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…

To this I answer.

1. By granting the conclusion; for the Jewish Sabbath Christians observe not. 2. but one day in seven they always ¹have observed, a manifest evidence that they never conceived this to be any impeachment to their Christian liberty. And no marvel; for they manifestly perceived that God required this proportion of time under the Law, and from the beginning of the World; how much more should we be careful to perform no less under the Gospel? And indeed rest on the seventh day did pregnantly represent before hand Christs rest that day, and that day alone full and whole in the grave. But as for any ceremoniality to be found in the special proportion of time, to wit, as one day in seven, never any man devised any ceremoniality therein more then in the time in general, which all confess by the very light of nature is to be consecrated unto God. So that we have no need of Doctor Rivetus, his answer to help us in the solution of this his argument. And whereas he conceives our Christian liberty to be impeached if any proportion of time be observed of necessity by force of precept, and of free choice. 1. This is as much as to say that our liberty is impeached, if we suffer our Lord and master, to prescribe unto us his servants what proportion of service we shall perform unto him, and not rather have him leave it to the servant to cut out unto him as little, or as much as he thinks good, yet we do not deny but he may allow unto him more; all that we stand for is that we ought not to allow him less under the Gospel, then he required under the Law; and then he required from the beginning of the World. 2. I marvel that Doctor Rivetus doth not observe how herein he contradicts himself; for hath he not formerly rested in this answer of Gomarus, that by virtue of the fourth Commandment, we must allow unto him days sufficient for his service; and that these days must be rather Frequentiores then Rariores, more rather then fewer; and if it be no prejudice to our Christian liberty to be tied, and that by virtue of the fourth Commandment, to allow unto him a better proportion of time, for his service, then that of one day in seven, how can it be prejudicial to our ⟨p. 79⟩Christian liberty to allow unto him this, and that by virtue of the fourth Commandment.

1. By granting the conclusion; for the Iewish Sabbath Christians observe not. 2. but one day in seven they alwayes ¹have observed, a manifest evidence that they never conceaved this to be any impeachment to their Christian liberty. And no marvell; for they manifestly perceaved that God required this proportion of time under the Law, and from the beginning of the World; how much more should we be carefull to performe no lesse under the Gospell? And indeed rest on the seventh day did pregnantly represent before hand Christs rest that day, and that day alone full and whole in the grave. But as for any ceremoniality to be found in the speciall proportion of time, to wit, as one day in seven, never any man devised any ceremoniality therein more then in the time in generall, which all confesse by the very light of nature is to be consecrated unto God. So that we have no need of Doctor Rivetus, his answer to helpe us in the solution of this his argument. And whereas he conceaves our Christian liberty to be impeached if any proportion of time be observed of necessity by force of precept, and of free choise. 1. This is as much as to say that our liberty is impeached, if we suffer our Lord and master, to prescribe unto us his servants what proportion of service we shall performe unto him, and not rather have him leave it to the servant to cut out unto him as little, or as much as he thinkes good, yet we do not deny but he may allow unto him more; all that we stand for is that we ought not to allow him lesse under the Gospell, then he required under the Law; and then he required from the beginning of the World. 2. I marvell that Doctor Rivetus doth not observe how herein he contradicts himselfe; for hath he not formerly rested in this answer of Gomarus, that by vertue of the fourth Commandement, we must allow unto him dayes sufficient for his service; and that these dayes must be rather Frequentiores then Rariores, more rather then fewer; and if it be no prejudice to our Christian liberty to be tyed, and that by vertue of the fourth Commandement, to allow unto him a better proportion of time, for his service, then that of one day in seven, how can it bee prejudiciall to our ⟨p. 79⟩Christian liberty to allow unto him this, and that by vertue of the fourth Commandement.

1. 1Respon.

