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…

Man could not possibly have known how many days God was creating the world, so to know what day he rested, that they might conform unto him in their rest; unless God had revealed it unto them; but supposing God had revealed it, and withal had called it his holy day, and it were known unto them that one day in the week must be set apart as Gods holy Day, in this case I appeal to every Christian conscience whether this were not sufficient to conclude that surely the day of the Lords rest, being his holy Day, ought to be the day of our rest, and our holy day. Now, thus the case stands with us Christians; we know what day our Saviour rose, having finished the work of mans Redemption; we know the Jews Sabbath is abrogated; we know the proportion of one day in seven remains still to be consecrated as an holy day to the Lord; we know the Lord prescribed to the Jews for their Sabbath his resting day from the creation; which is called his holy day: And in like manner we know, that under the Gospel, the first day of the week being the day of our Saviours resurrection, is called by Saint John the Lords Day; as for Easter and Pentecost, the ⟨p. 119⟩case is nothing like; those festivals being not of single days, but of whole weeks, once in a year, yet this proportion we find between them and the weekly Sabbath. There are in a year seven times seven weeks, and a fraction less than half a seven; so that the memory of the creation was seven times in a year celebrated more than the memory either of their deliverance out of Egypt, or, of their reaping the fruits of the land of Canaan, the one far surmounting the other, yet their Easter began the day of the year whereon they came out of Egypt. And Doctor Lake, Bishop of Bath and Wells, Thes. 41. de Sabbat. professeth, that God sets out the day by the work he doth on the day, the work I say done, doth difference a day from a day: and Thes. 43. Now then, when God doth any remarkable work, then will he be honoured with a commemoration day for that work. If the work concern the whole, by the whole Church; and by a part, if it concern a part: and Thes. 44. And his Will is understood often by his Precept; but when we have not that, the practice doth guide the Church, 45. This is a Catholic rule, observed in the institution of all sacred feasts, both Divine and Humane, 46.

Man could not possibly have knowne how many dayes God was creating the world, so to know what day he rested, that they might conforme unto him in their rest; unlesse God had revealed it unto them; but supposing God had revealed it, and withall had called it his holy day, and it were knowne unto them that one day in the weeke must be set apart as Gods holy Day, in this case I appeal to every Christian conscience whether this were not sufficient to conclude that surely the day of the Lords rest, being his holy Day, ought to be the day of our rest, and our holy day. Now, thus the case stands with us Christians; we know what day our Saviour rose, having finished the worke of mans Redemption; we know the Jewes Sabbath is abrogated; we know the proportion of one day in seven remaines still to be consecrated as an holy day to the Lord; we know the Lord prescribed to the Jewes for their Sabbath his resting day from the creation; which is called his holy day: And in like manner we know, that under the Gospel, the first day of the weeke being the day of our Saviours resurrection, is called by Saint Iohn the Lords Day; as for Easter and Pentecost, the ⟨p. 119⟩case is nothing like; those festivalls being not of single dayes, but of whole weeks, once in a yeere, yet this proportion we find betweene them and the weekely Sabbath. There are in a yeere seven times seven weeks, and a fraction lesse than halfe a seven; so that the memory of the creation was seven times in a yeere celebrated more than the memory either of their deliverance out of Egypt, or, of their reaping the fruits of the land of Canaan, the one farre surmounting the other, yet their Easter began the day of the yeere whereon they came out of Egypt. And Doctor Lake, Bishop of Bath and Wells, Thes. 41. de Sabbat. professeth, that God sets out the day by the worke he doth on the day, the worke I say done, doth difference a day from a day: and Thes. 43. Now then, when God doth any remarkable worke, then will he be honoured with a commemoration day for that worke. If the worke concerne the whole, by the whole Church; and by a part, if it concerne a part: and Thes. 44. And his Will is understood often by his Precept; but when we have not that, the practice doth guide the Church, 45. This is a Catholique rule, observed in the institution of all sacred feasts, both Divine and Humane, 46.

