theChurcb Juftly teach us to pray at the hearing of this

fourth

fourth Commandcmcnt; Lord have merq nfon us, and incline Se£i^n,

ohr hearts to k£(rpetbu law. Bit like enoughi boch Mafter/^^?- _*-(!,

jrers and this Prefacer might be of Brentitts his opinion; that it is left indifferent Co the Church at this day^to content thcm^ ielveswithobfcrvingof oneday in fourctecne, if it plcafeth them. But this was not the opinion of Pope Alex^ttdxht third, who profeiFeth, that Tumveteris cfmm novi Teflamenttpagina feptimttm diem adhum/tnam cjmete fpecialiter deputavit. Both the old and new Teftament hath appointed thefcventh day for the reft of man, which Suarez thus incerpreteth, Tk'at is^ each Tefigment hath approvtfd the cu^ame of affixing every fevetith day of the weeke for refit which is formally to appoint a feventh day, though the fame day materially he not alwayes appointed ; and thw it islrue, that that ftventh d^ij in the old Law wot the Sab^ hath day ; hut iv the new, it is the Lords Day: now when we fay the oblcrvation of one day infeven Is naturall, our meaning is notj neither was it D.^i'wj^/'/ meaning, th^t this pri?portion of time is knowne by the light of nature, to he that which of duty pjould he c on fe crated unto God: herein rather it becomes us to wait upon God,and he having defined it 5 now we fay nothiiig can be deviled by man more agreeable to realbn than this; aA^orim the Jefuit, profeffing it to he moft Agreeable to f'eafin ; And Dodor Field, as Mafter Broade sowchtth. him, fpared not to fay, that to him who knowes the ftory of the creation, it doth appeare in reafon, that one day in feven is to be confc-crated unto God; onely let us not looke for reafon demon-ftrative in matter of morality : <^riftotlc long agoe hath pro-felled, that not demonftration^but perfwafion alone hath place inEthicksj yet we may juftly call that naturall, which from the originall was common to all nations; and that fuch was the oblervation of the feventh day, the learned have fufficient-ly proved. Secondly, if it be not morall, what fhall it be ? Is hi judicialljor cercmoniall ? Never any man hitherto devifed any ceremoniality in the proportion of one day in feven; well it may be politive; yet lb, as to this day, from the beginning of the world,thi8 proportion was never altered; and'if I fhoUld live till the day be altered by any foberChriftian ^Congregation,! thinke I (hould live till the comming of Chrift; which

the

theChriftiansin/^w//Wtifnc^onceived that it would be on the Lords day. I come to the fecond charge which is i\m^wherea4 alt thinqs dfe in the lervijh Church were fo changed^ that thej rpere cleans lak^naivay ; this day {meaning the Sahhath^wasfo changed, that ftftUiremaineth ; and for this Mafter Rogers quotes Doft. 'Bownde, f. 20. onely Matter -R^^^r/faith, not ph^ all things ypere changed, as the Prefacer doth, hut ontly that all hivijh things were changed, now judge whether Mafter i?^^^rx might not have oppoled Doftor Andrews^s well as Do^or 'BownJe* For in hisCitechct.do(f^rine,/>^^. 2op. having propo(cd this queftion. *JBut is not the Sabbath a ceremony, and Jo abrogated by Qhrifi f He anfwers it in this manner i Doe as Chrifi did in the canfe of divorce, loof^ whether it were fo from the beginning^ now the beginning of the Sabbath was in Paradife before there was myfinne^ andfo before there needed any Saviour y andfo before there wMany ceremony or figure of a Saviour, And if they fay it prefigured the refl that we Jhall have ffom our finnes in Chrifiy^ we grant it, and therefore the day is not changed, but yet no cere^ mony proved, Hec proceeds to prove that it was no ceremony: : fifft from the Law j Secondly from the Go{peI,E/>^»2.4.chus: AH ceremonies were ended tn Qhrifl, but fo was not the Sabbath ; For, Matth. 24. ao. C^rift bids them pay, that their vifttation be not on the Sabbath day: fo that there mufi needs be a Sabbath after Chrifts death. Now, what doth Dodor Bewnde ^Sirme forty yeeres agoe, which Do<flor Andrr^wes did not in his pat-teriae of Catecheticall doctrine ? I coine to the third and laft: That the Sabbath was not any of thofe d^^emonies which werejufi' ly abrogated at (thrifts comming, Th;S very point Doftor An^, drewes maintaines by divers argumeiits, as well as D. Bownde, ■< which yet is rightly to be unde^. ftoodjto wit, not of the obfer-- vation of the Icventh day from the creation; but of theobfer-, vation of one day in fcvcn. So that in M. Rogers hi$*Breutian judgement in this particular, Doftor ^^Wr-fB^^/, who afterwards became BiQiop of Winchetter, might be accounted a Sabbatarian as well ^s D. Bownde. AH theft portions the Prefacer faith, are condemned for contrary to the Articles of the Church of England'^ >but by whom condemned ? by none but by M. Rogers; and by the fame reafon he might fay that the

doftrine

dcftrine of C)o(flor ^ttdrcives was condemned alfo for CQntrary vj^fjf m

to the doEirine of the Church of England, to wifj by M. Rogers, L'

And confider his abfurJ inference from the (eventIi Article ot the Chmch of England; The Article Gith that Chriftiarts ^reuot-ho^rd at all to the ohfcrvation of ludaicall ceremonies *^ Hence he infci res, that they whom he calls, Otirhome Sabha-tariam are advcrfaries to this truth in part^namely^in as much as they deny tfie Sabbath to be a ceremony : But doth our Church aftiimc the Sabbath to be a ceremony ? Nothing kfle; xhisM, Rogers, of hisowneheadjlayes downe for a principle, namely^ that the Sabbath was a ceremony, to obtrude upon us, as if himiclfehadasmuch authority as a whole Convocation. And\}.^^ndrewes takes upon him to difprove this very point (which Rogers fuppoleth as a principle) and that by various arguments: Belike D. Andrewes deferved not to be num-bred amongft the areateft Clerks ofthefe later times^-{ox D.Laks neither; nor Ki(hop'Baldington ; And as for the judgement of the r.ncient Fathers, it appeares what skil the Prcfacer hath in them, and what refpevSl he beares unto them, by the learning he hath bewrayed in this prebce. Had he found in them^how much the forbidding of dancing in their dayes, did hinder the growth of Chriftian Religion, we (houM have heard oi it undoubtedly, as ivell as how it hath hindred the growth of the reformed Religion in France out of Hejlins Geography: yet their doflrinalls (which I have (hewed to be the doftrinalls o^Doctor (^ndrewes as well as o^ Dodior Bcwnde, yea, and could (hew it to be the doftrinc of divers other late Bifhops in this Church) though dangerous in tk m!'elves,nothalf/o dejperate as that which followeth thereupon inpra^ice. Divers particulars whereof he reciteth out of the fame Mafter Rogers his preface, to his comment upon the Articles of the Church ot England. And indeed, this Mailer Rogers gloiieth there, Tjrgopo^ lynices^/ike, that he hath beeyie the man and the meancs that thefe Sabbatarian err ours and impieties were brought into liqht and knowlcd're <^fthe State ; (o he fpeakcs ; and that this is a comfort to his fcule, ardwvnldbe to hts dying duy. And in very deed, the particulars mentioned by him, are very foule; tor hee laith. It was preache-d m a market towne in Oxfordjlirey that to doe

^* O any

\

t6i The moralitie of the fourth C^mmandement^

Se£l *7 itnyfervilevPorkeoryHfinejjeontheLords'Daji is as great afinne .. * ' 1^ as to kill A man, or commit adultery . Second] y. It was preached in Sunm rfctfhirey that to throw aborvle on the Sabbath day, is as great aftnae as to kill a r/san-^ that it rvas f reached in Norfolke, that to mak^ a feafl or tvedding'dinncr on the Lords H^ay, is as great aftnne as for a father to take a k^ife and cut his childs throat, I wonder the Prefacer doth not call them miracles; Sommer-fetfliire is a pretty large County; and there be many market townes in Oxfoidftiire; and I doe not doubt but there are many parishes m Noriolke; But no particular is here let -downc, either ofperibn or of place; and wee have no better authority for the proofe of thelc imputations than this mans word, which yet undoubtedly was not prefent at thefe Sermons : for then he would have beene very carefull to exprefle thatjas in the next ftory hec doth the like. So that in the iflue^ the ftrength of all comes but to this, that he hath heard it thus reported. Nowj Ihave heard it preached, and that at Saint Maries in Oxford, that a man in Bunbury, or thereabouts, hsving broken a bone, his fbnne refuted to goe for a Bone-fetter, bccaufe it was the Lords Day, and this Sermon, afterwards comminginto print, the party finding himfelfc agrie-ved by this (candalous report caft forth of him, repaired to the quarter Seflions holden at Oxford, and complained to the Juftices of the wrong that was done unto him ; the Preacher of that Sermon being by, and the whole matter being opened, and the contrary juftitied 5 the preacher profeffed, that he delivered no more than he had heard,but promi(ed the next time that he printed that Sermon, hee would leave that ftory out. Doctor Hoskins of our houfe was prelcnt at the hearing of this bufinefle, and brought us word of it. But whether that Sermon ever came to be printed a Iccond time,! know not. In like fort, I have heard it reported of Mafter Bolton, that when one fell into the River on the Sabbath day, he would not differ tho(e that were with him, beinj^ ncere tornnne tohelpehim out: I profcded at the hearing of Ir, I knew Mafter 'Bolton fo well, that it (eemcd iHiaedible to mc, but the reporter pro fe fled to deliver it upon knowledge. But if it were {o^ many there be that can bcarc wkneffc thereunto in the place

where

where he livei Lately^ it hath beene brought unto mce, that 5"^^, 7,

one hathbeene heard to lay to my charge behind my backc, — ;

thaclfhould (ay, ^avid iinned more in dancing about the Arke, than either in deflouring Bathjhehath, or killing Vriah • though ic is (uch a comparifon that never entered into my thoughts, how much leffc to pafie fb prodigious a judgement upon the companion ? In the iaft place,he (aith^/f rvaspreached i4 Suffolk^, (and that hccouid name theman, and was pre(ent when he was con vented bebrc his ordinary for preaching th\e famc)that to ring more bels than one u^on the Lcrds day to call the people unto Qhnrch, is as great a ftnne, as to commit murther ; thu is more f articular than the reft ) and had hee added one thing rnore,t he evidence had been compleat,namely,that as he faith, he was convented for it before his Ordinary, fo he was found con-y i£Ved of it; which if it were (b, I wonder he (hould concealc it J if it were not (b, of what credit is th^s his relation ^ He addes, that ma-nj things t6 this efeB he had read before in the Sabbath doEirine sprinted at London fori. Porter and Tho. Man, what this bookc wis I could notdevife, but lately have gotten into my hands D. "Bowndes booke of the Sabbath, I finde by comparing it well, that this is the booke he girds at. Now I iinde nothing in him to thiseifeft, though I have gone over irjoft of the firft booke, and in the Index doe not finde any thing that can give me probability in the (econd booke, tending to any fiich cffeft: and I wonder he fpared to quote the place where fiich do^rines are to be found, nothing being jnore convenient ro juftifie his criminations (than to quote for it fomcthing that is to be feene in print) and thereby to cleare himfelfe from the fiifpicion of a malignant. But this Prefaccr very judicioufly believes him throughout, because the Relator was prefent when the broacher of the lafl pofition was convented for fty yet doth he vot fay he ivas convicted of it. And upon what ground he proceeds Co Judicioufly in believing it is rcmarkc-abJe, to wit, becaufe himfelfe hath heard it preached in Ldndnn, that the Law i^f Moies, whereby deathj^mporall was appointed for the Sabbath'breaksy v*Ai yet in force 5 and that whoever did the worlds of his ordinary c^llin^ on the Sahbath day , wca to die therefore. Now, I profeftc he fecmes to me a great deale more poli-

O 2 tiquc

^ ci _ tlque herein than at the lirft I was ware of : For, had hee not *7^ believed Maftcr Rorrers his report this way, others might have uken as great liberty to believe but their part concerning this. Therefore it ftoodhimupon, firrt, to manifeft his ingenuous facility in believing another, that this might be afhooing-horne to draw on others by way of the like ingenuous facility to believe him alfo; yet fiich things may be; for as long as the world lafts, we llia'dbe exerci(ed with wilde wits, and Co \ no doubt we Qiall with tale-tellers too, and Co much the more in all likelihoad the neerer the world approachcth to an end: It hath beene Co amongft Philofophcrs in Cicero his oblervati-on; it hith been lo amanglt Schoole-divines -, it is Co amongft Socinians and Arminians. But let the faddle be fee upon the , right hor/e, and let every man beare his owne burthen. Now I have made it manifeft, that the doftrines which he picks out of D. BoTvnde, and ftiles Sabbatarian dodrines, are thedo-£trines of D. zAndrewes, afterwards Bi(hop of Winchelter; I could (hew them to be the doL'-^rines of many other worthy Prelates that have been of this kingdome 5 and it may be that if the votes of tlie Biftiops of this kingdom were takcnjthe major part would concurrc with us, as touching the doftrine of the Sabbath,rather than againft us. The fame Matter Rogers facrl-ijceth to his net, and burnes incenfe to his yarne, and magnifies the good (uccefle of his labours. For thiigooji,hQCa\r\ hath en fuel there uf on ; uamely, that vhe [aid hookes of the Sub-hath, cori^pr eh ending the above mentioned, and many mare fuch fearefull and hereticalla^^rtions, have beene both called in, and forbidden to be printeda'^j more and to be made common, and that ay^rchlnfhop Whifgift, by hU letters and officers at Synods and Viftations, Anno 99. did the one, and Sir ]ohn Popham, Z6?r<^ ehiefe luftice of E gland at Bury Saint Edmunds hi Spijfr>lke, Anno i 600. did the other. For all this we have nothing but his word ^ andas for the bookes he talkes of, hee had formerly mentionedjbut one printed 95, at London for /. Torter ^ndTho, Man, of the dp<^rine of the Sabbath, which ap-peares to be D. Bown^es ^Jow,was this ever called in ? Sire I s^ni, D. iVilht uponOeneJis came forth the yeere after this Mi iJfi'^frj his Analyfis of the Articles of the Church of England,

This

This hee dedicated to King lames^ and over and above hath Se£l, 7

a fecond dedication in Latino to Archbifbop *BafJcroft and • *-—-

to the bifhop gf London then being 5 wherein hec fignifieth that the one of them was author 5 the other hortatonmto him to perfetfl this worke of his ; and therefore undoubt&-lycame forth with as good approbation as the y4nalyCtso£ IVJafler Rogers upon the fecond Chapter <?/6'i«. he ob^rvcs ihM Asthe Saibath J^pt then jipon the fevcnth day in remem^ hrance of the Cnation was oftht Jjords i>iflitutUny fo the Lords' *T>aJ^ ti noyp'^bferved bj thefamt authority , in remembra?i<:c cf the Refftrrellicn sf Chrift , and re^cmftion by the fame, Afid ' this hee delivers in oppolition to the Rhemilisj who ccunt t4jg obfervation of the Lords Day but a tradition of the (Jhurch , and' Scclefidfiicall inftitfition^ and having* fpent a whole page in folio upon thisargument in the next page thus hee writcth—-idoeTvonderJhetithis doflrine of the Sabbath^';- and day df refi HOW called the Lords ^ay having fuch evident demonflration out of the Scriptures and being confirmed by the conflant and c^ni'm vuallpraUife of the (^hurch, in all ages : that any frofefp.n^ the GoIfdl,.ffeciallj beings exercifed in the Study cf^the Scriprpires^ fhould gain fay ^ and ifKpu£ne thefe pvfi(io//jfollows/^ a^ erroneous, I. That the Ccmmandement offanElifying the Sabbath isnattiraH morall andperpetu^ll : Tor if it be notfo then all the Qommande^ ments contained in the Decalogue .ar£ not morall , fo jhould -we ' have,^.andnotAo^Comma/idements*and then Chrift-fiouldcame to deflroy the Law^andnot to fulfill iJ contYary to our Saviours fijrn wordsy Matb.5.17. 2. That all ether phings in the'Lavf were fo changed that they were cleane tak^naway^ asthepriefi-hoodySacrifces and Sacraments : this day ( namely the Sabbath') was fo changed^ that it yet remaines ^ For it is evident by the ^poftlespruBife^ Ads 20.7. t Cor,l6.2. Apo.l.io. that the day ofrefl ( called the Sabbath') was chanaedfrom thefeventh Jay to the firfl day of the weeke : and fo was obferved and kept holy under the name of the Lords Day, 3. That it is not lawfuU toufethe feventh day to any other endy hut to the holy and fan^ Slified endfor which in the beginning it was createck 4.* J^s the Sab^ hath cmne in with the firfi man , fo mufi^ it not goe eut , b»t. with the lafi. 5. That,we Are reflrained upon the-Sabbath from

O 3 workf ■

I €6 JhemofdlitieqfthefomthCBmmmdement^

Se£i 7 i^(f^ki (^s t^e Jewes Ti^ere ^ ih^ngh not in fnch firi^B particuUv .—.-.—2-1^ manner as thy wen y jet in general/ ^- ^^ forhiMen all kind of ^vporks Ptff>n th^ Jjords Dajf^aSji^j M??^f» ,wkich jnuy hindet the

Now the Author that hee intimated as oppoHng the(e po-fidons hcetielcribcs by the title, of his booke in the margent, whkh is this. The Catholie^tie 'dotlrme of the Chnrch of England printed at Cambridge p% 37. And the author of his bootee I have heard t© be M.a.fter Kof^ers ^ and it (ecmes likely enough, efpecially bythe^ 2. firitpofitions, Doftor ivillet et^ncludes in this manner, ^tt^t hee Had made ufe of cfivers allegations for the confirmation of his dodrinc in oppofi-tlon to the forc-mcntioried Author ^ bnt thefe allegations are herff/Hperflmli4S feeing theme p$ a learned Treatife of the Sahhath Already pubiyhed of this argf^went/ZirMch contatneth a mofi fSunddoUrine of the Sdhhath ^ as itisfdi^ in the former pofit ions, vphichfhall he^ able to abide the triall ^fthe JVord of god^ and fiandwarranted therebyywhen other humane fantafies fhallva^ mjh C'howfoeverfome in their heate and intemperance, or & not afiai4m ca:fltbefh SabhatdriorHnt err ores ^ yea heretftall ^r-thnsyd new luhilee • S» Sabbath y nforethen either lewij^ or popijh inflitHtioH 5 God grant it be not layd to their charge that fo fpeake or write , and Gddgive them a better minde^hhont two yeares before this, were iet forth Mafter Perkjns his cafes of conKcienee : wherein hee manifcftcth his concurrence' with Dotor 'Bownde in. the do6trine of the SaBbath, Neither doth Dpftor iAndrerpei^ irt any material! thing differ from Doctor BoTv»de^ Mafter Perkins^ Doflor fVillu, In the next relation of his which is of a fafniUar naturc^undoubtedly the Prefaccr delcrves to be believcd.That in a Towne of his acquaintance the preachers there had brought thepcopk to that paflc, that neither baked nor rofte meate was to be found in all thi? Parifhfor a funday dinner throughout ihe^yeare, and hee concludes it with fuch an Epiphonema. Thefe are the fruites of fuchdangeropis doHrines *^ as if the fortunes of the Church or ftate were hazarded for want of bak*t meatc or rofl meate on thefundaye?. And to confeffea truth, though I never wasjnor never am

. like eo be To precifc s yet confidering my meane condition, Se^, 7,1

I have divers times Uiought thiis with my felfc : why (bouW —^ ^

my provificn hinder any of my fervants from i^ermons on the Sabbath day ; io little did I feare any dangerous confe-qucncc of this praftife: but lince I am better informed by the (uggetVions of this judicious Prcfaccr 5 I will take hecde how I cherillifuch thoughts in my breil henceforth 5 and ifhee comeatany tir/ie to take paines amongft us, ftefng Ifinde -hcerefpefts b^ik'c meatc and roft meate ib well; it ftiall goe bard but wee will h^ve a tith Pig for his entertaincmcnt. And fo much the rather, that I may cleare my felfe from Juda'irme% for /<!?cj^of iVffjricTjr my Countrey man being a greati Clothier in his daycs ; and then ftrangers came from farrc to buy Cloath at his Hou/e, and arriongft the reit a company of Jcwes were fometisce entertained by him lying a veryhofpitalious man and an excellent houfe-keeper^his boufe being accounted the beft Inne in the Towne,to make him-

, i^lfe merryjcaufed the table to bee ftifniflied with x^ll variety of Hogges fieih; which they perceaving cooke it for a flout;

; but after they had grumbled a while upon it, hce made (hew

'fi6 if but then hee had remfcmbred himfclfe of his errour, and ' not till then coniidered.that they were Jewes ; and forthwith hee commanded all the difties to bt remoovcd, and o* ther difhes already prepared to'be fcton the board,where-with his table was as well fiirnifhed as it was with guefts. But to rcturne , it is an cafy matter now a dayes to acciiie of any thing, as DoCtor^rideaux hee faithjaccufeth us of Jqdaifriie, but j^ nccHCare fufficiat^qui^ imoceytsirit j when hee orDoftor Vridfaux fhall prove their^accufatiqnSj then let us be condemned ; and if wee be not condemned, till then wee care not. Yet it is untrue which hee pins upon Duftor Pri^ demx his fleeve 5 as if hee fhould alkage Atifiin Qym^^tfjat thfywh^ literally under ft and thfourthCommtrtd-me>tt^dof not yet favour oftheffirky neither S. An flirt fpeake? this of the fourth Commandtfmcnr, nor is "bee ib allcagcd by Oodor Prideat/x^ butof<he feventh da:y ; Qui/^uis d'um illHm ohfcrvMt fictit liters Cenat^carnaliter fAfit. As much as to fayjWhofocVer keeps thc^tday which the Jew kcepe9,livoui^«^h'carnally. Ncit^

O 4 did

168 ^^^ S^oralitie of the fourth Commandement^

c ft o did I know any of my brethren to ftand for the fanftifying ^^^ of the (eve nth day in correfpondeocy to the (eventh day, from the Creation but xDneiy oc" one day in feaven • which day mull alfo be prefcribed by God as the fcventh day of the weejce was to the Jcwes^which is the next thing impirted unto us , but the Lords Day. is-the firft d?.y okhe weeke to us Chriilian?. Se^. S..^n<^onuui:.

frsf* Thisvv.henlhadconfidered, when Iliad feribuflyobfer-

ved 5 hovY much thefefancies were rcpugnant both to the ten-.dries of this Church and ju'^gmertts of all kindeof writers and how unfafe to be admitted ; I thought I could not goc about a better workc then to exhibite to the view of my dearc Countreymcn this following Treatifcdelivered firft ^ and afterwards publiflied by the Author in another language. The rather (ince of late the clamour is cncreafed , and that there j is not any thing now more frequent in fome Zel&tes m^mhes - ( tou/e th€ Dg)elors words) then that the Lords Day is with us licentioufly yea facriiegioiifly profaned, SeBtQn drft. To fetisfie whole fcruples and give content utito'thtir m^ndes, I doubt not but this following difcourfc will be lufficient : which for that caufe I have tra*^ fluted faithfully, and with as good propriety as I could ; nojiiwerving any where from the (enfc.j and as !ittle as I could fromthe phrafe and letter, GratHmopiis agricolis : a worke as I conceave it, not un-fuitable unto the prelent times, wherein belides thtfe petciaht fancies before remembred, fome have fofarre proceeded, as not alone to make the Lords Day ftb je6l to the Jewifli rigoiirj but tobring in againft the Jewifli6abbath, and abrogate the Lords Diy altogether. I will no loriger detaine the reader from the benefit hee fhall reape^'therebyi^' Oncly I wlU crave leave for his greater benefit,t6 repeat the fumme thereof which is briefely this ; Firft that thc'Sabbath was not inftitutcdm t|?c firft Creation ofthe World,, nor ever kept by any of the ancient patriat-chs w4io. Jived before the Law of c3l/^j : thereforeoO.morall'and.perpetiiaJl precept as the other, are, i*i'^.2*^econdIy that the fariftify ing of one day in (even is ce-remonfellonely and obliged thcjewcs, not morall to oblige ^sChriftianstoiheliieiObfervariCe. .y^^,3*and4. Thirdly,

• that

that the Lords D.*y is foiincled oncly on the authority of the Se£i 8

Church, guided therein Ly the pravl^iceot'the Apolties; not- *

on the Fo'irthComtnandemcnt (which hee calls a fcandalous do^rine, Sccl. y-) nor any other c)<pre(Ie authority in holy Scripture, Seft 6.an J 7. Then fourthly, that the Church hath iHIiajithority to change the d<iy,though fuch authotity be not fit to be put in pra<!tice. Sect.7. Fifthly, thet in the celebration of hjthcre is no (iich cclTatton from works ot labour requi- j red troni a?, as was exafled of the Jewes^ but that we may law- > fully drelle meat proportionable to every n7ans eftate^and doc fuch other things as are no hindrance to the publiqriefefvicc appointed for the day, Seft.8. Sixthly,that ofi the Lords Djy all recreations whatfocver.nrsto be allowed, which honcftly may refrcfh the f[>irits, and increafe mutual! love and neighbour hood araongft us, and that the names wTiereby the Jcwcs were wont tq call their feQivalk (whereof the Sabbath was the chiefc) were borrowed from an Hebrew word,which lignifieth to da^ice,and to be merry,or make glad the countenance, Tf fb, it^ all fuch ceremonies as do i (create good neighbor-hood^^hen Wakes and tcafts^ and other meetings of th.jt nature. IF (Iich ashoneftly may refrefh the fpirits, then dancing, wrertling, (liootinpjind all other paltimes, not by law prohibited, which cither exerci(etl?ebody,or revive the mind. Andlaftly,thatic appertainestothc ChrKtian Magiftrate,tO' rdcr and appoint wTiat paftimes are to be permitted, and whafarc not: (obedience unto whofe commands is better farre than facrifice to the Idols of our owne inventions^ not unto every private perfon • (or as the Doftor»owne words are) not imto every mans rafh 'zeale, who, out of a fchifmaticall, Stoicifme (debarring men from lawfull paftimes) doth incline to JiK^aifncjSei^ 8. Adde for the clofe of allj haw doubtingly our Author fpeakes of the »

name of Sabbath, which now is grownc fo rife amongft us, Se(ft 8. Concerning which,takc here that notable diie'mvia of /<?/;« ^^rj^^^. the betrer to encounter thofe who flill retaine the name,and impole the rigor. Curforro illnm diem f^^rij^. Sefla- Partn,l r, riorum Sabbatum appcllatis ? What is the cauft (faith he) th at ^« "^^^ many of our Seftarics call this day the Sabbath ? Tf they ob-ferve it as a Sabbath, they muft obferye it becsufe God refted

en

1 -70 The Moralitie sf the fourth Commandement^

Wff 8 on the day, and then they ought to kcepc that day whereon '' V J*, God reftedj'and not the firft, as now they doe, whereon the . tord began his kbours. If they obierve it as the day of our Saviours refurreftion, why doe they call it ftiU the Sabbath>, feeing elpccially thatChrift did not altogether reft thedayjbuc valiantly overcame the powers of death t This is the fumrac of all; and this is all that I have to fay unto thee (good Chri-ftian reader)in this prefent bufinefTe, God give thee a right un-derftanding inall things, aiid a good will to doe thereafter. . i,x^m. This Prciacer accounts the opinions oppofite to his^ to be

fancies; D.fVillet on the contrary, as wee have heard, accounts this Prefacers opinion, maintained by M.Rogers, no better than fantaCeSj which (hall vanifh^owever now for a time tlhfcy ftourifti 5 Sure wee are, every plant that bar heavenly Father hath not planted (hall be rooted out. This Prefacer profeldcth, thofe whom hee oppofeth be. oppofite to the tendrles of our Church ; and indeed,the Author whom.D. fP^i/iet intimateth, intitled his booke audacioufly enough. The (^athglique dQ^rine of the Church of England; but D. TVillet on the other fide,won-dredj that any profeffing the Gofpel, fhould gain-fay and im-pugne the portions maintained by D, Borvnde. And iurclam, Biftop 'Bahington, Bifliop AndrewesS'l^o^ Lake agreed with them : And it is well knowne to fomej what the former Archbifhop of Canterbury profeflcd to the face of M.Broade^ when he came to move for the printing of a fecond book concerning the Sabbath: What Biftiop can our oppofitcs name of this Church, whofe praife is among the writers of the{e times, that hath manifcftcd his opinion in oppofition tothe{e?.As for th*e judgements of all kinde of writers which he boafts of, I thinke never came a Divine to take pen in hand to vaunt Co m much, and performe fb little. As for the unlafe condition of

our Tenets which he (iiggeft?, excepting thofe monftrous and wild Tenets mentioned by M. Roger's, for which \ know no betrer evidence than his word, and that in very odde manner delivered, I know nothing unfafe^ nothing dangerous in any Tenc: of ourSj who now (ceme to walkc as upon the pinacles of the Templcj and indeed in this refoeft they are like to prove very dangerous to us^ yet I would k were liot more dangerous

is ftill intone to bind Chrifiiatis. xyi

gcrous to the Church ofGod^to be bereaved of fo many faith- SeSl^^%,

full Pallors : For, certainly it fhall be honourable unto them, ^

they cannotfuffer in a more honorable caufe thin this^in^ftan-ding forthe fanflifying ofthe Lords Day in memory of his re- « furrcdion^who that day^being formerly a ftonc refuled ofthe builders, was made the head ofthe corner. For what danger is it to maintaincgthat from the Creation the Lord bleffed the feventhdayandfandiliedit; and what a(hamefull.courfci« it lb to expoutid it as in rdference to a time 20oo.and 4.or 500. yecrcsafterjandthitinrpight of the ancient Fath.;rs: And manifeft rcafon, as appeares by diviiion of time into v/eekcs, even from the creaiion^ and fo continuing to the time of tlie Law deHvcrcd on tlie mount Sinai, as appeares by the ftory of falling of Manna^ and the Jewef^ gathering of it on fixe daycs; none tailing noWj being gii>i^hered on the feventh, as the day on the week whereon God retted after he had made the world i!i fix. What danger in maintaining, that God required from the beginning, and afterwards fpecified fo much in the Law, that one day in (even is to be conlecrated unto Gods (ervice; and hencerto inferrcjthat if God required fo much of the Jews under the Law^it v/ere moft unreafonable and unconfcionablc we (hould not afford unto him and his fervice as good a proportion of time under the Gofpe'l? Thirdly, what danger is therein affirming, that the Lords Duy is of Divine inftitution> Is it not Scripture that calls it the Lords Day ? Arid what day was called cho Lords Day before, but the day of the Jewes Sabbath > And hath not our Saviour manifeftly given us to un- . derftand^ that even Chriftians were to have their Sabbath, as the Jewes had theirs, as Biftiop t/^^i'-<?»^-.f accommodates the place? M.mL2^,2o. And was the rerurrc(ftion ofChrift any thing inferiour co the creation, to give a day unto us Ghrifti' ans; like as Gods reft from creation, commended that day to the Jewes: Efpecially confidering, that a new creation requires a new Sabbath ; aS ^thanafitts delivered it of old ^ And D.ryfndreweso^Utt yeeres, treading in the fteps of that ancient Father, or rather of all the ancient Fathers: And whatdanger in maintaining that the Lords Day is entire^ and whole to beconfecratcd to Divine fei'vice; did Anfltn fpeake

