The Sabbath Vindicated, Chapter 1
Broad.
A Treatife of the Lords-Day. CHAP. I.
THe Church of Christ hitherto consisted of Iews and Gentiles. And as touching the beleeving Iews at Ierusalem,The Church of the Iewes, Acts …. 10. it is out of question that for many yeeres they observed the same day as before, for they were zealous of the Law; one part whereof was the observation of the seventh day. If Baptisme would not serve them in stead of Circumcision, who can beleeve that the Lords-day would serve them in stead of the Sabbath. Yea Iames and the Elders did not so much as teach them,Acts …1. …4. that the law of Commandements contained in ordinances was abolished, as it is manifest in that they desire Saint Paul to make it appeare by his practice, that the report of him was nothing, and that he himselfe also walked orderly and kept the Law.John 5. But were they zealous of the Sabbath or not, when the unbeleeving Iews were so much offended wth Christ afore time for the carriage of a bed on the Sabbath, Acts …1. 28.and at this time with Saint Paul for prophaning the Temple as they supposed, it cannot be that they would suffer their Sabbath, and other Holy-dayes to be prophaned by Christians, as long as their Common-wealth stood. It is then out of question that the Church at Ierusalem a long time observed the Sabbath: and now,Mention is thrice made of the Lords-day but alwayes among the Gentiles. that besides the Sabbath and other Holy-dayes▪ enjoyned in the Law, they sanctified the Lords-day, and so rested from worke two dayes in every weeke I cannot beleeve without some proofe, and … I have seene none at all.
Answer.
Here in you fight with your own shadow, for it is easily yeelded all you say; but what you would conclude hence, I see not, or what you can well conclude, from the weaknesse of the beleeving Iewes, to disprove the Lords-day to be the Sabbath; no more then you can prove Baptisme to be no Sacrament, because many of them held themselves still to Circumcision, in all which Paul was …aine to comply with them, that by becoming all to all he might win some. Yet still keeping the Doctrine of Christian libertie whole among the Gentiles*Verse 21. of that 21. Chapter. where there was no stumbling blocke, though in his practice he warped towards the weak Iews amongst them at Ierusalem. And therefore did those, that advised him to comply with the Iewes, declare their faith in the point, and shew him that it was meerely done to winne upon their weaknesse, as appeareth in the 25. verse (which I would have you take notice of, as well as of the 20. and 24. verses *Of th…t …1. Acts.) where they tell him▪ as touching the Gentiles that beleeve we have written and determined that they observe no such thing.
So that from the practice of the Apostles among the beleeving Gentiles we are to gather conclusions for our directions, and not from the practice either of the Iewes, or of the Apostles among the Iewes: For you your self will say, that the Iewes … observing the Sabbath, because (you say) it was then abrogated.
And (I say) they erred in observing that day Sabbath▪ for as Iames and the elders said to … in the 25: verse of that 21. Chap. of the Acts, … say I concerning the Sabbath. That they had taug…t the Gentiles to observe no such thing as to keepe the … seventh day, nor yet did they …each to keepe no day Sabbath, but instituted the Lords-day there, where they know they might doe it usefully.
Broad.
As touching the Church of the Gentiles,The Church of the Gentiles. I see no likelyhood, that for some yeers the beleeving Gentiles came together rather on one day then on another, but esteeming every day alike, and assembled as often as they could with conveniency. And thus it continued (as may be thought) untill neere twentie yeeres after Christs resurrection, for the text of Scripture, were first we finde mention of any such matter is …. Car. 16. which Epistle was written above twentie yeeres after Christ arose. as is said by some learned;The Epistle was written before the meeting at Troas. againe for a time after the Gospel was preached to the Gentiles, there was no need of an appointed day, some few only in a Citie imbracing the faith of Christ.
Answer.