Now whether Doctor Rivetus his answers to the arguments of Wallaeus, or his own arguments to the contrary be ¹of any force to hold him to that opinion which he conceives to be Calvin's in opposition to the Doctrine delivered by Wallaeus, I am consent the indifferent may judge; as also whether the two causes mentioned by him for the observation of the Sabbath contained in the Commandment, doth not infer the third also which Rivetus opposeth, namely the proportion of one day in seven. And that this is as free from all colour of ceremoniality as any of the other two. The first was that some time is to be set apart for Gods Service; now this general is not commanded there but as contained in the special, to wit, the proportion of one day in seven. Both of them being equally contained in the particularity of the seventh day in that Commandment expressed. And as for the morality of rest to be allowed to servants after six days of labour; this doth clearly draw with it the confinement of the time appointed for Gods Service to the proportion of one day in seven; unless the day of rest for servants shall not be the day consecrated to the exercises of piety. And I much wonder that Doctor Rivetus a man of such judgement, and perspicacity doth not observe this. The only way to help this anomaly is in plain terms to profess that some rest is to be allowed to servants by their Masters, but in what proportion, that is not defined, but left at large to the pleasure of their Masters. And as for ceremoniality in the proportion of one day in seven, never any man devised any such thing more then in the setting apart of some time in general for Gods Service, all confessing this to be a duty known by the very light of nature. But I do not find that Calvin hath any other meaning then that we are not so tied to one day in seven, but that more time then this may be consecrated to Divine Service; which as I have disputed before, so now I am the more confirmed herein, Doctor Rivetus manifesting this to be his opinion also, as well as it was the opinion of Gomarus; For in this he rests, as may appear by his ⟨p. 80⟩answer to the first argument of Doctor Wallaeus. Neither is it true that Calvin did censure them who simply maintained, that the observation of one day in the week doth still remain as moral;

Now whether Doctor Rivetus his answers to the arguments of Wallaeus, or his owne arguments to the contrary bee

Neither is Master Robert Low, in his effigiation of the true Sabbatism, of any such authority as to counterpoise the concurrent testimonies of so many of our English Divines to the contrary; not to speak of the multitude of outlandish Divines whom Doctor Walaeus mustereth up, concurring in the same opinion, and whereas he saith as Doctor Rivetus reports him, that some great men, who vehemently contend, that the perpetual sanctity of manners doth require, that one day in seven should be celebrated, have more authority then reason; I may be bold to say that they who with him have hitherto opposed the Doctrine we maintain, what authority they have I know not, but as for their reasons, they are of so hungry a nature; that hereby they manifest that nothing but affection and their private ends they have, to bear them out in this. And whereas I doubt not but Rivetus hath brought on the Stage the best reasons he could pick both out of ⟨p. 81⟩master Robert Low, and out of Gomarus; let every indifferent person judge of them as they deserve; though I verily think that nothing but his affection to Calvin, to hold up his credit, and reputation hath carried him all along; and yet either my self, and Walaeus mistake Calvin, or Rivetus miserably mistaketh him.

Neither is Master Robert Low, in his effigiation of the true Sabbatisme, of any such authority as to counterpoise the concurrent testimonies of so many of our English Divines to the contrary; not to speake of the multitude of outlandish Divines whom Doctor Walaeus mustereth up, concurring in the same opinion, and whereas hee saith as Doctor Rivetus reports him, that some great men, who vehemently contend, that the perpetuall sanctity of manners doth require, that one day in seven should be celebrated, have more authority then reason; I may bee bold to say that they who with him have hitherto opposed the Doctrine we maintaine, what authority they have I know not, but as for their reasons, they are of so hungry a nature; that hereby they manifest that nothing but affection and their private ends they have, to beare them out in this. And whereas I doubt not but Rivetus hath brought on the Stage the best reasons hee could picke both out of ⟨p. 81⟩master Robert Low, and out of Gomarus; let every indifferent person judge of them as they deserve; though I verily thinke that nothing but his affection to Calvin, to hold up his credite, and reputation hath carried him all along; and yet either my selfe, and Walaeus mystake Calvin, or Rivetus miserably mystaketh him.

