The Morality of the Fourth Commandment Still in Force, Answer to prefacer · Section 7
Pref.Sect. 7.
Which being ſo, the judgement and practice of ſo many men, and of ſuch ſeverall perſwaſions in the controverted point of the Chriſtian faith, concurring unanimouſly together; the miracle is the greater, that we in England ſhould take up a contrary opinion, and thereby ſeparate our ſelves from all that are called Chriſtian; yet ſo it is, I skill not how it comes to paſſe, but ſo it is, that ſome among us have revived againe the Jewiſh Sabbath, though not the day it ſelfe, yet the name and thing. Teaching that the commandement of ſanctifying every ſeventh day, as in the Moſaicall Decalogue, is naturall, morall and perpetuall; that whereas all things elſe in the Jewiſh Church were ſo changed, that they were cleane taken away, This day (meaning the Sabbath) was ſo changed, that it ſtill remaineth; and laſtly, that the Sabbath was not any of thoſe ceremonies which were juſtly abrogated at Chriſts comming. All which poſitions are condemned for contrary to the Articles of the Church of England; as in a comment on thoſe Articles peruſed, and by the lawfull authority of the Church allowed to be publique, is moſt cleare and manifeſt; which doctrinalls, though dangerous in themſelves, and different from the judgement of the ancient Fathers, and of the greateſt Clerks of the later times, are not yet halfe ſo deſperate as that which followeth thereupon in point of practice: For theſe poſitions granted and entertained as orthodox, what can we elſe expect, but ſuch ſtrange paradoxes, as in the conſideration of the premiſſes have beene delivered from ſome pulpits in this kingdome, as viz. That to doe any ſervile worke or buſineſſe on the Lords Day, is as great a ſinne as to kill a man, or to commit adultery; that to throw a bowle, to make a feaſt, or dreſſe a wedding dinner on the Lords Day, is as great a ſinne, as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat; that to ring more bells than one on the Lords Day, is as great a ſinne, as to commit murther. The author which reports them all, was preſent when the broacher of the laſt poſition was convented for it. And I believe him in the reſt; the rather, ſince I have heard it preached in London, that the law of Moſes whereby death temporall was appointed for the Sabbath-breaker was yet in force, and that who ever did the works of his calling on the Sabbath day, was to die therefore. And I know alſo, that in a towne of mine acquaintance, the Preachers there had brought the people to that paſſe, that neither baked nor roſt meat was to be found in all the pariſh for a Sundayes dinner throughout the yeere. Theſe are the ordinary fruits of ſuch dangerous doctrines; and againſt theſe, and ſuch as theſe, our Author in this following Treatiſe doth addreſſe himſelfe, accuſing them that entertaine the formall doctrinalls every where, of no leſſe than Judaiſme, and preſſing them with that of Auſtin, that they who literally underſtand the fourth Commandement, doe not yet ſavour the Spirit: Section the third.
Exam.
Auſtin ſomewhere ſaith, that he who lookes for miracles in theſe dayes for confirmation of the truth, Magnum ipſe prodigium eſt, himſelfe may goe for a monſter; he doth not ſay; It is a miracle that men ſo ſhould doe. Men may be ſottiſh, even to admiration, and ſuch if this Prefacer proves; we will not ſay it is a miracle: mira, wonderful things may be wrought not only by the practice of Satan, but in the very courſes of men, but God is he alone that worketh miracles. He talkes of unanimous concurrence of men of ſeverall perſwaſions otherwiſe in the controverted points of Chriſtian faith, and that both in judgement and practice with him in his way; he loves to ſpeake with a full mouth, and to make a great noiſe, as the Hogs in Aelian did, when their owner ſhore them; which gave him occaſion to ſay, That there was a great deale of cry, but a little wooll. And let the indifferent judge whether the wooll be anſwerable to the noiſe this Prefacer makes. Now, the men of ſeverall perſwaſions whom hee avoucheth are Papiſts, and Proteſtants, and amongſt the Proteſtants, both Lutherans and Calviniſts. And hitherto he hath ſpoken of foure particulars; I deſire the reader would take notice of the modeſty of this author in each of them compared with the noiſe here hee makes concerning them; as if he were as much crackt in his braine, as hee who ſtanding upon the key at Athens, with a note booke in his hands, ſet downe every ſhip that entred into the road as his, when he was not owner of any one of them. So I ſhall make it appeare, that this Prefacer hath title to none of the ſides he boaſts of for the countenancing of his way in any one of the particulars mentioned. The firſt particular is about the originall inſtitution of the Sabbath; as whether God commanded it immediatly upon the creation. This author denies the inſtitution of it before the promulgation of the law upon mount Sina; And what ſtrength of ſuffrages doth he bring for this amongſt the Proteſtants, whether Lutherans or Calviniſts? Surely not one Lutherane that I know; but of others all that he avoucheth by himſelfe are but Doctor Prideaux and Gomarus, and by his aſſiſtance, Vatablus and Muſculus; on the contrary are alleged by Walaeus: 1. Luther himſelfe: 2. Zuinglius: 3. Calvin: 4. Beza: 5. Peter Martyr: 6. Bullinger: 7. Zanchius: 8. Urſinus: 9. Gualterus: 10. Aretius: 11. Bertramus: 12. Mercerus: 13. Antonius Fayus: 14. Iunius: 15. Zepperus: 16. Martinius: 17. Alſtedius. The ſame is juſtified by Rivetus, who voucheth no leſſe than thirty Writers of note to concurre in this; Now let the indifferent judge on whoſe ſide is the miracle this Prefacer ſpeakes of, in his rhetoricall amplifications, on his ſide, or on ours. Yet not one Engliſh Divine is mentioned, either by Walaeus or Rivetus amongſt this number. 