The Morality of the Fourth Commandment Still in Force, Title page – Table of contents
OF THE MORALITY OF THE Fourth Commandement, AS STILL IN FORCE TO BINDE CHRISTIANS Delivered by way of Anſwer to the Tranſlator of Doctor Prideaux his Lecture, concerning the Doctrine of the Sabbath. Divided into two parts
1. An anſwer to the Prefacer,
2. A conſideration of D. Prideaux, his Lecture.
Written by William Twiſſe D. D. and Paſtor of Newbury.
Exod. 20. 8.
Remember the Sabbath Day to keepe it holy.
Mat. 5. 17.
Thinke not that I am come to deſtroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to deſtroy, but to fulfill.
verse 18 For verily I ſay unto you, Till Heaven, and Earth paſſe, one jot, or one tittle ſhall in no wiſe paſſe from the Law, till all be fulfilled.
verse 19 Whoſoever therefore ſhall breake one of theſe leaſt Commandements, and ſhall teach men ſo, he ſhall be called the leaſt in the kingdome of Heaven.
LONDON, Printed by E. G. for Iohn Rothwell and are to be ſold at his ſhop, at the ſigne of the Sunne in Pauls-Church-yard, 1641.
The Contents of the chiefe matters handled herein.
IN the anſwer to the Prefacer.
Section. 1. 1. The ancients are alleadged in vaine to oppoſe the Inſtitution of the Sabbath, as from the beginning.
Section 2. 2. The untruth of the Praefacers legends concerning Peter Bruis, Fulco, and Euſtathius and others, diſcovered.
Section 3.
3. Calvin abuſed by the Prefacer, and miſconſtrued.
2. What credite Barclay deſerves, relating a conſultation of Calvin, about transferring the Sabbath to the Thurſday.
3. Of the force of Apoſtolicall example.
Section 4.
4. The vanity of the Prefacers pretence, in ſaying Catarinus oppoſed Toſtatus with ill ſucceſſe, while he maintained the Inſtitution of the Sabbath from the Creation. It is made apparant, that his ſucceſſe was far beyond that of Toſtatus.
2. Whether Adam fell the firſt day wherein he was created.
1. Pererius his arguments for the negative. Sect. 4.
2. Doctor Willet his arguments for the affirmative. Sect. 4.
3. Pererius his reaſons againſt the inſtitution of the Sabbath from the Creation, anſwered.
4. Two Digreſſions in anſwer to Rivetus in two particular.
1. By way of reply upon his anſwer to Walaeus his arguments, juſtifying the moraltty of one day in ſeven.
2. To his arguments oppoſing the morality of one day in ſeven to be conſecrated to the Lord.
Section 5.
5. A conſideration of Walaeus his diſcourſe in anſwer to thoſe, who conceave the inſtitution of the Lords Day, Pa. 78.to have beene ordered by Chriſt himſelfe.
2. An examination of that phraſe of ſome of our Pa. 70.Davines, affirming the ancients to have changed the Iewes Sabbath unto the Lords Day for a probable cauſe: wherein it is ſhewed that the cauſe hereof was more then probable.
Section 6.
6. An examination of Chemnitius his diſcourſe, concerning the authority of the Lords Day.
2. A reply upon Doctor Rivets anſwer to Maſter Perkins his arguments ſtanding for the Divine authority of the Lords Day.
3. That the Lords Day, and the Lords Supper are ſo called in the ſame notion. 1. affirmed by Doctor Andrewes, Perkins, Thyſius. 2. juſtified by good reaſon.
Section. 7. 7. A briefe of the arguments on each ſide for every point.
1. As touching the originall inſtitution of the Sabbath.
2. As touching the Morality of one day in ſeven to be conſecrated to Gods ſolemne worſhip.
3. As touching the authority of the celebration of the Lords Day, and the immutability thereof.
8. The Prefacer, and M. Rogers oppoſing D. Bownde are ſhewed in every particular to oppoſe D. Andrewes.
IN the conſideration of D. Prideaux his Lecture.
1. How far light of nature doth direct, as touching the time which ought to be ſet apart for Gods ſolemne ſervice. Section 2.
2. Reaſons why the Creator ſhould preſcribe the proportion of time to be conſecrated unto himſelfe. Section 2. & 6.
3. How far light of nature doth direct as touching the particularity of the day under the proportion of one in ſeven, Sect. the ſame. Section 2. & 6.
4. That Enoſh with his holy company apparting themſelves from others, had a ſet time for divine worſhip. Section 3.
5. That it becomes not us to affect liberty to deſigne the day for the Sabbath. Section 6.
6 The danger of leaving it to man to make choyſe of the day. Section. 6.
7. That the clebration of the Lords Day is of divine inſtitution, and how far juſtified by the old Teſtament, and particularly by the fourth Commandement. Section 7.
8.
That it is nothing ſtrange, the Lords Day ſhould be called by the name of the Sabbath.Section 8.
2. Senſuall pleaſures are cleanly caried under the title of recreation. Section 8.