The Christian Sabbath Defended, Preface
The Preface of the Tranſlator to the Chriſtian Reader.Preface.
1 OF all the Controverſies which have exerciſed Sect. 1 the Church of Chriſt, there is none more ancient than that of the Sabbath. So ancient, that it tooke beginning even in the Infancie of the Church, and grew up with it. For as we reade in the Acts, There roſe up certaine of the Sect of the Phariſes which beleeved, ſaying, That it was needfull to circumciſe the people, and to command them to keep the Law of Moſes, whereof the Sabbath was a part: which in the generall, as the Apoſtles laboured to ſuppreſſe in the firſt generall Councell holden in Jeruſalem. 2. So did Saint Paul Sect. 2 (upon occaſion of whoſe miniſtry this controverſie firſt began) endevour what he could againſt this particular; ſharply reproving thoſe, which allowed yet the Iewes Sabbath, Gal. 4.10, 11.or obſerved dayes, and months, and times, as if he had beſtowed his labour in vaine upon them. But more particularly in his Epiſtle to the Coloſſians, Let no man judge you in respect of an holy day, or of the new Moone, or of the Sabbath dayes, which were a ſhadow of things to come, but the body was of Chriſt. Both which expreſſions of Saint Paul are in this following diſcourſe produced to this very purpoſe. Yet notwithſtanding all this care, both generally of the Apoſtles, and more eſpecially of Saint Paul to ſuppreſſe this errour, it grew up ſtill and had its patrons Sect. 3 and abettors. 3. Ebion and Cerinthus, two of the wretchedeſt Heretiques of the Primitive times,See Auguſt. de Haereſ. & Epiph. and after them Apollinaris, are ſaid to countenance and defend it, which doubtleſſe made the Ancient Fathers declare themſelves fully in it, as a dangerous point: which ſeemed to confirme the Jewes in their incredulity, and might occaſion others to make queſtion of our Sect. 4 Saviours comming in the fleſh. 4. Hence was it that Irenaeus, Iuſtin Martyr, Tertullian and Euſebius, men of renowne for learning in the primitive times (three of which are cited in the text of this following diſcourſe, and the fourth quoted in the margin) affirme for certaine, that never any of the Patriarches before Moſes Law did obſerve the Sabbath: which queſtionleſſe they muſt have done, had that Law been moral, and dictated Sect. 5 by nature, as now ſome teach us 5. Afterwards by the oppoſition made by Epiphanius, in his Confutation of the hereſies of the Ebionites; and by the reſolutions of Theodoret on the 20. of Ezech. Procopius Gazaeus on the 2. of Gen. by Damaſcen, and our Venerable Bede, (which two laſt are here alſo cited, Sect. 2.) concurring with the former Fathers, all talke and obſervation of the Jewiſh Sabbath vaniſhed utterly; and the Lords day which had from the Apoſtles times been inſtituted by the Church, in the place thereof, was hallowed without Sect. 6 any rivall. 6. Nor do I find but that all ſuperſtitious fancies about that day, were as wholly abrogated as the day it ſelfe. Save that S. Gregory tels us, how ſome in Rome were ſo ſuperſtitious in this kind, that they would neither work upon the Saturday, no nor ſo much as waſh upon the Sunday.
Exam.I obſerve in the title firſt, that the Tranſlator profeſſeth, he hath performed his part, for the benefit of the common people. I doe not envie them that benefit, if it be a benefit: but if it be not ſo, but prove contrary, I ſhall grieve rather. No doubt the Tranſlator thinks he hath an advantage thereby, ſo did Rabſhakeh, when he refuſed to ſpeak in the Aramites language, but choſe rather to ſpeake in the Jewes tongue in the audience of the people that were on the wall; that if they did not harken unto him, they might eat their owne dung, and drink their own piſſe, with the reſt. What will bee the condition of ſome of them who doe not hearken to this Praefacer; I know not, but according to my poore judgement, my opinion is, that as many as hearken to this Praefacer, if Chriſts comming ſhall bee on his owne day as Auſtin hoped,Sermon. de tem. ſerm. 154. it would bee (and what day more likely in all probabilitie?) and at his comming on the Lords day he ſhould take them in their ſports, their owne hearts would miſgive them, that their comfort ſhould bee as little as that the Orator threatned unto the Jewes upon the wall, in caſe they did not hearken unto him. In a book printed not long ago I hear, there is alleaged a paſſage of one of the“Theodoret. Fathers, for the free uſe of ſcripture by all ſorts of the vulgar people; and it is tranſlated alſo into Engliſh, belike, for the benefit of the common people, but in a ſecond edition the Greeke ſentence is“and by inquiry I find it true ſaid to be reteined, but the Engliſh tranſlation quite omitted. Did the Author report of gratifying the people thus, and quench his care of providing for their benefit? This obſervation is none of mine, but accidentally brought unto my hands by one of ſome qualitie, by occaſion of mutuall communication betweene us. But ſince, I heare the Author hath made amends for that another way. For having in the firſt edition profeſſed, that Popiſh errours are not damnable in themſelves, which with what reſpect it ſhould bee delivered for the benefit of the common people, amongſt Proteſtants, I know not; in the ſecond edition it is corrected thus, popiſh errours are not damnable in the iſſue. But where corrected? not in the text, (that continuing the ſame ſtill, that ſuch errours are not damnable in themſelves) but among the Errata at the end of the booke, although the Author was warned of the ſtrangeneſſe of that aſſertion (as I heare) and that in contradiction to the doctrine of the Biſhop of Canterbury in his Treatiſe of Councels, profeſſing that the Papiſts withholding the cup from the*people. people, is a damnable errour. Here is brave jugling in the Text to comply with ſome, and in the Errata, to provide againſt afterclaps for himſelfe, and to comply with others, and betray deep diſſimulation in both, enough to make ſome man (when