2. Then as for Papiſts: Toſtatus indeed diſputes againſt this opinion of ours, but his reaſons I have anſwered; and Catarinus a Popiſh Prelate, as well as Abulenſis, is acknowledged by this Author to oppoſe Toſtatus in this; neither hath he or Doctor Prideaux undertaken to anſwer him. OnelyOnly this Prefacer, after his bold faſhion, ſaith, that Catarinus tooke up armes againſt Toſtatus with ill ſucceſſe, it hath beene manifeſt that for ought doth appeare, Catarinus hath had better ſucceſſe than Toſtatus; For Pererius takes Toſtatus his part, yet all the Rhemiſts on Apoc. 1. 10. doe manifeſt themſelves to take part with Catarinus, and Gomarus acknowledgeth as much of Marius. And Rivetus alſo allegeth Auguſtinus Steuchus, Genebrard, Iacobus Solianus, Cornelius de Lapide, Emmanuel Sa, and Ribera, all concurring againſt Toſtatus and all Papiſts, yea, many of them Jeſuites. Hereby let the reader judge of the modeſty of this Author; and on whoſe ſide the feigned miracle is, on his ſide, or on ours. For it is manifeſt hitherto, that the men he ſpeakes of, of ſeveverall perſwaſions otherwiſe, are by farre, more for us than for him. But it may be in this particular, his glory is, that the Fathers are rather for his opinion than for us. But upon what ground? Is it from any evidence of Scripture? nothing leſſe, not one of them building hereupon; and as for evidences, they bring none, ſave that the Scripture doth not particulate, that the Patriarches of old obſerved the Sabbath. Yet it was not to be held a generall rule, that Argumentum non valet ab authoritate negativè; the argument drawne from authority doth not hold negatively in matter of fact. Secondly, not onelyonly our Divines, as Hoſpinian and Walaeus, that the meaning of the Fathers is onelyonly this, that the Patriarches did not obſerve it after a Jewiſh manner, but Iacobus Salianus a Papiſt affirmes the ſame particularly of Tertullian; as Rivetus voucheth him in his anſwer to Gomarus, pag. 21. And it may be made apparant from Tertullian himſelfe, otherwiſe hee cannot be freed from contradiction, as who plainly manifeſteth his opinion in our ſide, as Rivetus citeth him; pag. 23. So that the Fathers alleged by our adverſaries, being rightly underſtood, make nothing for them; yet we want not variety of Fathers making expreſſely for us, and againſt them; and that grounding themſelves upon expreſſe Scripture, Gen. 2. 3. therefore The Lord bleſſed the ſeventh day and hallowed it, which our adverſaries have no other meanes to avoid, than by ſaying that it is ſpoken by anticipation; according whereunto the meaning of Moſes muſt be thus; becauſe the Lord reſted the ſeventh day from creation, therefore he bleſſed the ſeventh day and ſanctified it, but would you know when? to wit, 2000. and 4. or 500. yeeres after. And laſtly, the dividing of times into weekes, proved to be the moſt ancient diviſion of times in the world, received by all nations, and made a feſtivall day thereupon; as many have moſt learnedly proved it, doe juſtifie the ſanctification of the Sabbath to have had its beginning and courſe from the very creation. So that in this particular wee have on our ſide both Scripture and reaſon, and Fathers, and the opinion of men of ſeverall profeſſions, as this author preſſeth it, both Papiſts and Proteſtants, both Lutheranes and Calviniſts; and this Prefacer can lay no juſt title to any one of them in this particular. The ſecond point he hath inſiſted upon, is about the morality of one day in ſeven. For this he pretends, onelyonly Papiſts in the firſt place, and not a Father throughout, (and as Chryſoſtome to the contrary hath profeſſed, that God from the beginning hath manifeſted, that on that day in the circle of the week muſt be conſecrated unto his ſervice) much leſſe Scripture. And it is apparant that God commanded that the proportion of one day in ſeven ſhould bee allotted to his ſervice; and it was never to bee abrogated, nor ever did any man deviſe any ceremoniality therein. And to this day it hath continued in the Church of God. To Toſtatus wee have oppoſed Azorius the Jeſuite; profeſſing that it is moſt agreeable to reaſon after ſix worke dayes to conſecrate one to Gods ſervice. Adde to him Stella upon Luke, Jacobus de Valentia, & Dominicus Bannes.—As for Aquinas, that which hee accounts ceremoniall in the fourth Commandement was expreſſed by him to bee not one day in ſeven, but the particulating of the ſeaventh day: But whereas he goes no farther in illuſtrating the morality of this Commandement then in ſaying that ſome time muſt be ſet apart for Gods ſervice, I appeale to every mans conſcience, whether the very light of nature doth not ſuggeſt that not onelyonly ſome time but a convenient proportion of time ought to be conſecrated unto God; and when God hath manifeſted this to bee one day in ſeaven under the Law; doth not the very light of nature ſuggeſt, that wee ſhould ſin againſt God if wee ſhould not allow unto him as good a proportion of time under the Goſpell? And further if the Lords Day, be of Divine inſtitution amongſt us Chriſtians, is it not ſtill the Law of God even unto us, to allow unto him one day in ſeven? Now Doctor Prideaux