dangerouilyj

• SeSi 8 dangeroufly, when he profeflTethj that thereon we muft tantum

__ ■■■- *—*- Deavacare, tantu culnl'm dlvinu vacare ^ would this Prefacer

be content to be found dancing aboi\t a MaypolcjOr in a IVlor-rice-dance that day that Chrift (hould come in flaming fire, to render vengeance to all them that know not God^nor obey the Gofpcl of Chrift Jcfus ? Nay, would hec not feare to rue the danger of h'sdo6trine, wiien it will be too tate to correcH ir, and aM the profanenclfe that hee hath promoted by this preface of his (hotild rife up in judgement againft Rim 5 yet now he thinkts he could not goe about a bictter worke than by this preface & tranflation to harden them in their profane and impure courfes; all his care at this timcjis to prevent fupcrftition, a wonder it is to fee how zealous men of his fpirit are to avoyd and (hun iliperftition. Belike all thcfeniutt be cenCtired for Zelotcs that complairtc that the Lords day is with us liccnti-oufly5yea5 (acrilegioufly profaned; yet thc(e are the times whereof S.PW prophecied^that men fhould be lovers of plea-(iire more than lovers of God; yet Dodor Prideaux could take liberty to profefle of the Jewes, that by their Bacchanalian rites,they gave the world juft occafion to fufpeft that they did confccrate their Sabbaths unto devils rather than unto Gods fervice; yet now adayes, they that oppofe revels on the Sabbath day, are ccnfured and condemned of Judaifme: Neither is D. Prideaux cendircd by way of (corne for a zelote in this; but unleffe wee concurre with this Prefacer, Infhinkingthat the forbidding of dancing in the French Churches hath hin-. drcd the growth of the reformed Religion there, and that upon the bare credit of Hejlkis Geography, w6c muft in fcorne be termed zelotes. Belike Bifiiop Bahington by this bold Prefa-cer, would be cenfured for a zelote, coniidering that on Exodm i6,pag, 122. hvewrites in this manner : CMay mt a good foptle thus reafon with himfelfe 5 This peop/e of his might not gather CManyia, and may I Jafely goe to markets, Mtncings, drinki^,gs, to waives and wantons, to ieare-baitings and E til-baitings,ayjdfuch like wicked profanations on the Lords Day f Is this to keepe the holy day ? Cm I anfwer this to my God? that gives mee fix dayes for my filfe, and takes but one to himfdfey of which I rob him alfo ? And Biiliop ^ufiin too * defer vcs

dcfei ves ro be cendireJ a zelote for that which hee writes SeEi 8

in his 3. traEl. upon John, Obferve the SahhathDay^ it is * *

rather commanded unto us^ because it is comm.tnded to be ob-(crved in a fpiritnall manner. For the Jewes obferve the Sab--bath day fervilelj unto luxury^ unto drunk^nne^e^ How much better were it for their Women to ^Inne fVooll then to dance on that day in their new UMoones ^ and in his 44. traft. 'the Jcwes refl unto toyes ^ and whereas God commanded th? Sab» bath to be obferved^they fpend the Sabbath in/uch thin/s which the Lord for bids* Of4r refl is from ev ill wor^f^ their reft is from (Toodworkj, For it is better to goe tofiowthrntodance : but albeit hce be cenfured as a Zelote, yet fiircly there is no colour why heefhould be thought to Judaize in this. And let '2A\h''i^ NaK.ianz.cne pafle under the fame cenfurc with them 5 who as Dialeric'.is upon the 17. Dominical] alter Trinitie Sunday allcdgeth him, proteflTeththat the fayiBiflcation dfthe Sabbath ronftfts not in the hiLirity of our bodies^ nor in the va^ riety ofgbriotugiirmr^ts , nor in eatings , the frptite wherof we l^ow to be wantnnn jf ^n^r in ftrewing of Flowers « thewayes^ which we know to be the manner of the Gentiles ; but rather iu the purity of the fouh^ and chearefulnc^e of the mind, and pious Ui'tfidrations^ as when we ufe holy Hymnes in fteadofTa^rrs^ <?Ki^Pudmes in ft ^ad of wicked fongs and dancings ^ The fame Di.derum allea£;eth Pope Cjregory out of his 91- booke of his Epii^lesand 3. E;:>itfle affirming. That therefore" on the Lords Day we ought to reft from all Earthly worke , and by all meanes inftft on prayer^ that if ought hath been Committed by us ne^liaent-lyonthe ftx iayes on the day of the L^rds Refurre5lion it might be cleared by prayers. And which is yet more, out o^Chryfc ftome 5. H^7??.'yjoiiy^/^r^.'7rheefhewes,howin thac Bifhops judgement we fhould be exercifed on the Lords Day, in our private Families, thus, IVhen wedep.m from the Eccldftafticall fiffcmblyywe ought not in any cafe intangle our felves in buftnejfes of a contrary nature , but as foone as we come home^ turne over the Holy Scripturcs^nndcall thy iVif, and thy Children to con-ferre^ahout thofe things which have beetiddivered^ a/id after they have been d:epely reated in our mi^ds^ then ts proceed to provide fr fuch things as are nece^ary for this life, S'^ anciently is the

pious

174 ^^^ Moralitie 9f the fourth Commandement^

Se£l 8 P'^^^** cxcrcife of repeating Sermons commended unto us by * ' this holy Bifhop, which in thefedaycs I hfive heard to bee cryeddowne, by profane ferfons, as a caiifeof increafeof < BrowniCnc. And I willingly confeflTe that when I firlt came to this place, there were no leffe then tennethac partly had withdrawne themlclves, partly were upon the point of withdrawing themfelves from our Common Prayers ; but within afliort time there was not onefuch to be found amongd us, and Co wee have continued to this day» But to returne, Eplortm SyrHs may goe for a zelote in like manner , who as bee is alleged by Rivetm treating of the Sabbath, exhorts to honour the Lords feftivitks celebrating them not panegyricalj^ » hut Heavenly ^not [ecularljybfitfpirltually;not like Heat hens,but like Chrifiians 5 and he [herpes wherein this confifts in the words following 5 ^mre mn port arum froutes cor onempu ^ let us not hanq^ Garlands upon thefr ont i[pice of our (jates^non choreas ^ucamusjet us not leade a danc^,, non chorum adornemusjetus not by our prefence beautifie any fuch company ; non tibiis audi^ turn effdminerntis det tu not effeminate our tares with their Mur (ick or with theirfidles—NsiySiS Do£lor Prideaux complaines ofthe]QVJes corrupting themfelves to the profaning of their Sab* baths, fo Polidor Virgil complaines of the like corruptions among Chriftians on their feftivalls,lib.6. cap, 8. notimploy. ing their time in prayer and in the exercife of Gods lVord;fer which caufefuch fefiivalls were inflituted ^ but in all manner of evill courfes tending to the corrupting of mens manners 5 and that herein they imitate Heathens, though of ancient times Ter-tullian (as hee iayth )reprehendcd Heathens for fuch courfes, as in his Apolognicum , fpcaking of the holy folemnity of their Emperours. Therefore (faith hec) Chrifiians are com-pted enemies to the State^ becaufe they doe not dedicate vaine^ lying and rajh honors to their Prince, Forfooth it is agreat good office^ to make bonfiers and dances in publicjue ^ and to feaft in every farifJy.to transforme the City into the habite of a Taverne; yinolutum cogcre , which Junius fayth was a fruit of their defperJte Luxury , and a fignc of their madncfl^ and fury: heprocecdes; to flrive who Jhall exceed one another in running about^0 doe injuries^to commit impptdencics^to provoke unto lufl.

And

^ndisthe^t4hHk.^jiyafterfHchamAHAerexprefi (to wit) IfJ SeSl^S,

j)HhHcfHff fhamd f 0 horvdcfervedh areweChriftUns to be con^

Ajmni^d { he fpeak^s it ironically) who hj carrying onr [elves fo' herly^ chaftly, honefily, doe oppofe the vorves made and the jojes exprejfed for the Emfi:rorSy to wit^ when for their fober andchajl arid vertHOHS CArriaqe onfuch dajts, not concurring with others to the fame fxcejfe of riotyMVcre ccndired as enemies untotheir Princes. Yet even in thole primitive times the manners of ChriiHans became degenerate, as Baldwin observes in his cafes of confciencCj p. 479. and that out of TertnlUan^ as whom hee ob(erves to have complained of it ; namely that Chri-iians imitated the manners of the Heathen in this, yea and grew vvorfe then they,in his booke de IdoL <r» 14. Omelior fides nationnm in fnam feElam , ^«<« nulUm Chriftianorum fo* 'lenmtatcmfbi vendicat^non ^omi?:icam,non Penrecofiem ; etiam fi ytojfent mbifcnm non communica^ent , ne Qhrifliani videren^ tnr ; Hos ne Ethnict pronuntiemur^non veremur. 0 thefiayth of phe Nations better then ortrs towards their own fed: ^ as who cha-lengs net to thtmfelves any (^hrifiianfolemnity , not that of the Lords Dajy nor that ^/Whitfuntide. Had they l^own it^they would not communicate with uSy left tkey (bouldfeem Chriflians 5 ws Chriflians fcare not to be accompted Heathens, O what a 2elote did TertulUan (hew himfelfe in this ! nay what thinkc \NQto£Leo and ^Anthemius Emperours ; were not they ze-lotcs too in that decree of theirs ( alieaged by the former Ba/dwinyT>iesfe/los majeflati Altiffimi dedicates nullis volnmtu voluptatibHs occupari undoubtedly they nieane hereby worldly pleafures ; (iich they waild have no place on holy fefti-vities ; and why > bat l:>ecau(e they accounted thole holy fcftivalls profaned thereby* And may not King Limes alfo be cenfured for a zeloce in making thit^proclamation ofhil for the reformation of abu(cs in profaning the Lords Day, at his firrt commmg into the Land, to receave this Kingdonie as his rightfull inheritance ? In the Conference before his Majefty at Hampton Court, I findc mention made of it by D. Reynolds in this manner .* To the former DoBor Reynolds didaddt the profanation of the Sabbath day^and contentpt of his U^Ujefiiesfrociawatim made for the reforming of that abufe , ^ of

which

I'lS . ^^^Motalitie oftheflurthCommandcment^

SeSi 8 n'hkh h e^^nefih ^efired nfinight^-Ofttrjefor reform^tthft there*

—-> f^f^dyid tiff to this ht'fop:nda <^€Pt rail andfifto.n'>mcus ^^jTf ??r. All the(e

belike were 2elores. So was his Maje% alfo that now is^ together with all the Lords both fpirituall and ten}porali,and the hpiife of Commons in that Ad made in the firilyeareof King CW/fi-toprefeive the Lords Day from profanation, wherein are forbidden expredely andby namcjbearebaitingg bulbaiting , cnterludes, common piayesjand in generall all other unlawfull exercilcs and padimes; and over and above all meetings and aflemblies or concourfe ot people out of theirowneparifhes for any fports or paftimes whatfbever; and confeqiiently no man ought on the Lords Day. goe forth of his owne parifhto any may-game^or to fee aMorrice-dance, or dancing about May-poles ; and feeing the Apoftlepro-fefTethfhat it isgood to be 2ealQUs alwayes in a good thing Gd.^,\%, and Chrift hath died for us to redeeme us from all iniquity, and to purge us a peculiar people unto himfclfc, zealous of good worke s, 7'//.2.i4. let them in the Name of Godbefuch 2elots Itill 5 this 2eale being a 2cale of Gods Glory ; and it becomes us to be 2ealous of his Glory,con-lidering how 2ealous hee is for our good, Efay^, 7. ^ Efay %9'^7' Of the fufficiency of the following difconrfe, we (hall by Gods helpe confider in due time.

ButI confefle it may be very futable to the(e times whereof the Apoffle prophecied 3 men fhould be lovers of plea-fiires more then lovers of God, and undoubtedly it will fint well w ith their affedions like a fweete morfell to the epicure which hee roules under his tongue , but all the praife is in parting ; and I would they would but thinke of that of the Prophet 5 what will he the end thereof ; when wet fhall give God caufe to (ay of our Sabbath^ as hee fayd of the Jewi(h5 / have hated your Sabbaths. And if t here be any fuch prafti(es ofSitanonfoote, as to bring in the Jewifh Sabbath, let it be confidcred in the feare of God , what doftrine doth more promote therein ; whether that which makes the celebration of the Lords Day Divine, or rather that which makes it merely of humane inftirntion ; and who feet^h not that if it be left to the liberty of the Church, they may bring in

' the

// fiillin force to bind Chrifiians. t'j'j

the Jcwifti Sabbath if it plcafeth them. Though it be notori- SeS, 2 oufly untrue, (as may be made to appeare both by Scripture, evident reafon and authority humane, both ancient and mo-derne5both Papifts and Proteftants) that the Sabbath was not ordained immediately upon the creation 5 yet were that negative granted; (inceGod hath nianifefted in his Law,thathe requires one day in (even to be {et apart for his fervicej it evidently fcllowes, even by the very lightpf nature, that it were moft unreafonable wceftiouldailowhima worfe proportion of time for his fcrviee under the Gofpell; that confequcntly the oblervation of one day in feven is to be kept holy unto the Lord, is now become morall and perpetuall unto the very end ofthctirorld; neither was it ever heardjthat any man did fa his wits on worke in devifing a ceremoniality in the proportionof one day in (even. A prefigoration of Chrift in fome refpeft hath beene found in the Jewifh reft on the feventh day of the weeke; but of any prenguration of ought in Chrift, by an indefinite proportion of one day in (even the world dreamed not of till now; neither doth any man offer to devifc what poffibly this might prefigure in Chrift : As for the third^ it cannot be denied, but that Chrift manifefted before his death, that his Chriftian Churches ftiouldobferve a Sabbath as well as the Jewes did; this appeares, Matth,2^, 20. T^ray,that

jour pght he not in tloe Wintery nor on the SMath day ; and thus Bifhop Andrerpes accommodates that place in his pattei;ne ofCatecheticall doftrine. It is as manifeft, that the day of

' Chrifts reftrreftion is called in the'^cripture the Lords Day ; as manifeft that not the day of the yeere, but the day of the weekjwhereon Chrift rofcjis called the Lords DayjWhich few take notice of. Likewife in the old Teftament is manifeft that the Jews Sabbath is called the Lords holy Day. Then the con-gruityin reference to thereatbnof theoriginallinftitutionis

• moft exa6l. For firft, Chrift by his re(urreftion,brought with him a new creation;'and this new creation^as D./^tfdrewes ex-prcfleth itjtieading herein in the fteps of the ancients,rcquireth a new Sabbathj and as the Lordrefted on the feventh day from the workeiof creation, fo our Saviour on the firft day of the weeke from the worke of Redemption: And laftly, the day

178 ^^^ Sforafitie of the fourth Commandement^

V ft Q of Chrifts rcfarredionj was the day whereon Chrift the ftonc *^L . foimerly refufed by thebuildcrs,was made the head of the corner, and of this day the Prophet profefleth of oid5{ay ingj This is the day which th Lord hath mgid ylet m he gladandrejoycein it • which can have no other congruous meaning but this 5 this is the day which the Lord hath made feftivall, cfpeciaily con-fideringthedodrineof BifhopX^i^, which is this; that the worke ofthe day is the ground of hallowing the day, as is to < befeenein the inftitution of all feftivall% both Humane and Divine. And I have already (hewed how abfurd it is, that wee (honld expert itlhould be left unto the Church her liberty to appoint it, confidering the great danger of diflention thereabouts,and extreme confnfion thereupon; And ittannot be denyed, but this day was eftablilhed by the ApoftLs, and that as of authority Divine, as appeares generally by the ancients. Jthanaftta ^xoitSmg^ thdit Dominus confecrnvithunc dkm ; Aufli'/i, that AfofiolifanxerHnt ; and Gregory, that An-tichrift, when hee comes into an humour of imit .ting Chrift, (hould command the obfervation of the Lords Day ; and Sw* fehitu hath as pregnant a teftimony to the Tame purpoic as any; and Sednlvw 5 and that not one ot the Ancients^as I know,al- j leged to the contrary* So that to afcribe the inftitution of it to humane authority, that every way were a fcandalous doftrine,. and To would the pra<5licc be alfoaccorJ'ing thereunto. And consequently the Church hath no authority to change the day, a«DodlorF/i/%pro^eir^thdiT^.inft theRhemifts : Andtoiay; the contrary, is to fay that the Church hath authority to con-curre v^i'h the Jewes in keepmg with them the Saturday, with the Turks, in keeping with ihem the Friday; yea, that they haveauthority to divide the dayes of the weeke, one nation taken one day to oblcrve^ and another anothefj which is as much as to (ay, that the Church hath authority to be notori-oufly (candalous. In the fifth be delivers more truth than in all his p''eface be ides : we makf no queftion, but that workes of neceflTity and workes of charity may be done on thisday^ though the proper workes of the day are the workes of holi-sieile. I know none that thinkes it unlawfull to clrtife meat proportionable to a mans eft ate on this day: fome arc of opi?

Is fii// in force to bind Chrijlians. Y79

nion, that this was not forbidden unto the Jewes; and that al- SeS. 8,

beit to go abroad on that day to gather Manna vyas forbidden, — -^

yet not the preparing or dreiling of it 5 though the moft common opinion of our Divines is to the contrary : Some thinke a greater ftnaneffc wasenjoyn^d them in the wilderneflfe than afterward obferved by them. As in the ftory oiNehemiah it is ^«^«f-i^* faid, there wa.s prepared for his table daily an Oxe, and five chofen .Sheepe- and our Saviours entertainment by fomeon the Sabbath day, doth feeme to them to intimate as much; howfoevcr in after times it came to pafle thit they grew fuperftitious this way; As Auftin obferves of them in his dayes, that ludai ne^^ occidmt.neji, coqunnt. Others who think it was both enjoyncd to them, and praftifed by them with greater ftriftne£e, conceive that this was by realbnof the myfteriouslignification,to witjoffomeexadrelHnChrirt-, this was their^remoniall reft; we acknowledge no reft but morall^which we nnderftand in that fenfe which here is expreflTed in part^ and but in part, after a halting manner; For hec profeffeth, that on the Lords Day WC are to abftaine from fttch roorh^s ^ are a'n hinderance to Gods fervice, but hedelivers thisonely of the publique fer-vice J as if to fpend an houre and an halfe in the morning, and an houre and an halfe in the afternoone in Gods fervice, were enough for the fancflifying of t lie day; yet Cjerardus theLu-theranc obferves, that God commands the day to be fanfti-fied, not a part of the day. And let the law oFthis nation or of any nation of the world be jud^'e between us, whether in cafe one man owe another a dayes fervice 51 f\y, let the world judge^ whether in common equity this be to be interpreted of an houre and an halfe in the morning, and an houre and an halfe in the eveningjor onely of a part of the day, and not rather the whole day. And what vile courfcs are thcfe^that men (hould carry themfclves (b bafely in difpenfingunto God the proportion of his fervice. In the fixthand laft place^wehave that wherunto all the former difcourfciscon(ecrated, namely, to make way for fuch profane fports and paltimes, which here are glofed with the cleancly ftlics of recreations to r-frrfbthe jfirits, and for the increafe ef mutf^all love and neighbnf^rhood ^mongsltd, as if he wcre*a{hamed to fpeake out^ th<4t all ihis

P 2 tends

I So The Sioratitie of the fourth Commmiement^

SeSi 8 • ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^ countenance of May-games and morricing, and * • dancing about May-poles on the Lords Day. D.zy^mrewesy fometimes Bilhop of Winchc^icr, I'pared not to profeflej that vacare choreis, to be at leifure on that day, for dancing, is the Sabbath of the golden calfc-, and hee aliegcthe^^/^w for it, though hee cannot juftifie his quotation. Doctor Do-^neha^, Bifhop of Derry, calls (uch like courfcs profane fports and tafiimeSi which more diftraEly and more hinder our worlds than hdnefi la^otdrs ; and he cenliires alfo iuch a Sabbath, calling it^ the Sahhath of the calfe, Exod. 23, 6, 18.19. Bifhop Babing" ton, on Exod, 16. puts a Chriftian fbulc upon this meditation, Good Lord, what dos lufon the Sabbath day ? This people of his might not gather A^annat and may I fafely gadto faires and maY". lzets,to dancings and drinkings, to wakes and wantons, to Beare»> baitings and BiilbaitiMgs,with fuch like wicked profanations of the Lords Day ? Are thefe work^s for the Sabbath ? Is this to k£epe the holy day ^ Can I anfjver this to my God, that gives mee fix dayes for my felfe, and takes but one to himfelfe, of which 1 rob him alfo ? No, no, ajfuredly IJhall not be able to indure his wrath for thefe things one d^y,and therefore I will leave them,and regard his holy day hereafter better than I have done. And in his cxpofitionof theCommandements by way of qucftion and anfwer, p. 44. reproves expreflely Summer^games on the Lords ^ay ; and in his Sxamen of confcicnce annexed to the fourth Coramandement, he fpcakes againft going to Chnrch^ales and SHmmer^games ; nay, is it not apparent, tkat by the very aft of Parliament, i** Caroli, that togoe out of a mans owne parifh a* bout any fports orpaflimes on the Sabbath day, is to profane the Sabbath^ For to prevent the profanation of the Sabbath, is that ftatute made: Now^unlefle the (ports themfelves be profanations of the Sabbath, it is as eyidentj that to goc forth of a mans parifli unto fuch fports, is no profanation, any more, than to goc out of a mans parifh walking, or to con-ferre in pious manner with a friend, or to fetch a Phyfi-tian or Surgeon, if need be, or to heare a Sermon. Audit is very flrangc, that wee of the reformed Churches, fhall juftifie fuch liberty on the Lords Day, which Papifts con-4eranc on their holy dayesj who ufiially complaine of

dancing

dancing upon fuch dayes ; as l^eljdoY Virgil upon Lnke^ and ^^^ g^ T^arifienfts de U^tbus cap. 4. And of old inch courfes have „,. ,■* beene forbidden by the decre*es oi Leo^ and Anthcfnini E\nr perQursjft is condemned alfoin the (ynodot tole.io ^^«.23,35. Baldmyj the Lntheran (heweSjWho alfo writes devoutly agamft iiich courfes on the Lords Day , and gives this rcafbn* For if the labours of otir calling Are forbidden in the holy day ^ how much more fuch recreations^ and ^. 4S. He Jherted hoiv the Sabbath tvm profaned by unchaft dancings and any manner ofwamonne^e 5 what need J here to mak£ mention of Auftin 5 ^

who profcffethjand that againil the Jewes, that it is better to goe to plow then to dance; and that it were better for their Women to Ipin Wooll, thfen immodeftly' to dance^as they did ; yet now a d^ycs fuch as oppofe the fame courfcs,as Auflin did^are cei>(iircd for Judaizing; thus the World feemes to be turned upfide ciowne. Is ic not high time Ghrift flaould come to fet an end to it ^

Dielerictis the Lutherane cpmplaincs of the like profanations of the Sabbath too much \\\ courfe amongft them,in his A-nalyfis of the GofpcUs for the Lords Day. p. 5 59. and let every Chriltian confcience be judgc^whether to follow Maypoles, May-games and Morrice dancing be to fanftifiethc Sabbath as God commands ? if any man (halLfay, that the fourth Commandcmcnt concerned thejewcs;and not us Chri-ftians, hec mull therewithall renounce the booke oiHomdies. For it profeflcth that this Commandement binds us to the obfervation of-our Sabbath , which is Sunday 5 the words arethc(c. So if we ivilt be the children of our Hea7fenly Fa' ther ^ we mufl be care full to k^ep the (^hriflian Sabbath Day, Tvhich ts the Swtday , not only for that it is^ (^ods (fommandement^ but alfo to declare our felves to be loving children in follorving the example of our (gracious Lord and Father. Then complain'^

jW /7(>7;? the Sabbath is protaned 5 Some ufe all^ayes alike •

The other fort rvorfe : For alth'?ugh they will not travaile^nor labour on the Sunday ^ yet they will not refl inholincffe^-as (jod eommandeth'J^ut they refl in ungodlinejfc andfilthin^ff-'^prancingin their-pride^prank^ng and pricki'^g^ F^J^^^^^ ^ painting : hemfelves to be gorgeous andgayJThey r^fiin excejfe ^/uperfiuttyjin gluttony

P 3 and

18 2 7 he mot alkie of the fourth Commmdement^

SeH 8 ^^^ dnmk^rtne^e A% Rats and Swin : they rcfl in brawlmg dfii . * ^ . rM/inaJ» quarrelling andfghtw^ : they rejlr in wmtomiejfejn toyifljtdhing^in filthy fie^jjlne^e 5 andconcludes aiter this man-ncr^i fo that it doth too evidently itppeare' that God u more dipjc^ nored^andthe Divellhetterfervedon Smday , then upon all the " dayes of the weeke befide. And that dilVinftion which Calvin makes of the Jewifh obfervation of the Sabbath , arid our Chriftian obfervation pf a Sabbath is ior ought I know, generally rcceaved of all ; anHI the diftinaion is this ;*that the « Jewes obferved their Sabbath fo ftri<^ly in the point of reft,

for a myfterious fignification 5 but wee obferve it in refting from other works fo farre forth as they arc Avocamentaa-faeris jludiis & meditatidnihpu^ avocations from holy ftudieSj and meditations; now it is apparant that fports arid pleafures arc as ftrorig avocations from holy rtddi^s'and meditationSj as worldly cares 5 and both equally are noted out to be (uch aschoakethe Word, Luk* 8.14. And therefore this day is altogether appointed to this end^evento recreate our'felves in the Lord 5 For feeing God purpofeth one day to kcepe.an everlaftmg Sabbath with us, when God ftlall be all in all V to niake us the more fit for this even the more meete partakerf^ of the inheritance of Saints in light^ therefore hee hath given ushis-Sabbathstowalke with him , atid to inoreourftlvei tb take delight in*his company, who t^kes delight to fpeake unto us asfrom Heaven in hisholy Wbtd 3 and to give us liberty toipeakeunto him in our prayers^ confe{Iions,thanki^ givings and (upplications • on other dayesVee care for the things of this World, on this day our cate fhould be fpi/itu-^11 and heavenly in caring for the things of another World^ Efay 58;^ 13. fo our pleafures fhould be fpirituall on this dfy ; ifthon jhah caUihe Sabbath a ddlght^ to confecrate it as gloriom nnto the Lord, Now have we not as much caufe to performethis duty under the Go fpeJl as ever the Jewes had under the Law V* And indeed there is no colour of re'afon againft this, but by affirmilig that now the {ettii^ of a day apart for Gods fervice is left at large to the liberty of the Church ; and albeit the Church hath fet apart the Lords Day for this; yet theii meaning herein is no more then thiSjthat they flial come to Church ' twice

twifeaday, aftdr^^erwards .give themfelvcs to what fports ^^£f g^

foevei are not.forbidden them by the Lawes of the Land : fo *

that now a dayes wee arc free tVom the obligation to the

fou'.th QoRitpandcnientjand yet we are taught by the Church

qfWjEll at the hearing ot this Coiiimandement as atany other

tO-Qy ^Lordhave mercy upon us avdincline our hearts to keep'e this

L^w ; afid the booke o{Homilies urgeth us to the fan6:ifying

9foar ChriiHan Sabbath ( which is Sunday,faith the book^

Gxpreiiyy )■ and that by'vcitue of Gods exprefTc Commande-

ment. 1 • -i' .

And therefore I cannot but wonder at the indifcre-tion ofthis Prefacer, who catcheth after fuch a fuperficiall advantage as the denomination of a fcaft amongft thcjewef?, not conlideringliQW little fiKablc it is to the grounds ofhis • Tenet ^ For by his Tenet ^ after evening Prayer the Sabbath is at endjthcChurcfies meaning being not any further to oblige them to the fanftifying of the Lords Day, but to give them liberty to ule any fports or pallimcs not forbidden them by the Lawes of the Land, But (b was not the feail of the Jewesended when they danced ;.' this being but an e)ipreffion of that joy whereunto the prefent folcmnity called them 5 and they finned no more herein then David^did.when hce danced bpforcthcArkc ; as wee fee/jrr. 31. 12. Therefore they JJ^aU Come, and ftng w the height of ^on^ and fjall flmv together to the goodneffe of the Lord for Wheatland for Wifhe^and for Oile^ and fortheyonng oftheflock.^.Vid of the heard^ and theirfonlefhall be as a well watered Garden , and they fl*all not jorrow any more atalL 13." Then fh all the Virgin re Joyce in the dance^both yong meHy 4n,{oldt9gether 'yfor I will tame their monrninq into joy^ a{nd will comfort thenri ^mak^ them re Joyce for their fcrrow* 14. And I will fatiate the foule of the Priefl with fatneffe,and nt^y people (hall be fatisfyedwith my goodnejfe faith the Lord, And the like wee reade Efay 50.19. Tefyall have a Cong as in the Nighty when an holy folemnify is kspt^andgladneffe of heart, as whfn one goethwith a fPipe to come into the Mountaine of the Lord to the mighty.One oflix^cl :fo that if Morricing and May-games and Dancing about May-poles were a fanclifying of the Sabbdth Day in pai t ( as the Lord commands the day'to

P 4 / be

184 ^^^ moralitie of the fourth Commandement^

SeSi 8 ^^ ran6tiFyed)thcn indeed ihefeTports were as'lawfull on the _1—^- Lords Day 5 as the Jcwes piping and dancing were lawftili on their feafts. But that any fuch piping and dancing were ii-led and allowed in thofe ancient times among the Jewes on their SabbathSjtherc is not the lead colour of evidence. And it is evident that (iich fports put them to Icfle reft for their bodies, then the ^'orkes of their calling 5 neither is'the^e any better evidence that any fuch piping and dancing were in u(e amongft the Jewes while they continued the people of God on every day of their folernqp feafts ; for two dayeS in each of thena, to witjthe fir ft d ly, and the laft, they are commanded to keepe as Sabbaths, whereon they were to have an holy convocation; and thereon they arc cxpreflfely cortiman-,dcd to reft, from all fervile workes ^.and I ftiould thinke, the following of naturall pleafures are to be prefumed as Icrvile workes,as the workes of a mans calling.