Happily this is true which you say, concerning the Church of the Gentiles also, That for a long time they used no such Sabbath, but assembled as they could conveniently; But what doth this argue, against the Lords-day being the Sabbath? no more then that of the Iews aforesaid. For we are not to judge of the Church of the Gentiles in their worst, but in their better estate. This new Creation had at first its Chaos, as well as the old, without forme, till things were perfected by degrees, now a little and then a little: It was no little while before they were perswaded that fornication was a deadly sinne.
The Lords-day received its Institution at the consummation of this new Creation, as the Sabbath did at the consummation of the old; though perhaps this, by reason of the Churches non age had its intermission, like as that had, being also set a foot in its season, as that was.
But let us not pitch either upon the rudenesse of the Iews, or the rawnesse of the Gentiles to take example by, but see the disposing providence, and directing hand of God in the Apostles them selves in those times, who were ordered by the speciall instinct of the spirit, and we shall see that in the 20th. of Iohn, where in the 19th. verse it is said, that the same day at night which was the first day of the weeke, and when the doores was shut, where the Disciples were assembled for feare of the Iews, came Iesus &c. and so again in the 26th. verse: it is said, That eight dayes after, againe the Disciples were within and Thomas with them, Then came Iesus &c. Which sheweth Gods speciall hand in assembling them on the day of Christ resurrection, and the Spirits care to record it for our learning, together with Christs approbation and blessing thereof by his presence.
Neither is there the least mention made of the Iewish Sabbath, but it is reckoned in the Text as the rest, (eight dayes after) and so Paul he passeth over the Iewish Sabbath as an ordinary day in the 20. Acts 6. and honoureth only the first day of the weeke when he saith, That he abode at Troas seven dayes, and the first day of the weeke the Disciples being come together, &c.
Dr. Heylyn, Part. 2. pag. 22. to make the matter good, biddeth us take notice that Paul had tarryed at … seven dayes before this meeting; But we may do better to take notice that he wrongs the Text, which implies no such thing, but that his stay was but seven dayes in all: for the 6. verse having briefly told us Pauls journall from Philippi to Tro…s, it also sheweth us the number of dayes that he spent there, which were but seven in all (where we abode seven dayes saith he) and then the 7. verse historizeth to us, the remarkeable example of Paul and the Disciples touching the first day of the weeke only, being silent of the rest. And upon the first day of the weeke, when the Disciples, &c. And as touching that 1 Cor. 16. which you mention. The words of Paul there seeme to take for granted the foreknowledge and acquaintance that the Christian Cori…ths already had of that day to be the Lords. And if so be the Lords-day be not the Sabbath, why was it kept of them, and is it now kept of us, in paralel to the Sabbath, weekly, and not anniversarily or yeerely, as Easter-day and other remembrances of Christ are? and as all the times of Commemorations which the Church of her own accord dedicated have ever and only been; as we see by the feasts of Puri…, and of dedication, among the Iews, and so now amongst us Christ… and Easter, &c.
Broad.
We read that the Disciples weré called first Christians at Antioch, though by whose me… it be not said in the Acts, but as touching the meeting on the first day of the week,Acts 11. 26. we neither find where it began nor by whom. This (in my judgement) is very probable if not certain, that this manner of assembling on the first day of the weeke, was approved by the Apostles, as was the name of Christians: Yea and Christ himselfe may seeme to approve it likewise, in as much as on this day, he revealed those mysteries to the beloved Disciple.So long it was between the writing of the first Epistle to the Corinths, and the Revelation. About fortie yeeres after this order began, the name Lords-day was given to the first of the weeke, which name had it been given when Saint Paul wrote his first Epistle to the Corinths, and Saint Luke the Acts, it is probable that one of them would have used it, and yet it is not improbable that this name Lords-day was given as soone as the day began to be in any great account.
Answer.