himſelfe alleageth more Papiſts for this opinion than for the contrary, and one of them, to wit, Silveſter profeſſeth it is the common opinion, as Azorius voucheth him. And as for Proteſtants to ſide with him herein, hee alleageth none but Gomarius and Rivet; it may ſeeme by his carriage, that Vatablus …nd Muſculus alſo are for him in this, but that is untrue, they are alleaged by Gomarus on the firſt point onelyonly as touching the originall inſtitution of the Sabbath. Now Rivet is oppoſed herein by his two Collegues, Walaeus and Thyſius; and whereas he takes upon him to anſwer Walaeus his reaſons to the contrary, and repreſent his owne reaſons for his opinion herein; I have taken into conſideration both the one and the other; and I truſt have repreſented the weakneſſe of his diſcourſe throughout, though otherwiſe a very learned and worthy Divine. Now Waleus hath not onelyonly alleadged amongſt the Fathers Chryſoſtome, Clemens Alexandrinus, Euſebius, Auguſtine, Theodoret, but a multitude of Proteſtant writers, maintaining the morality of one day in ſeaven as Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, Beza, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Zanchius, Junius, Viretus, Danaeus, Fayus, Martinius, Urſinus, Alſtedius, Lornſegius, Feſtus Hommius, beſides Engliſh and Scottiſh writers, whom he might have produced more then enough: yea of Biſhops in this Kingdome; as Biſhop Babington, Biſhop Andrewes, Biſhop Lake, yea and Maſter Hooker in his Eccleſiaſticall policy. Now let the readers judge by this of the modeſty of this Prefacer in this particular alſo, and whether the miracle (as he phraſeth it) be on our ſide in diſſenting from others unreaſonably, or on his rather.
The third particular is touching the celebration of the Lords Day, as whether it bee by authority humane or divine rather: wee ſay it is of divine; hee will have it to be left arbitrary: yet was it never knowne, that any earthly Maſter did leave the proportion of ſervice, to bee performed unto him, to the pleaſure of his ſervant; neither did God leave it thus from the beginning of the World-untill Chriſt, as hath beene proved. Yet this Prefacer will have it thus left unto us in theſe latter dayes; of which the Apoſtle hath prophecied, that Men ſhould be lovers of pleaſure more then lovers of 1 Tim. 3. 4.God. For this, he boaſts of all ſorts of Papiſts, this he begins withall; which was not wont to bee the courſe of Engliſh Divines; yet hee belies Doctor Prideaux in this; who alleageth more Papiſts ſtanding for the divine right hereof, then for the contrary; and one of them (as formerly I ſayd) profeſſeth that it is the common opinion. And Azorius the Jeſuite profeſſeth that it is moſt agreeable to reaſon, that as after ſix dayes worke one ſhould bee conſecrate unto the Lord, ſo the Lords Day ſhould be it. That many of our Proteſtants Divines call the obſervation of the Lords Day, Eccleſiae conſuetudinem, and that it was left free unto the Church to chooſe another, after the Iewes Sabbath was abrogated, I have ſhewed how little all this makes for him, anſwering to every paſſage punctually, as they are alleaged by him. For it is confeſſed that the Church they ſpake of was the apoſtolicall Church; and the cauſe moving them to chooſe this day was the Reſurrection of Chriſt, and whereas ſome two of them call this Cauſam probabilem; I have diſcuſſed that, and prooved it to be more then probable. I have ſhewed withall how the ancient fathers have acknowledged it, ſome expreſſely divine, ſome equivalently, and expreſſely apoſtolicall conſtitution or ſanction, as Athanaſius (whoſe reaſon drawne from the congruity betweene the firſt creation and the ſecond Creation by vertue of Chriſts death is remarkeable, and followed by many both Engliſh and outlandiſh Divines.
Auſtin, Sedulius, Gregory, and others; And with them the concurrence of our Proteſtant divines, Bucer, Calvin, Beza, Junius, Piſcator, Wolſius, Fulke againſt the Remiſh, Doctor Andrewes biſhop of Wincheſter, Doctor Lake biſhop of Bath and Wells, in expeſſing it to be obſervationis not liberae, but neceſſariae, Maſter Fox, Walaeus, Fayus, Hyperius, Perkins, Brownde. By this let the reader judge of the modeſty of the Praefacer in this particular alſo; and whether the miracle bee on our ſide in diſſenting from others in an unreaſonable manner, and not on his rather.
The fourth and laſt particular is the mutability of the day which this Prefacer ſtands for, we on the contrary profeſſing it to be unchangeable. Now the reſolution of this followeth upon the reſolution of the former; for this, onelyonly names are produced both by the Prefacer and Doctor Prideaux. Yet I have endeavored to finde out Chemnitius his diſcourſe thereon, and enter upon a diſcuſſion thereof. Bucer I am ſure, alleaged by Rivet, is nothing for this purpoſe. Doctor Fulke directly oppoſeth it, Doctor Andrewes, Doctor Lake above mentioned, Doctor Brownde, Doctor Willet, Maſter Perkins. The Chriſtian Church anciently being demanded whether they had kept the Lords Day, were wont to anſwer; I am a Chriſtian, I cannot intermit it. Beſides I have ſhewed in reaſon the unreaſonableneſſe both of changing theday, and the intollerable ſcandall that would follow upon it, and the unreaſonableneſſe of not changing it, if it be not of divine inſtitution; conſidering how prone wee are through the continuall obſervation thereof to conceave that to be a neceſſary duty, and ſo to be plunged into ſuperſtition, ere we are aware, if it prove to be no neceſſary duty.
