A Defense of the Sabbath Day, Chapter 3 · Commentary · Section 20
SECT. XX.
Their third argument from Teſtimony, is the conſtant practiſe of the Church, for many hundreth of yeeres togeather: for (ſay they) the Church of God, hath kept this Lords day for a Sabbath, now this Sixtene hundreth yeeres, & vpwards; & can it be thought, that Gods Church ſhould laie in an errour ſo longe? what Sixetene hundreth yeeres?
Herevnto I anſwer, 1. that the Church of God hath not euer & in all places kept the Lords day; for it was neglected of thos Churches, which ſucceeded the Apoſtles, vntill it was establiſhed by Chriſtian Emperours, ſo as in all porbability, it was not kept for 300 yeers by ſome Churches, as you hauehave heard quoted out of Perkins in the laſt Section before this.
2. In thoſe Churches where it was kept, it was not kept for a Sabbath, but as an holy day remiſly, and with workes of huſbandry done in it; & like as they kept their Friday, as we hauehave ſhowne in the former Section.
3. Since thoſe formoſt ages of the Church, it hath bene kept by all Chriſtian Churches being Romiſh, but as an other holy day, vntil Luther, and many yeeres ſince: for vntill Luther or thereabouts, our Church hath lyen buried in the Romiſh Church, as wheate in the chaffe; now it is vvell knowne, that the Church of Rome, doe hould & maintaine the Lords day, to be but a Tradition of the Church; and that it is to be kept but like an other holy day; & not by the 4th com. (& herein they are neerer the trueth then wee are) thus you ſee how the Church of Rome doth jumpe and agree vvith the Ancient Church in Conſtantins time; & how both in Conſtantins time, and in the Church of Rome ſince, vntill Luthers time, the Lords day, hath beene accounted but as an holy day; the contrary whereto cannot be ſhowne, thus you ſee what account the Churches hauehave made of the Lords day, vntill Luthers time, vvhichwhich is a matter of fiften hundreth yeeres.
And now let vsus come vntounto the times ſince Luther: If we ſhall take a ſuruey of the Reformed Churches in France, & the lovv Countries, it is apparant that they hauehave kept it remiſly, like an holy day, not like a Sabbath day; ſauing that, in the Low Countries, at this time, it is more ſolemnly kept, much what as ſolemnly as we in England keepe it now; but they hauehave not kept it ſo ſolemnly, vntill now of late yeeres, as within this 7 or 10 yeeres, or thereaboutes, as is well knowne.
Come we then vntounto our owne Church, which is the moſt famouſe Church for keeping of the Lords day of any other: I demaund how long our Church of England, hath kept this day, ſo zealouſly as now it doth? it is well knowne by men of yeeres, that can but remember 40 or 50 yeeres agone, that then the Lords day was not kept, as it is now: I ſpare to make a Catalogue, of the ordenary workes of mens caleings, then done on the Lords day, publikly, & frequently; I cannot remember 40 yeers paſt, and yet in my time, I can remember ſuch ordenary workes done, generally of all ſortes of men, as are no Sabbath day workes I am ſuer; but for the particulars, I referr you to the memory of men of greater age & more yeeres.
Thus I hauehave briefly giuen you a ſuruey, of the times & ages of the Church, & how the Lords day hath bene in account & in practiſe, from the Apoſtles times, vntill now with in theſe 40 or 50 yeeres, & hitherto it hath not bene kept like a Sabbath day; how then can the patrons of the Lords day, boaſt that it bath bene kept as a Sabbath in the Churches, conſtantly, for Sixetene hundreth yeeres? & whereas they aske by way of admiration, is it poſſible that the Church of God ſhould lye in an errour ſo long! what 1600 yeeres! they bewray their owne errour & ignorance to ſpeake ſo; for I hauehave ſhowne, that the Church, neuer accounted it, or kept it for a Sabbath day but for an holy day, remiſly, for 1500 or 1600 yeeres together.