It is true that in Antioch the Disciples were first called Christians, and be the meanes what it will, it was not without the speciall hand of God, nor without a speciall prophecy and promise as appeareth in the 65 of Isaiah 15. Where the name of the Iews is cryed down, and the name of the Christians set up*Dr. Hall upon the place.. Ye shall leave your name as a curse unto my chosen, for the Lord God shall slay you, and call his*Marke, God himself was the Father, and gave the name, who …ver was the God-father. serva… by another name. And as thus God prophecyed the alteration of the old name into a new, in the 15th. verse, so in the 17. verse, he prophecyed the alteration of the Creation from old to new, together with the forgetfulnesse of the old by reason of the joyfull remembrance of the new: which was yet further prophecyed by the Psalmist in the 118. Psal. 22. 24. The stone which the builders refused, that is, crucified and cast off, is the head of the corner, that is, is raised again of God and made our salvation, for this is the sense thereof, as you may see in the 4th. Acts 10, 11, 12. And what followeth in the Prophe… of David? That this worke of raising up Christ againe by his mightie power is a thing marvellous in our ey…s. And that therefore this is the Day which the Lord *Is not this divine institution, and a sufficient reas…n for the denomination of the Lords-day? Dr. Andrews is expr…sse for it, in his 13 Sermon upon the Resurection, pag. 529. Sayes he, How came it to be the Lords day? but that as it is in the Psalme, the Lord made it? And why made he it? but because on it, the stone cast aside (that is Christ) was made the head-stone of the corner, that is, because then the Lord rose.hath made, for us to rejoyce and be glad in it, as it follow…th in the 23 and 24 verses of that 118 Ps…lme.
Obiect. But it will be objected, that hereby is no particular day denoted, but indefinitely the time of the publication of the Gospel.
Answ. To which I answer, That the promise of the accomplishment of our … 3. 15. on the very particular day of Christs … is eminently meant hereby, as is evident by comp…ring this place with 13 Acts 32. 33. These words. 32. And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers. 33. God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised us. Iesus againe, as it is also written in the second Psalme: Thou art my …onne this day ha…e I begotten thee. As touching the meeting on the first day of the weeke, which you say we neither finde where, nor by whom it began. I have even now shewed you the originall of it, both for time and persons; to wit, on the day of Christs resurrection by the Apostles, and the day fennight after. Had they only met the day of his re…urrection, we might have thought it had been only accidentall, and not of speciall providence; or if it had been recorded, that they had met any other day besides, it might somewhat have weakened the force of this argument: But meeting twice, and it being recorded to be on the same day (together with the effects thereof) it doth wonderfully prove the thing to be of purposed providence, both on Gods part in assembling them then, and on Christs part in appearing to them, thereby to give originall to this Ordinance, which accordingly hath been so observed ever since. And therefore it is not likely that the Apostles tooke it up by approbation from inferiour Christians (nor yet that Christ honoured it only by way of approbation but also of institution, for we see what honour he gave to it a principio, by his often appearings thereon, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, Iohn 20. 22. on this day, which you so Sophister like passe over, and only instance in that which seemeth to serve your turne) but that it was taken up from them.
Though this confessed approbation of Christs, granteth it to be of the same authoritie with Baptisme, which was brought in by Iohn Baptist and ratified by Christ. And if the people of the Iews held the Baptisme of Iohn to be from heaven and not of men, though they had no expresse command for it but only his practice (and though the chiefe Priests and Elders beleeved him not) only for this reason, because they held Iohn as a Prophet, Matth. 21. 25, 26. and this their beliefe of Iohn and his Baptisme, producing sutable fruits of grace and holinesse in them, was approved of Christ, vers. 32. I wonder how any dare deny the Lords-day to be of divine institution, and affirme it humane, that know and acknowledge Paul to be an Apostle (the least whereof was greater then Iohn Baptist) and the thing of such great consequence and benefit to the Church, and otherwayes so backed: But let us labour to imitate these contemned Publicanes and harlots in beleeving this point of the Lords-day to be from heaven by divine institution, and not of men by humane ordination, suffering Pauls practice as an Apostle to overrule … as Iohn Baptist as a Prophet did them, and framing our practice to ou… faith like them: And so, obeying him and his Ministers, let us not doubt in like case the approcation of Christ in our behalfes, above the over-wi…e unbeleevers be they ….