In the next place hee tells us how that ſome amongſt us have revived againe the Iewiſh Sabbath, though not the day it ſelfe, yet the name and thing. Teaching that the Commandement of ſanctifying every ſeaventh day as in the Moſaicall Decalogue is naturall, morall and perpetuall; that whereas all things elſe in the Ieuiſh were ſo changed, that they were cleane to be done away, this day (meaning the Sabbath) was ſo changed; that it ſtill remaineth: and laſtly, that the Sabbath was not any of thoſe ceremonies which were only abrogated at Chriſts comming. All which poſitions are condemned for contrary to the Articles of the Church of England: as in a comment on thoſe Articles peruſed and by the lawfull authority of the Church allowed to be publique, is moſt cleare and manifeſt. Here wee have a diſtinction of a Jewiſh Sabbath brought in, yet not the day; a diſtinction contrived with ſuch wiſedome and perſpicacity as it ſeemes to exceed all humane diſcretion. For I verily thinke that from the beginning of the Primitive Church there was never heard of a Jewiſh Sabbath to be kept, any other then upon their day. The materialls are, firſt that the name Sabbath is retained; and well may it be in my judgement (though ſome entertaine ſublime reaches to the contrary) if our Saviour have any authority with us; who adviſeth his Diſciples to pray that their flight be not in the Winter, nor on the Sabbath day; which is ſpoken by him in reference to the time about the deſtruction of Ieruſalem, at what time the Lords Day was come in place of the Jewes Sabbath among the Chriſtian congregations, and that by apoſtolicall ſubſtitution. And in the very booke of our Homilies it is expreſſely ſayd that the Sunday is now our Sabbath. And his Majeſties briefes for collection ſo ſtile it. And in the conference at Hampton Court it was ſo ſtiled by Doctor Raynolds, and the motion he made thereabout generally yeelded unto; ſo that the State hitherto ſeemes to be cenſured by this bold Prefacer. The next aſperſion is, that the thing alſo is revived. But what thing? the Jewes had peculiar ſacrifice both morning and evening which doubled the dayly ſacrifice; this ſurely is not revived. There were beſides two things in the Jewiſh Sabbath; the one was a reſt, the other was the ſanctifying of that reſt; As for the reſt, if that were not, it were no Sabbath. Yet our Saviour calls it a Sabbath, our Church calls it a Sabbath, our State calls it a Sabbath. And Auſtin calls us to ſuch a reſt on the Lords Day, as that therein we muſt tantum Deo vacare, tantum cultibus divinis vacare, onelyonly reſt to God, onelyonly reſt for divine worſhip. And Calvin, who is taken to be no friend of ours in this caſe, profeſſeth, that we muſt reſt from all our works, ſo farre forth as they are avocamenta à ſacris ſtudiis, & meditationibus, avocations from holy ſtudies and meditations, but not for any myſterious ſignification ſake, and that herein conſiſts the difference betweene the Jewiſh reſt and our Chriſtians reſt; and I am exactly of his opinion for this: As for the ſanctification of this reſt, I truſt wee are as much bound to the performance hereof, and that in as great meaſure, and with as great devotion under the Goſpel, as ever the Jewes were under the Law; And at the hearing of this Commandement as well as of any other, our Church hath taught us to pray, Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keepe this Law. And I find it wondrous ſtrange, to heare, that ſome ſhould not ſpare to profeſſe, that this was ſhuffled in they know not how; At length wee come to the particular charges: the firſt is, that ſome ſhould teach, that The Commandement of ſanctifying every ſeventh day, as in the Moſaicall Decalogue, is naturall, morall, and perpetuall: and Maſter Rogers is quoted for this on the Article, Art. 7. hee quotes Maſter Doctor Bownde, pag. 7. Now truely, it cannot be denied, but that when the fourth Commandement is read unto us in our Congregations, wee are taught to pray unto God, to ſhew ſuch mercy unto us, as to incline our hearts to the keeping of this law. And both maſter Rogers and this Prefacer are to be preſumed to have ſubſcribed as well as others, and by their ſubſcription acknowledged that this is nothing contrary to Gods Word; that we are as much bound to the obſervation of this Commandement as of any other, and conſequently to keepe the Sabbath, and doe no manner of worke thereon that may hinder the ſanctifying thereof. Now Maſter Doctor Bownds words, (after hee had cited Chryſoſtome ſpeaking thus, I am hic ab initio &c. Here now even from the beginning God hath inſinuated this Doctrine unto us, teaching us in circulo hebdomadis diem unum, that in the compaſſe of a weeke, one whole day is to be put apart for a ſpirituall reſt unto God, are theſe: Unto all which may be added, that for profe othat this Commandement is naturall, morall, and perpetuall; that I ſay may be added which was practiſed among the Gentiles, and all the Heathen. And now Do. Bowndes purpoſe unto the p. 30. is to be proved only this, that a Sabbath was from the beginning▪ and ſtill is to be kept, and that in the proportion of one day in ſeven; and after that proceeds to prove what day the Sabbath ſhould be kept; his words are theſe p. 30. Now, as we have hitherto ſeene that there ought to be a Sabbath day, ſo it remaineth that we ſhould heare upon what day this Sabbath ſhould be kept; and here he ſheweth that this is not left unto the Church, but preſcribed by God himſelfe, as who preſcribed one day unto the Jewes, and another day unto us Chriſtians; but ſtill one in ſeven: The ſame was the opinion both of Bellarmine and Maſter Hooker in his Eccleſiaſticall policy. Whereas both Maſter Rogers and the Prefacer ſo carry the matter, as if by Doctor Bowndes opinion we Chriſtians were bound to keepe our Sabbath on the ſame day whereon