ſuch courſes are diſcovered) to be abhorred of al. But to proceed, the Tranſlator doth not ſay, he hath performed this taske fot the benefit of himſelfe, yet he plainly deales upon an advantagious argument. But if his Majeſtie ſhall be pleaſed out of his gracious diſpoſition (whereof he hath given many remarkable documents) to vouchſafe to receive information concerning the honor of the Lords day, in way of a juſt and neceſſary Apologie, which wee are driven to make, I truſt (through Gods goodneſſe (in whoſe hands are the hearts of Kings) it ſhall bee neither advantagious to him, nor diſadvantagious to us; and his Majeſtie may perhaps bee found to abſolve us in the Court of his owne conſcience. But what is that benefit of the common people, whereof this Tranſlator is ſo zealous? I gueſſe it is in freeing them from ſuperſtition; and that hereafter they may not bee ſo peeviſhly fooliſh, as out of any Cabaliſmes of conſcience, to forbeare their may-games; and uſuall dancings on the Lords day; yet ſome, and they no ſmall ones, as I have heard, do profeſſe them no otherwiſe to be allowed then as they may be done to the praiſe and glory of God. Which calls to my remembrance what a Scotchman ſometimes ſaid, as he was going in one of London ſtreets, and ſpying one of his acquaintance on the other ſide: for calling him aloud by his name; O Sir, ſaith he, when ſhall we meet at a Taverne, to give God thanks for our deliverance out of the Ile de Re? But how comes that to bee accounted ſuperſtitious, which all the Biſhops of the land, and the whole Kingdome accounts the prophanation of the Sabbath, not to ſpeake of particular Biſhops, though as great for learning and place, as Biſhop Andrewes, who in his patterne of catecheticall doctrine, tells us of ſome, who on the Lords day, vacant nugis, ſpecta…ulis, theatris, choreis, and approves the ſtiling of ſuch a Sabbath, Sabbatū aurei vituli, the Sabbath of the golden Calf; I make bold to tranſlate it for the benefit of the cōmon people; and B. Downham beſtowes the like denomination upon ſuch a Sabbath. Biſhop Andrewes over and above cites Auſtin for the like ſaying, but that is more then any quotation of his doth make good, for ought I find hitherunto. But what ſhould I alleage one or two Doctors opinions hereupon though never ſo great, when an whole Kingdome ſtands for the ſame in my judgement, even the Kingdome of England, as may appeare by the Act of Parliament 1. Caroli, concerning the Sabbath. The introduction thereunto, manifeſteth three grounds whereupon they proceed to make that Act. 1 That there is nothing more acceptable to God, then his holy worſhip and ſervice. 2 That the due ſanctification of the Lords day, is a great part of Gods holy woſhip and ſervice. 3 That men are very prone to prophane it. Now to prevent this prophanation of the Sabbath, many things are there prohibited; and one amongſt the reſt is this, that none ſhall come forth out of his own pariſh about any ſports or paſtimes; whence I conclude, that to come out of a mans pariſh on the Lords day, about any ſports or paſtimes is to prophane the Sabbath. For to prevent the prophanation of our Chriſtian Sabbath and to maintaine the ſanctification thereof is this law made. Now to come out of a mans owne pariſh about what buſineſſe ſoever, no wiſe man will ſay that it is to prophane the Sabbath; but according to the nature of the buſineſſe, whereabout hee comes forth of his owne pariſh, ſo ſhall hee bee found, either to prophane the Sabbath, or not to prophane it. As for example, for a man to come forth of his owne pariſh to heare a ſermon, no man I thinke, will ſay, that it is to prophane the Sabbath. In like manner, to come forth of his owne pariſh, into an other pariſh to fetch a Phyſitian or Surgeon in caſe of neceſſitie, no man will ſay that this is to prophane the Sabbath, becauſe the buſineſſe about which hee comes is not to prophane the Sabbath. But for a man to come out of his own pariſh to buy or ſell, to trade or traffique, no neceſſitie urging thereunto, this is to prophane the Sabbath; becauſe in ſuch ſort to trade on the Sabbath day, is to prophane the Sabbath. In like ſort, for a man to come out of his owne pariſh about any ſports or paſtimes, is therefore to Prophane the Sabbath in the judgement of the Parliament, becauſe the keeping and performing of theſe ſports and paſtimes, is a manifeſt profanation of the Sabbath in the judgement of the King and his Parliament. Now if all ſports and paſtimes on the Lords day bee a prophanation of the Lords day our Chriſtian Sabbath; it followeth that may-games and moricings, and dancings, at ſuch times uſuall, are alſo a manifeſt profanation of the Sabbath. And hererin wee ſpeake, as I conceive, in his Majeſties meaning, asſiſted with the great Councell of his Kingdome, the Lords Spirituall and Temporall, and the Houſe of Commons: and whoſoever ſhall account it ſuperſtition to ſay ſo, ſhall therewithall charge his royall Majeſtie, and all the Lords both Spirituall and Temporall; and in a word, the whole Parliament with ſuperſtition. Yet if it were onelyonly the benefit of the common people, that this Tranſlator did intend, I for my part ſhould bee content to ſuffer him to enjoy the honour of ſeeking the benefit of the people; onelyonly admoniſhing the people commited to my charge, to conſider well whether there bee any ſuch benefit to bee reaped thereby as is pretended.2 Pet. 3. And ſeeing Saint Peter exhorts us to give diligence, that wee may bee found of Chriſt in peace, when hee comes in flaming fire to render vengeance on all them that know not God, nor obey not the Goſpell of Chriſt Jeſus: Let every one examine himſelfe, whether hee could bee content to bee taken dancing about a may-pole on the Lords day, when the Lord, even the Lord of the Sabbath ſhall come, and that to be found of him in this condition, were to bee found of him in peace. But ſeeing this tranſlation, and eſpecially the Preface of this Author tends to the promoting of the moſt rigorous