Sunday a Sabbath, Chapter 4
CHAP. IIII. A compariſon of the old Sabbath day, the day of our Saviours Birth, of the day of his Paſsion, Aſcenſion, and of his Apparition to Saint John; with the day of his Reſurrection, touching right to the Title Lords day; and the preheminence and propriety of that Title to our weekly holiday.
THere bee many dayes that are ſet up with the day of our Saviours Reſurrection, in conteſtation for this title Lords day, (as in the precedent Chapter hath partly been obſerved) viz. The old Sabbath, our Saviours Birth day, the day of his Paſsion, Aſcenſion, the day of his Apparition to Saint John, and the day of Judgement.
And firſt for the old Sabbath (for here it may have the firſt place, IThe old Sabbath.though I have given reaſons why elſewhere I ranke it otherwiſe) concerning which I ſay, though in the fourth Commandement, Exod. 20. it be called [the Sabbath of the Lord thy God,] and ſo in that reſpect (albeit it bee there rather declaratively then preceptively brought in) it may bee named the Lords day, as aMr. Brab. Diſcourſe on the Sab. pag. 8. And in his Defence, ſaith he, The Son of man is Lord of the Sabbath; Wherefore the ſeventh dayes Sabbath may be truly called the Lords day. Mr. Brab. Defence, pag. 238.Maſter Braburne pleadeth; yet that is but by vertuall intimation, not by formall denomination, as S. John hath it, Rev. 1.10.
Secondly, Though it had been called expreſſely by the name of the Lords day in the old Teſtament, (and ſo long as it was in force, it was indeed the Lords day in eſpeciall maner, as is the day we celebrate now) yet it is not probable that day being generally noted by the name of the Sabbath from its firſt originall, both in the old Teſtament, and in the new, that Saint John would entitle it by a new name, having an old one already of pertinent importance, and permanent continuance, eſpecially there being a new day of eſpeciall note, and capable of that new title, (as bMr. Braburn. Diſcourſe of the Sab. p. 8.Maſter Braburne confeſſeth) viz. the day of the Reſurrection, to which, for its dignity in it ſelfe, and for diſtinction from other dayes, it might more properly bee applyed.
Secondly, IIThe day of Chriſts Birth.for the day of Chriſts Birth, or his firſt comming, albeit it bee a day of high account, yet the time of it was ſo farre from being ſo illuſtrious in the primitive times as that day which wee call the Lords day, that neither the day of the weeke is certainely knowne, nor the day of the monethmonth, nor the monethmonth of the yeere, no nor the yeere of our Lord ſo cleared, but that there is and hath beene much controverſie about them. Hence is that cVide variantes de eare ſententias à Bellarmino collectas. Bell. l. 2. de Ro. Po. cap. 5. p. 336. col. 2.diverſity in computation of his age, while ſome reckon his life at 30. ſome at 33. ſome 34. and ſome at 50. yeeres of age.
There was difference alſo, I confeſſe, about the Feaſts of the Reſurrection, commonly called the Feaſt of Eaſter, as dEuſeb. Eccleſ. Hiſt. l. 5. c. 21. pag 91.Euſebius, and other Eccleſiaſticall Writers have obſerved. To which I anſwer, that the diſſention was about the time of ſolemnitie, whether it ſhould be ordered by the courſe of the Moon (which would caſt it upon any day of the weeke, as it fell out among the Jewes) or were to bee confined to the day wee celebrate: but there was no difference, for the day of the Reſurrection, which it was in the order of the weeke, a matter of chiefe moment in a weekely holiday, for that there was good agreement on all hands, there being cleare texts of Scripture to take off all doubt in that reſpect.
Which doth plainly evince, that our Saviour aroſe the firſt day of the weeke, viz. on the day the heathens c…lled Sunday, and wee Chriſtians Lords day: But there neither is, nor can bee juſt, plaine, and apparent proofe for the day of Chriſts birth, which it was, either for order among the dayes of the week, or monethmonth of the yeere, or for number in the yeeres of the world.