the Jewes were bound to keepe theirs, which is moſt untrue, though the fourth Commandement may be indifferently accommodated to our Chriſtian Sabbath as it was unto the Jewiſh Sabbath, ſave onelyonly as touching the reaſon given, which hath expreſſe reference to the creation; but our Chriſtian Sabbath ſtands in reference to the worke of Redemption. Each is the reſt on a ſeventh day after ſix dayes of labour, and as they were bound to ſanctifie their ſeventh, ſo are we bound to ſanctifie ours; and as that was reſted on, and ſanctified in remembrance of Gods reſt from the worke of Creation, ſo is ours reſted on in remembrance of Chriſts reſt from the worke of Redemption, ſo that our day of reſt is but tranſlated from the day of the Lord our Creators reſt, to the day of the Lord our Redeemers reſt. And on this ground might the Church juſtly teach us to pray at the hearing of this fourth Commandement; Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keepe this law. But like enough, both Maſter Rogers and this Prefacer might be of Brentius his opinion; that it is left indifferent to the Church at this day, to content themſelves with obſerving of one day in foureteene, if it pleaſeth them. But this was not the opinion of Pope Alexand. the third, who profeſſeth, that Tam veteris quàm novi Teſtamenti pagina ſeptimam diem ad humanam quietē ſpecialitèr deputavit. Both the old and new Teſtament hath appointed the ſeventh day for the reſt of man, which Suarez thus interpreteth, That is, each Teſtament hath approved the cuſtome of aſſigning every ſeventh day of the weeke for reſt, which is formally to appoint a ſeventh day, though the ſame day materially be not alwayes appointed; and thus it is true, that that ſeventh day in the old Law was the Sabbath day; but in the new, it is the Lords Day: now when we ſay the obſervation of one day in ſeven is naturall, our meaning is not, neither was it D. Bowndes meaning, that this proportion of time is knowne by the light of nature, to be that which of duty ſhould be conſecrated unto God: herein rather it becomes us to wait upon God, and he having defined it; now we ſay nothing can be deviſed by man more agreeable to reaſon than this; Azorius the Jeſuit, profeſſing it to be moſt agreeable to reaſon; And Doctor Field, as Maſter Broade voucheth him, ſpared not to ſay, that to him who knowes the ſtory of the creation, it doth appeare in reaſon, that one day in ſeven is to be conſecrated unto God; onelyonly let us not looke for reaſon demonſtrative in matter of morality: Ariſtotle long agoe hath profeſſed, that not demonſtration, but perſwaſion alone hath place in Ethicks; yet we may juſtly call that naturall, which from the originall was common to all nations; and that ſuch was the obſervation of the ſeventh day, the learned have ſufficiently proved. Secondly, if it be not morall, what ſhall it be? Is it judiciall, or ceremoniall? Never any man hitherto deviſed any ceremoniality in the proportion of one day in ſeven; well it may be poſitive; yet ſo, as to this day, from the beginning of the world, this proportion was never altered; and if I ſhould live till the day be altered by any ſober Chriſtian Congregation, I thinke I ſhould live till the comming of Chriſt; which the Chriſtians in Auſtins time conceived that it would be on the Lords day. I come to the ſecond charge which is this, whereas all things elſe in the Iewiſh Church were ſo changed, that they were cleane taken away; this day (meaning the Sabbath) was ſo changed, that it ſtill remaineth; and for this Maſter Rogers quotes Doct. Bownde, p. 20. onelyonly Maſter Rogers ſaith, not that all things were changed, as the Prefacer doth, but onelyonly that all Iewiſh things were changed, now judge whether Maſter Rogers might not have oppoſed Doctor Andrews as well as Doctor Bownde. For in his Catechet. doctrine, pag. 209. having propoſed this queſtion. But is not the Sabbath a ceremony, and ſo abrogated by Chriſt? He anſwers it in this manner: Doe as Chriſt did in the cauſe of divorce, looke whether it were ſo from the beginning; now the beginning of the Sabbath was in Paradiſe before there was any ſinne, and ſo before there needed any Saviour; and ſo before there was any ceremony or figure of a Saviour. And if they ſay it prefigured the reſt that we ſhall have from our ſinnes in Chriſt, we grant it, and therefore the day is not changed, but yet no ceremony proved. Hee proceeds to prove that it was no ceremony: firſt from the Law; ſecondly from the Goſpel, Eph. 2. 4. thus: All ceremonies were ended in Chriſt, but ſo was not the Sabbath; For, Matth. 24. 20. Chriſt bids them pray, that their viſitation be not on the Sabbath day: ſo that there muſt needs be a Sabbath after Chriſts death. Now, what doth Doctor Bownde affirme forty yeeres agoe, which Doctor Andrewes did not in his patterne of Catecheticall doctrine? I come to the third and laſt: That the Sabbath was not any of thoſe ceremonies which were juſtly abrogated at Chriſts comming. This very point Doctor Andrewes maintaines by divers arguments, as well as D. Bownde, which yet is rightly to be underſtood, to wit, not of the obſervation of the ſeventh day from the creation; but of the obſervation of one day in ſeven. So that in M. Rogers his Brentian judgement in this particular, Doctor Andrewes, who afterwards became Biſhop of Wincheſter, might be accounted a Sabbatarian as well as D. Bownde. All theſe poſitions the Prefacer ſaith, are condemned for contrary to the Articles of the Church of England; but by whom condemned … by none but by M. Rogers; and by the ſame reaſon he might ſay that the doctrine of Doctor Andrewes was condemned alſo for contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England, to wit, by M. Rogers. And conſider his abſurd inference from the ſeventh Article of the Church of England; The Article ſaith