Of the morality of the fourth commandment as still in force to bind Christians…Of the morality of the fourth commandement as still in force to binde Christians…

3. The third reason is, that if this Commandment were then given, it should oblige all men; but it is plain that the Gentiles never observed it, neither do we read the Patriarchs did. I answer, there is no soundness in all this. For touching the Gentiles, we have no History before the Flood, nor till a long time after; in which space of time, this Doctrine of the institution of the Sabbath being carried only by tradition, might easily be obliterated. The Scriptures Divine are the most ancient Records in the World; but it follows not, that because the Scriptures do not Record how the Patriarchs did observe the Sabbath, therefore they observed it not; but much rather, because, the Scriptures Record, that The Lord blessed the seventh Day, and sanctified it, therefore the Patriarchs did observe it. And the truth is, until the coming of the Israelites out of Egypt, we read not of the Church of God any where but in single Families. Neither do we read of the Patriarchs before the Flood or a long time after that they kept any Day consecrate to GODS Service; will it therefore follow, that those holy Patriarchs ⟨p. 58⟩did set no time at all apart for Gods ervice? yet is it generally acknowledged as by the light of nature, that some time ought to be set apart for Divine service. And formerly I have showed out of Manasseh Ben Israel, that whereas the Lord enjoining to the Israelites the observation of the Sabbath, bids them remember that they were servants in Egypt; this the ancient wise men among the Jews do apply in this manner, Cogita in Egypto ubi serviebas, etiam ipso Sabbato per vim te coactum ad labores; think with thy self, how that in Egypt where thou servedst, that by force thou wast constrained to work, even on the Sabbath. So that the observation of the Sabbath was a duty even in those days. Observe farther that in the fourth Commandment, the Jews are charged to look unto it, not only that their children and their servants did observe the Sabbath, but also, the stranger that was within their gates. Now these kind of strangers commonly called Strangers of the gate, and thereby distinguished from Strangers of the Covenant; were such as were not circumcised, though accounted Proselytes in the first degree.

3. The third reason is, that if this Commandement were then given, it should oblige all men; but it is plaine that the Gentiles never observed it, neither doe we reade the Patriarchs did. I answer, there is no soundnesse in all this. For touching the Gentiles, we have no History before the Flood, nor till a long time after; in which space of time, this Doctrine of the institution of the Sabbath being carried onely by tradition, might easily bee obliterated. The Scriptures Divine are the most ancient Records in the World; but it followes not, that because the Scriptures doe not Record how the Patriarches did observe the Sabbath, therefore they observed it not; but much rather, because, the Scriptures Record, that The Lord blessed the seventh Day, and sanctified it, therefore the Patriarches did observe it. And the truth is, untill the comming of the Israelites out of Egypt, wee reade not of the Church of God any where but in single Families. Neither doe wee reade of the Patriarches before the Flood or a long time after that they kept any Day consecrate to GODS Service; will it therefore follow, that those holy Patriarchs ⟨p. 58⟩did set no time at all apart for Gods ervice? yet is it generally acknowledged as by the light of nature, that some time ought to be set apart for Divine service. And formerly I have shewed out of Manasses Ben Israel, that whereas the Lord enjoyning to the Israelites the observation of the Sabbath, bids them remember that they were servants in Egypt; this the antient wise men among the Jewes doe aply in this manner, Cogita in Egypto ubi serviebas, etiam ipso Sabbato per vim te coactum ad labores; thinke with thy selfe, how that in Egypt where thou servedst, that by force thou wast constrained to worke, even on the Sabbath. So that the observation of the Sabbath was a duty even in those dayes. Observe farther that in the fourth Commandement, the Jewes are charged to looke unto it, not onely that their children and their servants did observe the Sabbath, but also, the stranger that was within their gates. Now these kinde of strangers commonly called Strangers of the gate, and thereby distinguished from Strangers of the Covenant; were such as were not circumcised, though accompted Proselytes in the first degree.