Laftly^ all recreations are to this end ^ cven^ to fit us to the workes of our calling j either for the workes of our particular callings 5 or the workes of our generall callings^as we are Chriftians ; Such fportsjif they fit us for the (ervice of God^ were more (eafbnable in the Morning then in the Evening. If for the workesof our particular calling ; then are they in-fcriour to the workes of our calling, the furthering whereof is their end ; and the meanesarcllwayes inferioQr in dignity unto the end. Now if the more noble workes are forbidden on that day, how much more fiich as are inferior are forbidden V But it may be (lydjthat mens minds being burthened, and oppreffed with the former fervice of the day, therefore fome relaxatio is to be granted for the refreftiing of our fpirlts; As much as to (ay, a part of the Lords Day is to be allowed for profane fports and paftimesjto refrefh us after wee have beene tired out with ferving God 5 can this be favoury in the eares of a Chriftian ? ihould not wee ratlier complainc of the(e corruptions, and bewaile it before God, then give our felves to fuch courfe as are apt to ftrengthen it ? It is true 5 fiich is our naturall corruption, that nothing is more tedious unto us as wee are in our fclves,then to coi verie with Godjbut Siould not tiie confidcration hereof provoke us Co much the

more

^ more tqftrivcagaindit, then give way to the nourifliing and Se£i^S»

confirming of it ? And hath not our Saviour told us, that not

the cares of this World onely^bnt voJuptaous living alfbj is JC that choaks the good (cede of Gods Word , and caufeth it to become unfruitful 1 iii us ? As for the refrcQiing of our fpirits and quickning them, and therebymaking us the fitter for0odsfervice ; as in any modeft cxercileofthebody in private, accordingto every mans particular difpofition, to pcevent drowlineflc andtiiilnefle in attending to Gods Word, in praying in ringing of Pfalmes, I know none that takes any exception againftit. And as for the authority of the magi-ftrate to appoint paiVimeSjiiirc I am,the high Courtof Parliament with us, and that in the dayes of King Charles^hsith forbidden every man to .come out of iiispariflkj about any (ports and paftimes 5 a manifeft evidence that in their judge-inent the publiquc profecuting of(uch (ports, and paftimeSjis a-plainc profanation (5f the Sabbath ; and fo by this authors profound judgement,they deforve to. be ccnfured as inclining to Judailme. • •

Indeed the u/e of theVcrynamejof Sabbath is now a dayes carped at 5 and why > bur becaiife ii is a (ore offence unto them in their w^iy ; for if a reft from any thing ( otherwife lawfull in it felfe J be required on the Lords Day, it (eemcs moft rea(bnablethat a reft is required from fportsandpaftimes: undoubtedly they have neither rcafon nor authority to except againft this ; For our Saviour u(eth the word even of Chriftian timcSyMat.'i^t2o. Pray thatyonrflight be not in the winter, ?7<7r on the Sahhath T)ay, Do^or Andrerves^ one of the greateft Prelates of this Kingdome, accommodates this place to the lame purpole. All ceremonies (dtith heej were ended in'Chrilt; but (b was not the Sabbath. For Mat, 24,. 20. (^hrifls bids them pray that their vijitatidn be not on the Sabbath 'Day : (b that there muft needs be a Sabbath after Chrifts

i-death ; and by this nam^ heccommonlycalls this day wee kcepe weekely as holy unto the Lord. The booke of Homilies plainly tells uSjthat the Sunday is our Sabbath. In the.con-Urencc;xt Hampton Court it is (b called, without any diflikc flicwed by any one there pre(ent. Andtheonelyreafonwhy

the

186' The lyloYMliml^flihefmrM^^

Si S.8 • '^^ ancients put a dijpfe^^ce in, this^ not calling it the Sab-— ...■ . 1 -^ bathj^ay^but the Lo^^^l^ay^was this,J)ecaure DiesSaht^atl ■ i^iL%tin,ei^)(^ech ;he r^j^mrd^y, wbic^b was tl^^; Jj^wes Sab^ bath. E3yt;thi?y,geneWlly c^ll iis to-a ^rcli on thi^. d^y 5- ,an4^ that pjoft ejca^.as wherehx wee muft T^ntum I>co,v^curt^tan^ tfdm,i-^hji^^^ dlvm^^^are^ as ay^ufim by ,nd?il5j^ ,RQt. fplf^Pg toconft/Sthat (L>l(^^?fw^to 5 But '^axklay

k ftem^s^isofmor,^agihorky withthisP^cfaccr then ©o^^oi: Anh'twfs .5 f^nd th«^, Ghiifjch 3 yea , |^.nd b t our 6avi9ijr. tojj £. * yet weeoaliing it by that name, underftand no other thing

then our ChrUlian Sabbath^and had rather it were gene/ally called the Lords Day ; QxxdDodiov Bownde alfo ftandeth for tl^is denomination y and urgcth it : yet is hce acGoimteda Sabbatarian ty Ma%r Rogns^ thpi^h wee allco^purreijpii tViSjthat ifhereon wee ougbt to kcepe, and fan6i;ifie our Chri-ftian Sabbath, And lacobm de Vdentla.^ who was no fe&aiy in the opinion oi"Barklay , todiftinguifti the JewiHi Sabbatl]i from ours,^ cajls it SabbAtum Ugale^ and concluf 4^ hee faith th^tChriflianardigiocelebrat verum Sabhatum morale\i)f die ID(?»ii?7/r^. Chriftian Religion keeppth a true naorall Sab^ on the Lords Day ; yet I willingly conf efle,this is the uiCuall courfe of Papifts now a dayes, not to call the Lords Day, (b much a§ by the name of our Sabbath. As for Barl^aysdiC" coiirfe .; hee if much fitter tqswrite fomthin^anCwerabletp T>o^ Qji'ixGt then to reaion ^ we doe obferve the Lords Day, as a Sabbath 5 not becaple God refted that day from the Creation 5 for our DoQCor Andrewes ( of fomewhat nipre credit with us 5 and that not oiaely for his place,but for his fuffici-ency, thcn'Barklaj ) hath delivered it in the Starre Cham--ber, that It hath ever bem the Churches Do^rine^ that (^hrifi made (in end of all Sabbaths by his Sabbath in th^ Grave. Thit Sabbath was the lafi of them ^ And that th^ Lords Pay ^refently cameinflacecfit, Andaga'me. That the Sabbath had.reference to the old Creation, but in Chrlfl we^ are a new creature^a new Qreatlon^ and fo to have amie Sabbath. And this hee (ayth^ is deduced plainly: Firft by pradife, then by precept. And this new Sabbath on the Lords Day, wee obferve, becaufe' on that day.Chrift refted frpm the worke of redemption^

which

which ^was wrought by his death. So that though the Lord SeU^%^

begin fiis labours ill theworke qF Creation ori the firfl: day :—

of t;he Wcckc, yet .the" Lord Chriftfet an eiid to his labors hi theworke or re Jemptioii on the fame day of the weekc.* 'As for Chrifts vanquiliiing the powers of deatli on that day,to witjthc'firftdayotthev/ceke 3 the Women that came to the Sepulchre at fun rifing 5 found that he was ri(en. And what powers are thefe powers of dcath|hee rhetoricates of t is thepe any policive nature in death that our SavioUr hadnecdeto take fuchpaines to ovcrcorae them ; The Lord himfelfc when hqprcfted^hereftcdonely from Creation 5 he that vl^as beft acquainted with his coutTes hath told us faying, P^ttr ufcf-^ hodle p^^rz/rjinyFather to this day-works ilillj and I \vorke with him ; yet hfee^f oceids no farther in the workc of Creation, norChrirt bcmgoncerifenj in the worlic of redemption : S, ///^exhorts us to*contend the more earneftly f©r the faith, becaufefome there were craftily crept in, who other-wife were like to bereave them of it : In like (brt wee had never more need ether! now to contei^ for the maiiitainanceof tlieLoixIsDay, asoufCKriftian Sabbath, = becaufe too many therfe dre whofe pradile it i-s to bereave Us of the comfort of-it.

• i'lf; ■)•»;;■ .^r :{; V t;,«'j : _ -''^o;f! 1.—

The DectYtne of the 'Sabbath

xonjid'ered.

Firii^ icomVt^.theD^arineofthe Sabbath tranflared by the Prcfjcer -J nothing doubt but the Author thereof will take in good part my pnncs in the difcuflfion of it, confiJcring tbejprefeht occafion urging-jnce hereunto •, put of the variety (}f his leading 3 hee obferyes ijiany. wil4 derivations of the' name Sabbath, and out of his'jad'gment do^tl\ pronounce that i/;^ Jewes A)' their Bacchanalian rites gave the l^orldjuft occafion t9fu^'[h^ that they did confecrate thi^ Sahb'atlTunto Revells rather then Gods fervice. As io:thc rlgcrotis Reefing ofthsdaj in

fuch

i88 The Moralitie ^fthe fourth Commaniement^

SeSf t ^"^ ^°^^» *^ ^^^^^^^ ^^ kindle fire in the JV'mterHme wherewith to

warme themfetves: or to drtffe meat for the fufientation of them-

Jehes ; I am fo farre from juftifying it, that I willingly pro-

-fefTc I am utterly gnorant, where any (uch Chriftians live,

that prefle any iuch rigorous obfervation of it. The Jcwes'

were bound to bbferve the reft on that day for a myllciious

fignification fake, and thereupon depended their rigorous

obferving of a reft j. as many thinke, and not Zjr^ alone.

JVe mufh ky}ow ((aith hee ) - that refifrom mannMl works is. noa '

<^now ) rfo'yi^oroufly obfervidas in the old Law , hccaufe mcate

way he drejfed^ and other things done on the Lords Vay , which

were net Uwftill on the Sabbath : becmfe th^t reft was in part

fgurat ive^ as was the whole J} ate under i he Law, I Gor. I o. jiU

things befell them in figure ; Now in that which u figurative^ if

joutake aw ay never fo little 5 (^thati^^tf that which is figurative

be& not exafllj obferved *) the wholt and intire fignification 1

fatleth^ like as if you takeaway hut one letter from th" name

ofLafis^ the whole and intire fignification is deflroyed* Todeale

plainely^my opinion is,that all fports ^ and paftimes on the

Lords Day, arc a breaking of the reft belonging to it, and

a profanation of that day which ought ro be fanftified ; And

I truft,herein I differ not one )0t from the whole Parliamgnt,

I**. Caroli 5 wherein was expreffely prohibited, that any man

ftiould goe out of his owne Parifti.toany fports, and paftiines

on the Sabbath day 5 and this is done to prevent theprofana-

tion,of It, as appeares clearely by the reafons of that Ad-

which Parliament was held certaine yeares after this Lefture, ,

concerningtheDo6:rineofthe Sabbath was read in the'L^^j-

verfity. And I nuthing doubt but the cenfurc of a Zelote

will paflc upon mec for this, though wee (hew no more 2eale

in faying, that 'The Lords Day isbjfomeHcentiouflyprofanedy

then others doe in profefling that the Lord Day is by us fii-

pcrftitioufly obferved ^ nay who are the greateft zelotes in

their caufe , let the Chriftian World judge by the cffe^ts^

This is all I have to note concerning the firft SetHon, I come

unto the fecond.

Secondly, and here in the firft place concerning the inffltw-

tion of it ; let - mec take leave to profeffe, that the queftion it

. felfe

tsfiiil in force to bind Chrifiians, j g ^

(elfe is not indifFerenly ftatccl,whcn it is dated thuSy^hether he^ ^^Q g fore the publijhing ^/Mofes Law, the Sah hath rvxt to he ohferved * *

hy the law ef Nature. For I am verily periwadedj that the Doftor himfclfe will not affirmc, that after the pMiflnytg of Moftfi law, it was to he ohferved by the law of nature^ Un-dcrftanding by the law of nature (as I prefume he doth) fuch a law as is knowne^y the very light of nature. <iArifiotle hath taught us in gencrall, that morall duties are rather wrought upon a fober confcience by perfwafion, than doe carry with them any convincing evidence of demonftration. Yet it is con-fefTedjthatby the light of nature, fome time ought tobefet apart, even for the publike ferviceand worfliip of God, and not onely fo, but alfp it is nothing leflfe cleare, that a fiifficicnt proportion of time muft be alloted to the profefled fcrvice of our Creator. But wherein this iufficient proportion of time doth confiftjwe are to feek,being left unto our lelves^and in my judgement, confidering what we are, it is very fit we fliould be to (ceke in this 5 that (b our eyes miy wait upon the direftion of our Maker. For, is it fit that fervants fhould cut out a proportion of fervice to their Mafter at their ownepleafiire, and not rather be guided herein by their Maftcrs pleafure^efpe-cially by fuch a Mafter, to whom wee owe not onely all that wee doe enjoy, but our felves alfo; who holdeth our foules in life, and in whofe hands is the breath of all man-hinde. The queftion thus untowardly propofcd, it is fubjoyncd that. They commonly which are more apt to fay any thing, than able af* terwardtoproveit, maintaine a^rmatively thatitwas, Do(flor Rivet having propofed thiSjaddeth^that if it he ff?cken of the law ofnatHre, properly fo called, fcarce any one will he found to main" taine any fuch thing. And indeed, the queftion in hand, is of the inftitution of the Sabbath: Now,no wife man ufcth to inquire of the inftitution of that which is written in our heart s, and knowne unto us by the very common light of nature. It \%XxVit^fome fetch the origin all thereof from the he ((inning of the world, when God fir ft hlejfed the feventh day and fanBified it: ^ And what other fenfc this can have, than that God commanded it to be fet apart for holy ufes, wee cannot devife; For feeing Gods bkffingand fanftifyingof it doth.undoubtedly denote

i 90 T/^^^ Mvralitie of the fourth c omynandemem ^

SeSl Z ^^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ of Godj this muft be either an immanent ad, or '

- LJL an ad tranlient; Not an aft immanent/or all luch are eternally

but this was tcmporall, following upon Gods reft on the feventh: For therefore ('i^isfaid) godhlejfcdthefeventhdaj, and fantlifiedit; and being an aft tranfient and tcmporall, it muftdeclare his will to have it fanftified, that is (by thegene-rall notion of the word) let apart, that is, from profane and fecularjto holy ulesj And how could this will of Godbe ma-nifcfted but by commandcment, feeing it is a will of God not fo much concerning what (hall be done, as concerning what (hall be mans duty to doe^ And this hath both fT^-lam, and after him Rivetm juftificd, and this latter againft GomarMi once and againCjand that by divers arguments. And thus, as we have exprefle Scripture for it, £0 we have as evident reafon tojuftifieit: Eor, no other ground can be devifed for the dividing of the whole courfc of time into weeks, each con-fiftingoffevendayes, than as itftands in congruity to Gods making the world in fix dayes, and rcfting on the feventh. Which divifion of time was undoubtedly obSrved by the Ifra-elites, and received by them from their forefathers, yea, and from the Patriarches of old, who lived before the flood, and that continued without alteration even from the Creation of the world; For otherwife they could not have difcerned what days had been anlwerable to the firft Ci:^ of the Creation, and what day to the feventh,wherein God rcfted.having finifti-cd the creation. But this was weHknown unto them,as appears by their gathering Manna^ and promulgation of the 4*=^ Com-niandement,together with the reft on Mount Sinai 5 Nay, this divifion of time into weeks, was generally obferved among the heathens, as hath been (hewed by great variety of reading,and that this hath beenc the moft ancient divifion of time, thofe other divifions into moneths and into yeercs, comming in place long after, according as the motion of the Moone and of the Sunne were found out by Aftrologers, not till then, like as the denominadon of the (even dayes of the weekc by the (e-vciall names of the planets, was not brought in, untillchefe-verall motions of all the Planets, come to be difcovered^ As or the fecond reafon propofed thus on our part 5 Ifalltherefi

»f the Commandtme/its flow from the fr'tmiples of nature, how is SeEl y

this excluded ? It is not ht that any man (hould take upon him.. !

the fhdping of his adverfaries argiiirents j That this Comman-dement Ihould be taken for a part of the morall Law J wonder thatany manfhouldbefounreafonableastodeny; but that this Comniarfdement fhould flow irom the Principles of nature; and that delivered without diltiniflion, I know no man that affirmes. Bit let us diiiinguifli,and I make no doubt, but there will be found no difference of moment betwecnc Do<ftor Pride.wx and us: For, 1 find no man to deny, but that (bme time in generall is to be fee apart^ as well for Gods publiqne worfhipand fervice, as for private, and tliat this is acknowledged by the very light of nature 5 Only as touching the proportion of time that is to be fet apart for Gods fervice, heiem we ar^ to feeke; yet herein alfo the light of nature doth advantage us, and th«t fufficiently in tvvo particulars: For the truth whereof, I d ire appeale to the judgement of Doftor Frideaftxh\\r\(t\^'^. I* The firlt is this, that not onely fome time^buta fufficient proportion of time is to beconfecrated to thccxcrci(esof piety, both publique and private, Gomarus and Rivetus are driven to acknowledge this, in anfwer to WaUm about the propor^tion of oiie day in feven. And whereas wc may be to feeke of agreement about what is fufficient: 2. Therefore in the next place, the very light of nature doth fuggcft unto us; that it is-far. e more fit that the Mafter fhould prcfcribe unto the fcrvant, what proportion of fervice he experts from his hands,than that the fervant at his pleafure fhould cutout what proportion of fervice he thinks good unto hisMifterj how much more fit that the Creator (hould prcfcribe unto his creature, thCn that tne creature fhould prefcribc unto his Greater; confidering, i. how the dominion of G d over his creature is inco»nparabIy greater than that which any other Mafter hath over his fervant. 2. That man may become imrcafonable in his demands and commands, God cannot. 5. God can give ftrength to his creature topcrforme what he commands^ man cannot. 4, Themorecleareandex-prefretheCommandcment is, the more comfortable to the creature, being hereby afTured, the fervice he-e per formes is in

tbe:

19^ 7heMoraIitieofthefeuYthCommandement^

SeSi % ^^^ ^^y of obedience, not nnto his owne will, but to the will * * of his Maftcr. 3. May I not adde a third > namelyj that by the very equity of a naturall confcicnce, it is more fit to apportion unto Gods fervice one day in a weeke, rather than one day in amonethj efpeciallyconfidering that originally time hath bcene divided into weekes, tnd not into nioneth?, untill along time after. In all which, lam content to appeale to the judgement of Doftor Prideaux him-felle. Yet we have not done in this argument 5 For in the fourth Commandement, there is enjoyned, not onely the (et-ting apart of feme time in generall for Gods fervice; and the proportion of one day in feven in (peciall, butalfbthe particulating of a certaine day under this proportion; and who feeth not, that (b many different things (though one in fubordination to another) being duly conlidcred, it is no way fit to confound them, and to fpeake hand over head of the fourth Gommandement without diftin<!^ions^ NoWjas touching the particularity of the day^ herein I confcfTe, wee are more tofeeke by the light of nature, than for the fpeciall proportion of time due unto God ; Yet confider, whether herein alfo we arc not aififled in good meafure by the light of nature, and that in certaine particulars. i;"As firft the decent proportion of time being obfervcd, it is nothing materiall in it felfe, as touching the advancement of the ftibftanceof Godsfer-vice J what day of the weeke it be performed under the duly fpecified proportion. For wee find by experience, that all Mafters (land for a proportion of fervice, which they expeifl from the hands of their fervants; the quantity of fervice being a very confiderable matter inthe judgement of all; but •whether a man worke the firft houre of the day, and reft the (ccond, or five hourcs in the morning, and reft the iixth; or in what other difference foever, fo the quantity and proportion of fervice for that day be performed, all Mafters reft fatif^ fied. So for the fervice of the weeke, if it be fufficient to per-forme thus much fervice, as namely,a dayes fervice in a vvttVc^ it matters not what day it be done, fo the work be performed; I fay, it matters not, as touching the fubftanceoftheworkeit felfe to be performed. 2.. But though it matters not in this

refpef)".

Is jtill in force to bind Chrifliuns. j 9 j

refpefVj on what day tli€ (ervice is performed 5 yet it may SeB 2

matter mucii in another rcfped: For whereas we arc all Gods *

creatures^ and conftquently his (crvants; and the (ervice wee Ipcake ot concernes us all in gencrall, and that equally, and all wee arc reafbnable crcatiire^^ i. Firft it feemes fit in rea-fon, that thfere (hoiild be an uniformity : For, like as we converge together by commerce and trade in the workes of ouc calling on other dayes of the weeke; (b it (eemcs moft fit tve fhould walke together with Godi in the performance of his ferviccj otherwife there would be a manifcft breach of (bck* ty. For (uppofctherebcinfuchatowneasours, fcvcntimeg foure hundred perfons (for wee havealmoft 2000.Communicants ; one of the three parifhes in Reading hath as manyj if one 400. (hould kcepe the firft day of the wccke for their Sabbath, another 400. the fecond day of the weeke, and io to divide the dayes of the weeke betweene them, here were a manifeft breach of fociety both in thinges humane, and in things Diyine; for every day ifr the Weeke 406. would be ex« eluded, from converfing with their brethren, in btifinelles temporall-, and all the reft from them whofeday it is t© reft unto God, in cxercifes (pirituall, which all I prefume by the very light of nature, would judge intolerable. And this order would have place not onely in particular townes among themfclvcsj but with other alio 5 confidering that fix dayes in the weeke wee have converfc by commerce and trade, not i^^th'our neighbours onely, but with other townes alfo, farre and neere. Agair;e, another inconvenience would arife, and that a miicrable one, more dangerous than the former; For hereupon a window will be opened unto diflention, each ftanding for hisowne way, a s the manner of man is j and what could bcexpecxed but wretched confufion fliould follow hereupon > Laftly confider, fhould not the (ervice of man prove more comfortable unto him, if God, as hce hath appointed him the proportion of time, fo he would be pleafednotto leave him to (eeke of the particularity of the day under the forementioned proportion. 2. Therefore, as it is fit there fliould bean uniformity,for the rea(bns givenjib for the maini tenance of uniformity, no meancs fufficient, but Gods ovttit

Q^ prcfcri-

194 7hemoralitieof the fourth Cdmm

S£l 2 prefcribing of it, hereupon all juft occafion of difTention will * ^ be cut pflE, confuiion will be prevented,and the fcrvice ofGod^ as every way, eveti in the very circumibnce of timCj according tohiswiiljdiallbetheuiorecheercfully and comfortably per-. formed. 3-. ThircilyjCcufidcrwhatD./.^^ writes in hisThefes" Sde Sahif^io^Thct^^, Gods IVill is mdcrftood often hy his Precept, hut when rpe have not that, the praflice doth guide the Church : 45. This ts a Cathplique rvde, obferveahle in the inflltution of all facred feaftji i>oth divm^^and hpmme :■■ ^^4 The^workebf the .d'iy is fke.^f^ef^i^d afM/owfng the daj,whetkerit[ he wMklj^^^^^th-^-hy^K-JtW<d/ii as particulars evidence in Scripture apd Hifiory: ,47. -Nomdncantrar/Jl(tte the work£s, thereforenomancan tran-(late theMj, :, This is an undoulned rule in Theologie. Now, fop -pofe God had not commanded ttiC; obfevation oiraqy ©ne ^dayiin f,li€ wecke, biit leu it unto n^an .to cjioofe; if wichall heeiliQuld obftrs^eoue day'pre,ferre4'befpr€ anoiher in fomc . 5 not^^ble workc j: what reafori is there,; why man (hould choofc . ^py psthii day .fAther than;tliAt ?' i. This difcourft proceeds upon fuf pofition pf one day in feyen, tf^jbe iiet apart for Gods ^fcviiQe 'i} a«id accordingly we.o^being uj^on'the ele^ion of the .(Jay*; -NovVj,coji{ideritJ[iecaQj<r>fy^?^,;!?^5 G^d; having revealed iipto hinvhpw many dayes hehadrfpeoc jn th^ creating of all things, and in whatorder hee created them, the laft day of the (jx being the day wherein he created the bcafts of the field, . then inan^ and after placing him \x\ P^ar^diie, and after experience of his wJftdome appearing intjie naming of thebeafts Vbrought before hinij not findirig an. help meet for him^ cafling hipi^n a flecpe, and taking a rib out of his nde, thereof made -a woraajito be a help meet for him. The next day, which was the ieventhj God reding fipii) his worke, what day fhould mai?hav5e;pref(?r,redf©r,God§femce before t.y confidering the proportiqn bpj:Weene God?^f^ft from-bis works, and mans ^ reft from hiSi ?an4. that as;this day was thcfirft of Gods reft, , fo it Was the firfl of gians worke 5 And the very Heathens have counted it rearpn3ble5/z/«?i^tf;/?rw/jp?^w, to begin with God, eCpecially there being bo Jbetter. meanes to take liycry and fetfin;9f ;the world made by: God for the fcrvice of man, tfaaft^fci/.the i^ryi<pe o^cjod,, man being made to this end, and

accordingly

accordingly after God§ image, in4^ied with an underftanding ^^ <jf 2. heart to know him, and with rationall affections to fearcand *

(ervchim. And that with the firft, ^^ Caietdnohitv^tth, and that oiic of the j adgemenc of rcafpn, Par ^B ut poft krepta l>e-nsficiii:agnofcam:4s henefA^orem quango j_^, ano fiatim: It is fit after benefits received, wcc(houId acknowledge our Creator fometinies yea,forthwith : As wee reade the Angels did 5 as the Booke of lob infornies us^ Where wafi thou rohcn l laid th: f^ndatiotjs. of the-earth f declare., if th<m hafi underflandlrjg^ who hath laid the me a fur ss thereof, if-*thou 'l^oivefl ? or rvho \Jhath flretohed the line upon it. Whereupon are ths-found.itions thereof fafiened f or "vfiho laid the cornerflorj^^ thereof. When the Yi^crmigfiArrej^fangtogethfry dni all the fonn^'s-of God Jhouted . for ]of. The -fiiniime of-all istHii: i. It- ii5 generally con-{t^t.diy andthatby the very Hght of nature, tharfometimej and that'in a fufficient proportion, i^ to be fet apart for Gods fervice. 2. God being our great Lord and Mafter, it is moft fit, by the very fuggcftion ofnature^thatGod himfclfefhould fct forth nnto us his iervants, both the proportion of time, according to which, and the particularity of the day wherein he will be fervcd by us. 3, We judge that pi'oportion which God hath dehgned, and the day alfo wh'ich he hath marked out to us in his Wordj to be moft agreeable unto reafbn in.the cpnfideradon of his works. And in all this I am very willing ^^

to remit my felfe to che judgement of Doctor Prideaux, The ' next reafon here mentioned foliovveth;C^?f'Trf conceive that this oneh aremoniallUiv crept in, we k^ow not how^am'^nqFi the worall? Or that the Prophdl MofeS would have ufed fmh care in erderincr the Decalogue, onely to bring the (fhurch into greater trpublei ? I aufwer^that fome-time fhould be fet apart for Gods*, fei^ice, was never accounted cercmoniall; As touching the proportion of one day in (evendayestobeconfccratcdunto Godj I never found any Divine ancient or moderne buhe his w/t%about devidng any cercmoniality thereir^ neither did I obfe^vc^ny ancient produced to acknowledge any ceremoni-ality thcincin ; but as it is; fie wee fhould wait upon God for deligaing die proportion of time, (in whfch refpeft divers * count [that pofitive^ lo God having dcfigned unto us the

Q^ 2 propor-

156 TheMorAlitieoftyefamtbCommAndement^

r ci 2 proportion of tlracj we ace bold to fay with eyf^^W;^, thatT^-oeuP.t2 fiQ„ifif^ximecpmfemanefimep, It is mofi a^ireeabL to reafon af" terfix workaday es to confecfateofe wMo God, As touching the particularity of the day.under the proportion ofoneJn feveOj there is to be conlidcred, both relt and ran6lification; As for fanftifiCittion, I never read nor heard any man that conftituted any cerenioniality in the fanftification of the day, but onely in the reft of the day; yet all thefe are (huffled togctherj and ufually men talkc of the cerenioniality of the fourth Coni-mandement hand over-head without all diftinStion: Now^it is true, the ancient Fathers generally conceived a ceremoniality in the reft of the feventh day; but what was fignified by this ceremony, I no where find cxpteflely^neithcr in Mafter Broady nor in this difcouiTe. Other Divines of thefe dayes^had rather call it podtive 5 but how \ Surely in reference onely to the particular day, not to the reft of it, there being amorall reft nc-ceflarily required to the fan£lification of itj namely, fo farre forth in rcfting from our works^ as they are avpcamenta a fkcris flHdiis& meditatlomi>f^» sLvqcAtioQS from facrcd ftudiesand meditationSj as Calvin expreljeth it, and I know none that differ from him herein. Aqmms i^qf the fame judgement; but withall he confelfetH, that the Jewes observed the reft of this ddijfor amyflerioHs /i^yificatlonfak£,wh\chis as much as to fay^ ceremonially 5 in which refpeft it ought to be abrogatcdjwhen *** the body came that was (ignified thereby. So that this no-

thing hinders the morality of one day in (eveUj no nor the ob-iervation of any one particular day that Gods Word (hall commend unto us for ourSabbathj-and that unalterable^ (ave by that authority whereby it was introduced 5 Neither had CMofes any hand, that I know, in ordering the Decalogue, it:; being firft pronounced by the mouth of God, and afterwards' written in tables Ijy the finger of God. Nor did the dcfigning of a day expoic the Church to any trouble, much lefTe the de-figning the proportion of time; It being moft requifite, the Law-maker(hoiuddefigneeachpf thciie for the preventing of trouble; and each being thus defignedj wc find the defigna-tion of them to be mgft agreeable unto rcafbn. - If Tgrni lias thoptght it hardly credibU that Smfij Jhould affart himfelfe from -

the

thefonnes of Qiin to call t4fon the Name of the Lord^ yvithout ^^[f 2

fome certaine and ttpfointed time for that ferforntiince. I doe

noLthinkethat Dedor Prideaux conceaves it credible, that anyvv'ifeman would thinke it fit that the (ervant, and not rather the Milterfhould apportion out that fervice which is due unto his Lord and matter ; or tha:t it is more fit the (el-vant fhouIJ have the defignation of the particular time rather then the matter, the former reai'ons duly confidered- Or is there any reafon why C^/wXhould have fo little authority, whenheedifcourfeth in reaibn for the originall inftitution' ofthe Sabbath,as from tiie Creation 5 and fo great authority when hee (peakes upon his bare word againit the morality of One day in feven ( as fome thinke ) Seftenarium nnmerufn fion ita morcr, ut ejm fervituti cjuiccjuam aflr'mgercm. It is an fa(y matter to fay they conclude nothing ; though I may juftly wonder aqy rcaibnable man fhould (ay Co of the argument drawne from tboie words gen. 2.3. Therefore god hl> ffed the feventh day ^ aad fatiEiifyed it 5 the author alleadg-ing no other exception againft it, but the interpretation of Tofiattu, namelyjthat itisdelivcredby way of anticipation. For this is as good as to confcflejthat to hlejfe and fanWifj the feventh day y is all one as if hee had faid that God commanded it to be fandified. Onely they will not have it undcrftood of that time, when the Lord rcfted from the works of Crea ^"

tion. So that the meaning of ^^'/V/muft be this, In the fc venth :Uj God ended the works which he had made , and the fe^ venth day God refied from all the vporkes which he had made^ and hecaufe God refied on that feventh day from all the works that he had made,therefor e he commanded, not then that, that day from thence forward; but 2400. yeares after, that men fhould confecratc that day to divine fervice. Now in di(i puting againit the unreafbnablencfle of this interpretation given by Toflatm , I am very willing to make Doftor Pridraux my Jiidge, and(.^s it were)under his moderation to proceed in this. And hea I purpofe not to revive the difputa-tions oCvVaUm^ smd Rtvetm zgi'in^Tofiatui his anticipation ; but onely to content my fclfc with the ground layd byDoGtoxLak^ Bifhop yji^ath and fVclh^ in his Thcfis