that Chriſtians are not bound at all to the obſervation of Iudaicall ceremonies; Hence he inferres, that they whom he calls, Our home Sabbatarians are adverſaries to this truth in part, namely, in as much as they deny the Sabbath to be a ceremony: But doth our Church affirme the Sabbath to be a ceremony? Nothing leſſe; this M. Rogers, of his owne head, layes downe for a principle, namely, that the Sabbath was a ceremony, to obtrude upon us, as if himſelfe had as much authority as a whole Convocation. And D. Andrewes takes upon him to diſprove this very point (which Rogers ſuppoſeth as a principle) and that by various arguments: Belike D. Andrewes deſerved not to be numbred amongſt the greateſt Clerks of theſe later times, nor D. Lake neither; nor Biſhop Babington; And as for the judgement of the ancient Fathers, it appeares what skil the Prefacer hath in them, and what reſpect he beares unto them, by the learning he hath bewrayed in this preface. Had he found in them, how much the forbidding of dancing in their dayes, did hinder the growth of Chriſtian Religion, we ſhould have heard of it undoubtedly, as well as how it hath hindred the growth of the reformed Religion in France out of Heylins Geography: yet their doctrinalls (which I have ſhewed to be the doctrinalls of Doctor Andrewes as well as of Doctor Bownde, yea, and could ſhew it to be the doctrine of divers other late Biſhops in this Church) though dangerous in themſelves, not half ſo deſperate as that which followeth thereupon in practice. Divers particulars whereof he reciteth out of the ſame Maſter Rogers his preface, to his comment upon the Articles of the Church of England. And indeed, this Maſter Rogers glorieth there, Pyrgopolynices-like, that he hath beene the man and the meanes that theſe Sabbatarian errours and impieties were brought into light and knowledge of the State; ſo he ſpeakes; and that this is a comfort to his ſoule, and would be to his dying day. And in very deed, the particulars mentioned by him, are very foule; for hee ſaith, It was preached in a market towne in Oxfordſhire, that to doe any ſervile worke or buſineſſe on the Lords Day, is as great a ſinne as to kill a man, or commit adultery. Secondly, It was preached in Summerſetſhire, that to throw a bowle on the Sabbath day, is as great a ſinne as to kill a man; that it was preached in Norfolke, that to make a feaſt or wedding-dinner on the Lords Day, is as great a ſinne as for a father to take a knife and cut his childs throat. I wonder the Prefacer doth not call them miracles; Sommerſetſhire is a pretty large County; and there be many market townes in Oxfordſhire; and I doe not doubt but there are many pariſhes in Norfolke; But no particular is here ſet downe, either of perſon or of place; and wee have no better authority for the proofe of theſe imputations than this mans word, which yet undoubtedly was not preſent at theſe Sermons: for then he would have beene very carefull to expreſſe that, as in the next ſtory hee doth the like. So that in the iſſue, the ſtrength of all comes but to this, that he hath heard it thus reported. Now, I have heard it preached, and that at Saint Maries in Oxford, that a man in Bunbury, or thereabouts, having broken a bone, his ſonne refuſed to goe for a Boneſetter, becauſe it was the Lords Day, and this Sermon, afterwards comming into print, the party finding himſelfe agrieved by this ſcandalous report caſt forth of him, repaired to the quarter Seſſions holden at Oxford, and complained to the Juſtices of the wrong that was done unto him; the Preacher of that Sermon being by, and the whole matter being opened, and the contrary juſtified; the preacher profeſſed, that he delivered no more than he had heard, but promiſed the next time that he printed that Sermon, hee would leave that ſtory out. Doctor Hoskins of our houſe was preſent at the hearing of this buſineſſe, and brought us word of it. But whether that Sermon ever came to be printed a ſecond time, I know not. In like ſort, I have heard it reported of Maſter Bolton, that when one fell into the River on the Sabbath day, he would not ſuffer thoſe that were with him, being neere to runne to helpe him out: I profeſſed at the hearing of it, I knew Maſter Bolton ſo well, that it ſeemed uncredible to me, but the reporter profeſſed to deliver it upon knowledge. But if it were ſo, many there be that can beare witneſſe thereunto in the place where he lived. Lately, it hath beene brought unto mee, that one hath beene heard to lay to my charge behind my backe, that I ſhould ſay, David ſinned more in dancing about the Arke, than either in deflouring Bathſhebath, or killing Uriah; though it is ſuch a compariſon that never entered into my thoughts, how much leſſe to paſſe ſo prodigious a judgement upon the compariſon? In the laſt place, he ſaith, It was preached in Suffolke, (and that he could name the man, and was preſent when he was convented before his ordinary for preaching the ſame) that to ring more bels than one upon the Lords day to call the people unto Church, is as great a ſinne, as to commit murther; this is more particular than the reſt; and had hee added one thing more, the evidence had been compleat, namely, that as he ſaith, he was convented for it before his Ordinary, ſo he was found convicted of it; which if it were ſo, I wonder he ſhould conceale it; if it were not ſo, of what credit is this his relation? He addes, that many things to this effect he had read before in the Sabbath doctrine, printed at London for I. Porter and Tho. Man, what this booke was I could not deviſe, but lately have gotten into my hands D. Bowndes booke of the Sabbath. I finde by comparing it well, that this is the booke he girds at. Now I finde nothing in him to this effect, though I have gone over moſt of the firſt booke, and in the Index doe not finde any thing that