But as for our reason, we call all the World to judge of it; God did require one day in seven to be set apart for his public service under the Law; how much more doth he require as good a proportion of time under the Gospel? Nay from the beginning of the World he hath required it, and to this day both Jews, and Christian Gentiles have observed the same proportion. Again God in his moral Law hath required this, and that not as ceremonial, never any man hitherunto having set his wits on work to devise any ceremoniality herein; neither was it ever known that God abrogated this proportion of time to be allowed unto him for his service; therefore it continueth still as a moral Law to bind us, and shall continue until God himself set an end unto it: now let master Lows reasons be compared with these in every indifferent conscience, and let them have that authority which they deserve, because being well conceited of the strength of his reasons, he sensibly complains of his want of authority. It seems Pope Alexander the third was a man of more authority then reason. For he maintains in Cap. licet. de feriis, as Doctor Rivetus relates it, that both the old and new Testament have in special manner appointed the seventh day for man to rest thereon, and he takes it out of Suarez. de relig. l. 2. c. 2. but Rivetus cannot assent unto him, if he delivers this of any moral institution; yet that it was so appointed by the fourth Commandment unto the Jews it cannot be denied; and that not as ceremonial; for we have seen how oddly Rivetus hath carried himself in coming to speak of the ceremoniality. For to make this good he flies to the particularity of the seventh day; and if the ceremoniality thereof, be enough to infer the ceremoniality of such a special proportion of time as of one day in seven; it may suffice as well to constitute a ⟨p. 82⟩ceremoniality in the general, namely in this that some time is to be set apart for Gods Service, which yet all account to be moral by the very light of nature.

But as for our reason, we call all the World to judge of it; God did require one day in seven to be set apart for his publique service under the Law; how much more doth he require as good a proportion of time under the Gospell? Nay from the beginning of the World he hath required it, and to this day both Iewes, and Christian Gentiles have observed the same proportion. Againe God in his morall Law hath required this, and that not as ceremoniall, never any man hitherunto having set his wits on worke to devise any ceremoniality herein; neyther was it ever knowne that God abrogated this proportion of time to be allowed unto him for his service; therefore it continueth still as a morall Law to bind us, and shall continue untill God himselfe set an end unto it: now let master Lowes reasons be compared with these in every indifferent conscience, and let them have that authority which they deserve, because being well conceited of the strength of his reasons, hee sensibly complaines of his want of authority. It seemes Pope Alexander the third was a man of more authority then reason. For hee maintaines in Cap. licet. de feriis, as Doctor Rivetus relates it, that both the old and new Testament have in speciall manner appointed the seventh day for man to rest thereon, and hee takes it out of Suarez. de relig. l. 2. c. 2. but Rivetus cannot assent unto him, if he delivers this of any morall institution; yet that it was so appointed by the fourth Commandement unto the Iewes it cannot bee denied; and that not as ceremoniall; for we have seene how odly Rivetus hath carried himselfe in comming to speake of the ceremoniality. For to make this good hee flyes to the particularity of the seventh day; and if the ceremoniality thereof, bee enough to inferre the ceremoniality of such a speciall proportion of time as of one day in seven; it may suffice as well to constitute a