The work of the day is the ground of hallowing the day, whether it be weekly, monthly, or yearly, as particulars evince in Scripture and history. The very light of nature doth give testimony unto this, as appeareth by the common practice of the heathens; as to give some instance hereof, what is the original of the observation of the Friday, as a festival day amongst Mahometans? surely this; on that day Mahumet fled from Mecca to Jethrib, and so that day is accounted the first day of his kingdom, and from thenceforth it was ordained to be the first day of their year and of their week. So then the Will of God, in the judgement of this reverend Divine, is manifested not only by Precept, but by his Work. And yet I know none speaks more of Precept in this particular, than Doctor Walaeus, as I have often alleged him, pag. 172.

The worke of the day is the ground of hallowing the day, whether it be weekely, monethly, or yeerely, as particulars evince in Scripture and history. The very light of nature doth give testimony unto this, as appeareth by the common practice of the heathens; as to give some instance hereof, what is the originall of the observation of the Fryday, as a festivall day amongst Mahumetanes? surely this; on that day Mahumet fled from Mecha to Jethrib, and so that day is accounted the first day of his kingdom, and from thenceforth it was ordained to be the first day of their yeere and of their weeke. So then the Will of God, in the judgement of this reverend Divine, is manifested not onely by Precept, but by his Worke. And yet I know none speakes more of Precept in this particular, than Doctor Walaeus, as I have often alleged him, pag. 172.

Fifthly, I grant Junius went too far, in affirming that Christ did observe the same every week between his resurrection and ascension; but neither doth the contrary appear by Scripture; undoubtedly the two first he did, and it is not manifest that the three following he did not; and though ⟨p. 120⟩Cyril infers here-hence the reasonableness of our Christian assemblies on this day, yet we do not; but as Doctor Walaeus concludes that which he concludes not from any one place, but from many places together, that do we; Neither is it any thing to the purpose that Doctor Walaeus observes of Christs appearing on other days, as Joh. 21. 24. once, which was at a fish meeting. And as little material is it, that at such other times of his meetings he spake of the kingdom of God.

Fifthly, I grant Iunius went too farre, in affirming that Christ did observe the same every weeke betweene his resurrection and ascention; but neither doth the contrary appeare by Scripture; undoubtedly the two first he did, and it is not manifest that the three following he did not; and though ⟨p. 120⟩Cyril inferres here-hence the reasonablenesse of our Christian assemblies on this day, yet wee doe not; but as Doctor Walaeus concludes that which hee concludes not from any one place, but from many places together, that do we; Neither is it any thing to the purpose that Doctor Walaeus observes of Christs appearing on other dayes, as Ioh. 21. 24. once, which was at a fish meeting. And as little materiall is it, that at such other times of his meetings he spake of the kingdome of God.

Seventhly, And whereas some urged that if Christ himself had not instituted this day after his resurrection, the most Primitive Church should have been left destitute of a certain day of Gods worship, to wit, from the time of Christs resurrection to the first consecrating of the Lords Day, which they take to be absurd, and I confess, it seems unlikely that the Apostles took upon them to order ought until they received the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, that being the day they were to receive power from on high, to execute the commission given them, Mat. 28. 19. to teach all nations; till which time they gathered no Churches. For the strengthening the former reason, it is added; That the Jews Sabbath was now abolished by Christs death and resurrection. This I do not deny, but the Apostles might very well be ignorant hereof as yet, as not having received the Spirit as yet; yea, & after the receiving it, we find they challenged Peter for going to the Gentiles to preach the Gospel, Acts 11. to this argument some answer, as Walaeus saith, that the days between Christs ascension and the coming down of the Holy Ghost upon them, were spent in continual meetings of the Apostles and other Disciples. But from the day of Pentecost, the Lords day thenceforth observed. This answer reacheth not unto the days interceding between Christs resurrection and his ascension. And when I consider Bishop Lake his discourse, grounded, as he professeth, upon universal observation (and which I find no reason to resist) namely, that the work of the day commends the day: If ever any day deserved to be festival to any, surely the day of our Saviours resurrection deserved to be festival unto them, to rejoice in the Lord thereon, according to that of the Psalmist, This is the day which the Lord hath ¹made, let us be glad and rejoice therein; the ancient Fathers accommodating the place thereunto. The two verses immediately preceding, carrying in the forehead of them a manifest relation unto Christ as the proprietary of their meaning. 22. The stone which the builders refused, is become the head of the corner. 23. This is the Lords doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes.