cenſures againſt many; it ſtands us upon to plead our owne cauſe, and to labour herein as for life: even in examination of the doctrine here delivered, that wee may finde upon how juſt ground it proceeds; otherwiſe wee may bee juſtly condemned of all: and in the cenſures that paſſe upon us whether of Excommunication, or Suſpenſion, or Deprivation, finde none to plead our cauſe, or to commiſerate us. The ſecond thing I obſerve in this title, is the paſſage of Scripture here mentioned, as juſtifying the doctrine here delivered out of Mark. 2.27. The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Now none of us makes queſtion but that the Sabbath was made for man: Nay wee nothing doubt but that all the dayes of the weeke were made for man, that is, for the good of man, but the Sabbath for the beſt good, not the baſeſt good of man in following his worldly pleaſures. The ſix dayes of the weeke are given us to labour in our ordinary callings, for the maintenance of our life temporall: but the ſeventh is ſanctified by God, that is, dedicated to holy exerciſes in the ſervice of God, and to inure us to recreate our ſelves and to delight in the Lord; that as his ſoule takes pleaſure in us, ſo our ſoules might be accuſtomed to take pleaſure in him; and to make his Sabbaths our delight, to conſecrate them as glorious unto the Lord. It is true, there is another end of the Sabbath, and that was ut vires recolligeret, to recollect his ſtrength which had been ſpent and waſted in the ſixe dayes of labour; whence it followes evidently, that when a man was hungry as the diſciples were, when they plucked the eares of corne, they were not bound by any religion of the Sabbath to abſtaine from ſuch a courſe, whereby a mans ſtrength would become more and more weakned and impaired. Not that theſe things were commanded on the Sabbath day, but permitted; as is often ſignified by the word foreign it is lawfull; and for good reaſon.“Matth. 12.10.12. Mar 3.4. Luk. 6.9. For the Sabbath being ordained to promote a mans bene eſſe, his well being; and that in the beſt things it ſuppoſeth libertie to provide for his eſſe in caſe of neceſſitie; leſt otherwiſe he ſhall be found uncapable of thoſe things that concerne his bene eſſe, his well being. For our nature wanting neceſſarie refreſhment doth thereby many times become the more unfit for holy exceriſes, and to performe that dutie which God requires, and hath deſerved at our hands. How were Ionathans eyes enlightned upon the taſting of a little honey, 1 Sam. 14.29. But this Tranſlator deſires, as it ſeemes, from the generalitie of mans good to ſeale up an opinion in the minds of his Readers, that the Sabbath was made not onelyonly for the ſervice of God, and for the promoting of a man in the knowledge and feare of God, but for the furthering of his carnall pleaſures alſo. But never was it knowne that our Saviour juſtified any libertie to ſuch courſes on the Sabbath: Neither were any ſuch things, as it ſeemes in courſe, in the dayes of the Prophet Amos, who reprehends them for ſaying, Am. 8.5. When will the Sabbath be gone, that they might returne to their worldly courſes? Rather they could wiſh their ſun might ſtand ſtill on that day, as ſometimes it did in the dayes of Ioſhua, if libertie were given to ſports, paſtimes, and pleaſures on that day: and it wvre wondrous ſtrange that libertie ſhould bee debarred them from kindling a fire to ſet forward the ſtructure of the Sanctuarie,Exod. 35 3. Luke 33.25. …ast. made to this very end that the Lord might dwell among them: And from ſo precious a worke as the embalming of the body of Chriſt, the Lord of the Sabbath, and that at the very end of the day, if at that time they were not reſtrained from any ſenſuall courſe of recreation, according to the common faſhion of the world. Undoubtedly, howſoever it ſtands now with us Chriſtians; in the dayes of our Saviour, they that reſted on their Sabbath from embalming the body of Chriſt,Luk. 23.56. and that according to the appointment, which is as much as to ſay, according to the Law of God; ſurely they, by the ſame Law of God were much more reſtrained from worldly pleaſures, theſe ſtanding far more in oppoſition to the ſanctification of the Lords Sabbath, then the embalming of the body of the Sonne of God, who was Lord of the Sabbath. And therefore this text is moſt unſeaſonably and impertinently alleaged by the Tranſlator to ſerve his turn, being farre more fit to croſſe his purpoſes, then any way to promote them. So from the conſideration of the title, I come to the preface.
If the antiquitie of this controverſie concerning the Sabbath, were any thing materiall; this Praefacer were foundered at the firſt: For what if the Sabbath bee a part of the Law of Moſes? Was not the law of ſanctifying the name of God, the law forbidding images, the law commanding them to have no other Gods but him, that brought them out of the land of Aegypt: the law commanding to honour parents, to abſtaine from murther, adultery, theft, were not all theſe the Law of Moſes? Is not the law of ſanctifying the Sabbath one of the tenne Commandements delivered by God from Mount Sinai as well as the other nine? and was it not kept in the Arke as well as the reſt? Circumciſion was no law of Moſes, and therefore albeit it be ſaid Ioh. 7.22. That Moſes gave unto them Circumciſion, yet forthwith it is added, not becauſe it is of Moſes, but of the Fathers: ſo that Moſes rather confirmed it, then was the firſt giver of it. So that the Law of Moſes in this place is to bee underſtood of the ceremoniall law, not of the morall law contained in the Decalogue, and among theſe tenne Commandements, that of the Sabbath is one, and commended unto them in that ſtate as none ſo much, Remember the Sabbath day to ſanctifie it; and not onelyonly before Moſes, but before Abraham and Noah alſo, wee read,Gen. 2.…, …. that the ſeventh day God reſted from all the workes that hee had made, and that therefore God bleſſed the ſeventh day and ſanctified it.