If Zanchy hath no better argument to prove that the Decalogue as given by Moses to the Israelites doth not pertain to us but only so far forth as it agrees with the Law of nature; then by instancing in the Sabbath, which the Gentiles were not bound to sanctify: it stands Rivetus upon to oppose him as much as any, who maintains that the Law concerning the sanctifying of the Sabbath was given to Adam, and who brings diverse authorities to prove the observation of it generally by the Gentiles; This I speak upon consideration of his reply to Gomarus taking exception against somewhat in this argument delivered by him in his explication of the Decalogue. But I hope the moral Law shall be sufficient to bind us Christians if no other way, yet by this argument of proportion. If God required of the Jews under the Law that one day in seven should be set apart to his service: how much more doth it become us Christians to allow as good a proportion of time for his service under the Gospel? This I say shall suffice until Rivetus answereth it, which never will be, for he as good as confesseth that we are bound to allow God for his service, rather a better proportion of time then a worse. And as for Doctor Prideaux, I nothing doubt but he will clear us from Judaism in arguing thus; as who Sect. 7. professeth that if they (against whom he disputes) required no more, but the Analogy, the equity or the reason of that Commandment, we would not stick to yield unto it. And whereas Rivetus adds that the argument which he annexeth seems to him of great weight, namely that he who sticks to the Commandment must exactly observe it: And that therefore into the place of the seventh from the Creation, no day is to be substituted. But this argument I have answered before, all for the most part grant some ceremoniality in that Commandment; now if rest on the seventh be found to be ceremonial, but not the rest of one day in seven in an indefinite consideration; it will follow herehence, that the seventh must not be observed as ⟨p. 83⟩accomplished in Christ; and that the proportion of time is still to continue, as indeed by experience we find it verified in each. For the observation of the seventh is ceased as prefiguring Christs rest in his Grave, but the observation of one day in seven still continueth unto this day.

If Zanchy hath no better argument to prove that the Decalogue as given by Moses to the Israelites doth not pertaine to us but onely so farre forth as it agrees with the Law of nature; then by instancing in the Sabbath, which the Gentiles were not bound to sanctifie: it stands Rivetus upon to oppose him as much as any, who maintaines that the Law concerning the sanctifying of the Sabbath was given to Adam, and who brings diverse authorities to prove the observation of it generally by the Gentiles; This I speake upon consideration of his reply to Gomarus taking exception against somewhat in this argument delivered by him in his explication of the Decalogue. But I hope the morall Law shall be sufficient to binde us Christians if no other way, yet by this argument of proportion. If God required of the Iewes under the Law that one day in seven should bee set apart to his service: how much more doth it become us Christians to allow as good a proportion of time for his service under the Gospell? This I say shall suffice untill Rivetus answeareth it, which never will be, for he as good as confesseth that we are bound to allow God for his service, rather a better proportion of time then a worse. And as for Doctor Prideaux, I nothing doubt but he will cleare us from Judaisme in arguing thus; as who Sect. 7. professeth that if they (against whom he disputes) required no more, but the Analogy, the equity or the reason of that Commandement, we would not sticke to yeeld unto it. And whereas Rivetus addes that the argument which hee annexeth seemes to him of great weight, namely that hee who stickes to the Commandement must exactly observe it: And that therefore into the place of the seventh from the Creation, no day is to bee substituted. But this argument I have answered before, all for the most part grant some ceremoniality in that Commandement; now if rest on the seventh be found to bee ceremoniall, but not the rest of one day in seven in an indefinite consideracion; it will follow herehence, that the seventh must not be observed as

Preface.

Next for the second Thesis, 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. Arotius, Simler, 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, 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 Ursinus 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. Arotius, Simler, David Paraeus,

Neither is it to be thought, that there is any certain time or definite number of days prescribed in holy Scriptures, but that the appointment both of the time, and also of the number of the days is left by the authority of Gods Word, to the authority of Christs Church, to be determined and assigned orderly in every Country, by the discretion of the rulers and Ministers thereof, as they shall judge most expedient to the true setting forth of Gods glory, and edification of Gods People. Which preamble is not to be understood of holy days or of Saints days only, (whose being left to the authority of the Church was never questioned) but of the Lords Day also: as by the body of the Act doth at full appear.

Neither is it to bee thought, that there is any certaine time or definite number of dayes prescribed in holy Scriptures, but that the appointment both of the time, and also of the number of the dayes is left by the authority of Gods Word, to the authority of Christs Church, to bee determined and assigned orderly in every Country, by the discretion of the rulers and Ministers thereof, as they shall judge most expedient to the true setting forth of Gods glory, and edification of Gods People. Which preamble is not to be understood of holy dayes or of Saints dayes onely, (whose being left to the authority of the Church was never questioned) but of the Lords Day also: as by the body of the Act doth at full appeare.

Exam.