And you shall … second Treatise, pag. 22. … that, o… taken … the Lords-day is in some sort de iure divino, in some sort, namely not by personall but by delegate authority, that is, not prescribed personally and immediatly by God himselfe, but onelyonly by vertue of that authority which by God was committed to the Apostles, for the ordering and governing of his Church, but being taken for divine Ordinance or Commandement it is not de iure divine. And further he saith, To entitle a Commandement divine is required. 1. That the authority be divine wherby it is ordained. 2. That the Author himselfe that ordaineth be so also, that is, that both the power whereby, and the person that doth immediatly establish it, be divine. Which divine authority is confessed to be in the Apostolicall constitutions, but the immediate Authors are denyed to be divine.
Now as all other events and actions receive their denomination from their immediate not remote causes: so the constitutions of the Apostles, although they proceed originally from the instinct and aspiration of the Holy Ghost, Gods spirit yet proceeding immediatly from the institutions of the Apostles themselves, which delivered them unto the Church in forme of Commandements, they are to be tearmed humane constitutions, and not properly divine. Thus you have Mr. Breerewoods opinion of the divine authority of the Lords-day, much more Orthodox then yours, only in answer to this later part, where he saith that Apostolicall actions are to be tearmed humane, from that principle, That all actions are to receive their denominations from their immediate not remote causes. He might have considered how that all the new Testament is called the word of God from the remote Cause the Spirit of God, which inspired it, though the Apostles and Evangelists writ it (which were men) and that by no expresse Commandement that we finde.
Bishop White averreth against T. B. pag. 91. That our weekly observation of the Lords-day in the time of the Gospell is an holy and godly practise, for it is warranted by the example of the Apostles, and those Primitive Churches which were planted by the Apostles, and which received their Ecclesiasticall precepts and constitutions by tradition from the Apostles, so that the Apostles first founded it, as he further affirmes, pag. 97. saith he, It is an ignorant speech to tearme it a popish tradition, for popish traditions had not their beginnings from the Apostles. So also pag. 189. We beleeve saith he, that the holy Apostles ordained the Sunday to be a weekly Holy-day, because the Primitive Fathers, who lived some of them in the Apostles dayes, and others of them immediatly after, and who succeedeth them in Apostolicall Churches did universally maintaine the religious observation of this day. So againe, pag. 192. It is probable that in the Churches at Corinth and Galatia, the Lords-day was made a weekly Holy-day by the Apostles (for they principally governed those Churches at this time) 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2. (And yet Doctor Heylyn laboureth to prove this ordination of Paul to the Galathians to be upon a Sabbathday, and not upon the Lords-day.) And againe, pag. 192. It could not possibly have come to passe that all and every Apostolicall Church throughout the universall world should so early, and in the beginning of their plantation, have consented together to make the Sunday a weekly Service-day, unlesse they had been thus directed by their first founders the holy Apostles themselves, &c.
Lastly, it is a true that a long time after Christs Resurrection was the name of Lords-day given to the first day of the weeke*I have shewed before the significant use of the Sabbath, paffing under the name of the first day of the week in scripture before it come to be stiled the Lords-day., to wit, when the first day of the week began to be most currantly received for the Christian Sabbath: As the name of Christians was then given, when Christianity was generally professed and received, and yet was there a Sabbath before professed by many, as well as there were Christians and Christianity before they were so called: So that what you say of the one, you may as well say of the other.
Broad.
