Sunday a Sabbath, Chapter 3
CHAP. III. Of three moſt uſuall names of the Chriſtians weekely Holiday, Lords day, Sunday, and Sabbath: And firſt of the name Lords day, Rov. 1.10. The ſtrange opinion of Doctor Gomarus, and Maſter Braburne, charging the Title (as applyed to the Chriſtian Sabbath) with impertinencie and novelty.
THe names of our weekly Holiday more frequent in uſe, and yet not free from exception, are three, the Lords day, Sunday, and Sabbath day: I put the Lords day firſt, though it bee the youngeſt name of the three; not as aDr. Bound on the Sab. part. 1. p. 110. & 120.ſome who preferre it ſo farre, as by it to put downe the uſe of the other two; but becauſe it hath ſo much in preheminence of dignity by its notation, of neere reference to the Authour of Reſts, and Father of Lights, as maketh amends for what it wanteth in age and feniority; and the Sabbath I place laſt, though it bee the eldeſt of all, becauſe I ſhall moſt inſiſt upon it, and beſt conclude with it, in regard of the reall inquiries and obſervations, which (with reference to it) muſt begin when this Logomachie, or word-warre is at an end.
The title Lords day is not taken from Saint Paul, 2 Cor. 10.26. wherein hee ſaith, the earth is the Lords, and ſo that day may be called the Lords day in a common ſenſe, becauſe the Lord made it for a common uſe, as bAs the earth is the Lords, 1 Cor. 10.26. becauſe the Lord made it, and all things therein to ſerve man in his ordinary and common uſe, Gen. 1.26. & 9.3. So this day is called the Lords day, becauſe Chriſt ordained it for mans ordinary and common uſe, that is, for a working day. Mr. Brab. defence of his Diſcourſe. pag. 240.Maſter Brab. (not by any common, but by his own ſingular conceit) hath ſaid: but from Saint John, Rev. 1.10. where he ſaith, I was in the Spirit on the Lords day; that is, on the day on which Chriſt our Lord roſe from the dead; Upon this ground grew the obſervation of that day we celebrate, under that name wherein both the moſt, and the beſt Authours doe agree.
Againſt this, exceptions have been taken by two late Divines, who each of them have written two Treatiſes a piece upon the weekely Holiday of the Church, and have in all foure ſought, by new ſurmiſes, to ſhift off the title, both as in, and to this text of Saint John: the one is Doctor Francis Gomarus, the States Profeſſour of Divinity in the Univerſitie of Groning; the other Mr. Theophilus Braburn, a Miniſter of the County of Norfolke, a man, as the Biſhop of Elie (of whoſe Dioceſſe hee was, when hee was Biſhop of Norwich) cIn his Epiſt. Dedic. pag. 22, 23. before his Treat. of the Sabbath.noteth of him, who laid a load of diſgrace and contempt on his Puritan adverſaries, as hee termeth them. Doctor Gomarus maketh the Lords day to bee the ſame with the day of the Lord, and by the day of the Lord underſtandeth the day of the dDe die apparitionis Domini; aut in carne, ut dies natalis; aut quâ, illuſtri viſione, patefecit futurum Eccleſiae ſtatum. pag. 78. Theſ. 36.Advent, comming, or appearing of the Lord, Amos 5.8. Malach. 3.1, 2. and this appearing hee taketh to bee either the day of Chriſts birth, or that peculiar day, wherein, in an eſpeciall viſion, hee appeared to Saint John, and revealed unto him the ſtate of the Church for future times, or the day of judgement eSic, 1 Cor. 5.5. ut ſpiritus ſalvus ſit in die Domini, quo, ſcil. apparebit ad judicium. Dr. Gamar. Inveſt. Sav. c. 6. Ibid. Theſ. 34., 1 Cor. 5.5. but he fSi verò diem natalem intelligamus, aliquanto expreſſior erit circumſtantia temporis. Dr. Gomar. Ibid.pitcheth upon our Saviours birth day, applying unto it that which hee ſaid of Abraham, viz. That hee rejoyced to ſee his day, Joh. 8.56.
Upon that Text that rarely learned gBp. Andrews in his Serm. Joh. 8. ver. 56.Biſhop of Wincheſter obſerveth, That Chriſt had two eminent dayes; his Geneſis, or his comming into the world, and his Exodus, or his going out of the world; the firſt of his Nativity, the laſt of his Paſsion. But for one Geneſis, hee might have noted a threefold Exodus; one, out of the world of men into the grave; another, out of the grave into the world among men againe; and a third, out of the neather world into the upper, by his aſcenſion from earth into heaven.