In this Section, the Prefacer makes a greater bluster by far then in the former. For to except against the proportion of time, as of one day in seven to be set apart for the service of God in these days of the Gospel, is so unreasonable a course, and that not only in the judgement of a Christian conscience, but even in the judgement of a natural man, that I cannot easily devise any thing more unreasonable. For whereas all confess that by the very light of nature some time ought to be set apart for the service of God; and not so only, but that a fit, and competent proportion of time is to be consecrated to holy uses, as Gomarus acknowledgeth, though one of the most eager opposers of the morality of the Sabbath, that hitherto have been known. Albeit this convenient proportion of time cannot be so convincingly concluded upon by the light of nature, as to draw all to an unanimous consent thereunto; yet after God himself hath gone before us herein by blessing the seventh day and sanctifying it; and that upon the ground mentioned both Gen. 2. and in the fourth Commandment; henceforth as Chrysostom observeth, ⟨p. 85⟩God hath manifested, that one day in seven is to be set apart; I may say consequently, that one day in seven is that fit proportion of time which is to be sanctified to Gods holy worship and service, and that God hath now manifested as much ever since the Creation. And (hereupon as I imagine) Azorius the Jesuit in his institutions is bold to conclude, that this course is most agreeable unto reason. Now if the Lord under the Law did require such a proportion of time to be sequestered from profane use to Divine, at the hands of the Jews; can it enter into the heart of a sober man, that God should require less of us Christians under the Gospel, then he did require of the Jews under the Law? Or that God hath now left it to the liberty of the Church, whether they will set apart the proportion of one day in seven or less, to be spent in Gods worship? If we consider the service of the day, as whereby God is honoured, undoubtedly God hath deserved more service at our hands under the Gospel, then he did at the hands of the Jews under the Law; for as much as the love of God to mankind was never so revealed in former times, as in these latter times; So God loved the World that he gave his only begotten Son, &c.

In this Section, the Prefacer makes a greater bluster by farre then in the former. For to except against the proportion of time, as of one day in seven to be set apart for the service of God in these dayes of the Gospell, is so unreasonable a course, and that not onely in the judgement of a Christian conscience, but even in the judgement of a naturall man, that I cannot easily devise any thing more unreasonable. For whereas all confesse that by the very light of nature some time ought to bee set apart for the service of God; and not so onely, but that a fit, and competent proportion of time is to bee consecrated to holy uses, as Gomarus acknowledgeth, though one of the most eager opposers of the morality of the Sabbath, that hitherto have beene knowne. Albeit this convenient proportion of time cannot bee so convincingly concluded upon by the light of nature, as to draw all to an unanimous consent thereunto; yet after God himselfe hath gone before us herein by blessing the seventh day and sanctifying it; and that upon the ground mentioned both

And hereupon undoubtedly it is that our Saviour professeth, that from the time of John the Baptist, the Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. To such an height of devotion hath the Love of God manifested in his Son inflamed his true servants; according to that of John, We love him because he loved us first. Again if we consider the service of that day, as such whereby our souls are profited and promoted in faith and holiness, never was there more need then in these days of sanctifying a better proportion of time unto God Service, rather then a worse; and that in each respect. For the truth of God was never so encumbered with oppositions before the coming of our Saviour in the flesh as it hath been since. No heretics (to speak of) were known to trouble the peace of the Church, in those former times in comparison to the multitude of heresies that have been broached since, and began to be set on foot in the very days of the Apostles; Saint Paul professing that even then the mystery of iniquity ⟨p. 86⟩did work. And whereas Saint Peter tells us that false teachers should come privily bringing in damnable heresies even denying the Lord that bought them; Saint Jude tells them to whom he writes, that such were already crept in turning the grace of God into wantonness, and denying God the only Lord, and our Lord Jesus Christ. And Saint John after the same manner, little children (saith he) it is the last time, and as you have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now there are many Antichrists. And no marvel; for as much as the mysteries of godliness concerning the Trinity of persons and incarnation of the Son of God (whereat carnal wits are so apt to stumble) were never so punctually and distinctly expressed in the books of the old Testament, as now they are particularly delivered in the writings of the Apostles and Evangelists.