Now I have before acquainted thee with the agreement betweene divines touching this day, namely that ordinarily (some necessary businesses excepted) it is to be spent wholly in religious exercises. The difference be…ween them standeth in this point. Some will have the Lords-day to be the Commandement of Christ, or his Apostles, as the Sabbath was of God heretofore. Others will have it to be only an Ecclesiastical tradition or constitution, yet such an one as is of greater authority then many other Zanehius hath this saying, Traditionum enim Ecclesiasticarum, quaedam sunt Apostolicae, qu…dam mere Ecclesiasticae.*He instanceth in the Lords-day. Certe quas constat ab Apostolis fuisse profectas hae plus habeant authoritatis quam relique. Red. de trad. Eccles.
Answer.
It were to be wished that how-ever Divines differ in opinion concerning the Morality, that yet they agreed in the divinity or holy practise of the Sabbath. But there are of your opinion that sticke not to say, how that the Sabbath is but an ordinary Holy-day; and that the vacant hours which are besides the publike imployments ordained by the Church*For number and season. are of the same nature with working dayes, and their practise is accordingly: So that if we may judge the tree by the fruit, then may we judge their opinions by their practise which savoureth of the flesh, and not of the spirit, whose furthest progresse in the practicke part is (like some of the choisest heathens) to regulate their actions by the light of Nature. And happily they have the lanthorne of notionall divinity shining in their heads *And so take up a forme of godlinesse, but deny the power thereof, for seeing they see not, and hearing they heare not, but are wholly ignorant of the understanding with the heart, which Christ speaketh of, Matt. 13. 15. They see the Law, but Gods end in it, to bring the soule sensibly sentenced under sinne and wrath, to need and seeke a Saviour, and to keep the soul restlesse till it enjoy him, and accept him on any termes God doth offer him, by the sence of the depth of their filth & misery they experiment not in them, as appeares by their pride and I shmaelitish persecuting the sonnes of the free woman. They being flesh which lusts against the Spirit, and of carnall minds, which is enmity against God, do persecute him that is borne after the Spirit as was prophecyed, Gal. 4. 29. For the flesh despiseth and opposeth spirituall worship and spirituall worshippers, and being spiritually blind, sticketh not to speake evill of things they know not. And professing themselves to be wise, they become fooles. It was ever the lot of truth to be rejected of the builders. Many great Rabbies (professing the key of knowledge) were greatest enemies to the truth, as the truth is in Christ, that is, to the sincere pro…ession and practice of Christianity. Christ must be set as a signe and butt of contradiction. Offences must come, but woe be to them by whom they come. For carnal Protestants are held off from the true embracing of Christ, because they see the truth and sincerity of Christ every where so resisted and hated, by those that are great and wise in their Generation. For Holinesse in the forehead was a chiefe grace, but now with us it was become a chiefe disgrace, in so much that the despised members of Christ received extreme discouragement (except they have such a measure of grace as raiseth them above contempt) to professe holinesse to the Lord openly, the Devill spewing out after the Church a flood of poison to drowne her But be it as it will. I pray both the scorner and the scorned, to peruse considerately, the one for terrour, the other for encouragement, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21. verses of the Epistle of Iude.(a cold clymate for Religion to dwell in) which they (imbracing this present world) use (as workemen doe their tooles) to get money and preferment under the colour of an outward calling, for the inward they looke not after; But for the knowledge of that wherein the life and soule of Religion consisteth, to wit, Christ and him crucified, in a saving sence, they are as ignorant in it as Nicodemus was in the doctrine of Regeneration, which though he had read it before in the new Covenant (Ezek. 11. 19.) yet seeing he saw not, no more doe these, and therefore no wonder if they cry downe the authority of the Lords-day, that have no acquaintance with the Lord of the day, but instead of serving him as their Lord and Master, they serve themselves of him, making his Gospell (wherein they should labour in season and out of season) to be their stalking horse, to convey them the more plausibly to their prey of preferment here on earth, and leave that of Heaven for such fooles as they call Puritanes. I meane not non-conformists, except they be such as they meane, that is, Men that make not Religion to consist in knowledge, but in living according to their knowledge in inward and outward holinesse, not being vainly puffed up by a fleshly minde with a voluntary obedience of willworship, or meere formall holinesse, or morall excellencies, or civill and naturall righteousnesse; but holding the Head, labouring to increase with the increase of God, and to grow in the excellent and humbling knowledge of the simplicity of Christ, to the praise of the glory of his grace; in a word, such as the Scripture calleth Saints, and prophane men, Precisians.