Ob. The learned eBp. An…rewes his Sermon on Job. c. 8. v. 56. part. 1. pag. 62.Biſhop of Wincheſter ſaith, There is no day ſo properly Chriſts as his Birth day; which may appeare, ſaith hee, if wee ſet it in compariſon with other dayes of moſt memorable note, as the day of his Paſsion, Reſurrection, and Aſcenſion: for the day of his Paſsion, that was not ſo properly his, becauſe two theeves ſuffered with him at the ſame time, in the ſame place, after the ſame manner: Nor the day of his Reſurrection; for as hee roſe from the dead, ſo did others the ſame day, and went into the holy Citie: Nor the day of his Aſcenſion; for Enoch and Elias had their aſcenſion too, and that long before his: But his Birth day was his without a fellow; none ever ſo borne, none ever born ſuch a one; and therefore (as no Festivitie is beſides it) it is attended, as Christ himſelfe, with an Apoſtolicall retinue of Holidayes, which reckoning every day in Christmas (being uſually freed from ſecular labours) for a monethmonth, make up the fulneſſe of time, and ſo it is the recapitulation of the whole yeere, as the fBp. Andrewes Serm. on Gal. 3.4. p. 23.Biſhop maketh the alluſion and accompt.
Whereto wee ſhall returne a reaſonable Reply, which ſhall want neither light of truth, nor weight of authority; for wee ſhall bring in that great and reverend Prelate to drive back that Objection, and this it is;
Repl. Though that day of Chriſts Birth have much in it, which is peculiar to Chriſt, becauſe, as he ſaith, none was ever ſo borne, none ever borne ſuch a one; yet that is no more then wee may ſay for the day of his Reſurrection; for none was ever ſo raiſed, none ever raiſed ſuch a one: and ſo in this reſpect, even by his owne argument, the dayes are even; but herein the day of his Reſurrection hath the advantage of dignity above the day of his Birth: by his Reſurrection hee was declared mightily to bee the Sonne of God, Rom. 1.4. for hee roſe by his owne power, (as none ever did;) and by his Birth hee was in ſome reſpects declared ſcarce to bee the Sonne of man; for, as Saint Luke ſheweth, chap. 2. ver. 7. hee was borne in a ſtable among the beaſts, and laid in a manger for a cradle. Hereof ſaith the learned Biſhop gBp. Andr. Serm. 12. on the Nat. p. 114., The Divell breathed upon our firſt Parents with Eritis ſicut dii, and infected them with it, to make themſelves equall with God, which is plaine robbery; for that robbery of theirs was the Sonne of God robbed (as I may ſay) and quite ſpoyled of his glory; for their puffing up, foreign, hee was made empty; for their lifting up, foreign, was hee brought low; for their comparing with God, came hee to compared with the beasts that periſh, lay in their manger. Wee ſee this (ſaith hee) preaching of his Birthday, and therewith we may obſerve, that though hee were a Lord, hee ſhewed himſelfe no Lord in this reſpect, as at his Reſurrection hee did: and for the title of the day we celebrate, to that title in Saint John (as by a peculiar right) the Biſhop is expreſſe and peremptory, as by hB. Andrewes in his Speech in the Starre-Chamber againſt Maſter Trask. pag. 73, & 74.his words will appeare, which here we forbear, ſince we ſhall more ſeaſonably bring them in another place.
Thirdly, For the day of Chriſts Paſsion, iMr. Braburne his defence of his Diſcourſe, pag. 249 250. Hee ſaith alſo for Friday, May not a man ſay thus? Friday muſt bee a Sabbath day, becauſe on Friday Chriſt ſuffered; and Thurſday muſt bee a Sabbath day, becauſe on that Chriſt aſcended: thus wee may as well have three Sabbaths in a weeke, as this one Lords day. Maſter Braburne, Defence, page 249.Maſter Braburne ſaith, that Friday was the greatest day; for on it Chriſt bore the unſupportable wrath of his Father, which made him cry out, My God, my God, why haſt thou forſaken mee? But on the Reſurrection day, there was onelyonly Chriſts ſoule put into his body, and ſo revived again: Now, it was a greater matter (as I think, ſaith hee, every one will confeſſe) for the Deity to ſupport the humanity on his Paſsion day, then to put his ſoule into his dead body on the Reſurrection day.