CL3 of

SeSl Z. ©f the Sabbath, Thef, 46* The worke ofthedaytsthegremd * — nfln^Hnro'tyia the(Lij . tvhether It he tveek[] ^ monthly oryearely^ as varticpdars evince in Scripttire and Hiflory. I make bold to lay this for my ground-in this place ^ beeaufe it is apparant that God madeliis worke on the feventh day, the ground of hallowingthat day, namely, beeaufe it was the day of Gods reftjtherfore to make it the day of mensreft,for the fandifying of It unto the Lord. Now I pray confider is it reafbnable, that beeaufe (uch or fuch a worke hath beenc done in fuch a day , provoking us to kcepe it a fcftivall day unto the Lordj therefore it becomes us accordingly to fanftify it, but when ? not that day nor the fame day fenight, nor throughout the 52. weekcs ot thatyeare, nor any of the $2 wcekes the next yeare; no nor for the fpace of a 1000 yearesjor two thoufand: but after the expiration of 2500 yeares and more, then and nottiilthentofanftifythatday, becauic on that day of the weeke the Lord refted from the wprVe of Cieation, 2500 yeares before ? why might not the wiidome of our Parliament have imitated God, and in memory of our deliverance from the Gunpowder treafon, on ti«c 5 oiNovember , or-dcined that day, fliould bee kept feftivall, fo far forth as in the publique congregation to make a folemnejvtnd thank-full commemoration of that wonderful! deliverance, to begin forfooth a thoufand or two thoufand yeares after. So the Jewes obferved yearely the feaft of T;/r/w! 5 in remembrance ofGods mercifull deliverance of them , from the confpiracy of H^w^>^,but when did they ordaine this feaft to begin 1 not till a thoufand yeares after, had they done fo, who would not have faid, that their wifdome herein had exceeded all humane difcretion ? Or to avoid the like unrealbnable-iieflie on their fide, well they fay that the cafe is not alike 5 for as much as the frcfti remembrance of the Creation, and ofGodsreftingon the ieventh day was fufficient unto them, -both for the maintaining of the divifion of time into weekes or feven daycs;and of fanftifyingeach feventh unto the Lord 5 but when the memory hereof began to be obliterated ^ to wit, aboutfome900yeares after the flood, then it was fit the Lord fliould revive the oblervation of this day ^ by a particular

tkular Commandem^nt^But herby they fliall make the fourth ^^^ 2 Commandement not only niorall, but alfo more naturall then *

they are aware. Though I willingly confefTe they might well conccave that after fome 15 or 16ooyeares, men might grow weary oFobfef ving the (eventh day^^the day of Gods red from the worke of Creatioiijbecaufe by experience we finde that after (bmc 15 or i6ooyeare?,Chriliians feem to grow weary of keeping holy the Lords day/hed.\y whereon the Loid Chriit rofc from the grave,8c fo refted from his workc of redemption. But as not long after i6co yeares the flood came to fet an end to the World by water; fo it may be after 1600 yeares of the Gofpclljthere are but as few yeares to the comming of Chrift, to {et an end unto this World by fire:certainely/as often as fbmefeftivalldayjis grounded upon fbme lingular worke of God donCjOn that da)'(whichDo(flor Lak£ propofeth as a gc-nerall and undoubted rule, alwayes to hold concerning fefti-valIs)no time more fit for the obfervation of fuch a day, then when the memory of the workc is frefhjthen is a man like to be moredevout^morechearefull in Gods rcrvice,morc thankefuli unto him for his great goodneffe, like as the Angells immc-diatly upon their Creation pr^ifcd God lok 38. 7. fvhe?j the Starres of the morning praijed me ^ an^ alt the children of God rcjpjced, which in C^r«r///^ his language was to obferve the Sabbath, Now give mec leave to enlarge this by proportion. As there are Sabbaths of re joycing, fo there arc Sabbachsof mourning. And the expiatio day commanded unto thejcwes, wasanannuallfeaft, to inure them to this holy exercife, not onely once aycarc, but oftner, asGodfhould minilieroc-cafion.-Nowthfsdayis called by the Lord alfo a Sabbath, Lev}tti6.^i, And Do^or <iy^»dreTycs in his paterne of Catc-chericall dodrine, handles the duties of fuch a day , in his dodiine of the Sabbath. And it is well knowne that daycs of wrath have their courfc, and (hall have their courfe, as , long as this World la ftcth as well as dayes of mercy : And .xveehavecauI^tobieflTeGodthat hee hath inclined his Ma--jsfties heart to take notice of fuch dayes of wrath; and accordingly by Proclamation^ to Command a generall humiliation throughout the Land , divers and fund ry times. So t^ Q_4 wee

r ft : wsereide that the Jswes obfcrvei a fafton the firft moneth. ^ ^^ ( bcfidesthcfaftotthe feventh which God commanded) aS ""^ ' weereade^^/£-^.7.3 5- and it was obferved on the tenth day

of that moneth •, that being the day whereon Nei^uchadfie<,z.!ir burnt the houfc of the Lord, as wee reade, /^r.52.12, 13. Now thus far had they obferved the 70 ycares of their captivity 2" ^r/7. 7. 5. they did not put offthe observation of it till athoufandyearesafcer 5 it being moftfitj then efpecialiyto mournc, when God calleth us thereunto, and not to put it offwhcn hec calleih us thereunto 5 the Lord fore complay-ningoffuchconrfes, and pronouncing an heavy judgement upoa offenders in this kinde, iipj 22.12,13,14. Now like as it becomes us to mournc, when firft God calleth us thereunto , Co it becommech us to rejoyce in keeping a feftivall unto him, when hee calleth us thereunto; left otherwvire it prove out of feafon, when it is begun a long time after ^ and utterly negleded upon the frcfti memory thereof. Wee reade that when the Ilienfes^ inhabitants of Ilium railed anciently by the name of troy , fent an Ernbaffige to Tiberius , to condole the death of his Father AngHp^ui ; hee coniidering the unfeafonablenefle thereof, it being a long time after his death; requited them accordingly faying ^ that hee was fbrry for their heavineflfealfo, having loft lb renowned a Knight as HeBor was^to witgabave a thousand years before^^in the warres of Troy,

Surely when in the fourth C3mmandement, and in the teafon given it is (ayd 5 Torlnfxdajes the Lord made Hea^ ven and Earthy th? Sea and all that in them is ^ andreficdthe feventh day ; therefore the Lord Mejfed the feventh day , md fanBi^ed it , it ftands with far bstter reafbn to conceave the meaning hereof 5 in reference to time paft, thus; therefore the Lord commanded the fan^tification ofic 2500 yearesbe-fore; then to underftand cJ^Y^j words. Gen. 2, 3. Therefore the Lordblcfedthe fei>0 2th day , andfanllified it in reference to the time to come thus , therefore the Lord commznd'cd that feventh day to be fanBifed 2^00 y fares after. And ob(crve I pray the forme of words in the fourth Commandementj when ic is ^yd. Therefore tht Lord b/ejfed the Sabbath day^

and

afid pin^lfiedit, not of the time pre(eiit that he: now doth SeSl 2

bleffeit, andfaiiftify k , but ofthe time pafi:^ therefore hee - * * -

did bleffe it^ and fanilifie it; and when I pray but immediate^

ly from the Creation, that very day whereon hee firil refted,

and conftquently that very day, he commanded thefeventh

day tobe(anditicd;forto finu^irle the day is to command

the fanftliicatlon of it, as is confcffcd ^ otherwise there were

no place to plead anticipation. And that the phrafe of fpeech

mult fignifie Gods Command for the finftification of it, I

have already proved.

As for the Fathers affirming that the ancient Patriarches did not obferve the Sabbath, albeit thwir authority is of no force to countervailc fo manifeil evidence both of Scripture it Jelfe; and of the reafon drawne from the divifion of time into weekes, even from the creation, and (6 continued unto the Jewes in the very dayes of C-^^^7^/. Yet I may be bold to fay, we have better authority trom the anciencs for juftifying of our caufe thm our adverfarics have for theirs. JVaUm hath reprc-

dor, maintaining that the juftification of the Sabbath hath bccne from the Creation : Tothefe Rlvetm addes Tertnllltvi as ofthe fame mind, howfoever alleged on the adverfarics pare. And he alfo acknowledgeth the Jewes to be ofthe fame opinion : Bed,i is alleged indeed by Tererlm as on the part of Toftatta, butnofuch thing appeares in his Hewtmerort, but ratherexpreflely the contrary (his words being the(c ofthe Sabbathj femper ceUbrari foUbat^^^ I have (hewed in my anfwer to the preface,i'c'c^. i. Where alfo are repreicntcd thetefti-monies of Athanafta^ and Epiphanies, as maintaining the infti-tution ofthe Sabbath to have beene from the Creation; which atfo hath beene (hewed to have becne the opinion of Philo and lofephm,dind divers of the Jewifh E^^abbinSjand ofthe author of the Chaldee Paraphra(e upon the Pfalms,and of divers others. In Fftlm. 29. Ag'iinejconcerrung the paffages alleged out of fome Fathers to the contrary; notonely Ho/^/«i<j?,Tanfwereth, thaCthofc proceed ofthe rigorous observation of the Sabbath ^ but laiobM .J^i/mw^ a Papilfjin particular thus interpreteth Tertfi/lian'ymd TcrttilHan mJt^ be In. ome fiich (cnte undn'ttoodjis namely, ci^

cher

2oO The Moratitie ef'thefourth Commandement^

Se£l. 2 ^^^^ of obfcrvadon of other Sabbaths in u fe among the J^wes,

— '. * or of the rigorous obfcrvation of theJevv'fhSabbathjOr ofthc

Jewifh manner in obferving it by particular lacrifices appohi-ted for that day ; for as much as he clearely profeffethj that the Sabbath day was a primordio fanBus, as Kh\'tm Qieweth, and that the other Fathers (which are but foure) truly alleged, are to be interpreted by fome fuch manner^ I have endeavoured to SeB, I. evince by divers reafons in my aniwer to the Preface. And though fome are willing to admit that of Tomiellm, that in the accomplifhment of the Creation, the Angels didobferve tlie Sabbath, provided he recompence them in this particular now in queftion, and adde that the obfervancecfn hereupon the earth was not till ma?jy ages after. Yet this naked authority being little worth, hisreafon is fo weake in the former, that we have caufe to fufpeft it will not prove any thing ftronger in the latter; though I (hould have beene content to afford it due confideration had it been propofed : As for the Angels finging and (houting for joy. this was performed, as Torritallm ac-knowledgeth, the day wherein the foundation of the earth was laid, which undoubtedly could not be after the firft day of the creation. For if the foundation of the earth was not laid theUj when the Lord faid, that it was without forme andvoyd, and the waters covered it, I cannot devi(e when It fliould be; It is granted that it may be probably conjectured, that the fan6lification of the Sabbath was before the Law, as concurring herein with Calvin, but that Calvin (aith that no more, is not proved, neither is that paffigc exhibited wherein Calvin fliould deliver his mind fo coldly thereof; but Calvin in his harmony upon the foure bookes of Mofes, and on the fourth Pv€C€ipi^\st\^reffc^th2t1>ifmfeptimfifJifuwpJitDeus acconfecravit eompleta mundi creatione, that God aflumed and confecrated the feventh day unto himfelfe upon the finifhing of the worlds creation. And ic is enough for us, that then it wasinftituted; and hereupon let every fober reader judge, ivhethcr it be not more then probable, that the holy Patri-arches at lead obferved it. Neither doe Vv/e afteft that any man (hould reft (atisfied with our con;e8:ures; but letour realbns be cor>{idcred5 -and the plaine Text of Scripture profeffing that

hecaufe

hecaufe Cjud rcjlcd the fevoith djy, therefore hee hlejfcd the Se^^2,

feventh day and flintlified it 3 and le: them yceld thereunto

no more in this particular, then whereof it doth convince a man in confcietice. Yet who thole late Writers be who are io uniatisfied in this point, I know not well, I verily thinke they arc very few Protel'tants. G'^w^r/.'j (as I remember) ailegeth but two, Fatald^ ^nd Alu^c^/I.-^^, wnereas fVa-hns and RivetHS between them, have alleged no lede than thirty maintaining the contrary. As for the Papifts^ we fhall take notice of them in the next Sciflion.

It is confefTed tiiat this proote is ^ood^ God hUfed the fe» voith day , and/an^tified it ; therefore he commmded it t9 be kept holy hy his people. The fan^ifying of the day in the true notion thereof being nothing but Gods commanding man to fanftifie it, which yet if any nian deny, I appcale to my former argument. delivered in the former SeCiion , for the ju-flifying thereof. Onely it is faidthat therence itfollowcth not that Then or at that time, to wit, the very day whereon God rcfted , he comma'^dedit to he ^ept holy hy his people. Now this exception alio I have remoovcd in the former Se^ion^ And it is very ftrangc we (hould be to ^ttk^ ofthetlmein reference whereunto this is delivered ; mod of all, if fpoken onely in reference to 2500 yeares after, and not the leaft intimation of fo (Irange an anticipation beyond all example, 2i%lValtiis and Kivetpu have proved. When Ahalenfis faith that Mofes Jp^ke this hy anticipation rather to [hew the equity of the Commandcment then the Oriqinall ; If the booke o^Genefis were written before the Commandcment was given on mount Sitta,t\\h interpretation mud fuppofethat the Lord had already revealed to Mofes what hee Would doe on Mount Sina • and what ground is produced for the building of fo much as any conjefture hereof thereupon ? And what wife man would CKpc^ that any TKan fjould he fatisfied herewith ? Doth itnotconcernethemwhomaintaine this affirmative to make it good by Texts of Scripture ? If after the Commande-ments were delivered on Mount Sina ^ what necde ofrepre-(enting the equity thereof ^IfcHng the eqii ity, and that in this -very way, is cxprefled in the Commandcment it fclfc, and

that -

Se£l Z that in fuch manner as to manifeft evidently that God did * not now begin to command this, but that hec commanded

it of oldj even from the Creation, as already I have difputed and proved. And though/^^«/^;7/jVi^ere of th!s opinion, yet Cntar'inus was not i and though Tererim the Jefuitetookc part with Tofiatta , yet Rivetpu hath (hewed that Ccrndim at Uftde^SmmaviuelSa» i^/^^r^jall Jefuites do not 5 but with Qaurinui rather, or that Steuchvts , Euguhinm ^ Geneh}\.rd^ findlAcikbm Sdlantu concurre with them, again!! the opinion of ToftatHS ^ Cjomarui acknowlcdgeth MarimsLlCo to be of the fame minde , all Papifts; and let mec adde unto thefe all theRemifts, as appeares in their notes upon <iy^oc» i, 10, Efiojh might call uf on the Lord, and Abraham offer facrifice^ without relation to afet 9 and apfowtcd time ^ oftner and fel-^ domer as they had occafton. It was in the former ^<?^/W fignifi* cd to be T^rwW/f^ his reafbn which here is anlwered; now Tornietlm was of a contrary opinion to us in this particular, yet hcc confefltih that it Teemed hardly credible ; neither doth theDoftordeny it, oncly heefaith t\\^tEnoJhmight fodoe* hee doth not fay hee did ; yet undoubtedly many things are done that are hardly credible fliould be done, much more might bee done , though indeed they are not ; Yet this is none of our arguments j but fuch as it is, let us not extenuate it 5 but take it aright as it defcrves to be taken. Tornielltis fuppofeth that Enopj didafart kmfclfefr^M thefinnes <?/Cain 5 Now£/;<?y^wasnot alone in this , for the Text faith. Then hegan men to call Hfon the name of the Lord , not Snofh zloxit. Now in Reparation , they that feparate from the fame company in an holy manner have reafbn to congregate them-felvcs; the fame holincffe is as powerfully effecfluall to the one as to the other 5 and they arc called r/7c Sonnes of God^ in di{tin(!lion from the Tonnes, and daughtes ofmen^ Gen, 6» 2. though then the very Tonnes of God began to degenerate. And that thefe meetings of many (hould be without afet, and appointed time, I cannot devile any colour of probability. !♦ For that they could not all meetem one congrcgati* on. 2. that meeting in diverfe, the children of Gcd (hould defirethatatone time their ncetiug might be, the prayers

of

ofm^ny concurring in the fame fikh, and joyning together X^^/jC doebcfiegeGodsEares, and worke an holy violence upon *?*

him. 3. otherwife, there v/aiild be a breach oF fociety and niiituall commerce,; that beingan holy day in one place or countrey which was not in another. 4. being divided farre ofFit would be mod difficult to make new appointments. 5^ little likelihood of agreement herein if left unto themfelvcs, without fbme divine direction and appointment. But to re-•turnc, the next portion of the difcourfe is this. And as for the not fallm^ of the CM^nnaon the Sab hath dfty ^ this rather tvas a preparation to the Qqmmnndement , then any fromiiha^ tim of it. But (uppofe it had becne a promulgation of it, what could that hinder the difcourfe of lacobs not negled:ing LahansAocVt upon confcience of the Sabbath, which was long before the children of//r.^f///going downe into Egypt; whereas Manna fell not untill their departing out o^Fgypt^ and comming into the Wildernefle , which was diverfe hundreds of yecres after. But yet the ordering of the Manna in the falling of it fix daycs, and not the (eventh j doth evidently arg'je that this feventh ftanding in juij correfpon-dcncytpthcfeventhday from the Creation, ( as appeares by the ftory following ) the dividing of time into weekes, arid feptenaries from^the Creation , was (xaftly obferved from the Creation all along untill that time : And no lefle evidently doth it manifeft, thnt the Sabbath day was obferved before the Law given on Mount Sinai-^ and consequently either by light of nature direding them to the day of the weeke whereon God refted j or by Commandemcntj and Gommandemcnt wee finde none before chat on MoOnt Sinai^ onlcflTcthatin G^p;?, 2,*,3, Goe for a Commandeinenc from the beginning. ' ' * .

The firft mention wee readc of the Sabbath is that ExoJ, 16^23. Where Afofes Caith^This is that which the Lord hath fayd, tomgrrow istherefl of the holy Sabbath nnto the Lord^. aiid let every, one judge whether^there bee any forme of a Cdmriiandement in this, arid whether hec doth not fpeake untc> them of a Sabbath as of a thing formerly well knownc . uncothcm^andz/. 25. To day is the Sabbath mto thi Lord^

to

204 The Moralitie efthe fourth Commandement^

~ -Hl^ the condition of a Sabbath were any new thing iintoth'em»

But let us fee vvheth«eF there be any great ftrength in that which foUowei b. Ffit the cafe that Jacob m the Sahhath had \ negUBed Labans fiock^, and'that the Ifraelites under Pharaoh had not made up their tale of brickes 3 neither had he efcaped a chiding, nor they the infolent fury of their taskft9afterst aJ^ndnow according to the principles of thefe Sabbatarians , rvhat would yojfi counfaile them to doe ? did they chferve the Sabbath ^ they, wcrefure ofpumjhmentfromman, did they negldEl it, they werff,-■ J fire of vengeance fr cm the Lord, unto fuch firei(^hts.. are thei reduced, who. would impofe the sMbath as aperpetuaflLa7v of r^/^/^r^. Asforthefirftofthefej weccanriot be ignorant that both flockes of fheepejand heads of greater cattejl were Iboked*. upto in the time of the moft rigorous obicrvation of the Sabbath. Our Saviour observes the. Jewespr^ife (notwith-" ftanding all their rigour this way ) was to unloofe their Oxe an41^ade.hini to watering : Neither w^s Laban fo rigorous a Lp^d to Jacob being from-the firft his i^ncklcj and afterwards his father in Lavy,. and one that had as good meanes to fenow the ftory of the Creation as ^^f^i, and how thattheLord from the beginBJng Bldffcdthe feaventh day. , and fanSilfiedit ; afterwards/i^f^^/poftcrity met with Taske-maftcrs in ^^j;?f. And iftliee^^j/;;^/^;^;f had made copfcitnce of fetting {bn|c^ time apart/or thefervice of God,according to the Tuggeftion of that light which is cpnfefled to extend fo farrje by nature, how improbabk is" \t they would deny this unto their fer-^ \ v^nts ? The Kings of P<^r/7^ did not ufe tlicm fo hard, but^

zr.df.io, . promoted theii; facrificcs that they might praj foy-jhe JCiniTy. andthe^tngs Children x^ Traian rhade a Law that the Jewes' jfliould not be molefled on their Sabbath. The I'urkesu this • day give liberty unto Chriftians for the free cxercife of their' religion. And why (hould wee thinke the <tAlgyptians mox/^f rigoreus to x\\q Ifraclites, thtnthQ'Babylonians vjcxe to the ^^^5 ! P^ ^'^ ^^^ke 4cWhy i»ay, npt; a i;iian' conclude .a^ well ' ,^^f. -f^^ ^'^ ^^■'^'^^^'.i^s, of £l>e JJrdelit/^sin B^yptxhlt Jf. theyMidobferve the sM^fs'.thcy were.^fure offmlflment from r/K^n , -if they didmgleB iir.thej w^refii}e ofvtngmnckfrcmGod^, -. ' ^ '. ■ '■ The'

^The Canon of Linndicta enjoyning the celebration of the SeEl^ ?,

Lords diiy haLh this caution,/? ;>^^/j/"i which is thoiightto =■

befpokeninrefeience to fervants under the tyranny of Heathen niafters./AriH if thc'obfervAtion of the Sabbath may give way to the exertife oF charity Cowards others, and of mercy towards beads 3 may it not much more to tlicexercife ofmercy towards oiirow!-e bodies ^ yet what if all this were granted ? who (ecth not that if there be any ftrength in this argurtient they rway by as good rcalon difpute agaih(fthc pro-fedion o FChrl ft ianicy under pevfecuting tyrants. For if they doeprofelTc chiiftianicy under fiich ;they txreftire ofpmljhmmt from mnn ; if«not, they-are ft'tre of vengeance from God, So that to no fuch ftiaights are wee put as is deviled, like as the ^^tt of ttie quc(ii6n obtruded upon us is devifed affo, but that -I have formerly cleered, and (hewed that wee are to diftin-guilh. I. of time in generall to be let apart for Gods fervice. a. of the proportion of time in fpeciall. 3. of the day under that propOFtion of time in particular* And how farre the light of nature doth—^direft us.ih all thefe. That the fanfti-ficatioii of the feventh day. as commanded from the beginning unto man y I have already proved in the former xS'e'^/<?;73 and alfo that rcafon julfificth this drawne from the divifion ortimemtowcekes, as which had itscourfe from the beginning of the World 5 and how authority both ancient, and ^loderne doth countenance this way of ours farre more then the contrary. And Manages hen Ifrael one of the ancient wife Doft )rs of thejcwes obfcrves, that when the Jewcs are bid to remember thit they wore ferVants in ^y/^^j this is as if it^had beene fayd^ remember how that in E^ypt:^ where thou fervedftjthoii waft conftrayned to worke even upon the -Sabbath day. In Bxod.^^xfi. 1^6. Upon the Lords bleffing thefeveiithday.md fanftlfying it from the beginning of the World-, aiid upon the fourth Gommandemeac is founded our obieivation of the Sabbath ; as Chryfoftorm hath pro-fefTcd j that God' hath manifcfted from the be^innkg that One day in the circle of the? weekc ought to be let apart for a fpirituallieft. , ^

AU confeife that there is a difference betweenc. i. Time in

generall

29^ ^^^ M^y/«/t'fzV ofthefomth Commandementl

Se£l 2 generall to be fet apart for Gods {ervicc. 2. And the pro-_li!- portion of that time. 3. And the particularity of the day in that pro portion. The firft is generally receavcd to be moral!, the other two fome had rather call pofitive, then ceremoni-all, becaufe they conceave it to have beenc iuftituted in Pa-radifc before the fall 5 when there was no neede of any ceremony. They who do moft judicioufly difcourfe of ceremony in the fourth Commandcmenrj doe not call it ceremoniall hand over head 3 but with reference to the reft of the day. And herein the ceremoniality they apply to the reft on the feventhday. As for the ceremoniality to be found-in the proportion of time indefinitely coniidered , as in one day of feaven ^ I never read nor heard, till now. Yet wherein this ceremoniality doth confift^ I meane the thing iigniSed thereby is not explicated at all, neither in re{pe(S of the propor-. tionoftimc, as of one day in (even, nor in reference to the particular day. Yet the Jcwes reft on the fevcnth day, is generally conceaved to prefigure Chrifts reft in the grave that day full and whole, and onely that" day. And as Doftor zAndrew€s Blftiop of fVimhefler in his Starrc Chamber Ipeech profeflcth'j that It hath ever been the Churches doBrme that Chrifl made an end of all Sabbaths bj his Sahhath in the grave. That Sabbath vpas the I aft of thcTn, So Aufiin de Gen, adlit, I,/^.c,il>BedainHexamerononGenefts^zy^quin,2.2»^,i2l* art* 4. Tifiat, on Luc* 14. And albeit the refifromwork^svmf have a cerernoniall fignification of a reft from finne in the way of grace^asj ^zech, 20.12. and a reft both from fin, and forrow 5 ( which is alfo a fpeciall workc of ours through (in, Ier»2. 17.. hafl thoH not-procured this unio thy felfe becaufe thou haft forfak^n the Lord, ) and that iii the roay of glory, Bebr, 4. yet this is no iuch ceremony as to be aboliftied upon the fulfilling of the thing fignified ; for even the Jcwes under the Law had their reft from finne ( in the way of grace) as wee Chriftians under the Gofpell, yet nevcrthe-lefle gbferved the Sabbath , and that glorious reft which ihall not be accomplifhedtill the end of the World / is com-nionly called an eternall Sabbath. And undoubtedly that istobeaccompted as a reft morall whereuntothcfanftifica*

tion

lion of the day callcth us, namely to reft from all workcs,as SeSl. ^ '

they are Avocations from [acred Hudies , and medhations* But * *

doth Abulenps accompt the reft of one day in feven cercmo-mall, and not morall ? Do£^or fyillet relates him as of an other opinion^ and diftinguKhing thus. There arejome things ivhich are ftmfly morall , and fome thirgs Jimpty cercmoniali ^ andfome things of,a Tnixt ki'^^de , as being partly morally partly ceremonialL Simply morall are t hofe things which arc grounded en the judgement of natfirall reafon^as when naturall reafbn doth dilate that fonte time is to he fct apart for Gods fervice • Bnt precifcly to appoint the feventh day more then any day of the weeke, is Jimply cercmoniall ^ cjtiia nan hahet fundamentnm d rationcy fed a voluntate condentis legem • hecatife it is not gronndedon ^reafon^i/Ht on the will of the lavf^m^k^r. But te appoint one 'day of feven y andtpat^^ay wholy for the fpace of 24. houres to confecrateio^odi fervice y as therein to abjiaine from all kinds hfworke^ thefe things are not purely or fimply ceremoniall ,. bnt ff^Ttly morall asgronndedon the'judgement of reafon 5 though n$t totally and wholy^ For the firft^ if above one day in the weeke Jhouldbe kept perpetually holy , Xjravamen ejfet Uborantibus tO' ties vacare ; it were a grievance to labourers to rejifrom worke fo oft (his meaning is in this ca(e, they could not (ufficient-ly provide for themlelves 5 and their families, as touching the maintenance of this life temporall ) and if but one day in a fortnight or a month fljould be appointed ^ oblivifceremur Dei .per defuetudtnem cultPU ipjim. We fhouldforget Godthrough not accuftcming oftr felves fuffiiientlj to his fervice. Therefore it ftands with reafon that one da) in feven fhould be celebrated to the Lord. This furcly is not to deny the proportion of one day infeventobecon(ccrateduntothe Lord, to bemorall; buttoconfirmeit rather. Neither doe I finde \}^2X Ae^uinM re(blvcsit (o, as here it is pretended; that which hee fayth to be ceremoniall, is applied by him onely to the particular day ofthe weeke. Indeed hee doth fay that the proportion of one day in feven to be confecrated to the Lord, is morall, neitherdothheedeny it 5 onely hee fayth, it is morall that fome time (hould be fet apart for Gods fervice. And it may be Zdn.in 4.^<efff. under this he comprehends the proportion of one day in fe-p.5^9. ven>a8^#i»ir/y'duth. R* For

2o8 The ^of^liiii oft^ie fourth^mman^

r- rt ^ , For albeit bee treads in ^qnUas fteps when hee faythj

li— Morale efi qnateni^s natnra doctrt or pietas poflptUt^m aliquh

diesdeflinettir quietly ab o.-peribm fervil'ibpu ^ quodivino cuitni vacare fajjit Ecclefta 5 ceremomde efi quatenpu feptimns dies fHitpr<efcriftm^& nm alius^ It is morall to have a day deftinate to reft from fervile workes (b to be free tor Gods (crvice. It is ceremonial], that the feventh day, and no other is pre-*{cribed for this .- yet a little before hee manifefteth that by me day to befetapart^iot this he mcanes one day in (evisHj when he thus fay th. ^. ivv»,

ihU.^.'i^^' CorU Jidorale eft mandatHm y quatenptspraei^it ut e/eptem diehtu ^' 0rmm confecremus cultui diviffo ~'^-c^ proinde qnatenm tale

mandatum eft ntinqHamfrnt ahrognttim nee abrogaripoteft. The Commandetnent is morall as it commands us to confecrate one day in (evenunto divine fervice. And ip doth Dominicus Bayines%2*cj,/^^.(!rt,l, ^ BellarrHinede cultuSanUorHm lib,^^ cap. 1 1. And if no other be the opinion oi Aquinasj^f theCchooU men of vnhat feEi foever fay the fame , it followeth that they differ no more from us then Aquinas did ; it may be they will be found to agree witir ns. For I doe not thinkcariy ichooleman, being put to it willdeny but that by the very light of nature, not dnely fbmetime, but a Sufficient proportion of time muft be fet apart for Gods fervice. And albeit had we beene left unto our felves without any indication of this proportion from God , wee might well have beene to feeke in the fecting forth of this convenient proportion Yet confideririg how God hath gone before us making the World in fixdaies, andrefting the feventh, andconiideringthereupon the dif jfion of time into feptenaries of dayes ^ reafbn I fliould thinke vyi^h Toflat hs ^ doth didate that the proportion of one day ia-ftven was more convenient then any Other. Or if this were not fufficienC for our dirc(flion herein vy«t when God hath manifefted unto us both after the Creation, and in the fourth Commandement what proportion of time hee'likes beftfor thisf as it is in reafbn fit that the Mafter, cfpecially (iich a Mailer fhould prefrribe what proportion of time (hall be fet, apart for his fetvice ) then with Chrjfoftome^^Q^ have cauie by the very light of nature

undoubtedly

undoubtedly to conclude; that if in the beginning,and under SeEi^ 2 the Law God required oiic day in feven to be confecrated *—— *— to his fervice; wee Imely cannot allow unto hjm a worleproportion under die GofpelJ. KcA lacuhus de Valcntia.i^dverf, Jtid^, q* 2, PrxcfptHm dc Sabbato celchrandoefl fartim morale Concluf, propter prinrjim conditio/jcrK, This firft condition in refpeft whereof he f;iyth it is moral!, hee profeffeth to be two fold, I in regard of the reft. 2. in regard of the fanftification of it, tjbcn hee proves it faying, p}'vbattir ^ Nam prima Sabbat fm JduO^i. fait prtfseptum ad requiem hominis.^ & fanBificationem Dei^^t\ft .: v ; homo ceffaret ab omni negotio miindano^ut faciliHS pojfet H^eo fervire & Utriam. exhibere*Thtn comming to (pecifie the proportion of time to be allowed hereunto, Oportet ( faith hee) ut aliqua dies in ftpfimana ad hujufmodl JanEli^caiionem f^-latriamjit T>eo dc^icata. Et ut ftc hoc pr£ccpttm efiflabile c^ aternHWyUt patebit. One day in the weekc niuft be dedicated unto God for this fanftification and worfhip, and thus the precept is ftabJe and everlafting as it (hall appeare.In like manner .^r^//^ upon Z*;;^)^ 14. Ih the faHtiijicatign of the Sabbath there was fometbing morally and fomeihing ceremonialU his morallto obferve one ^aj in the weeki ; but that itjljould be this day or that daj/y this is ceremonialL Adde to thefe "Bellarmine de cnltH JanElorum lib, 3. cap; 11 • lus divinum requirebat^ ut unns dies hebdomads dicaretHY cnltul divino. Thus we fee thefe aredire6:ly for us; Aquinas and the fchoolemen are notdi-reftly againftus, f as hitherto ii^hath appeared,) no more then Zunchj , who yet isHiire^Iy for u^ , as hath beene (hewed. By the way 5 it doth not follow from any evidence, that either thefe or Toftatus have given, that the adighing of one d.ty above another was ccrempniall , taking this word (ceremonlall ) in proper fpeech ; for i^tmay beaccomp-ted politive. 2. what have wee to doe with ceremoniialls (in proper fpeech ) now under the Gofpcll, who yet doe Itill ob(erve one day in feven. 3* nay why may not that alfp juftly be accompted morall, if God hath marked out. that^ay wee celebrate by feme notable woike, to be CQnfecrated to the Lord, above others 1 efpcci ally according to Bilhop Lakeh\^ grounds, namely that (he worl^.of