And on them was usually imposed no other burden, besides the observation of the seven precepts of Noah, as Schindler observes upon the root [Greek or Hebrew]. Which seven precepts of Noah are also reckoned up by the same Schindler in the root [Greek or Hebrew]; and albeit the observation of the Sabbath were none of them express; yet in as much as the Lord gives express charge that the strangers within their Gates should observe the Sabbath, it seems it was comprehended under one of them; And therefore some think it was comprehended under that which was called [Greek or Hebrew] Benedictio Dei; that is, the worship of no other God, but the Creator of Heaven and Earth; and by name, my worthy friend Master Joseph Mede; as I have seen in a Manuscript of his touching the interpretation of the word [Greek or Hebrew] in the Acts; and hereof he gives this reason; namely that the observation of the seventh day was the badge of this, namely of worshipping the Creator of Heaven and Earth, according to that, the Sabbath is a sign between me and you, that I Jehovah am your God because in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth, the Sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh. Now if the observation of the Sabbath were ⟨p. 59⟩comprehended under the seven precepts of Noah, undoubtedly it was in force, and practise amongest the Patriarchs, and that not only after, but before the flood; for undoubtedly they all worshipped the Lord God Creator of Heaven, and Earth. 2. We have notable evidence for the observation of the Sabbath Day, even among the Gentiles. And first, the distinction of the whole course of time into weeks, for the antiquity thereof is remarkable, and now lately justified by Rivetus against Gomarus with great variety of learned observation, and that especially by Claudius Salmasius that renowned Scholar and Antiquary, one of them who with great instance urged Rivetus not to suffer Gomarus to pass unanswered in this point. It is true, as Rivetus observes, that Causabon writing upon Suetonius l. 3. 52. and upon these words, Diogenes the Grammarian was wont to dispute at Rhodes on the Sabbath, professeth his opinion, that the observation of weeks now a days generally received, was not commonly received before the days of Theodosius, though he confesseth, that long before it was in use among the Grecians, especially those of Asia.

And on them was usually imposed no other burthen, besides the observation of the seven precepts of Noah, as Schindler observes upon the roote 〈non-Latin alphabet〉. Which seven precepts of Noah are also reckoned up by the same Schindler in the roote ; and albeit the observation of the Sabbath were none of them expresse; yet in as much as the Lord gives expresse charge that the strangers within their Gates should observe the Sabbath, it seemes it was comprehended under one of them; And therefore some thinke it was comprehended under that which was called Benedictio Dei; that is, the worship of no other God, but the Creator of Heaven and Earth; and by name, my worthy friend Master Joseph Mede; as I have seene in a Manuscript of his touching the interpretation of the word in the Acts; and hereof he gives this reason; namely that the observation of the seventh day was the badge of this, namely of worshioping the Creator of Heaven and Earth, according to that, the Sabbath is a signe between me and you, that I Jehovah am your God because in six dayes the Lord made Heaven and Earth, the Sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh. Now if the observation of the Sabbath were

Yet Rivet makes it good, and that out of Tertullian, that long before it was in use among the Latins. Joannes Philoponus in his Commentary upon the History of the Creation, a book commended by Photius in his Bibliotheca lib. 7. cap. 14 and lately set forth at Vienna in Austria, writes thus; All men do agree in this, that there are seven days only, which by revolution in themselves do complete whole time, whereof what reason can we give, but that which Moses gave? to wit, that in six days the Lord made the World, and rested the seventh. And Clemens Alexandrinus and Eusebius prove the same out of Homer, [Greek or Hebrew], The seventh day was that, wherein all things were finished; and out of Callimachus, and out of Linus in diverse passages to the same purse, as Rivetus hath showed in his answer to Gomarus. And further, that in the French Kings library, there is a Chronology of George Syncellus, from Adam to Diocletian; wherein Salmasius observes, that the computation of times by weeks was before the computation of times by months and years was found out by Astrologers; and that the ancient fathers distinguished the spaces of times ⟨p. 60⟩only by weeks: and that the Chaldean Astrologers having observed the course of the Sun, Moon, and other planets were the first that bestowed on the seven days of the week the names of the planets; and that by the testimony of an ancient author Manuscript. Zoroastres and Hystaspis were the authors of these demonstrations. But that this circuit of seven days was in use before Zoroastres and the first authors of Astrology. But the Jews kept themselves as to the distinction of times by weeks, so to call the days by their order, the first, the second; and that the Pythagoreans did the like—and called the first day of the week [Greek or Hebrew] like as the Hellenists called it [Greek or Hebrew]. In the year, 1627. There was set forth a book at Venice (as the same Doctor Rivet writes) entitled Thesaurus praeceptorum Isaaci Atiae Judaei; in the first part whereof and 157. precept touching the Sabbath, he writes to this effect, that the holiness of that sacred day is so well known, that it were superfluous to use many words in the explication thereof; seeing it is found to have impression in the very hearts of the Heathens themselves;