Of any Miniſter or Paſtor in the Church of England that maintaines us Chriſtians to be obliged to the obſervation and ſanctification of the Jewiſh Sabbath, or of any Sabbath that is a ſhadow of things to come, the body whereof is of Chriſt, I never heard or read. Yet for ſome hundred yeares in the Primitive Church, not the Lords day onelyonly, but the ſeventh day alſo was religiouſly obſerved, not by Ebion and Cerinthus onelyonly, but by pious Chriſtians alſo, as Baronius writeth and Gomarus confeſſeth, and Rivet alſo, that we are bound in conſcience under the Goſpell, to allow for Gods ſervice a better proportion of time, than the Jewes did under the law, rather than a worſe. And further it is well knowne, that beſides the weekely Sabbath, there was variety of obſervation of times amongſt the Jewes, and divers of them called Sabbaths alſo, as ſome think, not one whereof was mentioned in the Decalogue, or pronounced by the Lord from Mount Sinai, as the fourth Commandement was, for the ſanctifying of the weekly Sabbath. So that this Praefacer every way ſheweth miſerable looſeneſſe in his diſcourſe. And if Ebion and Cerinthus, and Apollinaris, how wretched heretickes ſoever did ſtill inforce the ſanctification of the Jewiſh Sabbath, (whoſe wretchedneſſe yet conſiſted not ſo much in inforcing this, as in inforcing all the ceremonies of Moſes; the Jewiſh Sabbath long after Corinthus continuing to be obſerved by many pious Chriſtians, as Baronius obſerveth & others, and Saint Paul doth oppoſe all ſuch doctrine and practiſe in theſe paſſages of his here mentioned: did not this Author know that upon theſe very paſſages of Saint Paul, the Anabaptiſts and Socinians, as vile heretickes as Ebion and Cerinthus, and Apollinaris, for their blood have gone ſo farre, as not onelyonly to overthrow the obſervation of the Jewiſh Sabbath, but the ſanctifying of the Lords day alſo. The opinion of the law ceremoniall ſtanding ſtill in force (which indeed was the opinion of the heretickes mentioned) is I confeſſe, a dangerous point, and ſuch as not onelyonly ſeemed (as this Praefacer minceth it, out of what degree of wiſdome or providence I know not) to confirme the Jewes in their incredulitie, but indeed juſtly might confirme them; nor onelyonly occaſion, but juſtly cauſe alſo others, to make queſtion of our Saviours comming in the fleſh; not ſo the obſervation of the ſeventh day to ſanctifie it, for ought this Author hath hitherto manifeſted, or throughout this preface of his doth manifeſt; and the ſanctification of this day is apparantly commanded in the moral law ſpoken from Mount Sinai. And thoſe Chriſtians who a long time kept this ſeventh day holy as well as the Lords day, had no opinion of any danger at all in this their obſervation. And it ſtood the ancient Fathers upon to oppoſe the obſervation of the law ceremoniall. Yet what ſaith Auſtin againſt theſe heretickes, to whom this Author in the firſt place referreth us? All that hee delivers againſt the Cerinthians in reference to this particular is onelyonly this: They ſay that wee ought to bee circumciſed, and that other like precepts of the Law are to bee obſerved. I tranſlate it for the benefit of the common people. Of the Ebionites thus, They obſerve the carnall commandements of the Law, to wit, Circumciſion of the fleſh and the reſt, from whoſe burthens wee are freed by the new Teſtament. Of Appollinaris and his ſect this way, Auſtin hath juſt nothing: but Danaeus who collects out of other Authors alſo the hereticall opinions of the Apollinariſts in the laſt place writes thus of them: After the laſt reſurrection (ſay they) Sabbaths, Circumciſion, Iewiſh difference of meates, and all other legall ceremonies ſhall have place, yea alſo there ſhall bee a Temple amongſt us. And is not this wilde ſtuffe, in reference to the ſanctification of the Lords day, now in queſtion amongſt us?
Now let the Reader judge with what modeſty it is avouched, That Hence it was that Irenaeus, Juſtin Martyr, Tertullian, and Euſebius, doe affirme for certaine, that never any of the Patriarches before Moſes Law did obſerve the Sabbath; D. Prideaux ſaith not that Hence it was; neither hath this Author given the leaſt evidence hereof. Sure I am, that in thoſe Patriarches dayes Chriſt was not as yet come in the fleſh, but rather to come long after their dayes; and conſequently though it be a dangerous courſe in theſe dayes to lay any ground of ſuſpition that Chriſt is not already come, but as yet to come; yet this was of no dangerous condition at all in the dayes of the Patriarchs, becauſe in their dayes Chriſt was not come, but to come long after. D. Prideaux begins with Tertullian by this Author tranſlated thus, Let them (ſaith he in a particular Tract againſt the Jewes) aſſure me if they can, that Adam ever kept the Sabbath: or Abel when he offered unto God his accepted ſacrifice, had regard thereof; or that Noah kept the ſame, when he was buſied in preparing the Arke againſt the Deluge; or finally that Abraham in offering his ſonne Iſaak; or that Melchiſedech in execution of his Prieſt-hood tooke notice of it. Now I appeale to every ſober mans judgement, whether to put the Jewes in thoſe dayes to ſhew this, be to affirme for certaine, That never any of the Patriarches before Moſes Law did obſerve the Sabbath. It is true indeed, we have no particular relation of the obſervation of the Sabbath in that Booke of Geneſis, and this Tertullian knew full well; and againe it is as true that there is no teſtimony of ought to the contrary. In the Booke of Joſuah in like ſort there is not any mention of the obſervation thereof (any more than in the Booke of Judges, of Ruth, of the two Bookes of Samuel) but rather ſomething to the contrary, to wit, in the ſiege of Iericho, and marching round about the walls of Iericho ſeven dayes together. But yet in generall we reade in Geneſis, that when God had finiſhed all his works in ſix dayes, and reſted