To which I anſwer, that though it bee granted to be a ″I ſay greater, not harder: for to the divine Power, which is inſinite, nothing is hard; but all things not only poſſible, but eaſie.greater worke for the Divinity to ſupport the humanity in the Paſsion of our Saviour, then to reſtore his ſoule to his body at his Reſurrection from the grave: yet was not the day of his Paſsion ſo fit to be ſet up for a conſtant Feſtivity, which was to bee celebrated with rejoycing; for the day of our Saviours Paſsion (as the kBiſh. Andr. his Serm. on Joh. 8.56. p. 64.Biſh. of Wincheſter well noteth) was no ſuch day, nay, ſaith he, that day was none of his: for he ſaith to them that took him, haec eſt hor a veſtra, this is your houre; ſo theirs it was, not his; and if not his, not ſo fit to be called by his name, the Lords day.
Secondly, It was not his day; nay, it was no day neither, but the houre and power, tenebrarum, of darkneſſe: This is your houre, and the power of darkneſſe, Luk. 22.53. and (as he there addeth) ſo night rather then day.
Thirdly, But without all queſtion, no day of joy; the heavens were darkned, the earth quaking, the ſtones renting, every one going their wayes, beating their breaſts for ſorrow; that was no ſight to rejoyce at, that no day to rejoyce in. Thus farre that reverend Prelate.
Fourthly, Nor did the day of Aſcenſion (though an high day) ever aſcend to that height of this titular honour, (howſoever lEpiphan. orat. de. Aſcenſ.Epiphanius preferre it before the Nativity, Reſurrection, and the Feaſt of Pentecoſt) to be ſtiled, in the uſuall language of the learned Fathers of the Church, by the name of the Lords day, (as I ſhall ſhew anon) as the day of the Reſurrection was: nor need it ſeeme ſtrange, that rather that day, then either the day of his Paſsion on the one ſide, or of his Aſcenſion on the other, ſhould have the dignity of that denomination; for it holds the middle place, (though with a different diſtance) and the middle place, for the moſt part, is moſt honourable; as in the requeſt of the mother of Zebedees children for the next ſeats to our Saviour in his Kingdome, though it were a preſumptuous ſuit, ″Mat. 20. verſ. 21.that one might ſit on his right hand, and the other on his left; yet it implyed a little modeſtie and good manners, that ſhee left the middle place, as the prime place, to Chriſt himſelfe, as a Judge on the Bench, with his Aſſiſtants and Aſſeſſors on either ſide.
Secondly, In this ſituation of the Reſurrection of our Saviour, it hath on the one ſide, the black ſhadow of his Paſsion; on the other, the reſlexive rayes of his Aſcenſion, to add to its glory: for, ſo ſoone as hee had raiſed himſelfe from the dead, his glorified bodie had its qualification for aſcent, and was readily diſpoſed thereunto, if the time had beene come: and when it did come, as his Reſurrection made an addition of honour to his Paſsion, (for it gave proof, that his life was rather freely given by himſelfe, then forcibly taken from him by others); ſo did his Aſcenſion to his Reſurrection, for that gave evidence that his bodie was raiſed with all thoſe excellent qualifications which made it meet to mount up on high, and much more ſit for heaven then for earth; and though hee tarried ſtill below in his perſon, his Reſurrection was not the leſſe glorious for that; the Angels of heaven are as excellent ſpirits when they come downe Jacobs ladder, as when they goe up.