Maſter Braburn in his firſt diſcourſe of the Sabbath, having brought in the Jewiſh hThe Sabbaths were called the Lords holidayes. Eſ. 58.13. now, if the Sabbath be the Lords holiday, it is the Lords day. M. Brab. in his diſcourſe. pag. 8.Sabbath, and all the fore-named dayes (except that of his apparition to Saint John, which is Dr. Gomarus his peculiar conceipt, ſo far as yet I have obſerved) as rivals with the day of Chriſts Reſurrection, for reputation and right to the title Lords day, of that title ſaith thus; And which of them John had reſpect unto (ſcil. when hee mentioned the Lords day) the Scripture is altogether ſilent: and if hee and Doctor Gomarus had beene ſilent too, it had beene much better; but to make the matter worſe againſt the Antiquity of it, they both take ſuch exceptions as theſe; Maſter iMr. Brab. Defence of the Sabbath. p. 243.Braburne in generall ſaith, The name of the Lords day was but new, and put upon Sunday ſince Chriſt, and that not many yeeres too ſince Chriſt: hee might haply have read in Symeon Metaphraſtes, that Silveſter the firſt, firſt gave that title unto it, which kBaron. Annal. tom. 3. ad an. 315. num. 16. col. 163. See alſo Pol. …nrg de Invent, rerum, l…b. 6. … 5. p. 366. who relates the comeipt, and refutes it, a… Baroniu… doth.Baronius confuteth: Doctor lSi iſta app…l…atio ab Apoſtolis promanaſſet, & in Eccleſia ſu…ſſ…t recepta; an credi…ile eſt potuiſſe fieri ut Juſtinus Martyr (antiquiſ ſimus atque incorruptus Script…r) ea, in accurata rituum deſcripti… ne omiſſa, ſolis diem aut unum Sabbatorum, aut primam hebdomadis tantummodo nominaret? quemadmodum in Apologia, pro Chriſtianis, & Dialogo cum Triphone. Gom. Inveſtig. Sab. cap. 6. pag. 76. The like is in his defence of his Inveſtig. c. 10. pag. 135, 137, 141, 142.Gomarus more particularly telleth us, That, in Juſtine Martyr's time, the Chriſtians weekley holiday was not noted by that name, ſince hee uſeth other titles, as Sunday, and the Firſt day of the weeke, but maketh no mention of it at all by the name of the Lords day, albeit, if it had beene in uſe from the Apoſtles time to his, hee had good occaſion both to note it in his Dialogue with Tryphon the Jew, and in his Apologie to Antoninus, where hee maketh an accurate deſcription of the rites of the Chriſtian Religion. From his ſilence then in ſo commodious places for remembrance, Doctor Gomarus inferreth, that it was not derived from the Apoſtles, nor received into the Church till after Juſtine Martyr his dayes; ſo that, in ſumme, their objections againſt this title, are reduced into two heads, Impertinency and Novelty.
Firſt, for Impertinency; they would make the title Lords day no more pertinent or proper to the Chriſtians weekely holiday, then to divers dayes, called in the Scripture the day of the Lord; nay, more pertinent to others then to it.
Whereto I anſwer for the preſent (reſerving further ſatisfaction to the next Chapter,) Firſt, That wee may conceive (as a late mRejicimus Haebraïſmum, illum; multum enim intereſt inter diem Domini, & Dominicum; illa enim eſt appellatio generalior, haec ſtrictior & ſpecialior; m…ltae enim dicuntur Domini, tamen non ſunt Dominica; ut, arbores Domini, Pſal. 104 16. quas, puto▪ arbores Dominicas Gomarus non vocabit; & multa Dei dicebantur, quae tamen divina non erant; ut, montes Dei. Inquiſit. de Sabba…. pag. 84, 85.Writer diſtinguiſheth) a difference betwixt the day of the Lord, and the Lords day, or Dominicall day, (as the Rhemiſts in Engliſh turne the text, Rev. 1.10. not ſo much for congruity to the Originall, as to make obſcurity in the Tranſlation;) for many things in the generall may be ſaid to be the things of the Lord, which yet are not to bee named Dominicall things; as, the trees of the Lord, Pſal. 104.16. which Doctor Gomarus himſelfe would not think ſit to bee called Dominicall trees; and many things are ſaid to be Gods, which are not godly nor divine: for, in uſe of ſpeech, the former importeth a common right, which is a right in God to the creatures in common; the later, a right of peculiar appropriation to himſelfe.
Secondly, Howſoever that diſtinction prove (and though it be true and pertinent, it is, I confeſſe, ſomewhat nice and curious, ſo that few, upon their owne reading of the Scripture, will take notice of it); yet the diſtinction of nGomar. Inveſt. Sab. cap. 6. p. 74. Theſ. 33.Doctor Gomarus is manifeſtly faulty, both in it ſelfe, and in reſpect of the purpoſe for which hee frameth it. For, hee diſtinguiſheth betwixt the day of the Lords Advent, comming, or appearing, and his Reſurrection, as his words partly expreſſe, and partly imply; and this, to the end that hee may transferre the title Lords day from the day of the Reſurrection to ſome other; whereas indeed, that day on which hee aroſe, was as well an Advent, or day of appearance unto men, as that which hee ſo nameth by way of oppoſition unto it; for hee came that day, and, as by a new and admirable birth, appeared to many, Mark 16.9.
Thirdly, To prevent miſtaking of the Tenet, which I hold in the triall of right betwixt the day of our Saviours Reſurrection, and other dayes ſet up with it in competition for the title Lords day; I profeſſe with oMr. Primroſe his treat. of the Sab. or Lords day. part. 3. c. 1. p. 198.Mr. Primroſe, (though in many other points I muſt diſſent from him) that I doe not conceive there is any morall neceſsity that that day of the weeke on which Chriſt roſe from the grave, ſhould bee kept holy in the Chriſtian Church, rather then the day wherein hee was borne, or the day wherein he ſuffered on the Croſſe, or the day wherein he aſcended into heaven.
Fourthly, While therefore I plead for preheminence of right for the day of the Reſurrection, to the title in queſtion, I take not upon me to render reaſons for it, demonſtratively neceſſary; yet I doubt not but, upon ſerious conſideration, they will bee found ſuch as (together with the conſent of all, or at leaſt, of the moſt, and beſt approved Authours in all ages, who have unanimouſly met in the explication of that title of Saint John, and the application of it to the day of Chriſts Reſurrection) will appeare evidence ſufficient, in a point of no greater moment then this is, and ſuch as will not bee counterpoyzed by any proofe for the contrary Tenet.