Yet Rivet makes it good, and that out of Tertullian, that long before it was in use among the Latines. Ioannes Philoponus in his Commentary upon the History of the Creation, a book commended by Photius in his Bibliotheca lib. 7. cap. 14 and lately set forth at Vienna in Austria, writes thus; All men doe agree in this, that there are seven dayes only, which by revolution in themselves doe complete whole time, whereof what reason can wee give, but that which Moses gave? to wit, that in six dayes the Lord made the World, and rested the seventh. And Clemens Alexandrinus and Eusebius prove the same out of Homer, , The seventh day was that, wherein all things were finished; and out of Callimachus, and out of Linus in diverse passages to the same purse, as Rivetus hath shewed in his answer to Gomarus. And further, that in the French Kings library, there is a Chronology of George Syncellus, from Adam to Dioclesian; wherein Salmasius observes, that the computation of times by weekes was before the computation of times by moneths and yeares was found out by Astrologers; and that the ancient fathers distinguished the spaces of times

which some observe to have been spoken, not of the seventh day of the week, but of the seventh day of the month rather, wherein Apollo was borne (which yet is alleged by Clement and Eusebius as for the seventh day of the week) what is wanting herein, being so plentifully supplied other ways.) And whereas Gomarus being convicted of the evidence of this truth, betakes himself to a new course, as to say that this practise of Heathens was taken from the Jews, and not from the ancient Patriarchs; Doctor Rivetus brings a manifest place out of Josephus to refute that conceit of his; As who professeth that this custom of the Gentiles had been [Greek or Hebrew] long ago. And how unlikely is it, that either the Egyptians, or the Nations bordering upon the Jews should take this from the Jews, when we consider Solitum inter accolas odium, as Tacitus observes, the accustomed hatred between borderers; especially between the seed of the Woman, and the seed of the Serpent^*; and how distasteful ²the things of God are unto natural men, even foolishness unto them, neither can they know them, because they are spiritually discerned. And Homer, and Linus, and Callimachus, fetch the seventh day from the very Creation, as whereon the making of all things was finished. I come at length to the fourth Argument.

which some observe to have beene spoken, not of the seventh day of the weeke, but of the seventh day of the moneth rather, wherein Apollo was borne (which yet is alleaged by Clement and Eusebius as for the seventh day of the weeke) what is wanting herein, being so plentifully supplyed other wayes.) And whereas Gomarus being convicted of the evidence of this truth, betakes himselfe to a new course, as to say that this practise of Heathens was taken from the Jewes, and not from the ancient Patriarchs; Doctor Rivetus brings a manifest place out of Iosephus to refute that conceite of his; As who professeth that this custome of the Gentiles had beene 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 long agoe. And how unlikely is it, that either the Egyptians, or the Nations bordering upon the Jewes should take this from the Jewes, when we consider Solitum inter accolas odium, as Tacitus observes, the accustomed hatred between borderers; especially between the seed of the Woman, and the seed of the Serpent

If the Patriarchs had observed the Sabbath, Moses would ¹have mentioned the religious observation thereof by their ancestors, to encourage them. I answer 1. it is not likely they were ignorant of the practise of their ancestors. The Chaldee paraphrase upon the Psal. 92. supposeth Adam to have been the author of the Psalm that is entitled for the Sabbath. 2. If for Gods sake who delivered them out of Egypt, they would not observe it, neither would they observe it for their ancestors sake. 3. Moses makes no mention of their ancestors practise in setting apart any time for the service of God; shall we therefore deny that by the suggestion of light natural some time is to be set apart for this?