Thirdly, Though the Aſcenſion of our Saviour, locally conſidered, be an high degree of elevation above his Reſurrection; yet, Theologically taken, it hath not ſuch an exaltation of dignity above it; for his high humility in converſing ſtill among men on earth, when hee might have immediately mounted up into heaven, addeth much to the honour of his Reſurrection: for, hereby (as ″Te ad ſider… tollit humus. Plin. Panegyr.Plinie ſaith in his Panegyri…k to Trajane) may the higheſt grow yet higher, when hee comes downe (and ſo may wee ſay when they keep downe) below the elevation of his owne advancement. And who would not think Solomon worthy of as much honour honouring God upon his knees, 2 Chron. 6.13. as ſitting upon his Throne; being no leſſe a King on earth, but an holyer, humbler ſubject to the King of heaven in the one poſture, then in the other?
If altitude of place muſt carry away the preheminence of things and perſons, the fowles of the aire would flie up with it, and leave men, as their inferiours, on earth below; who, by Gods primitive appointment were to bee their lords, and to have dominion and ſoveraigntie over them.
Fourthly, But howſoever the compariſon betwixt the Reſurrection and Aſcenſion go, in reſpect of themſelves, yet in reſpect of men, who are to make obſervation of them both, the Reſurrection is more remarkeable in theſe reſpects;
Firſt, In that the Reſurrection was made knowne unto more by his ſeverall apparitions, both to more in number, and more oft in time; for hee was ſeene at one time to no fewer then five hundred brethren at once, 1 Cor. 15.6. His Aſcenſion was ſeen but by a few, viz. but by his Apoſtles, Act. 1.2.9.
Secondly, As for number, ſo for time, his Reſurrection was manifeſted more often then his Aſcenſion; for, as Saint Luke obſerveth in that Chapter, by many infallible tokens, hee was ſeene of them by the ſpace of forty dayes, and ſpake of the things appertaining to the Kingdome of God: But his Aſcenſion was ſudden, in a manner in a moment, Act. 1.9.
Thirdly, As Chriſts Reſurrection was manifeſted to more, and more often, ſo more clearely alſo; as the Sunne at his riſing appeares to us more fully then when it is aſcended to high noone. And it is to bee obſerved, that whereas our Saviours Reſurrection is ſet downe with aſſured evidence of ſenſe, for hee was ſaid to bee ſeene by many infallible tokens, Acts 1.3. yea, and hee was felt too; for though hee ſaid to Mary, Joh. 20.17. Touch mee not, for I am not yet aſcended, yet did Thomas touch him, and put his hand into his ſide, verſ. 27. But for his Aſcenſion, it was more ſudden, and at further diſtance; and it is noted, that it was leſſe in ſight; for, when hee aſcended, ſaith S. Luke, a cloud took him out of their ſight, Act. 1.9.
Fourthly, Though the Aſcenſion, touching the particular day of the monethmonth, be thought to have been the mChriſtus mortuus Martii 25. reſurrexit Martii 27. aſcendit Maii 5. Lorin. in Act. 1. v. 11. pag. 33.ſixth of May, and for the day of the weeke, by probable conjecture, be ſuppoſed to have been Thurſday, (for it is but probable, elſe Saint Chryſoſtome would not have ſaid (as nChryſoſt. apud Lorin. Ibid.hee did) that hee aſcended on the Sabbath; nor would it bee doubted (as it is by divers) whether the forty dayes from our Saviours Reſurrection to his Aſcenſion (mentioned Act. 1.3.) be to be reckoned incluſively, as taking in both ends of that accompt; or excluſively, for the one or both), yet neither that, viz. the day of his Aſcenſion, nor good Friday, nor any other day, which in any ſenſe is called the Lords day, is ſo often, and ſo expreſſely and punctually noted, with its place, and order in the weeke, as the day on which Chriſt roſe from the dead, which is preciſely obſerved by all the Evangeliſts; therefore none of them in all reſpects is ſo fit to bee ſet up for a weekly Holiday, and to be named the Lords day, as that is; and being now weekely obſerved (as the dayes of the Birth, Paſsion, and Aſcenſion of Chriſt are not) it hath beſt right to the red Letter, and to bee eminent above the reſt, both in brightneſſe of colour, and dignity of denomination, and ſo to bee called the Dominicall day, or the Lords day, foreign, both before and above all the reſt; which title it may hold now not onelyonly by originall right, but by ancient preſcription, as we ſhall ſhew in another place.