Seventhly, And whereas some urged that if Christ himselfe had not instituted this day after his resurrection, the most Primitive Church should have beene left destitute of a certaine day of Gods worship, to wit, from the time of Christs resurrection to the first consecrating of the Lords Day, which they take to be absurd, and I confesse, it seems unlikely that the Apostles tooke upon them to order ought untill they received the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, that being the day they were to receive power from on high, to execute the commission given them,

Now when was this manifested, namely, that the stone which the builders refused became the head of the corner, but by Christs ⟨p. 122⟩Resurrection from the dead, being thereby mightily declared to be the Son of God. Rom. 14. and was there ever work more marvellous in the eyes of Gods Servants, then the Resurrection of Christ, especially considering the disconsolate condition of his Disciples? Luke 24. 21. We trusted it had been he, that should have delivered Israel. The women departed from the Sepulchre, though with fear, by reason of the consternation received from Angelical presence, their countenance being like lightning, yet with great joy by reason of the news they heard from them of Christs Resurrection; upon the noise whereof (for they were commanded to carry word of it to his Disciples,) the Apostles as it seems were gathered together; and in the evening after he had showed himself to his Disciples going to Emmaus, Christ presented himself in the midst of them. Eight days after they were met together, and Thomas with them who being absent the time before, gave out speeches of peremptory incredulity concerning his Resurrection; therefore then and not till then also the doors being shut, Christ came before them, and calls unto Thomas to see his hand, and to put his finger into his side. These apparitions of our Saviour twice on the first day of the week might well add somewhat to the confirmation of them in the festivity of this day; and howsoever between his ascension, and the day of Pentecost they had their meetings, yet how improbable is it they should put no difference; between such a festival and other days of the week. A second answer Walaeus gives, namely that others say, that from the day of Pentecost it was not necessary that the Lords Day should be observed: but that at the first the Apostles together with the Jews observed their Sabbath not as a ceremony of the Old Testament, but as a free circumstance of divine worship, as for a while they retained Circumcision and difference of meats; which they gave over, after the Jews were found obstinately to refuse the Gospel. So that in these mens judgements the Lords Day was no festival to the Apostles, till by occasion of the Jews obstinateness, a proper occasion for the institution of a new festival.

Now when was this manifested, namely, that the stone which the builders refused became the head of the corner, but by Christs

And give me leave to differ from them in yoking ⟨p. 123⟩Circumcision and difference of meats with the Jews Sabbath, neither of them prefiguring Christ as to come, like as the Jews Sabbath did, prefiguring his rest that day in the grave; as the ancients have conceived it, without any contradiction that I know. Had they permitted sacrifices for a time, their comparison had been more congruous. I see no reason to withhold me from concurring with Austin, and in him with all the ancients, for ought I know to the contrary, that Dies Dominicus Resurrectione Domini declaratus est Christianis, & ex illo coepit habere festivitatem suam, yea with the very words of Scripture Psal. 118. 22. The stone which the builders refused is become the head of the corner 23. This is the Lords doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes. 24. This is the day which the Lord hath made we will rejoice and be glad in it. Neither is it credible to me that the Apostles were ignorant of it or of its application, to the day of Christs Resurrection, from the very day thereof. Heresbachius upon these words, Haec dies quam fecit dominus. They are (saith he) the words of the people exulting in the Kingdom of David, most of all of the glorious Resurrection of Christ, which of all others was most glorious to mankind: as whereon Christ redeemed us in a triumphant manner, from the Tyranny of Satan, and from everlasting death, and restored unto us everlasting righteousness. Arnobius interprets it of the Lords Day.