If the Patriarches had observed the Sabbath, Moses would ¹have mentioned the religious observation thereof by their ancestors, to encourage them. I answer 1. it is not likely they were ignorant of the practise of their ancestors. The Chaldee paraphrase upon the Psal. 92. supposeth Adam to have beene the author of the Psalm that is intitled for the Sabbath. 2. If for Gods sake who delivered them out of Egypt, they would not observe it, neither would they observe it for their ancestors sake. 3. Moses makes no mention of their ancestors practise in setting apart any time for the service of God; shall we therefore deny that by the suggestion of light naturall some time is to be set apart for this?

1. 14.

The Fathers profess that no other positive precept was given to Adam then to abstain from the Fruit of a certain Tree. I answer, ¹Chrysostom professeth expressly, that from the beginning God hath showed that one day in the circle of the week is to be set apart for spiritual operation; Likewise the testimonies of Athanasius and Epiphanius are express for the acknowledgement of the institution of the Sabbath immediately from the Creation, as before hath been showed. Indeed both as touching the setting apart of sometime in general for Gods service, and the proportion of one day in seven in special, is more then positive.

The Fathers professe that no other positive precept was given to Adam then to abstein from the Fruit of a certaine Tree. I answer, ¹Chrysostome professeth expressely, that from the beginning God hath shewed that one day in the circle of the weeke is to bee set apart for spirituall operation; Likewise the testimonies of Athanasius and Epiphanius are expresse for the acknowledgment of the institution of the Sabbath immediately from the Creation, as before hath beene shewed. Indeede both as touching the setting apart of sometime in generall for Gods service, and the proportion of one day in seven in speciall, is more then positive.

1. 15.

Divines teach that before Christs coming the Gentiles might ¹obtain salvation by observing the moral Law, and the Law of nature, with some light of Divine faith, and supernatural assistance of God. I answer. 1. of what reputation those Divines he speaks of, deserve to be with us, let every Protestant judge. 2. yet we know that the Gentiles might have evidence enough of the holiness of the seventh day; and that God left not himself without witness in this, even to Heathens is so notorious, that we may justly wonder, to observe how the monuments of the dignity of the seventh day were so strangely preserved among them. 3. Yet where testimony sufficient was wanting not only for the particularity of the day, but for the proportion of time; we do not hold these to be moral so absolutely, and in such a degree, as to say that failing in this alone in such a case should prejudice any mans salvation; though we say with Chrysostom that God ⟨p. 63⟩by the story of the Creation hath sufficiently manifested that one day in the week ought to be set apart for Gods Service; and with Azorius the Jesuit, that it is most agreeable to reason, that after six work days one day entire and whole should be consecrated to divine worship.

Divines teach that before Christs comming the Gentiles might ¹obtaine salvation by observing the morall Law, and the Law of nature, with some light of Divine faith, and supernaturall assistance of God. I answer. 1. of what reputation those Divines hee speaks of, deserve to bee with us, let every Protestant judge. 2. yet wee know that the Gentiles might have evidence enough of the holinesse of the seventh day; and that God left not himselfe without witnesse in this, even to Heathens is so notorious, that we may justly wonder, to observe how the monuments of the dignity of the seventh day were so strangely preserved among them. 3. Yet where testimony sufficient was wanting not onely for the particularity of the day, but for the proportion of time; wee doe not hold these to be morall so absolutely, and in such a degree, as to say that failing in this alone in such a case should prejudice any mans salvation; though we say with Chrysostome that God ⟨p. 63⟩