can give me probability in the ſecond booke, tending to any ſuch effect: and I wonder he ſpared to quote the place where ſuch doctrines are to be found, nothing being more convenient to juſtifie his criminations (than to quote for it ſomething that is to be ſeene in print) and thereby to cleare himſelfe from the ſuſpicion of a malignant. But this Prefacer very judiciouſly believes him throughout, becauſe the Relator was preſent when the broacher of the laſt poſition was convented for it, yet doth he not ſay he was convicted of it. And upon what ground he proceeds ſo judiciouſly in believing it is remarkeable, to wit, becauſe himſelfe hath heard it preached in London, that the Law of Moſes, whereby death temporall was appointed for the Sabbath-breaker, was yet in force; and that whoever did the workes of his ordinary calling on the Sabbath day, was to die therefore. Now, I profeſſe he ſeemes to me a great deale more politique herein than at the firſt I was ware of: For, had hee not believed Maſter Rogers his report this way, others might have taken as great liberty to believe but their part concerning this. Therefore it ſtood him upon, firſt, to manifeſt his ingenuous facility in believing another, that this might be a ſhooinghorne to draw on others by way of the like ingenuous facility to believe him alſo; yet ſuch things may be; for as long as the world laſts, we ſhall be exerciſed with wilde wits, and ſo no doubt we ſhall with tale-tellers too, and ſo much the more in all likelihood the neerer the world approacheth to an end: It hath beene ſo amongſt Philoſophers in Cicero his obſervation; it hath been ſo amongſt Schoole-divines; it is ſo amongſt Socinians and Arminians. But let the ſaddle be ſet upon the right horſe, and let every man beare his owne burthen. Now I have made it manifeſt, that the doctrines which he picks out of D. Bownde, and ſtiles Sabbatarian doctrines, are the doctrines of D. Andrewes, afterwards Biſhop of Wincheſter; I could ſhew them to be the doctrines of many other worthy Prelates that have been of this kingdome; and it may be that if the votes of the Biſhops of this kingdom were taken, the major part would concurre with us, as touching the doctrine of the Sabbath, rather than againſt us. The ſame Maſter Rogers ſacrificeth to his net, and burnes incenſe to his yarne, and magnifies the good ſucceſſe of his labours. For this good, he ſaith, hath enſued thereupon; namely, that the ſaid bookes of the Sabbath, comprehending the above mentioned, and many more ſuch fearefull and hereticall aſſertions, have beene both called in, and forbidden to be printed any more and to be made common, and that Archbiſhop Whitgift, by his letters and officers at Synods and Viſitations, Anno 99. did the one, and Sir John Popham, Lord chiefe Iuſtice of E…gland at Bury Saint Edmunds in Suffolke, Anno 1600. did the other. For all this we have nothing but his word; and as for the bookes he talkes of, hee had formerly mentioned, but one printed 95. at London for I. Porter and Tho. Man, of the doctrine of the Sabbath, which appeares to be D. Bowndes; Now, was this ever called in? Sure I am, D. Willet upon Geneſis came forth the yeere after this M. Rogers his Analyſis of the Articles of the Church of England.
This hee dedicated to King Iames, and over and above hath a ſecond dedication in Latine to Archbiſhop Bancroft and to the biſhop of London then being; wherein hee ſignifieth that the one of them was author, the other hortator unto him to perfect this worke of his; and therefore undoubtedly came forth with as good approbation as the Analyſis of Maſter Rogers upon the ſecond Chapter of Gen. he obſerves that As the Sabbath kept then upon the ſeventh day in remembrance of the Creation was of the Lords inſtitution, ſo the Lords Day, is now obſerved by the ſame authority, in remembrance of the Reſurrection of Chriſt, and redemption by the ſame. And this hee delivers in oppoſition to the Rhemiſts; who count the obſervation of the Lords Day but a tradition of the Church, and Eccleſiaſticall inſtitution, and having ſpent a whole page in folio upon this argument in the next page thus hee writeth—I doe wonder then this doctrine of the Sabbath, and day of reſt now called the Lords Day having ſuch evident demonſtration out of the Scriptures and being confirmed by the conſtant and continuall practiſe of the Church, in all ages: that any profeſſing the Gospell, ſpecially being exerciſed in the Study of the Scriptures, ſhould gainſay, and impugne theſe poſitions following as erroneous. 1. That the Commandement of ſanctifying the Sabbath is naturall morall and perpetuall: For if it be not ſo then all the Commandements contained in the Decalogue are not morall, ſo ſhould we have. 9. and not. 10. Commandements; and then Chriſt ſhould come to deſtroy the Law, and not to fulfill is contrary to our Saviours own words, Math. 5. 17. 2. That all other things in the Law were ſo changed that they were cleane taken away, as the prieſthood, Sacrifices and Sacraments: this day (namely the Sabbath) was ſo changed, that it yet remaines, For it is evident by the Apoſtles practiſe, Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. Apo. 1. 10. that the day of reſt (called the Sabbath) was changed from the ſeventh day to the firſt day of the weeke: and ſo was obſerved and kept holy under the name of the Lords Day. 3. That it is not lawfull to uſe the ſeventh day to any other end, but to the holy and ſanctified end, for which in the beginning it was created. 4. As the Sabbath came in with the firſt man, ſo muſt it not goe out, but with the laſt. 5. That we are reſtrained upon the Sabbath from works as the Jewes were, though not in ſuch ſtrict particular manner as they were, yet in generall we are forbidden all kind of worke upon the Lords Day, as they were, which may hinder the ſervice of God.