R 2 the

210 The Sioralitie ofthefourthCommandement^

SeEi ^ ' thedajfisthff groHJ^dofhaSowmgtheday'-z for proofe whereof *<L - hec appealcs to the inftifution of all fcafts both humane anH divine. Inthisc;i(cj Ifhould thinke there is ho colour for fulpition of any Judaiftie; who thole fathers are, who have ^pronounced (^ashcrc it is Qiidythe foftrth CoT^mafidgmertt to be a ceremonyy a fhadow, and a fignre only ^ here it is not mcntionedjbut delivered at large 3 but I finde that Ifychriut rejzElsfrom the Decahgfie this precept for the obfervationoftbe . Sabbath^ej^eemingh to be o^ilj cerert^^oniiill^o^^o(ed\it^tinhy ^M-44* '^^^•i* Dominicus Bannes ; SedprofeBofaliitur.iffioth Barnes: for. the precept is morall a^s toHchingthe fubflrance ofthepnecept^towit^ ■' that there be a certainc time wherein a man ought to reft unto God, although the determination of fuch a time be not dejlgned: BHt heretofore the feventhdaj was designed by a Divine pr<zc^pt •pofttive ; in the Law of grace ^ the day of the Lords Reftirreni^ on*fo that amongfl the people of God, one day in the weeke hath been determined for divine Cervice, Asforour Divines, the nioftgenerall opinion amongft them iSjthat the ob(ervation ofoneday infeven is of perpetuall obfervation. For albeit B-^entius upon Leviticus affirmes , that the Church may in thefedayesobfervebutoneday in 14. if they will. Yet not ondy Gomarus ^ and Rivet profeffe that under the Gofpell wee muft allow abetter proportion of time for Gods fervice^ rather then a worfe, in reference to that which was allowed under the Law : Bui Lusher tom.'yfol, 610. profefleth that ad minimum unus dies altquis per^JoMomadam ^ istobecho(cn forGods worftiip, and Baldwin in his cafes of confcience. 2.C. 15. ^4^.2. touching feafts./f // morall ( (aith hee ) to fanSlife ore day in feven. Mafter Hoo^r confeileth as much in his Ecclefiaftieall policy. hn(^\\(^alvtn hath a way by himrclfein this; there is no realon hee (hould be introduced to affront the moft generall current of our ownc Divines, muftered up by WaUus as a cloud of witneffes^ftanding for the morality of One day in feven. Yet ^^/<<^j hath cleared alfo Calvin in this point, and that in reference to more pregnant paffages then are produced here 5 where nothing ii delivered m oppofuion thereunto 5 the laft.tends to the confirmation of it*

For

isjlill in fine to bindChrijiians. ^ u

. Fer if it be reafonable that one day in (even fhould be al- SeEl^ t

lowed for the t^^ic , and recreation of (crvants j what day- *— —

(hall be their Sabbath , if not the day of reft ? and if thisbe moft re2(bnable, I hope in the lecond place it will be judged nioft unreafonable that there fhould be one Sabbath foi the Mafter^and another for the fcrvants : undoubtediy^now God hath gone before us in allotting this proportion of time for his fervicc; wee may be bold to (ay with AKornti ( and that incorrefpondency to Tojlatw his difcourfe ^ that rationi maxirrje confe>jtan''rim ejhaftcrfix work^ dayes toconftcrate one unto divine fervice.hr\6. (eeing Go.^ hath required fuch a proportion of time for his ferviceui der thcLiwiby the very light of nature it appeares to be. moft unreafonable wee (hould allow him a worle proportion under the Gofpcll ^ and Calvin profefleth that Nobis cum vn:ripopHh c^'.toadhanc p-:irtem com^ ii - lu munis efl SdbhatineceJJttas, We have as much needeof a Sab- Mofis'inpr£cep[ bath as ever the Jewes had. As touching the three particu- 4. lars wherein TY^^^^^J" is vouched to affirrae the fourth Com-mandement to bee <i'4 unflabU , ayid alterable ceremony^ Firl^ I have not hitherto found, that Toflatus confoundeth the proportion ofone day in (even, with the particular day under this proportion ; as if thefe were equally cercmoni-all. The reft on the (eventh day in the judgement of the an* cients prefigured the reft of Chrift ( that day) in his grave, and in that refpe£l'was accompted by them ceremonial!. But as for the proportion ofone d^y in feven, never yet did Imeete with any who fet his wits on worfce todevife any thing in Chrift to be prefigured thereby, that fo it al(bmight be accompted ceremoniall. Yet I nothing doubt hue this proportion is alterable by that power whereby it waspre-icribcdjbut not by any inferiour powcrjand fo it is accompted by Jacobus de Valentia , flabile & sternum , ftablc and ever-lafting \ and moft unreafonable that wee (hoiild not be bound to allowas good a proportion of (ervice unto God under the Gofpell, as the Jewes were bound to allow him under the Law.

The reft of the (eventh day being cer^moniaHjWee hold not onely with toflapHS that it is alterable, but with StelU that

SeSl' X* ^^ ^^^ ^^ altered^ and I hope the word it felfe affords evi-// * dence enough for this. It is true, the fourth Commander mentin the very front commands the fanEHfying the Sab hath not the (eventh day ^ but the Sabbath : and in like maner it ends "With profelTing that the Lord "Blejfedthe SMath day (not the feventh)*^/^??^/^^^ xV.But when the queftion is made ivhat Sabhath ? I (bould rather anfwer a reft from all fervile works 5 then as here it is an(wered5T/7? feventh day. For undoubtedly God doth not therein command us to reft the (eventh day in correfpondency to the feventh day from the Creation,there is commanded one day in leven, and a feventh after (ix dayes of worke. But wee rouft leave it unto God as to prefcribe unto uSjthe Matter to.his (ervants', the proportion of time to be fetapart for his fervice. To the particularity of the day alfo under the fpectied proportion 5 leaft o-ttierwifc there might be as many different opinions hereabouts, and courfes according thereunto amongft the people of God, as there be dayes in the weekc. Now God did appoint the feventh day of the weeke unto the Jewes for their Sabbath^ butthefirftday of the weeke, hee hath appointed unto us for our Sdbbath j ftill obicrving fix dayes worke before , and a fcvf nth of reft unto God, after. And thus Zanchy a learned and judicious Divine interpreteth the fourth Com-mandemcnt in 4. praecept. p. 5^p. ^<?/. 2. Stat fintentia non ftne caufafaHum Jfe ^ ut infpihftantta prceceptl diflum non fit j Memento ut diem feptimum^ fed tit diem SahhatiJ^cjuietis fanBi' ■flees, Hac enim ratione nos cfHoque prdceptum hoc fervamnSy dum fanEhificnmus dlcm Dominicfinr^cfHia hic^uietis dies nobis efl.ficntfHddn^fuitfeptimHu I am ftill of opinion , that not without cau(e it is fo ordered 5 that inthejfubftanceofthe precept it is not faydjremember the.feventh day, but remember the Sabbath day, that is, the day of reft to fanftifie it. For by this mcanes, wee alfo keepc this precept in fan6tify-ing the Lords Day.

So that this is not the opinion of Doftor Bowncie-ondyy J.nd of Mafter'Ptfri^Wjbut of/i^^wc/r?; alfo^and Jacobus de T/z-lentia adverfyjudaos qu,%. concluf» 4. Chriftian Religion cele^ Urates ^ true mcrall Sabbath on the Lords Day , M touching she

time

isflill in force to bindChrifiians. j 1

z

time 5 in 04 rrntch as it celebrates it on the day ^ whereon it ought ScSl t

^tobe celebrated, and concludes, So the precept of the Sabbath -^

as it is mirall remaines inthe new time celebrated on the. Lords day So Dominicm Bannes formerly alleaged dlftingiiifheth r^^ ftibfiance of the precept , from the partictilar determinatio-n ofths day 5 and addes,thatby a pofitive precept the feventh diy w.is dcjignedmt.o the lewes ; bat afterwards under the Lciw of (Trace Ba>tncs 11.4.44 was defigned the day of the Lords RefurrelHoa^ So that alwayes art.i^ to Cjois faithffill people w.ts dcfig>ied one day in the weehe^for Divine Seyvicei Whereas other fefiivities f fayth hee) are in cotirfe by the inftitntion of the Church, And Doi^or Andren es alio (hev/eth out of Math. 24. 20. that there m a f needs be a Sabbathafter (thriftsdeathy and addeSjthat Thofe which were ceremonies were abrogated : but thoje which were not cere^ monies were changed 5 as the Mini fiery from the Levites to be chofen throttghom the IVrrld. So here the day changed from the day of the Jewes to the Lords D ay,Kt^Ql.i, 10* And accordingly interpreceth the fourth Commandement as belonging unto us Chriftians as bound to obferve the Sabbath i. inonr pd'Tment by a . reiser end efleeming of it, not as a day appointed by man. .2, inottr u'^efet downe^ Efay^S. 13'. not following onr owne will^ nor doing our owae workes. Hereupon a queftion is propo(ed thus. 'Bnt is not the Sabbath a ceremonj ^ andfo 'abrogated by Chrijl ? and the anfwer is this, Do as Chrifl did in the cafe of divorce^looke whether it werefo from the beginning-^ Now the beginning of the Sabbath was in Paradife before there was any firt ^ andfo before there needed any Saviour, and if ihty .fay it prefigured the refl we fhall have from our fins in Chrifl^ }Ve grant it, and therefore the day is changed^ but no cc remony proved* The fraElife of piety is a booke dedicated unto his Majeily that now is^ when hee was Prince Carles in the yecre 162^. which is now 15. yeeres agoe, came forth the 10^ Edition of it 5 w^e have heard it highly commended by King lames , and chat it commended the author of the dedication to a Biftioprick. The author of this treatife^ is large upon the Sabbath, and concurres with ws in every particular wherein wee arc by the Prefacer to this tranflation op-pofei. Amongft other particulars this is one, that hee in-

terprctetb

214 The Moralitie of the fourth Commmdement^

SeSl. 1 . terpretcth the fourth Commandemerrt as Zafjcky doth, iay-

. 121^ ingyThe (^ommand^mcnt doth mt (}ij^ Remember to keefe holj

the feventh day next fallowing the fixt day of the (freat\on orthU orthat^fevemh day : but wdefimtelj^ Rcmewher that thoHJ^efe holy a SMajth day ^ and that Onr Lord lejtis having authority as Lord over th^ Ssibbath^had lil^wife far greater reafon to trarf" late the Sabbath day , from the Iewijh feventh unto the feventh day whereon Chriftians doe keepe their Sabbath ; which alft) hec proves by diverfe reafons. And the booke of Homilies whereunto all our Minifters are required to (ubfcribe, profefleth that wee Chriftians are ftill bound to the oblervation of the Sabbath, and that the Sunday is now our Sabbath. So then as thejewes were tied to the obfcrvation of the Sabbath on the day prcfcribed too them, fb are wee Chriftians tied to the oblervation of the Sabbath too jbut on the day prescribed unto us; {hould wee obferve the fame day with thejewes, wee (hould fall juftly under aAuftins cendire ^ that every fuch one carnaliter fapit. And the farae tAuftin profefleth that AuguU.k'Tern* VoEiores Ecclefia decreverunt omnem glcriam ludaici Sabb^ti Sir.x^u in illam transferrer The Dodors of the Church have de-

creed to transferrc all the glory of thejewes Sabbath unto the Lords Day. So that the cenfure following in the(e words. They therefore are but idly bujied , who would fofarre enlarge the Sabbath or feventh day in this com-' mandenjent ^ as to include' the Lords Day in it \ mud light not upon us onely, but upon other greater Divines, yea and upon the Church of England alfo; but our comfort is,that wee finde it very weakly grounded. As for the inftitution of the Lords Day, I never readc nor heard any that grounded it upon the fourth Commandement otherwife , then by proportion.

That Commandement containcs two things i. the fanfti* ficaticn of the Sabbath. 2« a defigning of the time^when 5 both as touching the proportion of time, to wit of one day in feven; and as touching the particularity of the day under the forementioned proportion.For in commanding a feventh, it commands one day in feven, the former inferring the latr ter, as well ^s it doth inferre the fetting of fome time in ge-

nerall

rcrallapartfbrGodsferviceg which not one (that I know) SeSi,A '

denies to bee the (iiblhnce of this commandement. Now -- 'JLZ

as the Lord defigncJ, what {hoiild bee their Sabbath day unto the Jewes ; (b hath hee dcligncd what fhall bee the Sabbath day .to us Chriftians.

This defignation made to m wedo not deriye from the fourth commandemcnt 5 but this day being by the word of God de-figned unto us, ftill holijng up the fame proportion of time: the reft of this day and thefanftification rhereof,this and this alone doe we derive from the fourth coramandcment, and al-fo, that undoubtedly we Chriftians ought not to allow unto God a worfe proportion of: time for his Service, then did the Jewes : and the proportion is apparant betweenc the Lord the creators reft, and the Lord the redeemers reft. And our reft on the day of our Lord the creators reft, being aboliftied asatype of Chrifts reft in the grave 5 what is more convenient to come in the place thereof then our reft on that day, which is the Lord our redeemers reft. As touching the paffage here alleagcd out oiCalvw^ lamfbrryto observe the common errour of others committed here alfo 5 by difmembring Calvins fentencejlcaving out one halfe of it,ma-king him to deliver that abfblutely, which hee utters onely conditionally. And the other halfe of the fiiftfentence here mentioned doth ipanifeft as much,namely that Calvin fpeakes only againft them,who think themfelves obliged to theobfer-vation of one day in y.for fome myfterious fignifications fake; andaccordingly WalUus ftieweth that he oppofeth none but Papifts, whofe courfe is to obferve fcftivall dayes for fome ' myfteryfakej whereof hee gives good evidence by a paflage which he allegeth out oiBelUrmine, all which I have formerly reprefcnted more at large, in my anfwer to the Preface ScEl, 4. I come to the fourth Seftion of the Author ; That Come doe urge the r:ords of this Cowmandement^ Jo far re till they d^av? hloodiyifteed of comfort^ are but words: nothing ofthisiiind hathbeene hithertomade good (b much as in the leaft colour of probabilitie:And who upon due obferving of the fourth commandemenc may not well be brought to admire the wife-dome ofGodj that as hee hath placed it in the morall law,

S which

X^fi 7 which concerneth ali times and perfjns ^ ^o he hath ordered k * ^L ^jhes fnch a nicinner ; that how Ibever tlie day fhou Id be altered, yet the proportion of time iiill to be kept ; and a Sab« bath i\i\l td bee of force, whether on the (eventh iUy which was the Sabbath day unto the Jewes, or the Lords day which (houldbeour Chriftiah Sabbath ^ thereon to reft unto God an-d to fandifie : hat day unto his fervice 5 we make no doubt but the Sonne of man is Lord of the Sabbath, and fo hath po-tver to change it, and none hath power to change it, but hee that is Lord of it. It is true, this was one argument amongft many, which the Author ofthe Tra^ice ofTletie ufeth to prove that the fourth commandement ftando ftiii iaforce 5 be-cauieOur Saviour profefTeth t\v.\t^He cams not to def^roy ths law^ but to fulfill it : and that the kafl of them, fhould not h ahroga-ted in his king^dome ofthe new Teflament. Info much that who-Soever break^th one of the leaft of thefe tenne commandments and teacheth men fo^ hee fhouldbe called the leafl in the Kingdome of heaveny that is ( faith the Author) he fhould have no place in his ()hHrch. To the firft of thefe here the Doftor anfwereth thus, 7u? vphkh we fay. with the <*y^poflle : Doe we defray th Law by -fakh f God for bid :.}Ve confrme it rather, zChrifrthenluth flit away the fl>adow, but retained the light ^and fpreads it wider theif before : Jkewingthtreby the excellent harmony,betweene the Qofpellandthe Law, As touchiFig the firft part of this prcftnc anfwer ; that is tooaliene from our prefent purpofe 5 the queftion betweenc us^being not whether the Law be deftroycd, by preaching juftification by faith 5 we know that as touching the ceremoniall Law, whatfoever was prefigured thereby is folfilled by Cbrift; and as touching the moral! Law, Chrift hath fulfilled that alfo partly in himfelfe by perfect obedience thereunto, and making fatisfaftion for our difobedience^and partly in us, by givmg ns more power to performe obedience thereunto through faith in him, then ever we had before fince the fall of ^!^i/.z;??. Butour Saviour, CMatth, 5. treats of deftroying the law by abrogating it or any part thereof, which how they can avoid,who teach that Chriftb? his death, hath freed us from the Yoke of the fourth commandement, I catmot comprehend 5 Suppofe it be but one of the leaft com-

mandemcnts

maiden ents, yetletthemlooketoit, vvhodircoiirfeofabro-^^<^ 2 gating it, and teach men that they are not obliged by it Jiand ^'

Ov er head j' leaft they be accompted by the Lord of Sabbath the leaft in thekingdomc of heaven : therefo:eitil:andsthem upon to conHrme it rather as they profefle, but how they doe peifonne that which they pretend^ I am utterly to feeke, 2.1 come therefore to the coniidcration of the fecond part of the anfwer conlTiling of two parts^, i. Thnt Chrift hath put a-rvctj thefl^Adew^2. That he^hath retained the light dr ffrencb it furthers As for thefirftwe€ have heard the proportion dfonedayin (even allowed unto Gods (erviccj to be called a ccremonyjand confequently a (hadow ; But what this prefigured is nc^t ex-planed at all, nor ever hath beene that ever I read or heard,. Neither is this put away, but continueth ft ill in the obfervati-on of the Lords day atithe Chriftian world over; and I doubt not but it will continue to the end of the world. The rcftraint of the worfhip to the feventh day hath beene alio called a ceremony, but too too crudely and without all explication of what it figured : yet we willingly grant a faireprefiguratbn of (bmewhat concerning Chrirt is found in the'feventh day acknowledged by the Ancients and by moderne writers, both Papiftsand ProteftantSj both Lutherans and Calvinifts ; but that is not in reference to the worfhip reftrained to that day, but in reference to the reft, fairely reprefenting Chriftsreft that day in his grave ; and thereupon grounding the rigorous condition of the Jewifti reft, which is the praftifc both of Papifts & of Proteftants (othat the Sabbath is not taken away neither as touching Tome time, in generall to be fandified unto God, nor as touching the proportion of time in fpeciall, as of one day in (even 5 but only as touching the particular day which is cha-nged into the Lords day : Our S.tviour pro-fefiing that a Sabbath ftill was to bee kept uf ChriCuans^as Doftor Andre-ppcs provcth out of Matth, 2(^ 20. As for the fccc)nd, to witj'^^ /ij^ht that is faid to be retailed andfprend wi' der then before ; this is meerc darkneffeuntomc, for I cannot by any meanes comprehend the meaning of it': Neither is here any Cbur (eta ken to expound it, and bring us acquairitcd with the interpretation of it. Suppofe by the light is meant

S 2 the

z

18 The ^ora/itie of the fourth Commandement^

SeSl A ^^ thing prefigured, and that is devifed to bee a fpiritujU '^*_ rell from finne. Buc this I hope the Prophets and holy fer-vants of God under the Law were partakers oE, together with the reftofthe Sabbath and the fanditication of it, as well as we under theGofpell ; and if the ianftification of the Sabbath (I (peak of our Chriftian Sabbath, according to our Saviours language, ALttth.2^,20) be taken from uSj I doubt wee (hill en;oy that ipu'itnall relt from finne, in farrelefle meaflire under the Gofpeli, then the Jewcs did u ider the law. Yet neither they nor we ftiali enjoy it intirely, till we arc brought to our reft in g-ory. Gertainely the confcionable obfervation ofthe Sabbath ever was, and is a principall meines to draw us to that (pirituall reft from fin, and eternall reft in glory. If Saint Tmtby taxirg theJewifh obtervation ofdayes & times, doth therewithal! tax the oblervatiorr otthc Lords day in place of the Jewifh . then let us turne Anabaptifts, and Soci-nians, and utterly renounce the obiervation of the Lords d3y, as well as of the Jewifti Sabbath. Thcfarne Apoftle Co/. 2. fpeakes not ofthc Sabbath, buc of Sabbaths ; and there were dayes enough fo called aniongft the Jewes, and that by the Lord both of dayes and yeares, be'ides the weekely Sabbath 5 yet we are content the reft ofthefcventh may be ranged a-mongft other Sabbaths, as prefiguring Ghrifts reft that day ia the grave. But to fpeake of the Sabbath hand-over-head without diftindion we love not; nor fee I any caufe^ why men fliouldbc in love therewith, unleffe withall they love confu-(ion: and to fifti in troubled waters, is many times an advantage to fcpve turnes. Let the reft of the leventhbein Gods name crucified with Chrift upon the crofle^ or at leaftbebu-ryed with him in his grave, and fo as never to rife with him ; but ktolir Chriftian Sabbath ( our Saviour fpeakes o^Matth. 24. 20.) take life together with our Sav^iours reftirrei^ion that brought with it a new creation, anew world, and there withall a new Sabbath, as Doctor ^A^drewcs Biftiop of Win-chefter delivers it in his Starre Chamber fpecch in the cafe of Trask^ As rcafbn teJ is us that there muft hefoms cert awe appointed time for Gods pHbllcjue Service i fo as good reafon telJs US, wee Chriftians cannot wit;hout finne, allow unto God for

his

his piiblique fervicc a wor fe proportion ofiime under the Goi^ Se^ A pcii, then the Jcwes were, bound to allow unto him under _——Il the Lav, God hi ai lei re never having defervcd fo much at the hands of man as under the Gofpell ; and there never being greater necelfitie of obferving a Sabbath, then under the Gol-pell 5 the way of truth and holinefle being fo befer, and with fuch encombrances as the like were never knowne to the world before 5 yet IHII from the boniag^e and nccejfltie of the le-wlfh Sabhath^ wears delivered by the Cfofpell ; for neither doe we keepe their day, then called the Lords holy day ; but the firft; day of the wceke, th^ day of Chriits rerurre6lionin thenew Teijament, called the Lords day^ Revel. I ,T o» And fo willing-Jy we come to the confidcration of the right, whereby 77?^ Lords day hathfticceededin the-place thereof ; Let it be X.\iQfhame of the Q^^abaptiflj Famlifi and SwenkjFcldianjio make all dayes cquall and equally to be regarded, fo inftced of Qhriftian libera tie to bring into the Churchy an Heathenifh Ucentioufne^ey yec ilirely the heathens ever had their feftivalls even weekely, and tha?: on the feventh day, which was fomctimes called in this refpeft mj^Z/j/xQiivrw. And at this day the Turkes fedivall is their Friday, the firft day of cJ^^^/^w?-// kingdome,when hee fled from M-tcha to lethriby and thenceforth conftituted both the firft day of their weeke and oftheir yeare. Let as many as by their Sabbatarian fpeculations, bring all to ludaifme bee ceniured as they delervc ^ but as for them that delire to have^i// the g^lory of the levees Sabbath transferred to the Lords day^ take heed how you cenfure them, leaft you cenfure Aufiin alio, and theDoftors of the Church menaoned by him,'who have decreed this. As for the river called Sabbaticus, let (uch letticc ^rves their lips that like them» Genfurea of fanatick and pec-vifh fpirits^A eas liberally beftowed by fome 5 as the Baiocchi and Bagalini, which the Pope fcatters at the day of his coronation •, but who they bs thicde(crve the:Ti God will one day Judge. But I perceive whither this tends y It fonie conceive the Lords day to be piophaned by Maygames aixl Morice 'danccSjthey are cenfared for men tanatick & of peevifti fpirits; but they little think that all the Prelates of the kingdome may as well cora^ under their lafh^and the whole Parliament iu the

S3 firft

aio The Moraiiiie 0f the fourth Commandement^

SeU t firftof king Chdrks, But thatthred which here is begun, i-s >>.-„__l£^ diawnc cucfomewhat longer in the next Se(5lion following. 5 In this fifth Sedicn things are focarryed^that it is an hard matter to dlfcerne the Dcftors meaning, efpecialiy in relating the different opinions, concealing the Authors of them and the place where they are to be found, and their arg^uments which here are only faid to be derived from the fan^^ifkatioii of thefeventh day in the firft creation of the world^ and from the inftic-ution of the Sabbath in the fourth commandcment: Forherenceitis faid, tbatthey whoftand for thetranflation cf the Sabbath from the feventh day ot the week, to the Lords day^as by divine authority, doe draw their arguments for the juitifying of their Tenet ; which I willingly profefTe, doth feemea prodigy unto me 5 namely that any man fhoulddil-pute thus. In the beginning of the world, the Lord commanded the (eventh day to be fan6lified5 therefore now under iheGofpellj the Sabbath is to be tranflatcd from the (eventh %■ day to the firft day oftheweeke. Or thus, the Lord in the

fourth commandement gave in charge to fandifie the Sab-bathj and tells them^ that the feventh day ( of the wceke)was their Sabbath, therefore the tranflation of the Sabbath from the feventh day of the weeke to the Lords day is of divine in-ftitution: As touching the firft of thefe deduftions,that which comes nearcft thereunto, is the difcourfeof Dodor Andrewes -^iihopofWinchefterjintheStarre Chamber. The Sabbath had reference to the eld creatiof7y but in Chrifl we are a new crea^ ture^a new creation^ andfo to have a new Sabbath* And Athana-fim his drfcoilrfe long agoneupon that of Matt h. 1 1. 27. All th'wgs are given to me ofmj Father, ¥inif prioris creationt6 Sab~ bntum^The end of the prfl creation^ was t he Sabbath day , but the beginning ofthefecond creation is the Lords day : and of this hce di(courfeth there more at large* And we find manifeftly this notable congruitie betweene the ^Sabbath day and the Lords day, that like as God on the feventh day reftcd from the worke of creation; fo Chrift our Saviour rifingon the firft day of the weeke from the dead, made that the firft day of his rcfting* from the worke ofredempyon. But when I confider the Do-dors (harp ccniures ofweaknejfe^ of imfudencyy of ignorance ^ it.

is

m

is not credible hcfiiould clofely Jet flee at fuchas AthariAflm SeU^r,

and Doftor Andrew^s i^illiop of Winchefter ; Neither doc I -^

find thoroughout this whole difcoiirfe any notice taken of this groiindj ivherenpon their diieouri'c runnes. It is more likely byfarrethat fomemeaner per(bns, and poore fnakcs. are herein letup as markes to (hoot at, and as lignes to be fpo-ken againlilt is true, many doe prove herence the morality of the fourth commandenient; The author of the praiftice of pi-etie which goes under a ^illiops name, t^ljesthis courfeof his tenne arguments to prove the commandemcnts of the Sabbath to be morall 5 this is the fecond ^ 'Becanfe it was command^^dcf God to AdAm'mhis tnnoce>Jcy, 'Sifhop Andrewes in his P^tterne ofcatechetiCiiU doUriae taketh the like courfc, as formerly hath beene mentioned andwhich ismore, proteffeth This to be a principle : th^ft thj ^Deca/i^^ieu thff larv of nature revived} and the Livp 'of'/mtHre is the Image of God:/tow i?i Qod ( faith he) there can ' heno ceremony^ but allmaft be etemail : aidfo in this Image which is the law of nature 5 andfo in the Decalogue, whereas a ceremony u iU^cc^yiv f^ovcv^^nd accordingly that one day in (even is to bee obferved^ and confecrated u-ko Gods Service, as Chry(bftonic long agoe hath inferred herence ^ but it is nothing ufuall to in-ferre herence the celebration of the Lords day. In like manner not one that /know^ancient or late,doc conclude from the fourth commandementj either the celebration of the Lords day^ or the tr.uiflition of the Sabbath from the leventh day to the firftdayof theueeke. But herence indeed theyinferre ( and moft juitly in my judgement ) that if one day in the weeke were to be con(ecrate;i unto the Lord by vertue of the morall laW; in the dayes of the old Teftamcnr, much more doth it become us (bytlievery light of nature) toconlecrate as good a proportion of time to Gods iervice under the Gof-pell; And accordingly to rcit from all workcs. that hnkler the fanc^ification of that diy in the exercifes of pietie, and fo f .srre forth as they are found to hinder it, not for any my (krious iig-Trifications fake, in which refpei^i: a very rigorous reit is molt commonly c >nceived to bee cn;oyncd tothe Je-wes. I doe wonder the C.moniits are reckoned amonglf thofe, who doe bitld the celebr^tioa of the Lords day, ttport th^ ccrdfinifhn of

the

The Mora/itie aft he fourth Commmdement^

SeSi A ^^^ Chfirch and aff,rme this ahfolutdj • when i n t he next Scftion

LJL- manyCanoniftsarealleaged outoft/^^5n'/«^3 as maintaining

the divine Authority of the Lords dayes ; and one of them« SyU dTLi. vejter by n2ime,iprom\\ng It to be cpimonemcommufiem. And

as for Schooie-menjit is apparant^ that P ommcfH "Banms^ puts a manifert difference betwecne the Lords day and other fefti-vities, which are ex inflitutione ectiejta. And whereas BeiLir^ 7w/>^isalleaged as the mouth of the Schoolemen,to affirme abiblutcly, that the celebration of the Lords day, is by the conftitntion of the Church, and that in diftini9:ion from them who fay it was ordered by the Jpofllrs:! find no (uch matter in the pjace quoted, but rather the contrary, both confirminga that one day in a wceke is to be confecrated to the Lord by law divine, and whereas it was not fit, that now the Saturday (hould be itj therefore the Sabbath was turned into the Lords day by the Apofllcs;his words arc thcfe, if^s divinnrequirebat Ht vnm dies hehdomaddtdicaretur cptltuidivino: non autemcon" veniebAt utfervarettir SMatum, Itacjue Sabbatttm ab Apofiolis in diem Dominicum verfumefi • \^tW\{t Sixttu Senenjis ^dXth^ that the inftitution of the Lords day is of the e^poftlcs. as I have fbewei in my anfwer to the preface S, 5. It is true that which is here reported oi'Brentins^ as who profefleth it to be left indifferent to the Church to ordain one dayin feven^or on day in fourteene to be confecrated 5 which whether it be not an unreasonable conceit, I am willing to appeals to the judgement of Doctor Trideaux^ytt Gemardm the Lutheran will not follow ^rr«//;^ in this (aslhavefhewedinmy anfwer to the preface and 5. Sedition) For hee acknowledgeth the celebration of the Lords day, to be ]uxta 'Jpoflolorum conflitutionem. And as for Chemnitim what he writes hereof, is not expreffed, but for the divine authority of the celebration of the Lords day, :I havereprefented the joyntconfent of feme it.or 12. of ourmoderne divines in the place before mentionedjBeddes the concurrence of the ancient Fathers, not ene of them being fo much as pleaded for the oppofite Tenet ; -and laftly the ge-nerall anfwer ofChriftians in the times of perfecution, when they were demanded in this manner ^DomimcHmfervafii^ haft thoH l^pt th f Lords day ;for udiajly it was \\\\%^Chrlftianm fum.