But admit that our Church, or ſome in our Church rather, hauehave accounted the Lords day, for a Sabbath day, by the 4th com. for this 40 yeeres or 50 yeeres, make they ſuch a wonder, that a Church may lye in ſuch an errour, as this is, as if it were vnpoſſible? what will they then ſay vntounto the Churches, that ſucceeded the Apoſtles, that neglected the Lords day all together for a matter of 300 yeeres, vntill it was reuiued by Chriſtian Emperours, as we hauehave formerly proued? why may not our Church, or ſome in our Church rather, err in thinking the Lords day, to be a Sabbath, when it is not: as well as thoſe Churches, which ſucceeded the Apoſtles, did err (as theſe men thinke that patronag the Lords day) in thinking the Lords day was not to be kept at all? if they might err for 300 yeeres togeather, may it not be thought poſſible for our new Sabbatharians to err for 40 or 50 yeeres together? Beſids, it is not the Church of God, that hath erred ſo long; it is the errour only of our nevv Sabbatharians, who hauehave erred from their cradle, & they thinke therfore that the whole Church of God hath alſo euer bene in errour with them, from the Apoſtles dayes, vntill now: indeed, they would faine make the world beleeue, that all Gods Church, hath euer bene of their minde for the Lords day, but you ſee they are foulely beguiled, thers no ſuch matter, it is but their dreame, when they awake they will ſee better.
It is to be lamented to ſee, how by this golding conceipt, that the Church of God hath euer conſtantly kept this Lords day for a Sabbath, ſince the Apoſtles, they hauehave ledd the world after them; and now they hauehave bred ſuch a firuent zeale of the Lords day, in the hearts of many men, as that they thinke it no leſſe then blaſphemy, for a man to ſay any thing againſt it, as they hold it.
But ſince they hauehave alleaged vntounto vsus the practiſe of the Church; I wiſh they would ſtand to their owne argument, and that they would ſubſcribe vntounto it, that vve are no otherwiſe bound to the Lords day, then can be proued the primitiue Churches practiſedit: for then ſhould not all Churches be bound to keepe the Lords day; but ſome might keepe it, that pleaſed ſo to doe; and other Churches might omit the keeping of it, vvho pleaſed not to keepe it: for ſo vvas it in the primitiue Churches; ſome kept it, but otherſome kept it not, no not for 300 yeeres together, as vve hauehave proued in the Section before this: Then alſo, ſhould not thoſe Churches vvhichwhich doe keepe it, keepe it as a Sabbath, but as an holy day, remiſly, ſo as they might make hay, in Hay ſeile; and reape their corne, in harueſt; and plough their Lands, in Wheate ſeile, vponupon the Lords day, for ſo did the primitiue Churches in Conſtantins time, they did their vvorkes of husbandry on the Lords day. But ſome in our Church, are growne more ſtrict, then euer the primitiue Churches were, and yet theſe are holden the pureſt Churches, we muſt doe no worke in Hay-ſeile, Barley-ſeile, Harueſt, nor Wheate-ſeile, & all in conſcience of the 4th com. if vve ſhould imitate the primitiue Churches in theſe dayes, either by neglecting the Lords day altogether, as ſome of them did; or by doeing the vvorkes of huſ bandry on the Lords day, as otherſome of them did, theſe our Miniſters, who vſe more zeale then knowledge, would damne vsus to the pit of hell for it.
To conclud this Section, vvhereas Miniſters hauehave formerly & frequently, abuſed the Churches of God deceaſed, & ſlaundred them, by fathering this their errour vponupon them, as if they had bene of their minds, keeping the Lords day for a Sabbath, vvhichwhich is falſe as you ſee: hereby they hauehave vvronged the dead, yea, thoſe pure primitiue Churches of God, & made thē ſpeake vvhat they neuer thought, to the boulſtering vp of a late ſprung vp errour; an errour of 40 or 50 yeeres old, by ſome in our Church; & of 7 or 10 yeers old, in ſome other Churches: they muſt conſider alſo hovv many thowſand ſoules they hauehave ſeduced, partly by this golding tale, of the conſtant practiſe of all Churches; and for time to come let theſe things be reformed, that ſo thoſe primitiue Churches be no more abuſed, nor our Chriſtian auditours deluded.