The Lords Day, Book 1 · Chapter 13
CHAP. XIII.
The Lords Day not to be profaned by ſurfeiting: Servants not to be called off from ſanctifying the Lords day: we ought not faſt on the Lords Day: whether Ambroſe was wont to banquet on that day?
EVen as the ſolemn obſervation of this day is not to be profaned by labour tending to our profit: ſo neither is it for us to give our ſelves to the pleaſures or delights of the world on it. We do not (ſaith Primaſius in Gal. 4.) celebrate feſtival dayes in luxury and banquettings: and that juſtly: aCyril lib. 8. in Joh. c. 5.for if a work be for bidden on a feaſt day, that by the body may be exerciſed for neceſſity of life, that we may more entirely attend on Divine matters: are not thoſe things by better right prohibited, which cannot be done without ſin, and grievous offending of God? It's for Chriſtians therefore neither by ſur…eiting, nor ſports, to defile the religious obſervation of this day. In celebrating feſtivals, divers of the Fathers do to their power reprove rioting and drunkenneſs.
Greg. Naz. aOrat. 48, in Iulian. 2.when he deſcribes the manner how Chriſtian feſtivals are to be celebrated, admoniſheth, that we rejoyce not with the varniſh of the body, nor change of garments, and their gorgeouſneſs, not in rioting and drunkenneſs, whoſe fruit, you have learned, chambering and wantonneſs are: nor let us crown our ſtreets with flowers, nor our tables with the deformity of oyntments: neither let us adorn our porches, nor let our houſes ſhine with a viſible light, nor ſound with a concord and ſhouting of Minstrels: for this is the manner of Heathens celebrating their feſtivals, &c. when he judgeth all kind of luxury is to be removed from Chriſtians in their feſtivals, not only becauſe the body being ſtuffed with meat, and overcharged with wine, eaſily falleth into wantonneſs; but becauſe amongſt the Heathens (with whom the Church in celebrating feſtivals ought to have nothing common) this was an uſual thing.
Feſtivals are not to be celebrated in drinking off cups of wine, but in renewing the ſpirit of the mind, and purging the heart: for he that facrificeth to the belly and Bacchus, doth more ſtir up to anger the Lord of the celebrity. Scholion 5. in Johannis Chinac… gradum decimum quartum de Gula.
It grieved Cyril, that ſo many amongſtUbi ſupra. the Chriſtians did on feſtival dayes, give up themſelves either to honeſt ſports, ſurfeiting, dances, or other vanities of the world: and he affirms, that theſe rites tend to no other end than the deriſion of Gods name, and ſlighting of the day: and they that follow theſe things, do grievouſly ſin, the rather, that they go about theſe things at a more holy time: for ſurely, they that give the reins to the belly and pleaſures, cannot celebrate a feſtival day.
St. Chryſoſtom by two arguments of greatHom. de Eleemoſ. 2. l. 5. p. 819. weight and authority, doth perſwade his hearers, ſpiritually to obſerve the Lords day. In the firſt place, from the various good things which we do enjoy on that day: and ſecondly, from our happy freedome from evils: and at length deſcends to remove thoſe means, whereby that ſpiritual honour is wont to be hindred, not by banquetting, not by pouring out wine, nor attending on drunkenneſs: in his judgment ſuch wicked deeds as theſe do no little detract from the honour of the Lords day. Yet manyServants not to be called off from ſanctifying the Lords day. in this our age, (eſpecially the richer ſort) for theſe cauſes cannot avoid a juſt reprehenſion: who above meaſure on the Lords day filling themſelves with ſurfeit, keep their ſervants at home to prepare meat finer than ordinary to ſatisfie their inſatiable luxury: and think much to give them leave to go to Church to feed their ſouls with the holy bread of life.
It once grieved Ambroſe, that a certainSer. 33. Chriſtian in the time of a faſt, did draw with him to an hunting, ſome ſervants that were accidentally haſting to the Church, becauſe thereby he heaped others ſins on his own pleaſures, not knowing that he would be both guilty of his own offence, and the perdition of the ſervants. And why ſhould not we as well grieve, when we ſee divers profeſſing themſelves Chriſtians to the world, not to be more careful for promoting the ſalvation of their Chriſtian ſervants, whilſt they hinder them from the publick aſſemblies of the Church on the Lords day, that they may ſerve their luſt? Eſpecially while, as ſaith Ambroſe, they do Ubi ſupra.not conſider, that although they be ſervants in condition, yet are they brethren by grace; for they have as well put on Chriſt, partake of the ſame Sacraments, and have the ſame God for their father which their Maſters have.
St. Paul would eat no fleſh whilſt the world ſtood, rather than that his eating ſhould make his brother to offend. 1 Cor. 8. 13. David ſcrupled the very once taſting of the water which was drawn out of the well of Bethlem by his Worthies, with the great peril of their lives, 2 Sam. 23. With how more heinous a ſpot do they brand themſelves therefore, who do expoſe the ſouls of their ſervants (whom they detain at home from the publick meeting of the Church, to ſerve their vanities) unto ſo great a danger? a wickedneſs it is rather beſeeming thoſe that ſacrifice to Bacchus, than thoſe that keep a feſtival to God.