2. From Papists this Prefacer proceeds to Protestants, and ¹tells us that this seems to be the judgement of the Divines in the Low-Countries; for proof whereof he produceth none but Gomarus and Rivetus; both which are well known to be opposite in the point of the original institution of the Sabbath. And as touching the morality of one day in seven, both Wallaeus and Thysius two professors of Divinity in the University of Leiden, are well known to differ from them both; and Hyperius a low Countryman too. As for Calvin, I have already showed how he makes nothing for this Prefacer; and that they catch advantage from him most unreasonably by dismembering him. Wallaeus shows the same to be the judgement of Martin Luther, namely, that one day in the week at least ought to be consecrated to Divine Service; and out of Melanchthon, that all the ceremoniality in the fourth Commandment is restrained to the observation of a certain day, that which remains besides therein commanded continuing moral. ^*Beza likewise affirms that the sanctifying of every seventh day as touching the Service of God, is of moral obligation and unremovable. The like Wallaeus shows to have been the judgement of Bucer, Peter Martyr, Zanchy, Junius, Viretus Calvins Colleague, Danaeus, Antonius Fayns, Matthias Martinius, and in a manner all that have written upon their Belgic Catechism. By this, the Reader may consider the modesty of this Prefacer, when he professeth that it seems to be the judgement of the Divines in the Low-Countries, that one day in seven to be set apart for Gods solemn worship is not of the morality of the fourth Commandment. But Wallaeus proceeds and shows the same to have been the judgement of Ursinus, and Paraeus of the Palatinate; of Alstedius Professor at Herborne; together with Lansbergius and Festus Hommius, all maintaining the morality of one day in seven, to be consecrated to Divine Service. And in the close professeth, he could add the testimonies of many English ⟨p. 64⟩and Scottish Divines, who ever have been accounted Orthodox, concurring in judgement with the former on this point.

2. From Papists this Prefacer proceedes to Protestants, and ¹

Last of all consider, what is Gomarus his own opinion; ¹to wit, that we are not so precisely bound to this proportion of time, but that we may allow a better. The condition of Divine worship (saith he) commanded in the fourth Commandment requires that not only certain days (for order and for Gods better service sake) be observed, but also that sufficient days be observed; it cannot be inferred from this that God hath not defined a certain day to us, that it is indifferent whether we make choice of one in fifty, or in an hundred, or one in a thousand. Then proceeding to define what are sufficient, he ²acknowledgeth that the days set apart for this must be either as frequent or more frequent, then one day in seven. And in this answer of Gomarus to an argument of Wallaeus made for the morality of one day in seven doth Rivetus rest; namely ³that to us who are eased of the burden of Jewish ceremonies, the days consecrated to Divine Service may be more, they may not be fewer. And adds of his own, that we cannot in charity require of our servants the labour of so many days (to wit of six) without some rest. As for the seconds which this Prefacer saith Gomarus brings, to wit Vatablus, and Wolfgangus Musculus, this is nothing to the present purpose. For these are not brought in by him in the point of the morality of one day in seven, but only in the point of the original institution of the Sabbath; but this is his juggling course to mendicate some show of authority to serve his turn where substance faileth him.

Last of all consider, what is Gomarus his owne opinion; ¹to wit, that we are not so precisely bound to this proportion of time, but that wee may allow a better. The condition of Divine worship (saith he) commanded in the fourth Commandement requires that not only certaine dayes (for order and for Gods better service sake) be observed, but also that sufficient dayes be observed; it cannot be inferred from this that God hath not defined a certaine day to us, that it is indifferent whether we make choyce of one in fifty, or in an hundred, or one in a thousand. Then proceeding to define what are sufficient, hee ²

3. As for the Hollanders who in travailing about the World Westward had lost a day, that is, came to observe our Christian Sabbath one day too late; when this Prefacer asks hereupon, what should those people do when they were returned; I will not answer by advising them to travail the World over again Eastward, that they may find the day which they had lost, by travailing round the World Westward; much less that they should renew their travails the same way till they had lost six days more, that so their Sabbath might concur with the Sabbath of their Countrymen ⟨p. 65⟩at home: but according to the particulars proposed by him; namely to concur now with their Countrymen a day before their time, that so they might make amends for that time which they had lost, if any need of amends, and not rather for uniformity's sake. For when in the days of Joshua the Sun standing still one day was as long as two days, yet this was nothing material to the altering of their Sabbath, much less when the Sun went back, 10. degrees in the dial of Ahaz, while King Hezekiah reigned. No sober man I think will say, the moral Law was broken by this, though one week in Joshua's days contained more time by 1 2. hours, then any former week, and another week in King Hezekiah's days was found to be many hours longer then his fellows.