No men greater enemies to preaching. A conscionable Minister, that is painfull in the discharge of his calling, labouring to save the soules of his flocke, preaching twice a day, and the name of a Lecturer (so called for distinction sake) stinks in ther nostrils, as they doe in Gods. I wonder how such men come to be called Divines or Preachers, that thus defile their owne nest, accounting soule-saving preaching, foolishnesse, and in a spitefull pride calumniating those that with conscience and diligence labour in the worke of the Lord.
How necessary is it, thinke we, then to maintaine the Prerogative of the Sabbath, when men of this Coate (like swine) tread holy things under their feet.
But let such ponder that place of the Evangelist, and apply it, Matt. 5. 19. Whosoever shall breake one of these least Commandements, and teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdome of heaven.
But to come to the difference it selfe, I answer, That I know no Divines that doe affirme Christ to have left it in expresse mandatory tearmes that that day should be kept Sabbath nor yet Holy-day; for indeed there is no such Commandement extant in the new Testament: But they say, That it is likely Christ did teach it to his Apostles before his death*As he did the place of meeting after his Resurrection, Matt. 28. 16., which though it be more then I know, yet sure I am their meeting thus emphatically recorded in Scripture to be on that very day, and the day sennight, of Christs Resurrection, and answerably practised after by Paul, is doubtlesse of binding authority, and to an exemplary use and end: And how-ever it be, that Christ did or did not, teach them by word of mouth before his death, questionlesse in that thing, at that time, they were especially taught of God, the instinct and secret guidance of the Spirit being in stead of a Commandement to them (though perhaps for present they were ignorant of their owne practice, as Mary was, when she powred the boxe of oyntment upon Christs head, that she did it for his burying) and doing the same thing that day sennight; We have just cause to thinke that Christ had an hand in it, though it be not expressed in the word, he having appeared to them the day before, and the same effect ensuing upon the same occasion, to wit, his appearing to them being met againe.
And therefore what though the Puritanes (as Bishop White stiles them, from T. B. pag. 185.) cannot shew the Lords-day to be made a Sabbath by any written Law (he meanes no doubt in the new Testament) may not the unerring spirit of the Apostles suffice us, seeing that himselfe saith, pag. 119. The inspiration of …od is of as great efficacy and authority as his writing, wherewith the Apostles doubtlesse were directed in the instituting of an exemplary perpetuall observation to the Church.
And whereas (I say) the instinct of the Spirit was as a Law or Commandement to the Apostles, in this particular of instituting the Lords-day upon Christs Resurrection. I would to this purpose commend the consideration of Moses his instituting the Sabbath, upon the fall and gathering of a double portion of Mannah in 16. Exod. which yet we doe not finde in termes to be taught him of God then, when that Law of Mannah was commanded, ver. 5. Fulke upon the 1▪ Revel. is peremptory and saith, That for the prescription of the Lords-day before any other of the seven, they had without doubt either the expresse Commandement of Christ before his ascension when he gave them precepts concerning the kingdome of God, and the ordering and government of his Church, Acts 1. 2. or else the certaine direction of his Spirit, that it was his will and pleasure it should be so, and that also according to the Scriptures, seeing that there is the same reason of sanctifying that day in which our Saviour Christ accomplished out Redemption, and the restitution of the world by his Resurrection from death, that was of …anctifying the day, in which the Lord rested from the Creation of the world. Nor can it be denyed (I thinke) but that the Apostles had many things taught them privately by Christ, which afterwards upon occasion they published, some by precept, and some by example*Matt 10. 27.. And wee may be the rather induced that Paul had received it from Christ, if so be we consider how ingenuous he is to acknowledge what he had not received in the 1 Cor. 7. 