Now the Author that hee intimates as oppoſing theſe poſitions hee deſcribes by the title, of his booke in the margent, which is this. The Catholique doctrine of the Church of England printed at Cambridge p. 37. And the author of his booke I have heard to be Maſter Rogers, and it ſeemes likely enough, eſpecially by the 2. firſt poſitions. Doctor Willet concludes in this manner, after hee had made uſe of divers allegations for the confirmation of his doctrine in oppoſition to the fore-mentioned Author, but theſe allegations are here ſuperfluous ſeeing there is a learned Treatiſe of the Sabbath already publiſhed of this argument which containeth a moſt ſound doctrine of the Sabbath, as it is ſaid in the former poſitions, which ſhall be able to abide the triall of the Word of God, and ſtand warranted thereby, when other humane fantaſies ſhall vaniſh: howſoever ſome in their heate and intemperance are not afraid to call them Sabbatariorum errores, yea hereticall aſſertions, a new Iubilee; S. Sabbath, more then either Iewiſh or popiſh inſtitution; God grant it be not layd to their charge that ſo ſpeake or write, and God give them a better minde. About two yeares before this, were ſet forth Maſter Perkins his caſes of conſcience: wherein hee manifeſteth his concurrence with Doctor Bownde in the doctrine of the Sabbath. Neither doth Doctor Andrewes, in any materiall thing differ from Doctor Bownde, Maſter Perkins, Doctor Willet. In the next relation of his which is of a familiar nature, undoubtedly the Prefacer deſerves to be believed. That in a Towne of his acquaintance the preachers there had brought the people to that paſſe, that neither baked nor roſte meate was to be found in all the Pariſh for a ſunday dinner throughout the yeare, and hee concludes it with ſuch an Epiphonema. Theſe are the fruites of ſuch dangerous doctrines; as if the fortunes of the Church or ſtate were hazarded for want of bak't meate or roſt meate on the ſundayes.
And to confeſſe a truth, though I never was, nor never am like to be ſo preciſe; yet conſidering my meane condition, I have divers times thought thus with my ſelfe: why ſhould my proviſion hinder any of my ſervants from Sermons on the Sabbath day; ſo little did I feare any dangerous conſequence of this practiſe: but ſince I am better informed by the ſuggeſtions of this judicious Prefacer; I will take heede how I cheriſh ſuch thoughts in my breſt henceforth; and if hee come at any time to take paines amongſt us, ſeeing I finde hee reſpects bak't meate and roſt meate ſo well; it ſhall goe hard but wee will have a tith Pig for his entertainement. And ſo much the rather, that I may cleare my ſelfe from Judaiſme, for Iack of Newbery my Countreyman being a great Clothier in his dayes; and then ſtrangers came from farre to buy Cloath at his Houſe, and amongſt the reſt a company of Jewes were ſometime entertained by him being a very hoſpitallous man and an excellent houſe-keeper, his houſe being accounted the beſt Inne in the Towne, to make himſelfe merry, cauſed the table to bee furniſhed with all variety of Hogges fleſh; which they perceaving tooke it for a flout; but after they had grumbled a while upon it, hee made ſhew as if but then hee had remembred himſelfe of his errour, and not till then conſidered that they were Jewes; and forthwith hee commanded all the diſhes to be remooved, and other diſhes already prepared to be ſet on the board, wherewith his table was as well furniſhed as it was with gueſts. But to returne, it is an eaſy matter now a dayes to accuſe of any thing, as Doctor Prideaux hee ſaith, accuſeth us of Judaiſme, but ſi accuſare ſufficiat, quis innocens erit; when hee or Doctor Prideaux ſhall prove their accuſations, then let us be condemned; and if wee be not condemned, till then wee care not. Yet it is untrue which hee pins upon Doctor Prideaux his ſleeve; as if hee ſhould alleage Auſtin ſaying, that they who literally underſtand the fourth Commandement, doe not yet ſavour of the ſpirit, neither S. Auſtin ſpeakes this of the fourth Commandement, nor is hee ſo alleaged by Doctor Prideaux, but of the ſeventh day; Quiſquis diem illum obſervat ficut litera ſonat, carnaliter ſapit. As much as to ſay, whoſoever keeps that day which the Jew keepes, ſavoureth carnally. Neither did I know any of my brethren to ſtand for the ſanctifying of the ſeventh day in correſpondency to the ſeventh day, from the Creation but onelyonly of one day in ſeaven; which day muſt alſo be preſcribed by God as the ſeventh day of the weeke was to the Jewes, which is the next thing imputed unto us, but the Lords Day is the firſt day of the weeke to us Chriſtians.