Nor can this title bee ſo ſhrunke up in that place where it is mentioned, ſcil. Rev. 1.10. as to be confined to the day of the Lords appearance and revelation to Saint John (as oSic dies hic à Johanne Dominici dici appellatione inſignitus dicatur, quòd in eo Deus quam admiranda pro Eccleſiae effet ſalute facturus, declarabat. Apud Rob. Locum of fig. veri Sabbatiſm. pag. 51.ſome would have it): for it is oppoſite to common ſenſe; which may appear thus,
Firſt, The Apoſtle beginneth the narration of the viſion with the time, I was in the Spirit on the Lords day, as not onelyonly diſtinguiſhing the time from the Apparition, but premiſing it, as being indeede before it.
Secondly, He mentioneth the day as a time known already to the Church, as thoſe that report to others a thing done at ſuch a time, preſuppoſe that that time is not unknowne unto them: but the day of his Revelation to Saint John was unknowne, and the day of the Lords Reſurrection was not; therefore, it is much more like the day of his Reſurrection, then of his Apparition to Saint John, was intended by the Apoſtle.
Thirdly, If the Lords day and the day of Apparition in this place were the ſame, it were no Revelation, or giving of light to the matter, but the drawing of a curtaine, in ſtead of the opening of a caſement: for this gloſſe doth rather darken, then cleare the text.
Fourthly, To underſtand by the title Lords day, Rev. 1.10. the day of his Apparition to Saint John, or the day wherein hee was raviſhed in ſpirit, is, as ſome conceive, to make a meere pSi pro die Apparitionis ſolùm intelligatur, tautalogia erit divina ſapientiâ indigna: ſic…enim eſſet ſenſus, In die apparitionis hujus, vel in die quo correptus eram à Spiritu, correptus cram à Spiritu. Inquiſit. de Sabbat. per Nath. Eal. pag. 86.tautalogie in the text, as if it ſhould bee read thus; In the day of this Apparition hee appeared unto mee; or, in the day I was in the ſpirit, I was in the ſpirit: So the Authour of the Booke called Inquiſitio de Sabbato, wherein hee keepeth cloſer to Gomarus his Comment, then Gomarus his Comment to the Text of S. John.
Fifthly, Before Doctor Gomarus, not any (at leaſt, none that was held for an orthodoxe Doctor) did ever light upon ſuch an expoſition as this, [viz. that by the Lords day, Revel. 1.10. ſhould bee meant the day of the Lords apparition to S. John,] which the Doctor himſelfe ſeemes ſometimes not ſo well to like, but that (for right to this title Lords day) qGomar. Inveſt. Sab. cap. 6. Theſ. 36. p. 75.hee preferreth the day of Chriſts Nativity, the day of his appearing in the veile of his ſleſh, before the day of his appearing by revelation to Saint John (as wee have noted his opinion before) and withall, (ſo farre as it proceedeth to the prejudice of the day wee plead for) confuted it. And for the fancie both of Dr. Gomarus and Mr. Braburne, that by the title Lords day, Rev. 1.10. may bee conceived the day of the Lords comming to his laſt Judgement, (for which the one citeth Luk. 17.30. the other, 1 Cor. 5.5.) I anſwer, firſt to the opinion it ſelfe, and then to the proofe.
For the firſt, I ſay, That Saint John ſpeaketh, as wee noted before, in the readieſt conſtruction of the words, as of a day that was in being before that Viſion, and ſo knowne, that the Reader might take notice when the Viſion came unto him: but the day of Judgment is not yet come, and ſo unknowne to man, that our Saviour ſaith of it, but of that day and houre knoweth no man, no not the Angels of heaven, but my Father onelyonly, Mat. 24.36.