the ſeventh, he therefore bleſſed the ſeventh day and ſanctified it; and whether this hath not greater evidence, that even then God ordered, that that day ſhould be ſanctified, than that the meaning ſhould be, that therefore God ordered this two thouſand and certaine yeares after, I appeale to every Chriſtian to judge betweene us. And if God did then order it, which could not be otherwiſe than by command, how could Adam be ignorant hereof; and if he knew as much, how improbable is it, that he and his, at leaſt Abel and Enoſh, and his pious poſterity ſhould not obſerve it? And if a time had not been ſet apart even in Adams dayes for divine ſervice, how improbable is it, that Cain and Abel ſhould concurre at the ſame time, in bringing their offerings unto the Lord; and if not at the ſame time, how could Cain diſcern that Abels offering was reſpected and accepted of God, when his was not? Yet for certaine, it was obſerved before Moſes Law, if by the Law we underſtand the Law given on mount Sina, as appeares manifeſtly Exod. 16. And withall it is thereby evident, that from the beginning of the world untill that time, the diſtinction of the yeare into weekes was obſerved, otherwiſe it were impoſſible to know, which day was the ſeventh in correſpondencie to the ſeventh from the Creation, (ſave by particular revelation whereof we reade nothing) now that being unknowne, the reaſon of ſanctifying the ſeventh day by an holy reſt, drawne from Gods reſt on the ſeventh, that is, the laſt day of the firſt weeke from the Creation had been utterly void, and nothing at all agreeable. And this diſtinction of time into weekes was obſerved from all Antiquity by the Gentiles, as hath been confirmed by Wallaeus and Rivetus, with the helpe of Claudius Salmaſius, that learned Antiquary; and likewiſe that the ſeventh day was a Feſtivall even among the Gentiles. And albeit divers others of the Ancients are alleaged to the ſame purpoſe, as affirming that the Patriarches did not obſerve the Sabbath, as namely Euſebius, Eccleſ. Hiſt. lib. 1. cap. 4.ſaying, They had no Circumciſion of the body, nor obſervation of the Sabbath, as we have not. And Iuſtin Martyr in his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew,Lib. 4. cap. 30. ſaying, Heretofore there were good men that pleaſed God, though they kept not Sabbathes. And Irenaeus in like manner, thus, Abraham himſelfe without Circumciſion, and obſervation of the Sabbaths, beleeved God, and it was imputed unto him for righteouſneſſe; Lid. Orthod. lib. 4. cap. 24.and laſtly Damaſcen, When there was no Law nor Scripture of divine inſpiration, nor Sabbath conſecrated unto God. For as for Bede (alleaged by Pererius to that purpoſe, in his Hexameron) I find in that place nothing anſwerable thereunto. Now Hospinian is of opinion that theſe paſſages of the Ancients are to be underſtood of the rigorous obſervation of the Sabbath among the Jewes; I adde, or in reference to the other Sabbaths commanded in the Law of Moſes; or laſtly in reference to the manner of ſolemnizing them among the Jewes, who we know had a peculiar Sacrifice ordained for the Sabbaths; and this I prove by theſe reaſons. Firſt, they deliver this as a thing well knowne; for they take no paines to prove it. Now conſider, what ground could they have for the cuſtome of the Patriarchs before the Flood, eſpecially conſidering that the teſtimony of Moſes, Gen. 2.3. is far better evidence for the keeping of a weekly Sabbath, in a morall way only, than any they could bring to the contrary. Secondly, then againe, could they have better grounds for the practiſe of thoſe ancient Patriarchs both before, and after the Floud than the Jewes themſelves? I preſume none will be ſo immodeſt as to affirme this; and if they had any ſuch evidence, it ſtood them upon to produce it, eſpecially in dealing againſt the Jewes. Thirdly, they deliver this as a thing undeniable by the Jewes themſelves, with whom they deale in this particular: but the Jewes had no ſuch faith, as to beleeve that the ancient Patriarchs never obſerved the weekly Sabbath. For none are of this opinion but ſuch as thinke that paſſage Gen. 2.3. of Gods bleſſing the ſeventh day and hallowing it, was not delivered of that preſent time, as if then God ordained it ſhould be ſanctified, but only by way of anticipation for the time to come. But this was not the opinion of the Jewes. Manaſſeth Ben Iſrael a moderne Rabbin, in his booke intituled The Reconciler, Conciliator, according to the argument of that his writing, which is to reconcile places of Scripture, in ſhew diſagreeing; and that upon enquiry into all the Rabbins both ancient and later; in his 36. Queſtion upon Exodus, writes thus, as out of the opinion of the Ancients; thoſe words, Thou ſhalt remember that thou waſt a ſervant in Egypt, obſerve how he expounds them; Ac ſi diceret, cogita in Aegypto, ubi ſerviebas, etiam ipſo Sabbato per vim te coactum ad labores; as if he ſhould ſay, thinke (with thy ſelfe) that in Egypt where thou ſervedſt, thou waſt by force conſtrained to labour, on the very Sabbath: Evidently manifeſting not out of his owne particular opinion, but as out of the generall opinion of their ancient Rabbins, that the Sabbath and the obſervation thereof was a duty in the very dayes of the Patriarchs. And in the end concludes thus: Igitur Deus benedictus cupiens Sabbatum, cujus ſanctimoniam tantis documentis approbaverat, in aeternum ab omnibus coli, dec…m praeceptis illud inſeruit, quo ſcientes praecepta aeterna eſſe, etiam hoc inter ea habendum intelligerent. Therefore the bleſſed God (it is fit I ſhould tranſlate it for the benefit of the common people) deſiring that the Sabbath might bee obſerved for ever of all (whoſe ſanctity by ſo many documents he had commended, placed it in the Dealogue (that it made it one of the tenne Commandements) to the end that knowing thoſe precepts to bee everlaſting, they ſhould underſtand that this Commandement alſo was to be accompliſhed amongſt them. And indeed Tertullian himſelfe profeſſeth that the Jewes were of this opinion, as Rivetus obſerves out of his booke againſt the Jewes, thus tranſlated, God from the beginning did ſanctifie the ſeventh day, reſting from all the workes that hee had made, and that thereupon Moſes ſaid unto the people, Remember yee the Sabbath day to ſanctifie it. And therefore when Mercer ſaith concerning the meaning of theſe words, Geneſ. 