3

intermittere

Is flillin force to bind Chrijiians^ zi2

iviternnttere non pcjfum : I cannot omit it, for I am aQlmftian, S 'El ^

The firft opinion (to wit of thofe who maintained the divine iL*

authoritie, of the cekbritie of the Lords day by the old Te-Itamcnt) is here censured for inclining much to Judaifmcj but it is not expreifed wherein. And it is apparantj they doe not maintainc the cbiervation of the feventh day. Ccrtainely this is delivered in reference to fomewhat, that is not thought fi:taljec;vpre(red ; yet.tbe prefacerdidexprcfTeit^ imputing unto therji vyhom.he oppoleth/that they doe obferve the JevvilhStl^ath, not in lefpeO: of the Jewilh day, but of the Jewifli manner obferving it, to wit^ in the way of a rigorous reft. But I know none that maintaines any other reft from ivorks, then as they areayocations from facred ftudiesand meditations : vyhereas the jewes obferved it for fome niyfterious lignification iakej and thereupon were tyed to a more rigorous reft. But let them fpeake plainly, and (ay we are too rigorous in thinking fports and paftimes unlawful! on the Lords day. And herein /appealc to every Chriftian conicience 5 whether thefe be notas great avocations from facred ftudics and mcdi-tadonSjasthcwprkcs.of our ordinary callings. Then againc ivhiehofus comes neareft toJudaiime herein ? /sitnota-gainft the Jewes, that <*At'ifiin profeflethf/^^f//w f/? or are qmm fait arc ^ Better to goe to plough then to dances ; and Pamin£ ve^ flrAfnelim lanam facerent quamfalt^ircnt. Better it were your women ftiould fpin wooU then dance : as their courfe was in their feftivalls. Againc, why fhotild their opinion be JewiHi, by maintaining it out of the old Teftament 5 rather then out of the new ^ Then, who are they that raaintaine it onely by the old Teftament ? And laftly^not one that I know (neither doe I thinke it can be juftly obtruded on any ) doe maintaine the fLicccflion of the Lords day, in the place of the lewifh Sabbath, either by theoriginall inftitution of it, asfom the creation, or by the fourth commandement ; yet upon thefc nullities .is founded^ the imputation oHhoih impHdency and ignorance^ in oppugning thii received opinion of Divines : That confidently taken up for a received opinion among divines, which is in no tolerable fort proved 5 not one Ancient alleaged for it, and but two PapJfts quoted ; the one of which I have fhewcd to be

V^Si A ^^^ plaine contrary opinion. And of Protcftant Divines, I

V 1 !j_L_>have reprcfcnted no leffe then elcven,maintaining the Apofto-

11c ,11 and divine conftitution of the Lords day, befides Gerar^ «^/^n he Lutheran, to atfront^^-^^Hi^^ 5 Nay^ Doctor Prideaux himielfe SeEl.7, maintaincs that it is of Divine authority 5 and as I remember, in the vefpers at the laft aft unalterable by the Church 5 That the Priefthood being changed^ there u made dfo a change of the law webeleeve, becaufe the Apoftle faith it Hehjt 12, & it is well if the Schoolemen make the word of God thei^: principles ; but of what Law ^ ofthemorall law, or of the tcnne commandements jor any one of them ? ( yet we willingly confefle a change of one particular in one of them)& not rather of the law of lacrifices- & fucha change as to fet an end to them. That herence the Schoolemen conclude that at this dsiy^the moralL law bindeth not, as it was pMified and proclaimed bf Mofes ; but ^ at fir ft it appertained no lejfe to the Gentiles then to the lewes ; this I fay is a myftery : And to cenfcflfe a truth, when I met with this^in a certaincmanufcriptof one Brewers, it feemed to me a very wilde difcourlcj from this place of the Apoftle to inferre fo much^but now I meet with it m a lefture, of fo judicious and learned Divine as Doftor Prideaux^ I will lufpendmy judgementj and waiteuntill I heare what thole Schoolemen are, and where it is that they make fuch inferences ; that being made acquainted withtheraj 1 may judge of them according to my capacity ^as they delcrve. Certaine* ly Zanchj in the place quoted, makes no (uch Inference from that place, Heb» 7.12. yet the Doftrine which he delivers is good and found, though the inftance he makes of the Sabbatf)^ too wcake to prove it, as appcares to all that acknowledge the Commandement of fanftifying the Sabbath to be given to y/^wWjimmediatly after his creation ^ who deferve to be ac-* comptcd more hot (purres then they, in whom The defire of frey Jothover^rfinne thefbnt ? Now what one of our Divines can be alleaged to derive theauthority of r^^ L^r^h dayfrem the law of Mofes ? I am verily perri^aded, noi one: Thcfanftify-ing of the Lords Sabbath they derive from thence, and the fanftifying of one day in (even, btit not the authority of the Lords day : But if it may appeare otherwise, that the Lords

day

day by good authority isTubftitutcd in the place ofthefe-^^^ ' venth to become our Chriftiln Sabbath, fuch as our Saviour * ^*

forc-prophecied of (Jliattk 24. 20. then from the fourth commandcment, they may make bold to conclude, that it ought to be {an6;ified. And this Zanchy himfelfc juftiiies iq the place quoted Qha^. i 9^ as before hath beene fhewed. And! our booke of homilies exprefly tell us^ that now Sunday is become our Sabbath. But we keepe not the fcvcnth day, the rclt on that day being ceremoniallj and prefiguring the reft of Chrift that day in his grave.

And as for the authority whereby wee have fubftitutcd the Lords Day in the place of the feventh,wc anfwcr, that wc are not they that have fubftituted, but the Apodles have fub-ftitutedituntoourhands^God having marked out that d ly unto them by a worke nothing inferior to the worke of Creadon ; to wit 5 the worke of Chrifts Refurreftion, (iach a worke as brings with it a new Creation, and therewithal! a new Sabbathj as Doftor zAndrewes obferves out of the ancients, and delivered as much in the Starre Chamber. And whereas under the Law the JewiQi Sabbath was called the Lords Day; Now under the Gofpell the firft day of the weekc is called the Lords Day in the language of the holy Ghoft in the new Teftament. And whereas our Saviour gives us plainly to underftandj that wee are to have a Sabbath under the GoCpcllMath. 24. 20. as the aforementioned Doftor ex/;?-dreives dothobfcrve in his patterne of Catechcticall doftrine. In common reafon , and in the conlcience of a Chriftian what day ought to be this cur Sabbath rather then the Lords Day, 'fo called in the language of the holy Ghoft; efpecially confidering that not that day of the yeere, but that day of the wcekeis called the Lords Day,a$ by moft generallacknow* Icdgeinent of all ihe ancients hath beene (uppofed. And to urge one place more out of the old Tclbment, then her^ is in a violent manner obtruded upon us, Pfa/,ii%. i^. This u the day which the Lord hath made Jet us re'vyce, and he glad in it, is evide?!t/y Jpohyi of that d^y wherein the ft one which the buil^ dcrs refnfed vpm made the head of the corner. Now by thut ftonc the holy Ghoft chiefclyunderftands the Lord Chrift, Aiat.

T 2 31,42.

226 ^^^ ^oralitie of the fourth Commmdement^

SeEl t 2'•4^- Marcii.io.Lucio^ij. A^Is <\.ii, jTct2,y, ani *^!_ when was hee made the head of*the corner , but in the day W2.1.4. of his Rcdirreclion 5 the Apoiile profelTing. that He was

declared mightily to be the Sonne of God touching the fpirit of fAnclification by the K>ifHrreBion from the dead. And under what ftilc did they rejeft hirag andcondemne him as a blaG-phemcr but for making himfelfe the Son of God? As for the rigorous obfeivation of the reft prefcribed unto the Jewes; as from kindling of fire 5 and dreiUng of meate; fome qualitic that rigour, conceaving that kiy^dling of fire was forbidden onely for the works to be done about making the Tabernacle. This being delivered as a preface, Exod-:^'^, 2. when the free will offerings were now to be receaved for the promoting oftheworkemanQiipofthat which formerly was commanded. And that dreding of meate was not forbidden them, no not in the gathering of Manna, as fbme thinkc ^ if then , yet not as a generall courfc to be obferved for ever 5 And as touching the Table that Nehemiah kept, thus we readc. i^oreover rete.5.17.18. there were at my 'table, an 150, of the Jewes and rulers which came unto us from among the Heatheyi that are about m. And there wa4 prepared daily an Oxe^andjtx chofen Sheepe^ 'and Birds

were prepared for me and hee was fofarre from confciouf^

nefic of profaning the Lords Sabbath herein, that hee concludes \}cwi^^Kemember me 0 mj God in goodnejfe^ according ta all that I have done for this people. But fuppofe they were tied fo ftriftly to fuch a reft, as from workes not fervile, onely in feeking againe^^as Zanehy btianceth the condition of a worke fervile ) but even from' (uch as ten led to the refrefhing of theirnatures I yet the reafbn hereof depended upon the my-fterious iigniiication of this reft 5 as formerly I have repre-fented out of L^nijfrom which ceremon-iaiky weeareabfol-yed 3 ^nd confeqaently freed from that rigorous reft depending thereupon, and reft onely from works fo farfeiorthas they are avocations from Sacred Studies and m..'iitations ^ as Calvin exprefTeth it ^ and tliis wee accompt a morall reft, ^diftinguiOi-'d from ceremoniall. And whereas the Do£lor tellsusthatruchalikcdiftindionis infirme , being con.'ent to fay nothing to confirme it, fave that theText fas hee

faith

faith ) iffjrds it yj'^t :\ had thought the very light of nature ^^^ ^ had beene (lifficicnt to embolden us to conclude, that where ^^—-^ — *-thefanftificationof theday is commanded , therewithal! is : commanded abftinence from all fuch things as would hinder thejfanftification of it, And as for the text it fclfejic isapparcnt

that neither the kindling of the fire, nordrellingotmeatc is particularly forbidden in the fourth Commandemcnt, Neither doth hee Co much as obtrude upon his adverfaries that they derive the fandification of their chriftian Sibbath from ought in the old Tertament, lave irom Gen, 2/3. and from the four h Commandement. In neither of which doth hedeale fairely 5 but is content to confound things that differ^ as if in this particular he affefted to fiih in troubled waters; arid we have better evidence (andindeed it is our only evidence therence) out of the old Te<hment, for thefeftivity of the Lords day,then he is willing to take notice of, namelyour of v

thc^faL 118. 24. Neither is it poifible he (hould beignoranc thereof, howfoever hee doth diflemble his knowledge of it. Yetl hope it is enough forus totinde evidence for it in the Sunfhinc of the Gofpell j and indeed here alone we have the original! obfervation of it, though that it (hould be ob(crved^ is as evidently prophecied in the old Teftament^ as that Chrift is thefione which wasfirfi refpifedof the ifmlders,^nd after made the head of the corner, adding only this unto it, that the day wherein the Lord did this^jjand made ib glorious a worke, marvellous in the eyes of men, was the day of the reiurreftion^ whichlfiippofe no intelligent Chriftian will deny. Iconic unto the 6, SeEliofi,

6 Who they be that mah^ their hoafly that they have found the jnftitHtion of the Lords day in the new Teftament exprejfe/y,^ willingly profeffe I know not, neither doe I thinke the Do6bor knowes. It is, true our Saviour oftentimes dirpfited with the Pharifces about their fnOerflitioHS obfervatioyi ifi he Sabbath day^ which at length degenerated into voluptuous living en that day;in fo nuch^ that ty^ujtin tells the Jevves plainly It is better-ts fToe to plough th'on toLtnce: but if herciipt-n VOU aske, where is^ my the leaji liifpicion of the abroqatin^.ofit ? I anfwer every one knowcs. The time was not yet com! for the abrogath'^ of it, -Nay,

T 5 ^ ' he

228 The Moralitie of the fourth Cemmaniement^

SeEl A ^^ difcoiufeth (b as if 40. ycarcs after his death, the obferva-*^l_ tion of the Sabbath (hould continue, as when he exhorts them at (lich a time, to fray that their flight he not in the Winter^ mr entire S ah hath day Matth, 24* 20. what will you conclude he-rence?cherefore the obfcrvation of the Jevvifh Sabbath was ftili to continue among Chriftians ? if you doe, who (hall more de-^ fervedly be obnoxious to the ceniiirc of Judaifme, you or wee^ yet when he tells them,tW the Sonne of man k Lord of the Sabbath^ how few interpreters writing hereupon, doe not take notice of his power to abrogat it ? But is it not enough that jP^^/cryeth downc the ceremonies of thejewcs, and in ipeci-all their holy dayes, and particularly xS^abbaths; to wit, fo far forth, as they are found to be (hadowcs, the body whereof was Chrift, fuch was the reft on the feventh day, as prefiguring Chrifts reft in the grave. But no (bber man (I trow )will he-rence conclude that herewithall hec cryeth downc the (etting apart of any time for Gods fcrvice, that having no colour of ceremony, or reft from fuch workes, as hinder us in the fer-viccofGod, this being as little ceremoniall as the former, I make bold to goe one ftep farther, and conclude by the fame reafon,that neither doth hecrydownethe proportion of time, to wit^of one day in (even, to be (et a part for the exercifes of piety, becau(e in this particular, there is no more ceremonia-licie to be found, then in any one of the former. But to proceed, what indifferent man would once cxpeft, that in our ^Ja-viours difputations with the Phari(ees about the -S'abbatb, mention ftiould bee made of the Lords day inftituted in the place thereof > It is enough, wee find it inftituted after our 5'a-viours refurreftion ; and fufficient I trowe it is to prove that it was inftituted, and thatin the beft manner, namely by efta-bllfhing it defa^o in praftife amongft the Churchesjl fay,this is fufficiently proved by the obfervation of it ; which undoubtedly , neither was nor could be by chance. A Sovuc mufling in the earthjmay make fomething like the letter A.but not Enniiu his Artdromacha faith Cicero, In like (brt the concurrence ofthe ChurcheSg in the obfervation hereof from the Apoftles, and continuancetherein unto this day, could not be by chance^ but by order, and that from the Apoftles. When

you

you as&c". Did not the ^poflles ki^pe the lewifh Sab hath ? I SeSl^A

anfwer, I doe not iinde they did, yet I finde revelations

were made unto tbem of what was to be done by ddgiees. Ff/fr was challenged <iy4[}s 11. by the reft of the Ap':>ftles, for preaching the Gofpell unto the Gentiles. They tooke indeed advantage ofthejcwcs Sabbath 5 to preach the Gofpell unto them congregated together AEl^ i i^So di J they to the (ame end take the oppotunity of the feaft of Pentecoft, AEls 18.21. I grant the Sabbath day wasoblerved together with the Lords day by fome Ghriftians; T^aronius imputes it to the OrUntales^ and gives the reafon why i^ormerly reprelented. If any man infcrre herehence that the celebration of the Lords day, is grounded upon the conftitution of the Church onely, let him make it good 5 for there is no reafon that words (houid carry it, much lefTe the voyce of one Papift who here is quoted. T am fure T)ommcHs "Bannes and Sixths Senenfis , are at another opinion, formerly produced; and hereafter follow many Ga-noniftsthat maintaine the contrary^by the relation of dxA: i?-> w^and btie of them, Sylvtflt:r by name,profefTeth that ft 'lis CommHttis opinio^ tbat'lth Cjfiyivheaitthbritif, Xi'Brerititis thinkcs otherwift ^ yet ijerardus refufeth to tread in his ffeps, though both are Lutherans. And it the Rcmonftrants concurrc VJithBremHs^it is nothing ftrange.they are (b neer a kin to the Sociiiians and Anabaptift?jwho renounce altogether the obftr-Vation of the Lords day.. I have formerly reckoned up and produced no leffe then eleven of our Proteftant Divines maia-t;?ining the ordinance thereof to be Divine and ApoftolicalK BcfideS"the Ancients who are many^and they expreflc for the fame, and not one that I know avouched to the contrary. Precept indeed we have not for this in the new Teff ameiit^but that w^^ is better then a precept.For had the Apoflles commanded it^and the Churches not praftifed it,thcircommandement had beene obnoxious to various interpretations ; but they tooke order to eftablifti it as appearcs^^i'.? fn^c. And D. Lake tcis us, that where divine precept is wanting, praclife guides the Church; and that the workc of the day is tht ground of hallowing the day 5 and rhe worke of redemption is nothing iti-feriour to chc worke of creation j and I appcale to every Chri-

itian

SeSi 6 ^^^" confcience, whether tipon rufpitioa that we Chriftians V * mult have a Sabbath to obiecyejas the Jewes had/or which we have the exprefie v/ords of pur Saviour^ Matth. 24.20# D. An'-■' drewes conciivning with us iii this ; and that this Sabbath xnuft be fome one day in the w^ske ^ which from the ordinance of God immediately frQm the creation ^ that God himfelfe hath declared unto us, ^^fihrjfcfiome obferveth, and reafon conclu-clct^as^nach for this, and that from coniideration of the proportion of time which the Lord required of the Jewes under the law, for undoubtedly wc (liould iinne if we £hould allow God a worfe prppoi tion under the Gofpell 5 and it is evident .{hatnoceremonialitycanbe found in the fanfkific^tion of one day in feycn , or in the reft of one day^ in (even.' I fay let eve^j qnj£ judge wfiether in. Chriftian j^afon any day ^i^ the.^s^ceke be tp be prefeii^cj-fpr-tUs, beEarc the tord? ■Af^.y th^beingthc day'pf CHrifts rcfiirreftion, the cjay ..^herein T^he Stom, ^^ic^ /%. '^^i^^^/ ^rf^fi4 7^^. ^(^dethe . head of the corner .; and this dfay not of the yeere^ but of .the Wieekeji^eing in Scripture-phrafe called the Lords day ; llkeas^the JewifKSabbath was foijmerly called the Lords holy ^y9^/*5^»: A4ds untotjiis that,D/Pri^^^a-here juftifieth their ob(ervation who maintainc the celebration of the Lords day to be by authority divine confifling in thefe particulars* l.That^i^^ffcmed 4 dang^r^Qus-i;hJ.7i£tGthe'vhoieFdhricki of re* 'i\gion^fif^ldhun^ne'Gx-d^/m^ limit the^ niceffnjyf G(ids vporfhij^ jpr t^tjJje.'£hurchpjo^idmt af[mkki^t^t^tlie.fUafHre.of the Clerp-e^and they perhapi^ nop wifl , at one Among iheppfi/ves, ■ Tot .y^ha,t, ypoHld^i^m,kH-f.cd,0,bout,t}^irFArrif^^h^y:-jokes.offixen^nd domefficke troMes ( m the invaded guefts in the 'hotj 'CoffeU^ ^j^Qt^ldthe^^np^f^fily fetat naughtanhtimajjecrdinarJS/^wotitdnot .f^fl-''^^^ WJ^.- f^f^y '^^fp^/^fi "^f-^f^-^ ?^^'V-4hfinting.ihen^:(vesfrom ilfJ^Ji ^i'^^p^^^ching^mdgtve thernfelv.es fre^ 'leave of doing or .negleBing^any thing , were there not fomethingfchn'Xi^ Script.we r^bioh mare-then any Immane ordinance or tnfntHtien.fhcnldhmde Xhe confcience > yet it is eafie to conjcdiure what would be an-fwered'to all this, for excommunication upon dilbbcdience tp the Church inay be a bond ftrongenough to oblige them nereumojOrifmenbc not fo fenfible hereof, yet thelawes

of

: of the land and penall ftatuteSjtnay provide for fuch reftraints SeU^6*

by fiich punifhmcnts 5 as whereof every naturall man will be —

fenfible enough ^ we have other confiderations to propolc, as I. Touching the proportion of time, to be allowed to Gods fervice, which concerneth the quantity of the fervice it (elfe. X. This is a thing very confiderable and of moment. 2. We have no example, that the quantity of fervice to be performed tothemaftcr, was left unto the confcience, or pleafurc ofthc fervant: but rather is to be prcfcribed by the Mifterjcfpecial-ly by fuch a Mafteras God i?. i. Who hath made us 1 2. Who will infinitely reward us ? 3. To (ervc whom is our moft perfect freedome and happinefle. 4. And who is able to give us ftrength to performe it ? 5. And who is tenderly fenlible ofourweaknefTes, as he is moft privy to them. 6. And after Cod hath difcovercd this unto us, and required the proportion of one day in (even to be confecrated to him, and that under the Law ; furely reafon doth fuggeft. that we cannot performe leffe unco him under the Gofpell. 2. As touching the particularity of the day under this proportion, i. We read that there is one, that is Lord of the Sabhath 5 Now in realbn, who (hall appoint this day, but he that is Lord of it ? efpecial-ly coniidcring that it is hl6 holy day Ef, 58. and fuch feftivalls were faid to be of his making ^falme i 18. 24. This is the day which the Lord hath made, not of mans making: fecondly, but it may be faid, he may leave unto man the appointing of it, if itpleafehim 5 laniwer, that in this cafe it (lands them upon, to (hew their Charter for this. Thirdly, .for my part, liee no caufe, we (hould defirc any fuch liberty, but rather pray unto God to blefTe us from it, i. For a8/amflc(h3 Ifhallbee flire to put it off to the end of the wceke ; and I may be gone out of the world ere that day comes ; and when that day. comes, I (hall be as loath to come to the fervice that day re* quires as ever, and afToonc weary of it, and fay, ivhen mil the Sabha{h begdne, that I may returne to my former courfes, fecondly, as I am fpirit, I have caufe to make choycc of the firft day ; for a love pri/icipijim ^ and Adam And Eve, being after the beafts of the field, made on the iixt day, and planted in Paradifc^ the (eventh day, .was the firftcntirc day to hint

V 4. Dodor

z^t

The 31oralitie of the fourth Commandement^

^ ci ^ 4. Do'flor L^k^ Bifhop of Bath and Wells, obferNTes that _ _I„ feitivaiis Hayes have evcrbeene commended untouSi by fome notable worke done on chat day. Now what worke, like un-to the refurieftion of Chrift, on the firft day of the weekc > 5. *B\{ho^ zA.-^dyewes obferves in his Starre Chamber fpeech, that this rcdirreftion brings with it a new creation, and calls for a new Sabbath ; and I find this, to have becne theobfcr-vation of Atha>ia(lHs.y^ho^xx. 1300. yeeres agoe, 6. If wc were left at liberty in the choycc of the day, it is to be feared, that if there were twenty dayes in the weeke, there would be twenty differences betweene us thereabouts, 7. Laftly, if left at li-bertic t I find norea(bn why weOiouldkeepc our {elves, to the oblervation ofthe fame day j this is fo apt and prone to breed in us an opinion of the neccflfitie thereof, and fo plunge us into (iiperftition ere we are aware, and thereby make our whole fervice of God, on that day diftaftfuU unto him. To proceed, the Pra£tife of the Apoftles is in Scripture, reprefcn-ted unto us in three fcverall places; thefirft whereof is <i^f?* iO 7. Upon the firfi Jay oftht week^^ rphe^ the Difciples cami to-' (rether to hreakc hread^ Paul preached unto them. The praftil^ is improved thus, why is itfnidexj^ejfelyythat the difciples came together to heare the word preachedy and receive the Sacramentsy rather on this duy then any other 5 rather then on the lewiflj Sab-* hath^ were it not then a cnftome^ to celebrate on that day their publique meetings ^ the Sabbath of the Jewes^ beginning by degrees to vanljh fit is farther confefled, that the Fathers and all imer* preters (almoft) doe foccuiceive it, Obfervcj not a Father is found 3 to take it in any other {enfe, only the Magdehur-^ genfesy and Calvin.zvt faid to ftick at the phrafe ^ Vd^^ruv^ as if it mightfignifie fome one day of the weekc 5 and yet iti Scripture phrafe Jt is apparant that, «f«>rii rndBiiTv^C^farc, 16» ^. is all one with, t^t a-a^i^ar^v^ Joh^2o,i^. KndithSal^ 7»^y/^ his obfervation, t\isx.tht Pythdgoreans called the firft day of the weekc «^'«, inftccd of t^/^' », "But the Dv^dlor pro-fcffeth, that from a cafuallfaB he (eeth not^ how a folemne In'-fiitution mny^ he jufily grounded 5 but it is not proved, that thh fa(fl was caluall ; nay the text carry eth in the face of it mani-fcft evidence againft cafealitic* For it is faid that they came

together

together to cat bread ; all then convening to a facred a<ftiorJ, SeEl.6

how could this be done, ifchey had not agreed hereupon be- 1 1

fore 5 cfpecially it being a biifinefle whereabout they came, that required folemne and (acred preparation ? all which affront cafualitie. Take the circumftances aright, TheDifciples from dkers parts came together that day about foUmne and facred ri<^/(?^;therefore it was ordered before^to meet together on that day ; Now this concludes only concerning thern ; and therefore WdHjtHs profcilethjtbat the force of theTc three textSjtakcn apart doe not conclude, but joy ntly ; Now by the next place, l,^«?r. \6, 2.it appeareth, that the fame day was the ordinary day ef mce ing for the Cormths-^and for thcChurches of (74* /atJa alfo : Now how can^.c it to pafle, the fame day was the day of meeting about holy exerciles, in the Church of Ephe-" [t4s^ the Church of Corwth^ and in the Churches of GaUtia? could this ordinary courfc Cfcr fo rruch is fignlfied, i. Or. i5.2.)offomany Churches concurring herein, comctopafle by chanccj or could their confent herein, fo many Churches fo farrc diftant one from another, be wrought by chance, and not rather in all rcafon^ was wrought by authority Apoftoli-call ? And as for the (econd place, i Cor. 1 6, i. whereas the exception is, that there it is (aid the Apoftles ordered colleElioni Bn that day,hut not their meetings 5 yet Do dor ^»^rf 7??^/in his Starre Chamber fpeech alleageth it, as the Apoftles precept, for their meetings on thatdayjand (b doth "TarAwfox though it be notexprefltd, yet fo much is implyed, as by therea(bn formerly mentioned hath beene argued : e(pecially confidc-ring the laft place, ReveL i. 10, where the firft day of the weeke is called the Lords day, a notable evidence of the divine authority 5 the Scripture phrale no where calling any the Lords day, or the Lords Altars, or the Lords fealts, but (uchasare of the Lordsinftitution ; and in thi? particular, ^ifhop AndrcTves compares the Lords day ivith the Lords Suf-pery profefllngnhe notion to be a like in both. And hereupon it is moft ingenuoufly SLcknowled^cd^th^tThea/terationojf^the name doth intimate^ that the Sabbath w^u alf9 altered, in relation to gods worp/jp, but the appointment of the tim^Scc, wherein en-deththis Sedion. And the next begins with this queftion^

V 2 tvhat

2 34 ^^^^ Mordlitie of the fourth Cemmandement^

Se£l ^ "^^^^ ^^^^ '-f^^^ ^^ rtjj^w^ that the Lords day is founded on dhinc authority > and the anfwer is, For my part(rvithout prejudice to

any mans ofinion) lament unto it ; how ever the arguments like me not, -whereby it isfupforted ; well therefore, let us lovingly and candidly, as it becomes the gates of the mufeg, confcrre about thefe arguments. Firft^ thu inference offends me ; that in the cradle of the-world^ (jodhleffed thefeventh day andfanBified it j therefore all men are bound tofanUtfe it by the Law of Na^^ ture : fince I both doubt, whether the T^atrlarches did ohferve it before Mo(es time^ and have learnt alfo that the Law of nature U immutable r^ Doftor Andrewes in his patternc of Catecheticali Doftrine writes faying, This is a principle, that the Decalogue is the Law of nature revived^ and the law of nature is the Image of God. B\Xi let us confider the argument; It is one thing to except againft the antecedent, another to except againft the inference made herence : As touching the Antecedentjit is one thing, what God hath ordained, and may be another thing, what the Patriarches obferved ; we fay God ordained it in as much as hee commanded itin thefe words, Therefore God hieffed thefeventh day and hallowed it^ that is, commanded man tofanBifie it as hath beeneproved : and is alfo confefled i only to helpe themfelves, as it were at a dead lift 5 they fay, thofe words in Genefis^ are uttered by way of anticipation 5 as much as to fay 5 because God refted on that day, therefore God commanded man to reft on the fame day, and fanftifie it, but when ^2500. yeercs after ; for the unreafonablenefle of which interpretation, and the incongruitie thereof unto the fame words, repeated in the fourth commandcment 5 I ap-peale to that which I have formerly difcouried hereupon : Now if God from the beginning ordained the feventh day ta be kept holy ; wee leave it to every fober con(cience to judge, whether it be not moft likely, that both Adam and the holy Patriarches obferved it; for we infift not in this argument upon humane obfervation, but mecrely upon Divine inftitucion. And though God did from the beginning command it, yet it followeth not, that all men are bound to (anftifie that day, unlefjethey havefome evidence of Gods command, wherewith we are made acquainted by the Scriptures. If the law of

nature

nature be meant a light of nature convincing U8,wc doe not in- SeSl^ f^

fcr iierence or at all maintainefnor any that I know ) that in

this fenfejall or any are boundto keep the feventh,or a feventh day holy 5 but onely by vertue of Gods comn^and. Yet this wee profefle, that feeing it is generally confefled that^/ th:^ verj/ light ofnAtiirefome time is to he fet apart forGodsfervice, Wee cannot devife in rea(on any better ccurfe , then to fet one day in fcaven apart for this ;con(ideringthefifftdivi-fion of dayes is into weekes 5 and if a feventh part of our time be in reaibn to be confecrated unto God , wee thinkc it more convenient to fct one intire day in (even apart for this> then the (eventh part of every day, bccau(e the other bufi-nefles of every day are apt to caufe diika^ion from the Lords lervice. And as I have butetft difcourfed; it is more fit the Mafter (hould appoint unto the (crvant what, proportion of fcrvice hee fhall performe unto him 5 then that this (hould be left to the diicretion or liberty of the fervant. 1. both the honour of the Ma(ter requiring this, 2. and the good of the fervant;for hereby hee Qiall be afflired ofthebctoeracceptance at the hands of his mafter. And fo for the particular day^ it is fit the Mafter (hould raarke out that alfo unto him by (bme prerogative fet upon the dayjas hee did the feventh day, by fini(hing the worke ot Creation, and by his reft thereon from his workes to call man to an holy reft from his 5 fo to be more.free for the (crvicc of his Creator. In which cafes, both touching the proportion of the time, and par-ticularityofthcday, the Law behig made jit (hall continue immutable and unaherable by the will of the Creature 5 but mutable, and alterable according to the will of the Creator : fb that things being well diftingui(hed 3 and rightly conftde-red and ftated, I fee no bug- beare of inconvenience in all this. Neyther doe I fee any reafon why the fpendi^j of one day in Gods holy ivorfhip as a morall andperpctnail dnty , (hould fceme difta(^full to any. Since it is apparant that God commanded it unto his people of the Jewes ; and for \6oo yeares it hath beene continually obferved by Chriftian Churches unto this day; and I make no doubt, but it (hall hold till Chrifts commin^g; though from the beginning ^f th;i World it was