And give mee leave to differ from them in yoking ⟨p. 123⟩Circumcision and difference of meats with the Jewes Sabbath, neither of them prefiguring Christ as to come, like as the Jewes Sabbath did, prefiguring his rest that day in the grave; as the ancients have conceived it, without any contradiction that I know. Had they permitted sacrifices for a time, their comparison had beene more congruous. I see no reason to withhold me from concurring with Austin, and in him with all the ancients, for ought I know to the contrary, that Dies Dominicus Resurrectione Domini declaratus est Christianis, & ex illo coepit habere festivitatem suam, yea with the very words of Scripture Psal. 118. 22. The stone which the builders refused is become the head of the corner 23. This is the Lords doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes. 24. This is the day which the Lord hath made we will rejoyce and be glad in it. Neither is it credible to mee that the Apostles were ignorant of it or of its application, to the day of Christs Resurrection, from the very day thereof. Heresbachius upon these words, Haec dies quam fecit dominus. They are (saith hee) the words of the people exulting in the Kingdome of David, most of all of the glorious Resurrection of Christ, which of all others was most glorious to mankinde: as whereon Christ redeemed us in a triumphant manner, from the Tyarnny of Satan, and from everlasting death, and restored unto us everlasting righteousnesse. Arnobius interprets it of the Lords Day.

Eighthly, the last argument, and which he acknowledgeth of greatest moment is that, which is taken out of Apoc. 1. 10. Where the first day of the week is called the Lords Day, whence they conclude, that it is of the Lords institution. And indeed Doctor Andrewes Bishop of Winchester in his Star Camber speech professeth, that this denomination is given only to the first day of the week, as called in Scripture the Lords day, and to the Sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, as called the Lords Supper, and that to show that the word Dominicum (the Lords) is to be taken alike in both. In the same sense we call the Prayer which our Saviour taught his Disciples the Lords Prayer. But let us hear Walaeus his answer, that we may consider it. This consequence ⟨p. 122⟩(saith he) is not necessary, for it may be called the Lords, not only that which is of his institution, but even that which is made to the remembrance, or in the honour of him, or for his worship, as the ancients speak, as the altar of the Lord, and feast of the Lord are often so called. And that in this sense it was taken of the ancients it appears by this, that the ancient Fathers both Greek and Latin, called Temples by the name of Dominica, and [Greek or Hebrew]. That which we urge is the language of the Holy Ghost, now throughout the holy Scripture, it is not the language of the Holy Ghost, to call either Altars the Lords Altars, or Feasts the Lords Feasts, but such as are of the Lords institution. Neither do the fathers (in my observation) call the first day of the week the Lord's day otherwise then in reference to Christs Resurrection, as the cause of the festival nature thereof. Temples indeed they call [Greek or Hebrew] as consecrated to the Lord; but the denomination is not to distinguish it from other Temples; as the Lords Day hath its denomination to distinguish it from other days. But the day of Christs Resurrection being called the Lords Day not as such a day in the year, but as such a day in the week, this to my understanding doth manifestly infer the succession of it into the place of the Lords day of the week amongst the Jews. Both ancient and modern Divines do hold it lawful to consecrate other days to the service of of God, such as we usually call holy days. But never any man (I think) was found that durst call any of them Diem dominicum the Lords Day.

Eightly, the last argument, and which hee acknowledgeth of greatest moment is that, which is taken out of

Add to this, wherefore doth our Saviour say, that the son of man is Lord of the Sabbath, but plainly to conclude hence, that he can dispense with it, he can abrogate it, and bring another into the place of it? and none hath power for this but he who is Lord of the Sabbath.

Adde to this, wherefore doth our Saviour say, that the sonne of man is Lord of the Sabbath, but plainely to conclude herence, that hee can dispense with it, hee can abrogate it, and bring another into the place of it? and none hath power for this but hee who is Lord of the Sabbath.