2.3. Hebraei fere referunt in futurum: the Jewes for the moſt part referre it to the time to come: he is to be underſtood of the later Jewes; but of this more ſhall be ſpoken ere wee part from this ſection. 4 Fourthly, not one of the ancient Fathers is alleaged by our adverſaries, delivering his opinion upon that paſſage, Geneſ. 2.3. to ſhew what hee conceives to bee the true meaning thereof, which yet is the onelyonly ground whereupon our doctrine is built concerning the originall inſtitution of the Sabbath; and ſeeing it contains a meaning at firſt ſight manifeſtly contradictious to that which they affirne, as wee interpret it of the weekely Sabbath, without reference unto the Jewiſh manner of obſerving it: therefore in this caſe it ſtood them upon to take notice of that place, and by ſome faire interpretation vindicate themſelves from ſuſpition of contradicting the expreſſe Word of God. 5 Tertullian himſelfe juſtifies our doctrine, namely, that God from the beginning ſanctified the ſeventh day, as Rivetus ſhewes out of his fourth booke againſt Marcion, cap. 12. where hee ſayth, Chriſtum ipſum Sabbati diem, benedictione Patris à primordio ſanctum benefactione ſua efficere ſanctiorem, That Chriſt himſelfe made that day more holy by his well doing on that day, which by the benediction of the Father was made holy from the beginning. So that Tertullians meaning in the place alleaged to the contrary, cannot bee, that the ancient Patriarchs ſimply obſerved not the weekely Sabbath, but onelyonly that they obſerved it not after that manner the Jewes did; and that the like interpretation muſt bee given of the paſſages alleaged out of other of the Ancients. 6 For further proofe whereof, obſerve that Theodoret, albeit on the 20. of Ezekiel hee ſaith in like manner that God preſcribed unto the Jewes the ſabbaticall vacations, Ʋt haec civilis adminiſtrationis ratio peculiaris à Gentium quidem eos diſtingueret inſtitutis: that this peculiar adminiſtration might diſtinguiſh them from the cuſtomes of the Gentiles: yet Wallaeus ſhewes that the ſame Theodoret in his queſtions upon Geneſis,Diſſert. de. 4. praecep. p. 44. doth manifeſtly declare, that even from the beginning of the creation, God did ordaine this day to reſt and ſanctification. As who having created the creatures in ſix dayes, by the reſt of the ſeventh day manifeſted the creation to be perfected; like as in ſeven dayes hee concluded the whole circle of dayes. And that by bleſſing the ſeventh day and ſanctifying it, he declared, Quod non illum diem inutilem putabat ad creandum, ſed ad quietem accommodatum ſtatuit. The meaning whereof in effect is this, that hee did not thinke that day unfit to have any thing created therin, but onelyonly it was his pleaſure to ordaine it for a day of reſt. The ſame Author ſhewes Chryſoſtome to bee of the ſame opinion in his 10. Homily on Geneſis, whoſe words in Latine he rendreth thus, Iam hinc ab initio doctrinam hanc nobis inſinuat Deus, erudiens in circulo hebdomedae diem unum integrum ſegregandum, & reponendum ad ſpiritualem operationem, Now from the beginning God inſinuates this inſtruction, teaching that in the circle of the weeke one entire day is to bee ſequeſtred and imployed on ſpirituall actions. Theſe authorities in my judgement ſhould bee of the greater force, for as much as they deliver their opinion by way of interpretation of Gods Word, and that according to the plaine literall meaning, and that ſuch as whereunto every Chriſtians conſcience, not fore-ſtalled with prejudice, is prone enough to yeeld by reaſon of the native evidence of the words. For they denote an externall action and tranſient, not an internall and immanent in God, (all of which kinde are eternall) which externall action is the dedication of the day to holy uſes, which cannot bee imagined to bee done any other way (as I ſhould thinke) then by commanding it to bee ſanctified. The ſame Author ſhewes Auſtin to have beene of the ſame judgement, writing thus,Auguſt. epiſt. 86. ad Caſulanum. When God ſanctified the ſeventh day, becauſe thereon hee reſted from all his workes, hee did not deliver ought concerning the Faſt or Dinner of the Sabbath: nor afterwards, when to the Hebrew people hee gave commandement for the obſervation of the day it ſelfe, did hee mention ought as touching the receiving or not receiving of food: onelyonly commandement is given concerning mens vacation, from their owne or from ſervile workes, which vacation the former people receiving as a ſhadow of things to come, in ſuch manner reſted from their workes as now wee behold the Iewes to reſt. Hee citeth alſo Theophilus Patriarch of Antioch a moſt ancient writer in his ſecond booke to Autolychus writing thus, Furthermore, as touching the ſeventh which amongſt al people is celebrious, moſt men are in great ignorance. For this day which is celebrious amongſt all is called the Sabbath; if a man interpret in Greeke, it is called Septimana; by this name all men call this day, but the cauſe of this denomination they know not. Now what was the cauſe hereof in his judgement, but the Lords reſting thereon as the ſeventh; after hee had finiſhed all his workes in ſix dayes, and thereupon bleſſing it and ſanctifying it, whereupon it grew to bee a feſtivall day generally amongſt all? Tertullian though alleaged on the other ſide, yet hath beene already ſhewed to bee of the ſame minde, in this particular with Chryſoſtome and Auſtin. Adde unto theſe Epiphanius haer. 51. Sabbatum primum eſt, quod ab initio decretum eſt ac dictum à Domino in mundi creatione quod per circuitum ab eo tempore uſque huc juxta ſeptem dies revolvitur. The firſt Sabbath is that which the Lord from the beginning ordained and ſpake in the creation of the world, which by revolution from that time to this, according to the circle of ſeven dayes returneth. Athanaſius alſo upon thoſe words of our Saviour,Matth. 