3. As for the Hollanders who in travailing about the World Westward had lost a day, that is, came to observe our Christian Sabbath one day too late; when this Prefacer askes hereupon, what should those people doe when they were returned; I will not answer by advising them to travaile the World over againe Eastward, that they may finde the day which they had lost, by travailing round the World Westward; much lesse that they should renew their travailes the same way till they had lost six dayes more, that so their Sabbath might concurre with the Sabbath of their Countreymen ⟨p. 65⟩at home: but according to the particulars proposed by him; namely to concurre now with their Countrymen a day before their time, that so they might make amends for that time which they had lost, if any neede of amends, and not rather for uniformities sake. For when in the dayes of Joshuah the Sunne standing still one day was as long as two dayes, yet this was nothing materiall to the altering of their Sabbath, much lesse when the Sunne went backe, 10. degrees in the diall of Ahaz, while King Hezechiah reigned. No sober man I thinke will say, the morall Law was broken by this, though one weeke in Josuahs dayes contained more time by 1 2. houres, then any former weeke, and another weeke in King Hezechiahs dayes was found to bee many houres longer then his fellowes.

THE SECOND DIGRESSION CONSISTING OF TWO PARTS. I. In making good Doctor Wallaeus his arguments for the morality of one day in seven, against the answer of Doctor Rivetus. II. In answering of Doctor Rivetus his arguments directed against the morality of one day in seven.

NOW whereas Doctor Rivetus about the observation of one day in seven as necessary, differeth in opinion from his two Colleagues Doctor Thysius, and Doctor Walaeus, and not so only, but directs himself (after Gomarus) to take into consideration the arguments proposed by doctor Walaeus for the morality of one day in seven, and to accommodate an answer thereunto: I think it fit, not to omit the discussion of that answer of his; and that in such sort that I may carry my self correspondently to his ingenuous behaviour herein.

NOW whereas Doctor Rivetus about the observation of one day in seven as necessary, differeth in opinion from his two Collegues Doctor Thysius, and Doctor Walaeus, and not so onely, but directs himselfe (after Gomarus) to take into consideration the arguments proposed by doctor Walaeus for the morality of one day in seven, and to accommodate an answer thereunto: I thinke it fit, not to omit the discussion of that answer of his; and that in such sort that I may carry my selfe correspondently to his ingenuous behaviour herein.

The first argument of Walaeus is this, if by the force and analogy (of the fourth Commandment) it be not rightly collected that one day of seven is to be consecrated to Divine worship, then no certain number or circle of days can be limited (to the foresaid purpose) by any Divine precept, seeing in no other precept ⟨p. 67⟩is found mention of any other number; and therefore it shall be lawful to choose either a thirtieth day, or a fiftieth day without transgression of any Divine precept. But this is absurd. This argument is of great force; considering the difference between proportion of time allowed unto Divine Service; and the difference of the day, keeping still the same proportion. For every master, from the greatest Prince to the meanest householder expects that his servant should be profitable unto him, and accordingly he expects a certain proportion of service to be performed by him; as namely a good days work for every day; a good weeks work for every week. And in every trade it is well known by them that are seen therein, wherein consists a good days work, whereof whosoever fails, he is accounted but an idle and unprofitable servant; but so the work of the day be done, whether he laboureth more in one hour, then in another, he regardeth not. Such in like manner is every ones consideration of a weeks work. So likewise as touching the service of God, it is nothing material as touching the substance of Gods service what day of the week is set apart for that. For whether we consider the advantageous nature of it for setting forth the glory of God who is our maker; and as we came from him so we must be for him, Rom. 11. & Heb. 2. The supreme efficient being ever of duty the supreme end; or whether we consider the profitable nature of it to our own souls in coming acquainted with him, both touching his nature, touching his counsel concerning us, and touching his will. For when we despise him, we despise him against our selves; and when we provoke him, we provoke him to the confusion of our own faces; himself being nothing profited by our service, but our own souls rather, though he be pleased to account himself glorified thereby: it being his glory to do us good. This advancement of his glory and our good is no more promoted by setting one day in a week apart for this then another.