And hereupon undoubtedly it is that our Saviour professeth, that from the time of Iohn the Baptist, the Kingdome of Heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. To such an height of devotion hath the Love of God manifested in his Sonne inflamed his true servants; according to that of Iohn, We love him because he loved us first. Againe if wee consider the service of that day, as such wherby our soules are profited and promoted in faith and holinesse, never was there more need then in these dayes of sanctifying a better proportion of time unto God Service, rather then a worse; and that in each respect. For the truth of God was never so encombred with oppositions before the comming of our Saviour in the flesh as it hath beene since. No heretiques (to speake of) were knowne to trouble the peace of the Church, in those former times in comparison to the multitude of heresies that have beene broached since, and began to bee set on foote in the very dayes of the Apostles; Saint Paul professing that even then the mystery of iniquity

So that had we in these days two Sabbaths in a week instead of one, all were little enough to instruct our people, and strengthen them against the oppositions made by men of carnal minds, and thereby to keep them in the right way of Gods saving truth. And no less necessity is there for the keeping of them in the ways of holiness, such is the degenerate condition of the World; Long ago it is that the severe judgement of God, had its course in giving men over to illusions to believe lies, and all for not receiving the love of the truth, as much as to say for the profaneness of the Christian World, in not making it their care to walk worthy of their calling, worthy of the Gospel; whereunto the Apostle so often exhorts Christians. So that if at any time it were requisite to set one day in seven apart for the service of God, surely by the very dictate of common reason, it is most requisite in these latter days of the Gospel. Especially considering the rage, and fury of Satan in opposing the Kingdom of Christ more now than ever, because he knoweth he hath but a short time. As for the alteration of the day (the same proportion of time still continuing) from the seventh to the first day of the week, that I confess willingly seems not at first sight to have the like evidence. But whereas this Prefacer contends for the alteration of the day, ⟨p. 87⟩as only by an humane and Ecclesiastical constitution; observe that not one of the ancient Fathers are mentioned by him for the justifying of this, though divers are referred unto by him, as against the institution of the Sabbath from the Creation. But we have divers of the ancients bearing witness to the Divine institution of the Lords day, to come in place of the seventh. As first Athanasius Homil de Semente. Olim certe priscis hominibus in summo pretio Sabbatum fuit, quam quidem solemnitatem Dominus in diem Dominicum transtulit. Heretofore truly the Sabbath was in great price, with men of old time, which solemnity the Lord hath translated unto the Lords Day, Austine hath divers other passages to the same purpose de civitate dei. lib. 22. cap. ult. Dominicus dies velut octavus aeternus, qui Christi Resurrectione sacratus est, aeternam non solum Spiritus, verumetiam corporis requiem praefigurans.

So that had wee in these dayes two Sabbaths in a weeke insteed of one, all were little enough to instruct our people, and strengthen them against the oppositions made by men of carnall mindes, and thereby to keepe them in the right way of Gods saving truth. And no lesse necessitie is there for the keeping of them in the wayes of holinesse, such is the degenerate condition of the World; Long agoe it is that the severe judgement of God, had its course in giving men over to illusions to beleeve lies, and all for not receiving the love of the truth, as much as to say for the profanenesse of the Christian World, in not making it their care to walke worthy of their calling, worthy of the Gospell; whereunto the Apostle so often exhorts Christians. So that if at any time it were requisite to set one day in seven apart for the service of God, surely by the very dictate of common reason, it is most requisite in these latter dayes of the Gospell. Especially considering the rage, and fury of Satan in opposing the Kingdome of Christ more now than ever, because he knoweth hee hath but a short time. As for the alteration of the day (the same proportion of time still continuing) from the seventh to the first day of the weeke, that I confesse willingly seemes not at first sight to have the like evidence. But whereas this Prefacer contends for the alteration of the day,