11.27. All things are given to mee of my Father, diſtinguiſheth betweene the Sabbath day, and the Lords day; affirming the Sabbath day to have been the end of the firſt creation, and the Lords day the beginning of the ſecond creation. Beda in his Hexameron profeſſeth, that the reſt of the ſeventh day after ſixe dayes working, ſemper celebrari ſolebat, was alwayes wont to bee celebrated: If alwayes, then before the children of Iſraels comming out of Aegypt, before Abraham, before the flood, even from the beginning of the dayes of Adam the firſt of men. Adde unto this the received, and moſt currant opinion of the Jewes, by the teſtimonies of Philo and Joſephus vouched by Wallaeus. Philo in his ſecond book of Moſes writing thus, Quis ſacrum illum diem, per ſingulas hebdomadas recurrentem non honorat? Who doth not honour that holy day according to the weekely revolution thereof? and hee delivers this not of the Jewes onelyonly, but of the Greekes and Barbarians, of inhabitants of Maynland, and Ilands, thoſe of Europe, of Aſia, and of the whole habitable part of the world to the very ends thereof. Ioſephus l. 2. againſt Appion, profeſſing that there is no City of Grecians or Barbarians, nor any Nation, to whom the cuſtomary obſervation of the ſeventh, whereon the Jewes reſted, had not reached. Adde unto this the teſtimony of two Rabbins, mentioned by Broughton in his Conſent of Scriptures acknowledging this, and another Rabbin alleaged by Peter Martyr upon Geneſis, both cited by Maſter Richard B…field in his anſwer to Maſter, Breerwood. Give me leave to adde my mite alſo of mine owne obſervation. The 92. Pſalme hath this title. A Pſalme and Song for the Sabbath. The Chalde paraphraſe hereupon writes thus foreign A praiſe and Song which Adam (the firſt of men) ſpoke on the Sabbath day; manifeſtly evidencing that in the received opinion of the Jewes in thoſe dayes, Adam ſanctified the Sabbath. Rabbi David Kimchi teſtifies the ſame in his Commentary upon that Pſalme, to be the doctrine delivered in their Daraſh, namely, that Adam the firſt conceived this Pſalme after hee was created on the Sabbath day, and that afterwards he ſinned, and ſo prophaned the Sabbath. So that notwithſtanding all the bluſter which this Author makes, this fourth Commandement may continue morall nevertheleſſe. And ſure I am, Irenaeus puts this difference betweene the words of the Decalogue (ſo he ſpeaks and conſequently expungeth not, but rather includeth the fourth Commandement) and the ceremoniall lawes,Iren. l. 4. cap. 31. that Decalogi verba, the words of the Decalogue ſpoken by God himſelfe unto all, doe therefore continue in like manner with us, receiving extenſion and augmentation by the comming of Chriſt in the fleſh, but no diſſolution. But the precept of bondage (ſo he calls the ceremonials) by themſelves hee commanded unto the people by Moſes, fit for their inſtruction and diſcipline. And Doctor Andrewes I am ſure, ſo great a Prelate in our Church, denies all ceremonialitie thereunto, ſave only ſo farre as may juſtifie the change of the day, and in reference to the rigorous reſt of the Jewes. And Azorius confeſſeth (as before hath beene alleaged) that after ſix dayes worke, one day ſhould bee conſecrate to divine ſervice is a thing moſt agreeable to reaſon. Yet I know none that accounteth this a Dictate of nature ſimply, as this Author would faine obtrude upon us; but rather with Chryſoſtom, that God by creation hath taught us as much, and now God hath gone before us herein, wee conceive it to bee moſt agreeable to reaſon. And D. Field did profeſſe as much upon acknowledgement of the Creation, as Maſter Brode confeſſeth.
If all talke of obſervation of the Jewiſh Sabbath vaniſhed not till the daies of Bede, it was 700. years firſt in the account of Bellarmine. And of any reſolutions made by Bede or Damaſcen hereabouts, in D. Prideux ſect. 2. I finde no mention. Yet I thinke it likely enough, that both they and Procopius might eaſily contrive as many reſolutions hereabouts, as either Theodoret upon the twentieth of Ezekiel, or Epiphanius againſt the Ebionites; for neither of them in the places mentioned, make any reſolutions on this point at al. He grants the Lords day to have beene inſtituted by the Church from the Apoſtles dayes, which latter clauſe is an ambiguous phraſe. For it may bee applyed to the dayes after the Apoſtles. If in the Apoſtles dayes, then undoubtedly it was inſtituted by the Apoſtles, what meant hee then to ſay it was inſtituted by the Church, and not to bee ſo ingenuous as to confeſſe that it was inſtituted by the Apoſtles? How far off is he from acknowledging it to have beene inſtituted by the Lord? yet Athanaſius openly profeſſeth thus much. Olim certe priſcis hominibus in ſummo pretio Sabbatum fuit, quam quidem ſolennitatem Dominus tranſtulit in diem Dominicum. Heretofore with men of old time the Sabbath day was in great price: which Feſtivitie truly the Lord hath tranſlated unto the Lords day. And Cyrill in his 12. book on Iohn, chap. 58. conſidering the Lords appearance a ſecond time on the eighth day, Thomas then being preſent, and upon conſideration finding it to have beene the firſt day of the weeke, concludes thus: Iure igitur ſanctae Congregationes die octavo in Eccleſiis fiunt. By right therefore holy Congregations in the Churches are made on the eighth day, meaning thereby the firſt day of the week, that is the Lords day: and as hee concludeth thus, ſo undoubtedly his opinion was the Apoſtles themſelves did conclude in like manner.