The first argument of Walaeus is this, if by the force and analogy (of the fourth Commandement) it be not rightly collected that one day of seven is to be consecrated to Divine worship, then no certaine number or circle of dayes can be limited (to the foresaid purpose) by any Divine precept, seeing in no other precept

But between the proportion of one day in a week, or one day in a month, or one day in a year, there is a vast and momentous difference. For we come to the knowledge of God, and of the mysteries of godliness by small degrees; ⟨p. 68⟩and in the ways of holiness we clamber as it were up an high and steep hill; and our life is a wayfare, our condition is the condition of travellers; nay our life is a warfare, and the Devil and his angels of darkness go about continually like so many roaring Lyons, and hungry Bears, seeking whom they may devour; So that we travel to Heaven as it were by dens of Lyons, and over mountains of Libbards. And will any wise man say that it matters not much in this case, whether we acquaint our selves with the Armour of God one day in a week, or one day in a month, or one day in a year to arm our selves against such ghostly and watchful enemies? Secondly, considering that it was never known that any master from the highest to the lowest, was so foolish to leave it to his servant to cut out what proportion of service he thinks fit, wherewith to satisfy his master for his keeping, and for the wages which he expecteth at his hands. These things considered; I say this first argument of Doctor Wallaeus is of great evidence and force, and therefore it is to be well weighed and considered what answer either Doctor Rivetus or any other doth make unto it, and what satisfaction it gives. Now the answer that he makes unto it proceeds not in his own name, but in the name of another, to wit, in the name of Gomarus, and such as concur with him.

But betweene the proportion of one day in a weeke, or one day in a moneth, or one day in a yeare, there is a vast and momentous difference. For we come to the knowledge of God, and of the mysteries of godlinesse by small degrees; ⟨p. 68⟩and in the wayes of holinesse we clamber as it were up an high and steepe hill; and our life is a wayfare, our condition is the condition of travellours; nay our life is a warfare, and the Divell and his angells of darknesse goe about continually like so many roaring Lyons, and hungry Beares, seeking whom they may devoure; So that we travell to Heaven as it were by dennes of Lyons, and over mountaines of Libbards. And will any wise man say that it matters not much in this case, whether we acquaint our selves with the Armour of God one day in a weeke, or one day in a moneth, or one day in a yeare to arme our selves against such ghostly and watchfull enemies? Secondly, considering that it was never knowne that any master from the highest to the lowest, was so foolish to leave it to his servant to cut out what proportion of service he thinkes fit, wherewith to satisfie his master for his keeping, and for the wages which he expecteth at his hands. These things considered; I say this first argument of Doctor Wallaeus is of great evidence and force, and therefore it is to be well weighed and considered what answer either Doctor Rivetus or any other doth make unto it, and what satisfaction it gives. Now the answer that hee makes unto it proceeds not in his owne name, but in the name of another, to wit, in the name of Gomarus, and such as concurre with him.

To this they answer (saith he) that it is no inconvenience that there is no certain number or circle of days defined for Gods service by any precept. It is enough that the nature of public worship, in general comprehended in the fourth Commandment, doth require that not only certain days be observed, but that the number of them be sufficient also, nor fewer then the right institution of the Church, the salvation of men, and glory of God do require, and that God by not defining it, hath not left unto us a wild licentiousness but a prudent liberty. And therefore that it cannot be differed to one day in twenty, or thirty, much less to one of a thousand.

To this they answer (saith he) that it is no inconvenience that there is no certaine number or circle of dayes defined for Gods service by any precept. It is enough that the nature of publique worship, in generall comprehended in the fourth Commandement, doth require that not only certaine dayes be observed, but that the number of them be sufficient also, nor fewer then the right institution of the Church, the salvation of men, and glory of God doe require, and that God by not defining it, hath not left unto us a wild licentiousnes but a prudent liberty. And therefore that it cannot be differred to one day in twenty, or thirty, much lesse to one of a thousand.