25. As concerning virgins (saith he) I have no Commandement of the Lord, but I give you mine advice. And Zanchy observes that he taught them not so much by words, as by the efficacy of the Spirit, which being their unerrable guide in all things concerning the Church, we may well allow to be ours in this matter of the Lords-day by vertue of their exemplary Ordinance. Their practice and example, I doubt not you will say, had been enough without precept (and I remember none they have in any expresse tearmes from Christ) for the ordaining Pastors and Ministers, nor doe I think you will deny them to be iure divino. But granting this is not commanded by Christ, yet are you no gainer by it. For I doe the rather thinke that because no expresse mention is made of it in the new Testament by way of Commandement, it should seeme the rather to be the Sabbath. Thus Eatonus de Sabbato, pag. 69. de institutione & iure diei dominicae ait. Non opus erat mandato novo, cum vetus illud mandatum de observando Sabbato in vigore esset, & adhuc est, iam autem novum praceptum ferre de re illa, quae veteri pracepto stabilita fuerat, esset vetus praceptum abolore. Christus autem non venit abolere legem sed implere. And indeed God is most precise as we see, both in Innocency and under the Iewes, to prescribe the dayes of his solemne worship by speciall Commandement, and so certainly would he have done this if it had been a new thing; but being not commanded in the new Testament, it ought the rather to be taken for granted in the matter of it, from the fourth Commandement*And indeed to any sober minde that knoweth the Law of the Sabbath, these things are sufficient to let us know that this is the Sabbath., and in the manner to be regulated by the Apostles example (which should be of force to us, as well as Davids eat…ng the Shewbread was to the Iewes) else God would never have let such a day, which hath ever in the Church been received as a weekly Sabbath, to have been without an expresse Commandement; especially considering how precise he was in that point, even son the dayes that were appointed for the solemning of the Type in the Time of the Iews. And yet as … saith, pag. 70. Nulla est conseque…ti…, Non … dixit & fecit Dominus noster de quibus … …pud Ev…ngelistas facta est mentio, satis au… …
It is no new thing, both to belee…e a thing to be … divi…, for which yet there is none other commandement (expressed then practice, as also to beleeve that it was commanded of God, though there be no specification of any such Commandement in holy writ, as for instance in the sacrificing that was before the Law, where finde you any Commandement to sacrifice, before you finde Abel sacrificing? And yet (I beleeve) you doubt not but there was a command or something equivalent. Neither can you other-wayes thinke, but when Noah at his going into the Arke, tooke with him beasts both cleane and unclean, he was instructed from heaven, which was which, though no such instruction appeare.
Againe did not Christ, in the instituting of the new Sabbath, imitate his father in his manner of instituting the old in the old Creation: For what Commandement did God give at first? Was it any other then a declaration of his owne practice to Adam, whom he had then extraordinarily made, that he by his practice should teach it to his posterity? So doth not Christ the like? For because he rested by rising on the first day of the weeke from the worke of our Redemption and re-creation, therefore did he blesse and hallow it, by his example to his Apostles, whom he had extraordinarily called (that they by their example should doe the like to others) with those many manifestations of himselfe, and admirable blessings, which he then bestowed on them. Which practice of Christ doth wonderfully make good both the Morality of the Sabbath, and justifieth the alteration of it also to the first day of the weeke. For whereas God at the first blessed it, that is, appointed it to be a day wherein he would especially confer spirituall blessings. We see Christ accordingly doth still on this day blesse and enlighten his Apostles, by appearing to them being together glorifying God.
Now if you will say that Adams posterity (whom in your first Chapter you say, it is probable, had they continued in Innocency, should alwayes have followed Gods example in working sixe dayes and resting the seventh) should have sanctified the last of seven by Tradition from God and Ad…ms examples, I will easily yeeld you that by the like tradition from Christ and his Apostles example, we doe now keep the first day of the weeke.