Next for the second Thesis,1 that the alteration of the day is only an humane and Ecclesiastical constitution, the Doctor showeth in the first Section, the general consent of all sorts of Papists, Jesuits, Canonists, and Schoolmen; of some great Lutherans by names, and generally of the remonstrant or Arminian Divines in their confession, whose tendries in this point, we may conceive with reason, not to be different from the Doctrine of the Belgic Churches, in that four professors of Leiden, in their examination or review of that confession, have passed them over without note or opposition. To these besides are added diverse of our own, Et è nostris non pauci, as he speaks it in the general, that is, as I conceive his meaning such as are neither of the Lutheran, nor of the Arminian party: of which since he hath instanced in none particularly, I will make bold to borrow two or three testimonies, out of the tractate of Gomarus before remembered. And first he brings in Bullenger, who in his comment on the first of the Revelation, calls it Ecclesiae consuetudinem, an Ecclesiastical Ordinance, and after adds, Sponte Ecclesiae receperunt illum diem. The Church did of its own accord agree upon that day; for we read not any where that it was commanded. Next Ursinus telling us, that God had abrogated the Jewish Sabbath, adds presently, that he left it free unto the Church, Alios dies eligere, to make choice of any other day to be selected for his service: and that the Church made choice of this in honour of our Saviours Resurrection. Zanchius affirms the same; Nullibi legimus Apostolos, &c. We read not any where, saith he that the Apostles did command this day to be observed in the Church of God; only we find what the Apostles, and others of the faithful used to do upon it, Liberum ergo reliquerunt, which is an argument that they left it holy to the disposition of the Church. Aretius, Sin•ler, David Paraeus, ⟨p. 84⟩and Bucerus, which are all there alleged, might be here produced, were not these sufficient. Add hereunto the general consent of our English Prelates, the Architects of our reformation in the time of King Edward the sixth, who in the Act of Parliament about keeping holy days have determined thus, together with the rest of that grand assembly, viz.
Next for the second Thesis,1 that the alteration of the day is onely an humane and Ecclesiasticall constitution, the Doctor sheweth in the first Section, the generall consent of all sorts of Papists, Jesuites, Canonists, and Schoolemen; of some great Lutheranes by names, and generally of the remonstrant or Arminian Divines in their confession, whose tendries in this point, wee may conceave with reason, not to bee different from the Doctrine of the Belgicke Churches, in that foure professors of Leyden, in their examination or review of that confession, have passed them over without note or opposition. To these besides are added diverse of our own, Et è nostris non pauci, as hee speakes it in the generall, that is, as I conceave his meaning such as are neither of the Lutheran, nor of the Arminian party: of which since he hath instanced in none particularly, I will make bold to borrow two or three testimonies, out of the tractate of Gomarus before remembred. And first hee brings in Bullenger, who in his comment on the first of the Revelation, calls it Ecclesiae consuetudinem, an Ecclesiasticall Ordinance, and after addes, Sponte Ecclesiae receperunt illum diem. The Church did of its owne accord agree upon that day; for wee reade not any where that it was commanded. Next Ʋrsinus telling us, that God had abrogated the Iewish Sabbath, addes presently, that hee left it free unto the Church, Alios dies eligere, to make choise of any other day to be selected for his service: and that the Church made choyse of this in honour of our Saviours Resurrection. Zanchius affirmes the same; Nullibi legimus Apostolos, &c. We reade not any where, saith hee that the Apostles did command this day to bee observed in the Church of God; onely wee finde what the Apostles, and others of the faithfull used to doe upon it, Liberum ergo reliquerunt, which is an argument that they left it holy to the disposition of the Church. Aretius, Sin•ler, David Paraeus, ⟨p. 84⟩and Bucerus, which are all there alleaged, might bee here produced, were not these sufficient. Adde hereunto the generall consent of our English Prelats, the Architects of our reformation in the time of King Edward the sixt, who in the Act of Parlament about keeping holy dayes have determined thus, together with the rest of that grand assembly, viz.
- 1Preface.