Now albeit much had beene effected for the abrogation as well of all ſuperſtitious fancies about that day, as of the day it ſelfe (that is of the Jewiſh ſabbath) by the labours of the Fathers fore-mentioned, and particularly of Damaſcen and venerable Bede among the reſt; yet there comes in an exception ſomewhat of the nature of a ſixth finger; and that is, Saint Gregory tells us notwithſtanding how ſome in Rome were ſo ſuperſtitious in this kinde, that they would neither work upon the Saturday, no nor ſo much as waſh upon the Sunday. So little effectuall were the labours of Damaſcen and venerable Bede, that they could not prevent the ſuperſtitious fancies of ſome that lived an hundred yeares before. For Gregory by Bellarmines account dyed in the yeare of our Lord 604. and Damaſcen lived long after the yeare 731. and Bede was living in the yeare 731. as Bellarmine obſerves out of his fifth booke of Hiſtoria Anglicana. Who would deſire an adverſary ſhould betray more weakeneſſe than this Author? but wee ſee manifeſtly whither he tends, and no marvell if God ſmites him with the ſpirit of giddineſſe and confuſion. His quotation of Gregory ſeemes to bee the ſame with that which wee finde in the decrees De conſecrat. diſt. 3. cap. Pervenit. Now whereas this Praefacer relates it as of the ſame perſons, it is farre otherwiſe in Gregory, for apparantly the relation in Gregory is concerning different perſons, for thus it runnes, Pervenit ad me, &c. Relation is made unto mee, that certaine men of a perverſe ſpirit have ſowed amongst you ſome corrupt doctrine contrary to our holy faith: ſo as to forbid any worke to be done on the Sabbath day: theſe men we may well call the Preachers of Antichriſt. Then he ſets downe what ſhall be the practiſe of Antichriſt at his comming, namely to command the Sabbath day and the Lords day both to be kept free from all works. And why the Lords day? to wit, becauſe he meanes to imitate Chriſt; and therefore will conforme himſelfe to the practiſe of Chriſtians, in celebrating the Lords day; his words are theſe; Quia enim mori ſe & reſurgere ſimulat, haberi in veneratione vult diem Dominicum; that is, Becauſe he counterfeits himſelfe to die and riſe againe, therefore he will have the Lords day to be had in veneration. Where by the way obſerve two things; 1. The practiſe of Chriſtians in Gregories dayes, to keep themſelves from all worke on the Lords day. 2. That Antichriſt would imitate Chriſt, as in pretending to dye and riſe againe: ſo in commanding the Lords day to be kept holy. A ſhrewd evidence that both Gregory, and the whole Church in thoſe dayes, were of opinion that the Lords day was of Chriſts inſtitution; which Antichriſt perceiving would conforme thereto, the better to promote his owne counſailes. Now the reaſon why he would command the Jewes Sabbath to be obſerved alſo, was Quia populum Judaizare compellet, ut exteriorem ritum revocet, & ſibi Judaeorum perfidiam ſubdat; therefore coli vult Sabbatum. He will have the Iewes Sabbath kept alſo, compelling the people to Iudaize, and reſtoring the outward ceremonies of the Law, that ſo he may bring the Iewes in ſubjection unto him alſo. Then he makes mention of another relation; Aliud quoque ad me perlatum eſt; Another report was brought unto mee; and what was that? Vobis à perverſis hominibus eſſe praedicatum, ut Dominico die nullus debeat lavari: That ſome perverſe perſons preach among you, that on the Lords day none ought to be waſhed. This is clearly another point, maintained by other perſons, different from the former, which yet this Prefacer confounds into one. And marke it well, that none ought to be waſhed lavari, on the Lords day; which this Author tranſlates thus, No nor ſo much as waſh upon the Sunday. What not ſo much as waſh their hands or their face? here indeed were ſtrange ſuperſtition. I willingly profeſſe I was not a little moved at this his Tranſlation, nothing anſwerable to Gregories reſolution, which is this; If any deſire to be waſhed pro luxuria & pro voluptate, that is, out of a luxurious dispoſition and for pleaſure; we doe not permit this to be done on any day. But if the bodies neceſſity require it, we doe not forbid this on the Lords day. Now I doe not find that any man uſeth to waſh hands or face out of any luxurious diſpoſition, neither doe I know in what ſenſe the neceſſity of the body can require it. For the neceſſity of the body in this place, ſeems to me to be ſpoken in reference to the recovery of a mans health, requiring no time to be neglected. Hereupon I am verily perſwaded, that by Lavari in Gregory, is to be underſtood a mans going into the Bath; which may be done out of a luxurious diſpoſition, and meerely for pleaſure. Then againe, the neceſſity of the body may require it, and according to theſe different caſes it is by Gregory both permitted on the Lords day, to wit, in caſe of neceſſity, and denyed on any day, in caſe it be done only to ſatisfie a mans luſts. And I find a great difference in the Latine phraſe, betweene Lavare to waſh, and Lavari to be waſhed, and that out of Varro his eight booke of the Latine tongue. For the active is of uſe, when a part only is waſhed, as it is rightly ſaid, I waſh my hands and my feet. But the paſſive is in uſe only when the whole body is waſhed, as in the Bath. Quare & in Balneis non rectè dicunt lavi, ſed lavor. Wherefore in the Bathes it is not well ſaid, I have waſhed, but I am waſhed. And accordingly runnes that in Juvenal, Sat. 2. Nec pueri credunt niſi qui nondum aere lavantur. The Scholiaſt interprets this of Infants, quia pueri non dant Balneaticum; for the quadrant which was the uſuall fee to bee paid of them that made uſe of the Bathes, was not exacted of ſuch. Hence is that phraſe, Mercede lavari, to goe into the Baths paying a fee; and dum te quadrante lavatum, in Horace, to the ſame purpoſe.