The Lords Day as the eighth eternal which was sacred by Christs Resurrection, prefiguring an eternal rest, not of the spirit only, but of the body also; and in his Ep. 119. ad Januarium, The Lords Day is declared not to the Jews, but to Christians by the Lords Resurrection, and from thence began to have its festivity; and de verbis Apostoli Sermo. 15. The Lords Resurrection promised unto us an eternal day, and hath consecrated to us the Lords Day, which is called the Lords, because the Lord rose on that day, and de Temp. Serm. 251. The Apostles and Apostolical men, have therefore ordained the Lords day to be kept with a religious solemnity, because on that day our redeemer rose from the dead. Cyril. in Joan. lib. 12. cap. 58. From Christ presenting himself unto his Apostles on the eighth day, which he interpreteth of the first day of the week, concludes therehence that by right therefore holy Congregations are kept in the Churches on that day. And as Walaeus observes, the celebrity of this day Eusebius refers to Christ himself in these words, Who ever prescribed to all the inhabitants of the World either by Sea or Land, that meeting together one day in the week, they should celebrate the Dominical festivity. Add to this that of Gregory mentioned Section the 1. Nay Athanasius ¹goes further, and shows the equity of it in proportion to the new Creation compared with the old; The end ⟨p. 88⟩of the first Creation was the Sabbath; but the beginning of the second Creature is the Lords Day, wherein he renewed and repaired the old man. Like as therefore in former times he would have the Sabbath day to be kept, so we keep holy the Lords Day as a monument of the beginning of the second Creation. And this proportion is apprehended by Beza also, on the Revelation the first Chap. and 10. verse. That Sabbath day (saith he) continued from the Creation of the World to the Lords resurrection, which seeing it is as it were an other Creation of another spiritual World (as the Prophets speak) then for the Sabbath of the former World, or seventh day was assumed (and that undoubtedly by the Holy Ghost suggesting this to the Apostles) the first day of this new World, in which not the corporal or corruptible light, in the first day of the first World was created: but that heavenly and eternal light did spring unto us.

The Lords Day as the eighth eternall which was sacred by Christs Resurrection, prefiguring an eternall rest, not of the spirit only, but of the body also; and in his Ep. 119. ad Ianuarium, The Lords Day is declared not to the Iewes, but to Christians by the Lords Resurrection, and from thence began to have its festivity; and de verbis Apostoli Sermo. 15. The Lords Resurrection promised unto us an eternall day, and hath consecrated to us the Lords Day, which is called the Lords, because the Lord rose on that day, and de Temp. Serm. 251. The Apostles and Apostolicall men, have therefore ordained the Lords day to be kept with a religious solemnity, because on that day our redeemer rose from the dead. Cyril. in Joan. lib. 12. cap. 58. From Christ presenting himself unto his Apostles on the eighth day, which hee interpreteth of the first day of the weeke, concludes therehence that by right therefore holy Congregations are kept in the Churches on that day. And as Walaeus observes, the celebrity of this day Eusebius referres to Christ himselfe in these words, Who ever prescribed to all the inhabitants of the World either by Sea or Land, that meeting together one day in the weeke, they should celebrate the Dominicall festivity. Adde to this that of Gregory mentioned Section the 1. Nay Athanasius

In all which Beza doth exactly tread in the steps of that ancient Father Athanasius, and concludes that the assemblies of the Lords Day (which Justine expressly makes mention of in his second Apologetium) are of tradition apostolical and truly Divine. And after him Doctor Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester, whom Doctor Hall now Bishop of Exeter some where calls the Oracle of these times upon the same ground, maintains the equity of bringing our Lords Day into the place of the Jewish Sabbath.

In all which Beza doth exactly treade in the steps of that ancient Father Athanasius, and concludes that the assemblies of the Lords Day (which Iustine expresly makes mention of in his second Apologetium) are of tradition apostolicall and truly Divine. And after him Doctor Andrewes late Bishop of Winchester, whom Doctor Hall now Bishop of Exceter some where calls the Oracle of these times upon the same ground, maintaines the equity of bringing our Lords Day into the place of the Jewish Sabbath.