A63997:350
The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians…
The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is showed that the morality of the fourth Commandment is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twice D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is shewed that the morality of the fourth Commandement is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twisse D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.
London: printed for Thomas Pierrepont, 1652
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
The ancient Fathers sometimes do expatiate this way, for the setting forth of the honourable condition of the Lords Day; but they build not doctrines thereupon; which if they had done in some particular case advantageous to our adversaries, it had been enough to have cried us down.
The ancient Fathers sometimes doe expatiate this way, for the setting forth of the honorable condition of the Lords Day; but they build not doctrines thereupon; which if they had done in some particular case advantageous to our adversaries, it had beene enough to have cryed us downe.
As for Judaism, I have often showed, how little colour there is for any such imputation to be cast upon us, but rather upon our adversaries: I see no cause to range the Petrobusian with the Ebionite, but were they yoke-fellows, ⟨p. 238⟩whereof I find not the least evidence; yet should not we draw with them under the same yoke; Chemnitius his discourse I have formerly examined somewhat at large; The voluntary consecration of it by Christians no man hath cause to embrace, who professeth himself not satisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church, as but erst the Doctor did. Of Brentius I have spoken enough; yet well fare him that professeth the authority of the day to be so far divine, that he who shall neglect it, or rashly break it, doth forthwith become worse then the Jew or Infidel. As for the Arminians, what respect soever they pretend to the pattern of the primitive Church, like enough they could be very well content with the Socinians, to make all days equal in use, as well as they are in nature, or in respect of any mysterious signification; I leave Azorius to refresh himself with the juice of his own distinction; It is well that Suarez comes so far as to profess that practically it is not alterable by the Church. As for Calvin, Bucer, Chemnitius, and the rest, who are only said to affirm that still the Church hath power to change the Lords day to some other, I find no such thing in Calvin, and Bucer: as for what Chemnitius delivers hereupon, in my judgement he saith no more then Calvin: though some particulars in him I have found to be weak enough, upon discussion in the 6 Section, of my answer to the Preface: having there met with the same names, named to the same purpose. It is not credible to me they should give power to the Church to bring us back to the Jewish Sabbath: in that case who should savour most of Judaism? or prefer us to the Turks festival day which is the Friday. To be instituted in memory of our redemption, admits an ambiguous signification; That bringing with it a new Creation, and so requiring a new Sabbath; as Bishop Andrewes discourseth and Athanasius 1200 years before him; No day had a better mark for this to be preferred into the place of the Jews Sabbath then the day of Christs Resurrection; yet considering that not that day of the year;