Secondly, For their proofes, though both places produced be meant of the day of Judgement; yet, that they appertaine not to the title now in queſtion, wee may obſerve, that neither of them nameth the day, as Saint John doth the Lords day; for in the one, viz. 1 Cor. 5.5. it is called the day of the Lord Jeſus; in the other, viz. Luk. 17.30. the day of the Sonne of man: So that this device of the day of judgement (as to the day pointed out by Saint John in his appellation) is void of all judgement, and withall, ſo full of preſumption, that if any man ſhould goe on in commenting on the Revelation throughout, to the laſt Chapter, as hee begun with the firſt, hee might thereby derive upon himſelfe a wretched right to thoſe plagues, with commination whereof Saint John ſhuts up, and ſeales up his myſticall Propheſie, Revel. 22.18, 19.
Ob. But, if wee take the Lords day for the Reſurrection, (for that, as rM. Brab. in his diſcourſe. pag. 8.Maſter Braburne, notwithſtanding his croſſe conceits, confeſſeth is properly the Lords day) it will not follow that it ſhould be a weekly Holiday; it may ſuffice for that title, being given it but once in Scripture, fM. Brab. in his Defence p. 163. and 175.if it be celebrated ſome one firſt day, though but once a yeere, as the Nativitie, Paſsion, and Aſcenſion are, and as the Feaſt of Eaſter is with us, in reference unto it.
Anſ. To which I anſwer, Firſt, That the queſtion yet is not, whether the Lords day ſhould be a weekly Holiday or not: But being ſuch a one in fact, (for yet wee are not come to diſcuſſe in point of right) whether it may not in its weekly recourſe be intituled by that name.
Secondly, That the day of the Reſurrection being ſtill noted in Scripture to bee the firſt day of the weeke, and not ſuch a day of the monethmonth as returnes but once a yeere, or once in halfe a yeere, or once a quarter, or once a monethmonth onelyonly, it may bee called the Lords day once a weeke, for its weekly recourſe, as well as once a yeere, if, as the Feaſt of Eaſter, it came no oftner.
If it be ſaid, that no Friday is called good Friday, nor any Thurſday holy Thurſday, or Aſcenſion day, but one in the yeere; it may bee replied to that, if they were weekly obſerved (as for a time good Friday was, and the firſt day of the weeke hath beene ſince the Apoſtles time) they might all be partners in the ſame appellation (all holy Thurſdaies, all good Fridaies) as well once a weeke, as once a yeere; though the firſt might have ſome preheminence above the reſt; and after the firſt, that which anſwereth to the firſt in the ſeaſon of the yeere, as well as in the day of the week, and by reaſon thereof (as being no common gueſt) it might have an Alablaſter box of oyntment beſtowed upon it, more then upon thoſe which were more ordinary gueſts; as Eaſter Sunday was (by a tA die Reſurrectionis (per integram hebdomadem) ſideles feriuntur Concil. 6. gener. Conſt. Can. 66. pag. 646.Decree of the Councell of Conſtantinople) to be kept holy, and for its ſake, all the ſix dayes that followed next after it, yet it might, in its weekly recourſe, bee very well called the Lords day; as though all the Jewiſh feſtivities were called Sabbaths, and ſome in ſolemnity exceeded others, yet the weekly holiday of the Jewes was beſt knowne by that name, which was ſometimes by eſpecial priviledge uShabbath, Shabbathon, given only to the Sabbath, i.e. of the 4th Commandement, or to ſuch dayes as for ceſſation from worke, were equivalent unto it. Dr. Willet in Levit. 23. q. 31. p. 586.doubled upon it: ſo the name of the Lords day, howſoever it be ſometimes attributed to other dayes (all being his) yet doth it moſt appertaine unto the weekly holiday of the Chriſtians; and the rather, becauſe it hath a more conſtant and continuall Lordſhip or dominion over the dayes of the weeke, then any other by its comming in a weekely returne above fiftie times in the yeere: for the other Feſtivities, they have their turne but once a yeer. And ſo we have anſwered the objection of Impertinency of that title [Lords day] to our weekly holiday, which hath beene urged, as if it did not more properly appertaine unto it, then to ſome other daies before rehearſed.