Lastly, when he saith, pray that your flight be not in the winter nor on the Sabbath day, what is the reason hereof, but religio Sabbati? as all confess the religious observation of the Sabbath; and did they understand any other religion of the Sabbath but as from Divine institution? Now the time concerning which our Saviour delivers this, now about the destruction ⟨p. 125⟩of the Temple by Titus, after that no other Sabbath but of the Lords Day, was generally established in the Churches.

Lastly, when he saith, pray that your flight be not in the winter nor on the Sabbath day, what is the reason hereof, but religio Sabbati? as all confesse the religious observation of the Sabbath; and did they understand any other religion of the Sabbath but as from Divine institution? Now the time concerning which our Saviour delivers this, now about the destruction ⟨p. 125⟩of the Temple by Titus, after that no other Sabbath but of the Lords Day, was generally established in the Churches.

¹Last of all, for the third, and last conclusion, that still the Church hath power to change the day our Doctor in the 7. Section, bringeth in Bullinger, Bucer, Brentius, Ursinus, and Chemnitius, aliisque nostris with divers others not named particularly, as they are which think no otherwise thereof then Calvin did, and shows by what distinction Suarez, though otherwise no friend unto the men, doth defend their Doctrine.

¹Last of all, for the third, and last conclusion, that still the Church hath power to change the day our Doctor in the 7. Section, bringeth in Bullinger, Bucer, Brentius, Ursinus, and Chemnitius, aliisque nostris with divers others not named particularly, as they are which thinke no otherwise thereof then Calvin did, and shewes by what distinction Suarez, though otherwise no friend unto the men, doth defend their Doctrine.

1. 1Pref.

Now as the doctrine was, such also is the practise of those men and Churches, devoid of any the least superstitious rigour, esteeming it to be a day left arbitrary, and therefore open to all honest exercises and lawful recreations; by which the mind may be refreshed, and the spirits quickened. Even in Geneva it self according as it is related in the enlargement of Boterus by Robert Johnson, all honest exercises, shooting in pieces, long Bows, crossbows, &c. are used on the Sabbath Day, and that both in the morning, before and after Sermon; neither do the Ministers find fault therewithal, so that they hinder not from hearing of the word at the time appointed.

Now as the doctrine was, such also is the practise of those men and Churches, devoid of any the least superstitious rigour, esteeming it to bee a day left arbitrary, and therefore open to all honest exercises and lawfull recreations; by which the mind may bee refreshed, and the spirits quickened. Even in Geneva it selfe according as it is related in the enlargement of Boterus by Robert Johnson, all honest exercises, shooting in pieces, long Bowes, crossebowes, &c. are used on the Sabbath Day, and that both in the morning, before and after Sermon; neither doe the Ministers finde fault therewithall, so that they hinder not from hearing of the word at the time appointed.

Dancing indeed they do not suffer; But this is not in relation to the Sunday, but the sport it self, which is held unlawful, and generally forbidden in the French Churches: which strictness as some note, considering how the French do delight in dancing, hath been a great hinderance to the growth of the reformed religion in that Kingdom.

Dancing indeed they doe not suffer; But this is not in relation to the Sunday, but the sport it selfe, which is held unlawfull, and generally forbidden in the French Churches: which strictnesse as some note, considering how the French doe delight in dancing, hath beene a great hinderance to the growth of the reformed religion in that Kingdome.

Exam.