V 3 never

216 7^^ Mo^alitte ef the fourth Commandementl

Se£i f5 never found to be fo hotly oppolcd as at this day. And wh y

- V Should any man ftick in acknowledging it to be morall 5 when

never any man bufied h'lmlcUe to finde out any ceremonia* llty in reference to the proportion of one day in (even ? Neither doe I thinkc ever any man called it /udiciall, but Az^erins profeflTeth it to be rationi maxime coiifentanetim mofi agreeable to reafoyi : and no man that I knovtr hath at any time fet himfelfe to devile a proportion of time to be fpent in Gods fcrvice, more agreeable to reafon then this. And as f©r 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 Chriftian Sabbath; but fuppofing it to be our Sabbath, as the bookc of Homilies (ayth it is ; and our Saviour fignified that Chriftians ftiould have their Sabbath, as well as the Jewes had theirs, Math.2^.2o» wee produce the fourth Comman-dement to prove, that wee ought to fan^lifie it, and that wc may the better fandifie it, to reft from all wcrkesthat hinder the fanftification thereof ; And indeed the Commande-demcnt is (b drawcn 5 as to command one day in feavcn to be obferved, and whatfoever is that icventh prcfcribed by lawfull authority 5 to (anftifie it; and abftaine from all works whereby the hallowing of it is difturbed 5 and all this we take to be morall, namely the worfhipping of God in a ccr-taine proportion of time prefcribed by him, and to that pur-pofe to reft from workes 5 not for any myfterious fignificati-on fake, as did the Jewes ; wee thinke the praftife of thc^ Church in the Apoftlcsdaycs is fufficienttoinferretheapo-itolicalljand divine inftitution thereof 5 from hence Athanam [tm , ^/-/Y/, Auftin^ and the Fathers generally, ( for I know not one alleagcd to the contrary ) fo take it* And the Lords Day hath no other notion in Scripture language, then a day of the Lords inftitution ; and this is confirmed in that it comes in the place of the Jewes Sabbath, which is called in Scripture^ the Lords holy day Sfay^^. mdPfal. 118. 24. of the day wherein Chrift was made the head of the corner, having beenc formerly refufcd of the builders,it isexprefly faid, that it is the day that the Lordhath made • and thereupon wee

are

are called to rejoyce^mi be ahtd h it. And it hath this con- Se£l 6 gruity in the caiifc of its inrtitution to the firft Sabbath ; that. s^s on the fcventh day the Lord reded from his Work^ of Creation, lo on the Hrft day of the weeketheLord Chri^ riling from the dead, then relied from his worke of redemption. And lalUy Chrilt bringing with him a new Creation is it ftrangc that he fhould bring with him a new Sabbath?and no day fo fit f^r this, as the day of his Rcllirredion. And laftly wholoevcr doth not icit fati fied With the bare crdinance of the Church ; muft hee not be driven to acknowledge an ordination more then humane , requirablc thereanto > Of the necelTity of my conlequences j and evidence of expreflc Scripture formerly mentioned , I leave it to the indifferent to judge 5 and to none fooncr then to Doftor Prldeanx him-felfe 5 none being more able to judge of Confequences thca hee, being (b verfed therein , and 1 am well perfuaded of the indiffereney of his afFe(flions 3 and had thole writings in the canvaifmg of this point beene extant before thisLefture of hi« which hath fince come to the light of the prefle 5 I am apt to conccave that either hee would have given way to "^

that which (eemes In my judgement to be the truth , or re-prelented good reafon of his diflenting from it. The Apoftles example, nor 16 ondy, but drawing the Churches generally tothefamepractife, doth argue a conftitiition; yet morels brought for the confirmation of the authority of the Lords Day then example. That of fear chiy^^wto the veyles And fljU" dowes of the aid Teflament tofinde this inftitution is a myftcrv unto race 3 and (b farream I from that courfcjthat Iknow noneguiltyof itjTheancifeiit Fathers fometimes doe expatiate this way , for the fettin^ forth of the honorable condition of the Lords Day ; but they build not doftrines thereupon 5 which if they had done in tome particular cafe advantageous to our advcrfarles, it had beene enough to have cryedusdowne.

As forJudaiGneJ have often fhewcd, how little colour there is for anyfucH imputation to be cafluponus, but rather upon our advcrfarics : I (ee no caufe to rang« the TfrrcT" buflan with the Bblonlte , but were they yoake-fcllowes,

whereof

2 \2 7 he moralitie of the fourth Commandementl

S^Si 6 w^^^'^o^I ^^*^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ evidence ; yfet (liodd not wee _J1__L-L-draw with them under the fame^yoake ; ihemnitim hisdif-courfe I have fornneriy examined fomewhat at large ; The vciuntary conjecrationpfk by Chrlflians no man hath caufe to embracejwho prafefleth himfelfe not fatisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church, as but erftthcDoftof did .Of Brentius I have fpoken enough ; yet well fare him that pro-fefleth the autboiity of the day to be fo farre divine^that he ycho Jhall tjegUB it , or mfhly breake it^ doth forthwith become roorfe then the Jew or InfiJell, As for the ay^rminians^vihAt refpe^ foevcr they pretend to the fatterne of the primitive Churchy like enough they could be very well content with the Socinians^ to make all dayes cquall in ufe , as well as they arc in nature 5 or in refpe^ of any myfterious fignifica-tion i I leave ^Azoriui to refreOi himfelfe with the juy ce of hlsov/ne diftinSion ; It is well that Suarez comes fo farre as to profefle that pra flically it is mtalterabiebj the Chiirclu h%Soi(^4vin^ Bucer,Chtmnitltiiy and thereft^whoarcQneiy faydtoaffirme that//// the Chnreh hath power to chmh the 'Lords day fefome othery I finde no fuch thing in Calvift, and Bficer: as for what Chemnitius delivers hereupon^in my judgement hee fayth no more then Cdvin : though fbme particulars in him I have found to be weake enough, upondilcuf-fion in the 6 Se^Jon^ of my anfwer to the Preface: having there met with the fame names, named to the fame purpofe. It is not credible to mec they fhould give power to the Church to bring us backe to the Jewifh Sabbath : in that ca(e who ftiouM favour moft of Judaifme } or preferre us to the Tnrkes feftivallday which is the Friday, To be inftlaited in me-mory of our redemption, admits an ambiguous fignificati-on; That bringing with it a new Creation, and fo requiring a new 5abbath;asBi(hop Andrewes difcourfeth d^ndAthana' Jius 1200 y cares before him.; No day had a better, matke for this to be preferred into the place of the Jewes Sabbath then the day of Chrifts Refurre<flion ; yet confidering that not that day of the yeare j'but that day oftheweeke is called in Scripture the Lords "Day^this maketh it evidently to favour of Divme inftitutioHj yet it is well that here it is acknovykdgcd

~' to

to be exprefly of traditions ApoftoUcall. 'Bezm addeth, & vere Vpff dt ^ivina^on Revel, I. 10. I truft we [hall ever give due refpefl, *

both to Law, and Gofpell; and the better concurrence wee finde of chein for the maintenance of any dodrinc of ours., the mere caufe wee (hail have to rejoyce therein without fearc ofcenftire for the mixing of them 3 ov framing any Sabbatic all IdolloHt of them. It is not the firft time I have read of ibme fuch afperfion in Rogers his preface to his Analjfs of the Articles of the Church of England; And the next yecre was printed DtfVi/iet upon Cjenefis dedicated to Y^xn^lames , where 'on t\it%.ch.^,v,ht concludes his difcourleon this argument after this mannerj^/^f thefe aU^gatio^s are herefHperflHous^feeing there is a learned treatife of the Sabbath already pnblijhed of this argw G;rdc4 at by tnent (meaning D. Bownds difcourfc thereon ) which contain" Mr. Rogers-eth a mojijound do&rtne of the Sabbath y as is layd downe in the former f oft ions ^which Jhalbe able to abide the triall of the Word of God y andJland warranted thereby ^ when other humane fantafies Jball vanijh: howfoeverfome in their heate and intempcrance,^rtf not afraid to call them Sabbatarian errors , yea heretic all ajferti-ons^a new lubily,Saint Sabbath^more then either lewifi or Popi/h irtflitution ; much lelTe doe wee fearc theftory ofthe Jewof TenkesbtiTy • Solomon hath taught us that the righteous ff?areth hisbeafi^und in our Saviours dayesthejewes them (elves though very fuperftitious in the obfcrvation of their Sabbath, yet (hewed mercy towards their beafts in leading to them to water, and helping them cut ofthe ditch on their Sabbath day. But God can give men over into a minde voyd of all judge-mentjas to the deftru6^ion of their foulcs, (b to the temporall dcftruftion of their bodies alfo^and that as in the way of pro-faneneSj wherof we have manifold experiencejfo in the way of fuperftition.Now (iich (tories are pretty flourifhes, and plca-Hngto the judicious,provided they are to purpo(e5 and found argument hath not beene wanting to jaftifie the doc5lrine they maintaine : but when they are out of (cafon, or (upply the want ofbctter argument 5 they want their grace, and are pleafing only to the ignorant or p^rtialift. At length I am come unto the laft SeBion,

For the one halfe of this Se6lioD3 there is little or nothing controverted betwccne us. But here we have a faire diftin(5li-

X on

- . ^ The Siotalitie of the fourth Commandement^

r> ci ^ ^ on as good as confeflTed^ bfetweene a cerccnoniall reft^ - and ^etf.Om another reftjwhich isdefcribed b^ acreft/ro^ y^Grkes^ as it is "^ ' ^n impediment to the f^rfdrricanceofffich duties^ as are then com"

mand:d\ this I can a reft morall, the rather that the diftinftion may not flye with one wing : That of Saint Hierome is a quick palTage on ^A^, iS* affirming that Saint Vatd when hee had none to whom to f reach in the congregationj did on the Lords day nfe then>orke5 ofhis^occHjiation. I will notanrwer5as the oLitlandifh Priefts faftiion was, as Sir Thomas More reports tbe ftory^ Dominenovilocum^vertimrefpondeo^ fkmitur d^p/ici" per ; fo gratifying hisadverfariesargument with one member of hisdiftin(5iion jand hisowrre, in providing for elcapeoutof the briers by the other : leaft I might be ferved as Sir Thomas More ferved the Prieft, pretending to quote fuch a chapter of Saint Matthew^ or Marke^ when there were not fo many in the whole Gofpell^ or fuchaverfe in a certaine Chapter, when there were not fo many verfes at all.Thercforc I dcfirc to COtiCnlt Hierome^ but Hierome hath not at all written upon the Afts 5 and where elfe to (ecke it I know not. Yet I deny not, but that Dietericm tht Lutheran upon the 17. Domini-call after Trinity Sundays hath fuch a paffigc, Hieronjmm ex (iyiti, 18,^. 2. (^ 4*^ Coiliglty (jpioadieetiam^omnica^ a%Andb-e^HibminfuhUcoconcionaretur^ Vaulmnonhabe-bat,ma^ n'lhasfm laboravit,. But where it is that Hierome doth collcft this he doth not fpecifie : our Saviour was borne under the Law, and knew full welliit became hinii to folfill all rightcoujp-neflfe, and therefore undoubtediy he never did tranfgreffe the fourth commandement : indeed (brae there are, who diftafte the name of Sabbath now a dayes ; and truly the Ancients doc ufually fpeake ofthe Lords day, in diftinftion from the Sa^b-bath, bccaufe that denomination doth denote the Saturday; but I doubt, that in thefe diyes it is diftafted m another re-fpeft, even for the reft of it 5 which I no where finde diftaftcd amongft the Ancients, nor any libertle given by them for (ports and paftimes on the Lords day : But our booke of Homilies fpeakes plainly in faying, The Sunday is our Sabbath day.hnd Proclamations that come forth in his Ma jeftics name ufually call the Lords day by the name of Sabbath. And in the conference at Hampton Court, Doftor Raymlds made a

motion

jnotion, for prcfcrving the Sabbath day from prophanation, SeEt A according to the Kings procIaraation,neither have we heard of ^ * * any prelate of this kingelome,that then interpofcd to alter that phrafe; And which is more, our Saviour calls it the Sabbath, fpcaking of the times of the Gofpell,when the Jewifli Sabbath was to bee buried with Chrift, to wit, Matth. 24. 20. and Doftor zAndrevpes in his patterne of Catecheticaii Doftrincj juftifieth this interpretation of tiiat place, and that to this cndj Co to maintaine the continuance of a Sabbath amongfl us Chrifiians. I doe highly approve the diftinftion following of things commanded, and things permitted on the Lords day, and the explication of each member ; the obJ€6l of the oncj all a£^ions advancing GxDds icrvice, the obje£t of the other, (uch things as are no hindcrance tliereunto ; As in the firft place work^s o^necejfitie ; th^mx^ork^s ofcharitie 5 yet the permittirgof thefe, is rightly to be under flood ; not fb as if the workesof neceffity here mentioned, were in fuch fort permitted as left to a mans liberty, whether he will perfornac them or no- For undoubtedly we are bound as much as lyes in our power, to quench a dangerous fire kindled in a Towne, on the Sabbath day, it being a worke of mercy^ neceffarily required. For if to returnc a pledge ere the poore pawner of it went to his bed, in ca(e it were kis covering, were a worke of mercy, how much more to fave a mans houfe from burning, how much more to fave awholeTowne trom being confu-med, whereby many m:ght bee driven to lye without doores, void of all comfort to the body ? So to draw the ox out of the ditch, and to lead Cattells to watering, I take it to bee a worke of merc}'^, as tending to the prefervation of life in a dum creature. In like fort the dreflTingof meatfor the health of mans body, I take to bee a worke of mercy. So that the performing of theft in reference to the end whereto they tend, I take to be of neceflary duty (as h«re they are called workes of mcelTirie) an^ conieqtiemiy not permitted only, but commanded alio in the general!,though not in this commandement 5 but in the fecond commandemcnt of the (econd table only they are faid to be permitted on the Lords day to figniiiej that the fctirth comfnandcmentdoth not enjoync them nor forbid them, in commanding rctl f^ornworkes on that day, ami the

X 2 fanaifying

2AZ 1^^ moralitie of the fourth Commandement.

KpEI ^ fanftifying of that reft. Idoenocdoubt butrhitcWiri^ ^<?-^ * L ^^ms from it jelfe, and the Scripture commands us to love our 'rielghhonr 04 onr [elves. And can wee performe better love to our felves in advancing our owne good, then by making Thi SMath om delight,to confecrate it asgbrisHS to the Lord ? As for the recreations^ which are here faid to ferve lawfully to the refreOiingofour Spirits ; this appellation is very ambiguous, neither doe I know any difference betweene the recreating of our Spirits, and the refre|hing of our Spirits: yet here the re-freftiing of our Spirits ism ide the ead of recreation. Againc it were good to diftingi^iOi betweene recreation of the body, and recreation oftheinind. Ithinke the refreOiing of Spirits pertaines to the recreation of the body; mens fpirits are natural! and materiall things, and they are apt to bee wafted fir ft naturally: for as life confifts in calidoy in an hot matter^ fo heatcisapttofpcndandwafte the matter wherein it is 5 and Spirits thus wafted are recreated, that is, repaired by eating and drinking. And thus provifions of viv^aall are commonly called rccrcats. 2. Secondly they are wafted alfo by labour voluntarily undertaken, and thefe arc repaired, as by ihe former way^fo by reft alfo. And each way we are allowed to recreate our fpirits on the Lords day ; and as to allow fnch reft to our fervants as a work of mere y^ fo to our own bodies alfo. But now a dayes many comTcs arc called recreations ^wherein there is found little reft 5 and the naturall Spirits of man are rather waftedj and his nature tyred 5 farrc more then the one is repaired, or the other eafed. And when all comes to all^ I doubt the ifllie will bc^to ftile the pleafures of our fenfes by the cleanly name of recreations. NowtheJew.es were expreffely forbidden to find their owne pleafure on the Lords holy ^aj Ef.'^S, 13. yet were they not forbidden all plealure, that belonged only to fucha Sabbath as was a faft ^ and therein indeed hypocrites are taxed for finding pleafurc on that day Ef.'yS, g. But the weekely <5'abbath, was for pleafure anddelight, but no6' for mans owne pleadire, • nor for the doing of their-owne wayes. But to delight in the Lord, which is fpirituall pleafure, and the recreating of our fouls in the Lordrthis isa bleffedreft^thus to reft unto him \ and the word of God is the beli foodijf the ^ i<r:ii\ki No recreates like unto G^ds holy ordinances. Of wi^ib-.

dome

dome it is aid.thitbrw^jes art thewajcs of pUafantnejfe. I SeU,6. Willingly confefTe, that to thensturall nun, as ">'^kngsof —

GodarUom>n.p:fothe^ordofG.d....reproach.moh^, hee , J,_J

hathJd light ink: }\.. delights rather m carnal! pleafur; andisitfictohuflournmvin fuch courfes. and that on the ic. 6..o Lord, day > our Saviour exprefly «lls«s, that T/,. ?%«--/ ^"-^-^■ lifechod the word, anim.kjit hec^m .«,^.«<«& Therefore it no way fits a man to Gods Service , And if way be opciied to fuch courfes, though nottillafterevemngprayer 5 a "la y« are taken with them, will have the.r rnmds "■"""'"S "P^" them fo as to fay. ^h-.r^ y^i'l '^e SM.ith begone, and the time of Divme fervid be over> that fo they may com.to their fports. as well as covetous perfons longed after the like^ th t they m,y returne to their trading. A "«""11/"'"'f^f^^^J'' calling is dikribed unto U5 in Scripture to bee fuch a one as rJvedlu^s a»ddiverfej,lear^res,,nd the wicked are faid « j„j g.„. y„dJrd.jesi.plear/re,.nA &ch «^« ^^ey whom the Pro- EAr-S. Phet defcribeth after this manner, Hearenow thou that artg,-t^!,oZZ. As for thechildren of God, as they are renew-cdintLraffeaionsgeneraU^^^

&eisthiH.^J«^^

ha tt Jndo?IlltLu'd^fcourfe^

hortation, fe.e God,.r,dk,epehu "--1«J7 ; ^^.^^^t Me mJs then on the other fide, the b'efj^d, tl e com^or a ble and only profitable condition ot delight ng >"/heLoirt, SjSnlnt of ^.x'.-^, theFat^herotKmg..W.^J;;

The Moralitie of the fourth Commandement^

ii^ht thoH in the Lord.and he fhall give thee thy hearts defire; to ineete with the contrary judgement of carnalJ merijwho fay, h profitt^eth not a man^ that hejhould delight himfelfe with God, It it be faid that fuch fpcrts are tokratcd^to fit axnan for bis calling the day following ; It is very flrange, that workcs of our calling (hould not he permitted on any part of the i'abbath day, and fports and paftimes (hoiild 5 And (hall not the (pending of our time in Gods iS'crvice, not publiquconly,but privateallb^ farre better fit us to ferve God in the workes of our calling, and ixiake us more capable of his blefling upon our labours, t hen the exercifing of our felves in (ports and paftimes ^ As for the maintaining of good neighbourhoodj appealeto every mans confciencc, whether Chriftian neighbourhood be not better maintained, in meeting together in the repeating of a tycrraoDj the word in the originall being onlyC^;^/<5m/^?^5or in edifying one another in holy communication; then in meeting together at bcare-baiting, or at a play, or at a maygame, or to look upon a morice dance.2.whether on the Lords day which is our Chriftian Sabbath it is not fit to maintaine neighbourhood, and Communion in things fpirituall ; as at other times to maintaine neighbourhood in things civilljand tcmporall. To conclude thisjthere are 3. things that in this difcourie give little fatisfaftion. i. that under recreations arc comprehended not only fuch cour(es as recreate^and refrcfli the Spirits, wher-by men are made more fit for labour both of body^ and minde, but alfo^and that more principally intended as it femees) the plcafing of the (en(es3 and efpecially the eye and the eare^and thus mens pleafures carnall plea(ures are cleancly carryed under the ftile ofrecreationSjand refre(hmcnts of the fpirit^when they deferve rather to be called the tickling of the fle(h. 2. here is no mention made of the end whereunto recreations tend which ought to be only to fit us either for the labours of our-(peciallvocationSjOrfor the works ofourgenerallcallingjas lliufe is for meat?. 3. Laftly under recreations lawfull there leemes to be no intention to acknowledge our converfing with Godin any recreatior75yety/^//?<7r/^ could take notice of a plca-fure taken in this that a man knowes by curious dcmoniirati-on, that a Triangle containes three angles equall to two right: (iich like thing was that which Ar.chimedcs'XQpycQ''^ in/ when-

he

he cried out iopu(t,ivp)Kx, And Pythagoras asl icniember/a- SeEl^6

crificed a greatlaciihcc upon the lin Jing out the eqaalityof the "

fquare of the fubtendeiic line in a icAangle Triangle, to the fquaresofthetwoiid.s So a fcholar takes delight in finding out by curious denionilradon the fqmring of a Circle, a thing confefled by Ariftotlc to be kaowable^ bnc thedemonltration of it hath not beenc found untill about fifty ycarcs agoe^as Saimnth writes upon Pancirolla, Should any pleafure taken in any other worldly th'ngjbe comparable to that which ought to be taken in the enjoying of friendsj and their mutuall communication 1 1 have heard it accomptcd the beft mufick; how much Icffe (hould be all other pleafure in comparifon to that pleafiire which is taken in God, who hath Rivers of^leafures pral.36,8. in his ^'Sfifr^ wherewith to entertainc us? not to fpeakeofthat fulneffe of joy which Is in his ^refence ^ and ^r his right hand plea- Pfal.i^. 11. fHrcsforevermQrefiodsfoule'^^^o'^-^i2kts^\c3L(iKt in us : why (hould not we take delight in him 1 1s not all other rejoycing hrirompariron to our rejoycing in him a rejoycing in a thing of Amos 6. i j. nought fCertainly he that /oveth any fbafure or pa/lime in comparifon to this 3 will in the end prove to be a very poorecrca," ture. But to proceed 5 after this a rule is giyen,T%at this onr^ vhrifiian liberty he voydoffcandaUxo \N\X.^of fcandall]tiftlygiven^ Prov.H. 17. andnotvainely caught at 5 but in what ca(es it falls out to be juftly given^and in what not;in what cafe it is vainly caught at, and in what not^here we find no explicationjwhich yet I pre-iurne will feeme necefTary in every wife mans judgement jcf" pecially to me it muft needs feeme fbjbeingas I anijin cxtreamc defpaire of devifing thefc different cafes of mine owne head. OfChriftian liberty from the yoke of Jewifh ceremonies I have read, but of Chriftian liberty unto fports, andpaftimes^ under the gentile notion of recreations^and that on the Lords day,I never read till now.TheJcwes to this day continue their ceremonicsjbut not any abftinencefrom al fports^andpaftimcs on their Sabbath^ for if they did^why (hould Auflin tell them, it were better for them to goe to plough then to dance ? In the very feftivalls of the Jcwes which were yearclyja difference there was in the dayes of each;the firft, and laft were Sabbaths appointed for holy convocations, and thereon abftincnce comtiiandcd from all fervile vvoifcs 3 tno where finde any piping

246 ^be Moralitte ef the fourth Commandement^

SeEl S P^"g^"<^^^"cing on thofcdayeSjfaving their temple mufick;

* how much more undecenc is it to clap the weekely Sabbath,

together with other felHvalls, as if there were no difference: ;^;^n fignifies to be moved round,and confequently it figniiies, as fometimes to dancCjas i iS'4»?.3o.(b fometimes alfo to dagger like a drunken man, F/^/. IC7. 27. And dancing was ufed Ibmetimes in the feftivalls of the Jewcs^w hereby they teftified their re joy cing in the Lord, h r.31. and with a pipe they came to the mount of the Lordp£/r30.and Miriam Mofes fifter, and other women al(b with Timbrclls, and dances expreffcd their joy in the Lord for their deliverance from the hands of the SgyptAYis^zxA for their fafc paffage through the red Sea^wherc-in the enemies were drowned. But of any fuch courfe u(ed on the firft,and laft day of their ycarely feafts j which were (et a-part for holy convocations jWe find no example amongft them; much leffe as approved,while they continued the Cburch,and people of Godjieaft of all on the weekely Sabbath. As for love feafts on the Sabbath untill abjfe crept in , they continued without exception in great (bbrietyjOnly to quicken one another, and provoke unto love,and gracious communication for the edification of their (buls.I never heard of any (chifmatique how ra(hly 2Calous or Stoicall fbever, that tooke upon him the authority of the civill magiftrate : All for ought I know, concurre inthisjthat it belongs onely to the magiftrate out of coercitive power to command^and compellj but to the Mini-ftcr of what fedl fbever,only to perfiiadejand worke upon mens confciences: fo that the members of this comparifon are moft indecently yoaked feigning men to be of what (pirit (bever it pleafeth to ftiape them, and to doe whatfoeverthey thinke goodjthough never fo unreafonably^ and without all example. Of the Jewes I have read,that they count it unlawfull to kill a Flea on the Sabbath ^ and fiich things muft be pinned upon the fleeve of oppofites to grace their caule/o/w ant of better arguments to ftrengthen it.Infine we have abuffe give to debauched companions in words, when under the cleanly termeof Recreations on the LordsDay^the courfe here taken is to facrifice unto them indeed, and in cffed.

Doctor Lake Bifhop of B a t h^

and Wells ^ jhefesde Sabbato,

O D at firft made us not only meiijbut alfo children ofGod.

2. Therefore wee had a double being, or were fitted for a double X_ '. . I - S CivilL : ^^^^^^ i.lEcdcfiaflicalL . 3. Thcfc ftates are inwrapped the one in the other; For the Eccledafticall prefupofeth the Civill, He that is a child ofGodisaman, and hee muft be of the Civill that is of the Ecclefiafticall (bciety.

4.And the Civill ftatc muft be fealbned with, and moderated by the Ecclefiafticall ^ for a man in his Crvill ftate muft live as a child of God, and merubcr of the Church. 5. NotwithftandingGod wouldthat each of thcfc ftates fhould during this World, have (uccefllvely their principall imployments.

6. And for thcfe imployments hec appointed certainc

times.

7.The proportion of time aHowcd,the principall imploy-

mencof the civill ftatc was fix dayes ; And that which was

allowed the principall imployment of Ecclefiafticall ftatc

was one day •

S. What times himfelfc tooke for to work in or reft after theCrcation, the lame did hee aftlgnc to men, and made his patterne a perpeaiall Law ^ 9.S0 then of our thne God rcferved a feventh pare for his (ervice.

A lO.But

r>

Thefes de Sahbate.

lOf But in this apportioning as he refcrvc d a fevcnth part oftimc;(b was that feventh the (eventh day of the •weeke. 11.Whereoftheground was his reft from labour. 12. For that he would have to be the day of mans reft j be-caufe he faniSlified ic.

i3.And though, no raeane bothJcwes 9 and Chriftians

doubt of the beginning of this obfcrvance by man^

yet I thinke it began with •iAlam.

i4.God had a Church and a feivice of his cwne prefcript

from the beginning; and why ftiould we doubt whether hce

cloathed then.hisfervice with due circumftances of 5^^^"^'

15 Did he fanftifie it for his owne ufc>That were^abfurd to thinke the Word lanaifying doth refute it 5 for whom then ? (urely formanh ' ^^ ' ■'

i6.Aad the place jBW. i^.together with the Preface

to the fourth Commandcment [remember]wcigh

more with me then all the weake prefumptions that

are brought to the contrary.

17.1 conclude then^that the fourth Commandcment is not

an introduftion^but a declaratory Law.

13.But moreover I adde, that when it was delivered to the Jewes there was fupcraddedjadiftinguiftiing reference to that Church.: ; '■'■' :7il!o.-orA.^7/i,f[ .L.^ioW t jn ..-'i;L... . .,

19. For it was prefcribed as afigneofGodl(anftifying refidence amongit tlicm' 5 and a memoriall of their freedome from Egyptian bendage.

20. But thefeacceffories derogate not from the firftinfti-tution.

21. No more doth the forme of Liturgy which was oc-cafioned hy the fall,or their freedome,

22. Thefe things (hew rather to what fpcciall ufe they did apply the timcjthen touch the apportionment thereof.

23. The apportionment of time ( of which I take thele Queftions moved J bath two remarkable things;

^1 .That God refefveth a feventh part of time, 24.V- ^^^^ ^^^ deiigneth which of the feven days V (hallbehis, ^5 The

Thefes de Sahhato.

25»Thercfcrving of the (evcnth part I hold.to be by Gods Ordinance who is not variable in his choice,as everlafting as the World, bccaufe appointed before the fall.

26. And fo (hould the hallowing of thel(wr.\hayfn the Creation have beene as lafting, had it not beene for fin^ for virhatcoLild have altered it but a new Creation ?

27, But man having finned, and fobylin abolifhedthe firfl: Creation ^fj^r^jthough not ^^'/^^^j God was plea fed to make by Chriftan inftauration of the World.

284 Hce ( as the Scripture {peakes ofChrifts Redemption ) made a new Heaven, and a new Earth 3 old things pafled then away,and To all things were made new-.

1 9 Yea every man in Chrift is a new Creature,

30 As God then when he ended the firft Creition^made a day of reft, and fanclified it.

31 So did Chrirt, when he ended his worke,make a day of reft and fanftified it.

32.Not altering the proportion of time which is eternally but taking the firft day of feven for his portion ^ becaufe fin had made the feventh alterable, Therefore.

3^. This firft day fucceeded the {eventh,and by that was this mem oriall abdlifhed.

34 And although the Apoftles were indulgent to the Jcwcs in keeping the (eventh as well as the firft^when they converfed with them ; uncill the deftru6tion of the Temple.

35 Yet would they not endure, that the Gentilesfhould be tied to the obfervation thereof.

36.This firft day Chrift fanftified not only by his refiirrc-(^ioujbut alfo by fundry apparitions before his arcenfion,and after his afcenfion by (ending thereon the Holy Gholljthis is cleare in the Gofpell and A6lcs.

37 The Apoftles directed by Chriftsnot onelyexampie^ biitfpirits alfo, obferved the fame jwitnefleinthe AEisS. Paul ; SJohn in the Revelation,

38 And from the Apoftles the Catholike Church uniformly received it ; wicncfieall Ecclcfiafticall writers.

39 And the Church hath received it not to be Z-'vr« of^frr' vathyi/i-j3,s if men might at their pleafure, accept or refu(e it.

ThefesdeSahhato.

40 But to be perpetually obfeivcd to the Worlds end; for as God only hath power to apportion his time ; fo hath he power to (et out theday that hee will take for his portion, for hee is Lord of the Sabbath.