The Doctor indeed saith, that Calvin, Bullenger, Bucerus, Brentius, Chemnitius, Ursine and others of the reformed Churches affirm, that still the Church hath power to change the Lords Day to some other; but he neither cites their words, nor quotes any place out of their writings. And as for Calvin, whom this Prefacer proposeth as chief, and the rest as thinking no otherwise thereof, then he did; I make no doubt but the passage in Calvin is instit. 2. cap. 8. sect. 34. ⟨p. 126⟩where thus he writeth, Neque sic tamen septenarium numerum moror, ut ejus servituti Ecclesiam astringerem, I do not so regard the number of seven; as to tie the Church to the servitude thereof; which considered in it self, might intimate that in his opinion, it is indifferent whether we keep holy one day in seven, or one day in fourteen; but the words immediately following do manifest his meaning to be far otherwise, as namely, that we are not so tied to a seventh, but that we may solemnize other days also, by our holy assemblies. For thus it follows, Neque enim damnavero qui alios conventibus suis solennes dies habeant. I condemn not them that keep other days holy: will any man suppose that some there were, well known to Calvin, who kept other days solemn, and not the Lords Day; and that these men Calvin would not condemn? And Gomarus, who is most opposite to us in this argument, professeth, that seeing not only a time, but a sufficient proportion of time is to be set apart for Divine service, therefore we must now under the Gospel, allow rather a better proportion of time for Divine service than a worse. And in this also Rivetus rests, in his answer to the first argument of Walaeus, contending for one day in seven, as necessarily to be allowed to the worship of God. For Bullinger, I know not where to seek that ¹which the Doctor aims at. As for Bucer, I have showed before out of him, that the Lords Day was by the Apostles themselves consecrated to Divine actions; which ordinance the ancient Churches observed most religiously, and that one of the chief causes hereof was, that they might celebrate the memory of Christs resurrection, which fell out on the first day of the week;

The Doctor indeed saith, that Calvin, Bullenger, Bucerus, Brentius, Chemnitius, Ursine and others of the reformed Churches affirme, that still the Church hath power to change the Lords Day to some other; but hee neither cites their words, nor quotes any place out of their writings. And as for Calvin, whom this Prefacer proposeth as chiefe, and the rest as thinking no otherwise thereof, then hee did; I make no doubt but the passage in Calvin is instit. 2. cap. 8. sect. 34.

of power to abrogate this day left unto the Church he saith nothing, but to the contrary rather, that all they who desire the restoring of Christs Kingdom, ought to labour, that the religion of the Lords Day may be soundly called back and be of force. Yet (saith he) it is agreeable to our piety to sanctify other festivals also, to the commemoration of the Lords chief works, whereby he perfected our redemption as the day of his incarnation, nativity, the Epiphany, the passion, the resurrection, ascension and Pentecost. And the place which Doctor Rivet explic. decal. pag. 189. col. 2. allegeth out of Bucer in Mat. 10. ⟨p. 127⟩to prove that he maintained the day to be alterable, is nothing to the purpose, and as little do they make for it which he allegeth out of Musculus. To find out what Chemnitius saith hereupon, I turn to his Examen of the council of Trent, concerning festivals; There pag. 154. col. 2. he saith, that Christ, to show that he kept the Jews Sabbath freely, and not of necessity;- against the opinion of necessity, touching the abrogation of the Mosaical Sabbath, he taught both by word and deed. By word, in saying, that the Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath; and by his deeds, as in healing on the Sabbath day, and defending his Disciples in plucking the ears of corn. Now, hereby I take it to be manifest, and acknowledged by Chemnitius that none hath power to abrogate the Sabbath, but he that is Lord of the Sabbath. And seeing even Christians were to have their Sabbath, as appeareth by those words of our Saviour, pray that your flight be not in the winter, nor on the Sabbath day, which is delivered of the time about the destruction of the Temple by Titus; at what time Paul had suffered martyrdom divers years before, by whose writings it doth appear that the Lords Day was kept in place of the Jews Sabbath, both by the practice of the Apostles, and the Churches of Galatia and Achaia, as Chemnitius acknowledgeth from the force of those places, Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. and Apoc. 1. 10. in the next column it followeth, that the Lords Day was the Christian Sabbath, and so to this day continueth, and consequently, that none hath power to alter it, but he that is Lord of the Sabbath, which is Christ himself, it being accordingly called the Lords Day.