41 And hedoth itby the workc which heedothonthe day 5 the worke I fay doth difference a day from a day. "

42 Whereas ctheiwife ail dayes are equally and the fame in themfeives 5 as the fonne of Syrach teacheth.

43 Now then when God doth any remarkeable worke, then will hee be honoured with a commemoration day for that worke ; if the woike foncerne the whole by the whole Church-;an.d by a part if it concerne a part.

44 And his will is underdood often by his precept, but when we have not thatjthe pradift doth guide the Church,

45 Thisis cicatholick rule obferveable in the inftitution of all facred feafts both Divine and Humane.

46 The worke of the day is the groimd of hallowing the day,whether it be weekly monethly or yearly 3 as particulars evince in Scripture and Hiftory*

47 No man can tranflate the worke, therefore can no man tranflate the day ^ this is an undoubted rule in Theology, .

48 And no man can in reafon deny duercfpeflimtothe worke,thcrefore hee cannot deny the hallowing of the day; a true rule in morality.

49 Now then feeing the Lords Day hath not altered the proportion oftime,but onely changed the day, though not properlyjet by analogyjthongh not with the accefTorieSjyet according to theOriginall Sabbath, It may well agree with the tenor of the fourth Commandement ^ and the obfervancc thereof be commanded therein.

Jccerdhg to thefe Thejes which I hold true , mtill any of them be conftitedy I will pcint out what Imiflike In the Qieflions or the Anfwers: not every particular^ hat fome principall potfits.

Figure the SeUion of the A n fwers in your hoQko^and ym Jhall the better fit my Thejes to them»

^ejlion

Thefesde Sahhato.

§luejlion I,

T 7 T THatrioeyou mean when you pray after the fourth V V Commandemcnt, Lor4 have mercy, upofj us^cfrc. The 49 Thcfes anfwercth, that we meane not the Jcwifh Sabbath, byt that which analogically to the Otiginall Sabbath we ob(erve,T'/7<? Lords T)ny, Q^fiion 2,Seft,i, The obfervation of the Sabbath (bine fay i? morall, and pcrpctuall. ]

'By Sabbath you mull: underftand the Lords Day^other-wife none but Hercticks hold this opinion. Then I thinke the proportion of time is perpetuall Thefi 15 ; though ifyoulooke to the affignation of the day^ it is not perpetuall; fin hath altered it occafionally , and God Cmfnlh ; nhfque hoc it was intended that it fliould be perpetuall, Theft 26.

But whether is the obfervation of the Lords Day morall? Certainly this is a morall rule; to hallow the day wherein God doth Come remarkable worke. Thef. 43. Sc 48. But Chrift did rife for the reftauration of the World this cfayjthereforethe ob(ervance thereof moral).

Were it an abfolute alTignation of tiinc3.theappointing of the Lords Day, it might be doubted ; but take this cir-cumftance as it cloatheth the worke^ then I hold it cleare that though time be but a circumftance, yet the obfer-vance of time fo underftood is Morall. But there is a mutability in the obfervance of fuch times .^s cloath Gods works, bccaufe the works themfeives are fub-jeft to mutability 5 and fothefeventh day was changed for thefirlt, becaufethc firft Creation needed an inftauration • and he that caufed the Inftauration might make the alteration. Thefi 33.

Queftion i. Se^ion I, The Text is cleare Co/o/^ 2. that the obfervation of the Sabbath was ceremoniall 3

As a (hadow > mcane you this of tjie originall Sabbath or c A 2 the

IhefesdeSahbato^

the declaratory cloathed with the acceflbries. Thef. 18., 19. &c. It is certainc the originall could be uo ftaddow, . for it is precedent to the fall.

The declaration may • true; as confidcrcd with hisaccef-foriesj but the autlior of the Queftions (I thinke^ miftaketlji the text of S.T^/^/.

For the words referre to the controverfie betweenethe Jewesand Gentiles jboth believers ; but the bclecvingjew would have put upon the believing Gentile the ceremonies, which S. Panl indureth not,eithcr here or in the GMat,

M for the place to the Rom : that tempcreth the predim-ptioHjof the Gentilcwho out of the concciptofChriftian liberty forgot to beare with the wcakejew. All this is nothing to the Originall Sabbath^whcreunto ( I fay j) the Lords Day fucceedeth ^ and is by analogy in the fovirth Commandementjwhich hath no mixture oft hof^ acceflbries, for ought J can fee in the words. ^MefHon I. SeBioft 2. It cannot be proved, that the Apoftles commanded to fanftifiethe Lords day in memory ofChriftsRefiirredion.] No canHvhat author ancient is there that doth not.hold it to have had his originall from the Apoftles ? heftiould doe well to alleage them. It iJ5 fomethingdircrcpant from the do(flrine of our Church.] You alleage the words of the Homily, but ftreighten tlietenfeofthem; for the Chriftian People that cholc the fiift day^were thofe that lived in the dayes ofthe ApoftleSjali of them and their poftcrity fiicceifively to us*

Doth it therefore follow that wee may not keepc the feventh day in memory of the worlds Creation ^ It doth; for the Lords Day fucceedeth in ftcad ofth^it^ut Thef,^^, 'iherefore they cannot confift with the purpofe of the alteration, which is to note a New Creation.

Conftantme commanded the fixt day (hould be kept in memory of Chrifts death ]

Kept as a fading day, not as a feAivallday 5 and (b the Church kcepcth it fiiJh

Thefes de Sabbato,

ihtl

Sabbato & fofiride SMati cortveninnt*'] Sodoth the Church now ; but Saturday is Pararcevctp the Lords Day; and leall they (hould fceme to Judaize, they did and do begin the Eve after noon, to note it is but a preparation to Sunday. Ibid, Saint <*y^uftin tcrmeth the Sabbath in the fourth Com-tnandement, Sacramfntum Vmbratile, ]

, True^as the Jcwes did obfervc it ; So himfclfe there cx-poandeth himlelfe.

Queftton, I. Sexton/[,

*" The obfervancc of the Sabbath day by Chrift compared to

Tewiih facrifice. ] v ,

This fpeaketh not of the alTignation of dayes ^ but how ftridly the day muft be kepCj and it is as true of the

Lords Day.

SeEiion 5. Hf^tfw/4.mention is made of three refts. ] Or one reft rather,which is Gods reft^and the participati. Gcru 2.

on thereof 2 wayes5'{'^f^f^^^^ • 7! SftritHallj.

TheTypicallis the entrance into Canaan ^ which carried with it a ceflation from labours of the Jewifh fervitude, and Pilgrimage.

From this Typical! many ( faith the Apoftle)were excluded through infidelity, and by fayth fome did partake it. Bwx. there was another participation, a (pirituall 5 whicb came by Jefus^ vvhereunto/^/«^^ could not bring^whicbisa ceafing not from corporalLbut ipiricjall toylesandiinnes immediatly : but mediately it will bring unto, a fpirituall bleflcd reft both of body and foulc in Heaven*

This fpirituall immediate reft or participation i/Gods reft is called Sabbatifmns popi^/l Dei, If this be (as I conceave it is) the meaning of the place ; what is this to dayes?

Thefes de Sahbata.

Ii>. Seflim 6, Some w^l havea weekcly Sabbath a fliaddow in regard of theftrianeffeof theReft.]

I thinke the ftrianeffe was not iti, at leaft not principally:

but the Accefrion;of which in the T/7«f/fx.

^utyoLi arc out of yoiir argument/or S. 'I'^fil fpeakes of

fhadowwhereofthebody isChrift , Now before the fall the

Sabbath was a kinde of (hadow of our eternall reft 5but not

of that whereof Chrift is the body.

And to us the Lords day is a forctaft of that etei^all reft , and I hold this ftiadow to be as lafting as the World. /^. NewMoone Et cater a (hadowes in their fubftance not their acccflbries, ^r^^? the Sabbath. , >

Aweakecolleftion; for other fcafts were inftitutedaf* ter the fall under the Pedagogy of the Law, the Sabbath before; therefore this might be made a (hadpw by acccC^ forie, thele not (b. Ihid.

Shall I demand of thenijWhen this Sabbath began to be a fliadow. ]

When after the fall it received acceflions, it became fuch aftiadoWjasSalnt P^ff/lpeaketh oi CoL 2. othcrwi(eit was a kinde of fhadow of eternall reft in the foundation, and the Lords Day continueth (b now.

ih. . : ^

The Apofile Hei;rew 4 fpcaketh of the feventh as teftcd upon, not fanftified.]

Reacie the mifiake of this f lacs before. Ih,Senion6, The Sabbath more ceremoniall then the other Coniman-dement8:you prove it out of S.^^/^'^. ]

And it is plaine hee fpcaketh of the Sabbath as the Jewesobfervedit, and had it given in charge withiis accefforie.sbut I ftill call you to the Originall Sabbath. <?<^a. Ref.

Rf^fponfad^H^flion.l, SeElion i. Our words and meaning muft not agree in our Prayer, Lord have mercy ufontisj^c,

A

Thefcs de Sahbato.

A ftrangc anfwer; I thinkc they muft and doc agree; for by

analogy i^ the Lords Day contained in the Commander

ment, and the Church direfteth us fo to underftand.

The apportionment of time is cverlafting, only the tran-

flationoftheday isby all that have any undcrftanding to

Catechize taught to be grounded upon anew Creation luc-

ceeding the old.

The perfonall defeats I cannot reply to.^but leave them to be reformed. Though the imperfe(5lions of the ignorant Qiould not be prefentedj when the queftion is made lo difficult that the learned can hardly aflbile it. As the author of the quefti-ons thinketh.

How (hall the fourth Commandemencbind us confiderlng the forme of words to keep any day but only the fcventh^]

I fuppofe in my T'/^^/^j I have given a probable anfwer. Seeing the apportionment of time is eternall , which I

thinke cannot juftly be denycd, ! hold the tranflation of

of the feait from the (cventh to the firft day is grounded upon Analogy.

For feeing God was pleafed that the day of the Creation fhould be commemorated fasappcareth by the Letter of the Commandement)and the firft Creation being by fin diffolvcd jure, & reftored againc by Chrift upon the firft day;where we find the reft after the new Creation^there we muft fix the feaft; And this is perfwaded by the drift of the Law.

Except we lay this for a ground; God will havi the day of

Creation obftrved. Obfcrved after the rule of the firft Creation it cannot bc,for then we doc not acknowledge the diflblution thcreof^I meane 0ill mcrito.

In teftimony of that, and Chrifts rcftitution,we keepe the day of the newCrcationjand wc are guided to it by the fourth Commandcment. Queftion 3.

How ftiall it appeare to bethcLawofnaturctofandlifie one day every weekc?

Smcly here the Author of the queftions makes a ftrangc

anfwer.

B For

ThefesdeSaihau.

For he loofeth himfelfc in his diftindion of the Morall Law and the Law of nature which he fccmeth not toundcrftand well.

He would have the Law of nature to prefcribc circumftan^ ces to a^^ions^and not the morall LaWj whereas the morality ftands in obfervingthecircumftanceofaftions,asthe Ethickf will teach , and this in the phrafc medium rn' tionps. Secondly 5 hee thinketh that all the Lawes morall are as he callcth them of nature,doe reprcfent the Image of God , anf| are unalterable even by God himfelfe. ^ J ' j? T.,,

Not coniidcring that there is a morality that cohcerneth man as he is Anirnd rationale^ and realbn moderateth the fenfuall part^which cemmeth not within the compafleof the Image of God^ And in many particulars is mutable5and difpenlable in cafes of neccffity; as it is held againft the Law of Nature that brothers and lifters fhould marry^but God difpenfed with it, but I ftiould wade into a large argument if I (hould rippc up thefc

two Errors. .^^ h V>^r:-^- ■

I rather note^that hee underftandeth not'thegroundofa.

Feftivall day, that maketh no orher ground of it than Ow?7w,

^ant or dine ^' decenter,

TheLords Day had a higher ground, which 1 opened in the Thefes^dLtid that is Chrifls Refurreftionj and thereby ^ newInfiauratkn.of the World* ' -,Z/'.\

Which Wee are bound to obferve upon the groiliijcfs fct

downe in the Thefes,

And in a word; Hee that doth not let Gods Word be the guide diievftrng to fanftifie a Feftivall day, I thinke hee fquareth not his opinion according to truth, neither hath hcanyp'rcBdtintfrom Gods Word,

FINIS'

-£!*♦ ♦*» ♦^ £^ ♦^•» ♦A^ «*»

5 2.^ yJ:^ ' S^4? ^^^^:' ^"^ ^^

L. -/Jl^ -ZA. ^^^ ^^ 'J^ ^^ ^j^

Defenfio Thefium de Sabbato.

^ Take notice oitertullJufiin C^artjr : 1 J'hsp, i . ^|| true ; but they alter not my judgement: j1j7a And whyU finde in them onely a bare af-'5^1)1 ,rerti0n,and that of a thing fo remote from ^ their times, that they could not know it !l^:2 otherwise then by relation. From the Scriptorc they had none ; happily they had it from fomc '^cwcs.Gaiaiims alleadgeth(bme.But I oppofejewcs to Jevves, ^Fhilo fudiCM de apifieioMu^di not onely is of a contrary o-pinion, but holdeth al^ that it was a feaft common to all Nations, nccjJ^np^sio/n-ij. And^pcradventure fome fuch thing h mP2int by Heftod his *l^^ofj.9h^of ^fj.af. And it is not unlikely that ;God qiade ihe obfervation of the day a memoriall of the Creation. But I will not enlarge that difcourle. It fliall fuffice that p^/7<7 ludaui ^ and y^^^« F^r4 alfb and r rr) / others thinke otherwift 5 whefe judgfment our Ortho ^ ^^'

dox Divines doejf not all,yet for the moll part follow. Read them upon the fecond of Cjeneps,

14 What the PatriatIts did in point of religion, I thinke 2,

they did it by Divine direftion. Yee know that e96Ao9jHdrx«A did never pleaic God; wherefore the-^^-faicall Lances ( other then thofc that had reference to the Church as nationall , and delivered out of the ir?7/>?M« bondage) a re to be thought not introdufto-ry^but declaratory.Out of queftion tho(e that concerned the fubftance of the ftrvice which ftood in facri-fices, and I thinke concerning the circumftance of tlme^nd place.

Thefes de Sahhato.

The place; for there where God appeared, there

did they ereft their altars: yca^^^ in the ftory oiRe-

^gy^jj^ heccA it is plaine that (hee went to a fct place to

confalt the Lord. And why (hall not the time come

under the fame condition?

15 The'»'po^>^4''Jm^ft receive an anfwer from that which

is added in confirmation of the 13 Thefu, It is but an ungrounded conjefture.

16 Where had/J^^«4w^ that opinion ? his varying from

tholc.whom I anfwered on the 13 lloefis (heweth that hcc WAS not of Ififiin Martjr or TertuUian his opinion ^and yet givcth no rcafbn that may move to credit him, or countervaile what 1 havealleadged for * my opinion.

iS YeSj there is more, if you compare Dent, c, 5. with

Exodus c, 20. but I meant not oncly that, but other

' paffages which make the Sabbath a iigne of Gods re-

fidcnce fanftifying the Jewes, &c. which I exprefled

in the next the/Is,

i^ Bedes conccipt may pafleforan allegory built upon a witty accommodation of the litcrallicnfc which other fathers obfervcd before him. ^ut that cannot be the litcrall fenfe of the Commandcment.Y u will not deny itjifyou grant that the Sabbath wasirfti-tuted before the fall, which I thinkc more then pro-bable.though the "JBrottghtonifishdi^^iMhehW before theSabbath. J^nd I cannot without^oqdreafon jield that the patriarchs h/id no Jet tirHe for divine ferviccy Jmeane a weehelj time^

31^ Trucitis thatChrift did reft from fuffcring upon the

'" . fevcnth 5 but the laft enemy death was not apparerhiy

^ overthrowne untijl the reunion of his foule , and

bt'dy, till he rofe againc for our juftification, &:c.

Therefore did the apoftles make that the confummati-

pn of redemption in Chrifts Ferfbn*

ThefesdeS^yyato.

35 You cannot findc in all the ri.tothe Romans that the Apoftlc is pofitive in the doftrine of d'ayes, he expref-fcth a mutuall indulgence untill men had attained 7rX>ipo?o/3;'ctv concerning the liberty from Mofes Law. Neither doth he beare out the Gentiles againft the JcwcSjbutqualific rather the deftempered i;eale of the Gentiles that were too hot againd the Jewe s; Sertft^s diSiorumfumeHdm eft ex catifts dicendortiW^lt is plainC that there was a queilio^whether the.ChrifUan gentile fliould bqpreffed to observe the cercnionles whereun-rothechrirtian Jewes were pertinacioufly addifled ? but never was there(for ought I read) a queftion whether the jewes (hould keepe the Lords day ?for I think they never refufed it.Hid there been fnch a quarrclij I-would enlarge the ren(e of that Chapter, as you doe, to our queftion, but feeing there was not, I fee not how it fliould be reafonably doncv 3^ I fay not that the Apoftles imprinted any holinefle upon the firil day of the wcckc ; It was Chrifts re-furre6^ion that honoured that day, which (1 fay) the Apoftles were to rerpedl,noc arbitrarily,but ncceflari-ly. You may perceive thereafon in my Thefes, You cannot obferve from the beginning of the world any other inducement to the inftitution of feaftsjbut Gods workedoneon the day; If it were not a continued-worke,as the dwelling in Tabernacles. But you thinke the Apoftles did not prefcribe the observation of that d Ay ;No?you confeffe they made choice of iti and were moved fo to doe by the reafon whicli I alfeage, And were they not fcattered over all the world?& wliere they came did they not all give the fame order for the facred affcmblies? And fliall we thinke that this could be done with-; out an a^oftolicall prefcript ?

37. & 43. I conjoyne them , becaufe one anfwcr will clearcboth^Lctusthen firft agree, what it is for a thing to be Libera ohfervationif. The Queftonift in liis interpretation , which commonly is received^

Icaveth

leaveth a poffibility for an alteration by humane auftority,if any rcafon (hall pcrfwade a convcniency fo to doe 5 though fo long as pablikc auftority com-roalndeth itjhe will have it dutifully obfervcd.

Whereupon will follow a Con(c(flaiy or two. Fiifta that this Law doth not immediately bind the con(cicnce,becaufe Mere htimnni luris pejitivi.

Secondly, that Extrafcandalfitn, amanmay tran(^

grcflc it. For example, a Tradefman majFworkein

his Chamberjit ho body bee privy to it.

Ifthis be the Commentary upon i«/'<?r^ ohfervatio (ardiF

Jf be well inquired into, you will finde that I doe notmi-

ftakcthe meaning ) ^z\\ J. pifof, fleX Cf nq^t \}^%oi fuch a

Fori am pcrfwaded that if all Chnf^ndomc (houldmecte, and have never fo plau^bleaiground, they cannot alter theday iie jure^though de foBo they may; but it is worfethen pieviftmefle (b to doe.? ftnd why ? ihey cannot alter the firft ground, .Chnfts ri-fing upon that day. Secondly^ they cannot alter the uniforme order that upon that undenyable ground was letdown by the ApolUes themfelves, which were I, ipfallibly guided by the Holy Ghoft.

And out of thefe grounds I dediicc,that the Law doth immediately bind their confcience.

And that it is to be obfervcd^even where it may be ' tranfgreffed without any fcandall.

Chrift and the Apoftles were not abfolutety bound to lay

■ (uch a foundation of the Lords Day*^ and fo it was Libera, inm

jhitHtionis ; but they having layd it, I deny that it is now

Libir<f.Obrervationis ; (b that under God I know no power

that can alter it.

Thef. 49, ^^^ Fathers fpcake of the Jcwifh Sabbath, and

Allegorize that as it was carnally n(ed by the Jewef, i^ut we (hall wrong the Fathers, if we thinke they held that there was no Morality in the Letter of the Commandement. For

Thefes deSathto.

For though there wcrcamyftcry figured in it, yet they doe not deny that there was a nioull proportioning of time for Divine Service prefcribed therein 5 which is thefeventh partofthe wcekc. ,;:--: ::

It is oiicthingtO'faythat*aHbiir lifetime we muft be religious in our conYerfation, and keepe a fpiri-tuali Sabbath ; anothtrchfng toaffirmcthat we mull not have a (blcmnc weekcly day, wh erein to intend oncly Divine worfliip.

This laft point the Fathers doe not fay, the former they doe,and to argue froni their Omilfion , is to extend their wordd beyortd their meaning 5 atleaft, their meaning is not ada^jftate to the fen(e of the Gom-

niandement. .....

No nor to their pradilc ; For they did^cteitftiidtly db-fervea (eventh partofthe wecke, which'I fayjstlic firft prm-cjplecontainedinthe fouith Commandemeqt,

Though I deny not but there is moreover a limita-

~ tion tq the feventh day from, the Creation exprefl-,

' \vhich6hi:il!'andhis,ApoftIes altered ; but thisalte-

racion cannot overthrow the firft principle; they may

•:i>i both well goe together.

'■- n' - ■

Totheparticularallegatiqosoutof the Fathers I will an-Twer noiiiore chca, that what they fay is true, but doth not cont^ift what I hold. For the myfticall fenfe doth not o^ verthrow the literal! of the Comma ndictpent* A^idtheyun-dei ftand the Seventh day precifely from the Creation, which weconfeffe altered, and (pcake not of the divine Ordinance, ifortheapportioningoftime, but the carnall obfervationof thejcwcs.

And vour anfwcr to the firft Qieftion grounded on the Fathers words may pafle for good 5 but there ismoreintheCommandemcntthcn (0. . ' . ' Your Anfwerto thefecondlcanaotfo^wdl appr'CVe. tie^ caufe it is Exclulive. '' ^^'y^^^^ - ^ --^ '

As

Thej^

As for your third anrwer,Tbat the fourth Com-niandcff.ent is net the Law of natiihc, but a pofitivc

' law 5 take thdLa*w of Nature for Moral! ReaIon, then

^ I think there IS moSPc then ineerepofitiveneflre in it»For

niorall reafon teacheth to honour the day whereon

the work is dqi.^; and that morall reafon which gave

\ ^ this in charge w-afApcftolicalJ^ and fo of a comman-jding power in both. And then you fee that it is neither nneerely pofitive, nor meerely naturall, but mixt, and fo binding accordingly^^/y^^r^ ^^^T/j^/z^. 37* d" 43.

Ton adde i n>o ^eftions*

"' i Whether feeing the Lords day fucceeds the Jesvifh Sabbath, wee are to kcepe it in the fame manner, and with the

.CwpttrlQ«efre> .:

' n:j 'hn Firftlhold in my T^^:/^/, that Our Lords daydoth properly fucceed the Sabbath inflituted ac the Crea-^. ... doD^ ,tbup5 not- .' V^hereupon Ifeparate-alf the Acceilbries

Secondly, The Jewes did mifconfture the flrick-

ncfTc of their Sabbath, as appeareth by the many

corrcdions of our Saviour in the Gofpell, and his

lor. ri:**' Generall Rule : The Sabbath was made for man, not

:'' man for the Sabbath. ' '%'

Thirdly, They held that they might not fo much

as kindle a fire, or dreflc Meat upon that day, groun-

, -i. ' dingtheir conceipt upon the Texts that arc JE'.v. 35,

But both Texts feemc to be wrcfted ; for that Exod!, 55. about kindling a fire, muft be limited by the verfe going be-fore^and is not to be underftood of any other kindhng of fire, then for following ot their Trades or Servile workes, as they are called. And foO^ufffier^ VatM^^y and others upon that place cenfiire their miftake.

And

Thejesde^abhato.

And that it is a miftake againft the meaning of the

Commmandmcnt, I gather from hence : For the

Jewes that will not put their owne hands to kindle a

hre, will hire Chriilian- to doe it for them 5 as if the

C'^'mmandmcnt did not reach Servants and ftrangers

within their gates; and they offend as much in doing

it by others, as if they did it by them.felvcs. But (o

doe they u(e to abufc the Scripture, and confute their

Glodes by thcirowne practice.

As for the 1 6. Chapter of Exod. which fcemeth to forbid

the drefling of Meat, / hold that miftaken alfo. Read the

Chapter and mark whether you can finde that upon the (ixth

day they were to drefle any more then ferved for that day^and

to lay up the reft undrcfTed untill the Sabbath; at what tiir.e

(F hope), they were Co drefTc it before they did eat it.

And indeed only the providing of Manna is there forbidden , and a promife (whereof they had experience) that it would not putrifie upon the Sabbath, though they kept it till then, whereas upon other dayes it would.

And in this fenfe doc I imderftand thefeverepu-

nifhment of him that gathered flicks upon, the feventh

dayj it was becaufe he then made his provifion, and

did it, it fliould feemc ^ with an high hand. Numb.

cap. 15.

As for recreations I can fay nothing, but that feeing the

Lords clly is to be thcexercife of that life which is fpirituallj

and as a foretaft of that which is cternall, it weretobe wifht

that wee did intend thofe things as farre as our frailty will

reach.

But Vivitur mncum ferfeElis hommibm , and wee

muft be content to have men as good as we may, when

It is not to be hoped they will be as good as they

fliould.

Yet we muft take heed that we doe not rolemni2e our fcaft

vainly as cither the Icwes or Gentiles did.

Againft whom Nazianz^ne is very tart^ 8c TVr/;//. inhisApolog.

Thefes de Sabhat&.

In the Civill Law wcfindc a dirptnfation for Husbandmen in cafcof neccflity, contrajy to the Jewifh policyj Exod. 34.

Which is followed by our Law. Edi»4ird. the 6.

Wee may in apparrell and diet, be more liberall and codly on feafts then on other dayes..

A>«Vct/ were Corporall feafts joyncd to the Euchacift, wherein the rich did feed the poorc^ Which afterward for inconvenience was re^ioved out of the Church.

I meane the Corporall fcaft ( although in Saint nAfifiins confeflions you fhall find, that in Saiat nAmbrofe days there were*W7r«i at the Toombs of Martyrs which Saiiit A^^rofi tookeaway.

But though the etraV ^i were taken out of the Church, yeC upon thole dayes the rich relieved their poore Brethren.

VVhich they little thinke of, that for feare of

breaking the Sabbath have taken away Hofpitality,

Some men are over-nice in this point,more nice then Chrif!

himfelfe, i^«c. 14. who on the Sabbath went to a feaft, and

that was to a wedding fcaft;

And why not ? feeing the iJabbat his iS^wW/^fw z^terjf£^i\9t only cjuietIs^hixt LdtifU 5 therefore refembled to a feaft without the toyle of Acquifition;

So that the Sabbath is not violated by feafts> if wee

exceed not Necejfnatem Terfom, though NMurdt wee

doe.

Now NeceffitAs Perfondt requireth that more be imploycd

in providing feafts 5 as a Kin^ diet then a Subje^s, a Noble

then a Common mans, a Colledge then a fingle Perlbn;

But we muft take cstrc Nequid nimh in viElu^ joy &c. Alogia which S,<^Hftin reproves E^iftSS^adCa" fulafiummuik not be uitd> And we miift keepe the Apoftles rule 5 Whether wee eat or drinke,we muft doe all to the glory of God.

And it were to bee wifhed, that the old praftice, whereof there is a Patterne in the Kings houfe,& fome

Cathedrall

rhefe

lefes d^ Sahhato.

Cathedrall Churches, were every where in «f«. That at (ix a Clock in the Morning Prayers, were every where appointed for ^yervanti and fu£h as were to prepare dinner; to goc then to Church, at who(e rcturne the Matters might goe wicli the reft of their familie.

As for other recreations, if they be not oppoHte or prejudicial! to Piety, they may well Ibnd with the Iblemnizing of the Sabbath and other fealts.

Too much Aufterity doth rather hurt then good 5 efpeci^ ally in thole dayes,wherein Indulgcnce,where of we have Pat-tei nes in Gods Synchoreticall Lawes, is extorted from thofc that are in Authbritie,by the generall corruption; of the time.

Wherefore I would diftinguifti in fuch cafes be^ tweene the Precept and permiffion.

The Precept fhcweth whereunto men (hould tend and be exhorted ; and it were to be wiftied they would follow, and kcepe the Lords Day, as they are direded by the Canon and Injunftion.

The Permiffion ftieweth what muft be toUerated for the hardnefle of mens hearts.

Vacation from bodily labour is required both Per

■fe 5 for it is a figure of our frcedomefrom tho(e Ani-^

mall toyles ia the Church Triumphant , and alfo

Propter filiftd, that we may the better intend onr fpi^

rituall life.

To conclude all, Teeing all agree that it muft be observed, and differ onely upon what ground and how farre ; (ce-ing to fetch the authority from God, and to keepe it with allreafonableftriftneflemaketh moftfor Piety, in a doubt-full ca(e, I incline thither, though I condemne not them that are other wife minded , wiHiing that fobriety of judgement toall in fuchdifputes, which Saint I?^/*/commendcth Rom, f. .14.

FINIS,

J n Errata.

IN ths preface^.8. luiz, 23. it is To far to be accomptecf mo-lall. In the treatife^ f.^.i 20. report, read, lepent. J.7./.28. to feale, readi to fteale, f, 16. /, 35. a new Father^r; a new maiter, ^.37./.3i.Mockel. jJ.gS./.tf. blot out and ^.39./.j 2. wee, r. who f, 41 /.8. would rcai could3f48./.2. Piloponuij p, 50.L59. rather then p. ^3-1.31. \mto.p,$6J. 3. from CmSyYeud for {ms,p.^^ /.30. «W./. 53.putfej»^e//;ipurpofc.]7. iio./.io. 6toh fejiboth/?.iio« /.16. and by fending the holy Ghoft,^. i22i /, 2. rw^ Rom: 1.4 ^.122. /. the laft5now readvfzs^p. 129. /.4. reui iecaufe on that day,p.133.Z.^. Qua,red<^ux, page 137. /.j. hisreAiis3J>,i44./. 23. fome without,re/j^(liins with purj».i5i./ 2^.yetre///iyea^. i^iJ.6.rvayus3ths{t^readv0tiUvA fay that j». 15 2./. 27. & rmidcread & the feventh made, //'we laft, that on that day re^^, that one day. p. 158. /. II. is to be proved, read is, to prove only, f, 161. /. 18. rej^Banbuiy,!?. 16$. /. 7.Rogeis upon.re^^ Rogers. Vpon, /. 26. is contrary reji it contrary p. 167. /. the laft, dele which the Jewes kecpe, rcadas the letter foundeth, j). 168.29. againft, read againc, p. 170./. 16. be, read to be, 1.171. /.I.i ^. dele now being, read to be, p. 180./. 6. though he read though l.p. 180, /. 27. that, re^i and that, p. 187./.12. pcratur,rw^ op€ratur,p.i95. /. 5. unore^^imo,p.i9^. /.j2. well, re^^ will, p. 198. /. 6. obferved the, re^^i obfervcd it in the j>. 20. /. 27. faith that no more, redi faith no more, p. 205./. 20. as, read was p. 207. /.24. he doth fay, read he doth not fay, p. 222. /.27; Gerardus,p.23o. iLi.read fuppofition /. 6. that God, dele that, & read God p. 233. /.14. o£Ephcfus,rf</iofTroas^. 240. l,j^. I can, read I call.

Tb^, de Sabbat, Thef. 16, the feventh day from 27. Chriflan. $7, Spirit.

^v

>

z

/