In the Council of Paris, this very ſameCan. 50. wickedneſs grieved the Fathers, for though the Lords day ſeemed to be kept in ſome reverent manner, by certain Maſters, yet was it found very ſeldome to be obſerved with due honour of their ſervants under ſubjection. I wiſh that the Chriſtian Religion, even defiled with the blot of this wickedneſs, in our age, were not ill ſpoken of amongſt divers! At leaſt, I beſeech in Chriſt, thoſe that are the cauſe of others abſence from the publick exerciſes of piety, that they would, with their ſervants which they keep at home, be pleaſed to do that which Chryſostom requiresHom. 10. in Gen. of his hearers; namely, to diſcourſe of what they heard, with them that were abſent, by which means, they might hear and learn from them, what they lost themſelves in preparing of corporal food, being held from ſpiritual, Let them conſider this, who cauſe thoſe that are under them to be hindred of ſpiritual food, that they may prepare corporal meat for their uſe.
Gregory aDiſt. 5. cap. deui… ▪allowed not at all the cuſtom of Laicks; feaſting ordinarily on Lords dayes, from which they could not eaſily be moved.
In the mean while, I am not ignorant,We ough… not to faſt on the Lords daye that in the old Church divers Canons are extant, of not keeping faſts on the Lords day. Although they condemned not a Faſt of it ſelf, and in the general, as a work contrary to Gods command, or that is repugnant to his Word: becauſe divers illuſtrious examples thereof are afforded in the rules both of Old and New Teſtament; yet did they judge, that Faſts on that day were to be relaxed.
To the Africans, he that faſteth on the Lords day is no Catholick; to bEp. ad Phil. An. 324.Ignatius, he is foreign, a killer of Chriſt. Yea, in Concil. Gangren. Can. 18. an anathema is denounced againſt the obſervers of this faſt; and prohibitions of this nature are frequent amongſt the ancients; the cauſe whereof Zonaras cIn Can. 52. Conc. in Tralla.ſeems to teach, while he ſaith, the time of fasting is appointed for ſorrow; but a feſtival celebrity for mirth and joy. He teaches the ſame in Can. 18. Concilii Gangrenſis. Therefore, becauſe the Lords day, being conſecrated by Chriſts Reſurrection from the dead, it is a day of joy to theAug. Ep. 86. Church: thereupon, the rejoycing Chriſtians gave thanks on that day to God, and relaxed their faſting, and abſtained from every right that might inferr any ſorrow. They were ſtirred up to this alſo by the pranks of Hereticks, who denied the Reſurrection of Chriſt; amongſt whom the Manichees acted with a Diabolical ſpirit, and ſtudying to diffuſe this errour, that they might extinguiſh the joy of Chriſtians for the ſaving Reſurrection of Chriſt, have preſcribed Faſts on the Lords day to their followers: whoſe errours, and others which held the ſame, that the Orthodox might prevent, they have lookt to it, that on overy Lords day the Faſt ſhould be relaxed.
But although we reject not the Canons ſet out by the Church in deteſtation of Hereticks, yet we affirm, that proviſion was made in them about this matter, was ordained by the Fathers, and not by the Apoſtles. Otherwiſe St. Austin had miſſed it,Ep. 86. when he ſaid, It is not defined by our Lords command, or of the Apoſtles, on what dayes we ought not, and on what to fast. And if this had been a true Apoſtolical ordinance, it had been lawful for the Church to faſt on the Lords day, when no occaſion was offered. But Hierom thinks otherwiſe, while hea Ep. ad Lucin. wiſheth that we might faſt at every ſeaſon (he excepts not the Lords day) and ſayes, that Paul, and the faithful with him, faſted on the Lords day, yet doth he not accuſe them of the Manichean Hereſie. And becauſe we read not that the aforeſaid Canons were ordained by the Apoſtles, therefore they are grown out of uſe in the Church: becauſe, like as the impious madneſs of Hereticks, adulterating the Chriſtian faith, hath given the Church occaſion to ordain divers ceremonies in the external worſhip of God, by which they might both extinguiſh their poiſon, and better confirm the minds of Chriſtians in the truth once received, which, as before thoſe Herefies did put up the head, were not in uſe; ſo thoſe being extinct, they grew into diſuſe again.
Therefore, whatever we meet with in the ancients, of prohibiting Faſts on the Lords day, doth not at all enervate my opinion of avoiding ſurfeit on that day, which is confirmed with the graveſt ſayings of the approved Fathers; neither do they make any thing againſt me: to faſt and ſurfeit do differ far enough: between which extremes, a third thing is given; namely, a ſober and moderate dinner: the uſe whereof, none will deny to Chriſtians on the Lords day, unleſs any think with Urbicus, aAug. Ep. 86.that not to fast is to be drunk. Auſtin, who uſed a ſparing and frugal table, tells us, that he entertained at dinner with him, a man miraculouſly reſtored to his former health on the Lords day *De Civ. Dei, lib. 22. cap. 8., aPoſſid. de vita Aug. c. 22.becauſe he ſhewed hoſpitality, as Poſſidonius.
Arbogaſtes being entertained at a feaſt by the King of France, and asked, Whether he knew bPaulin. de vit. Amb.Ambroſe? anſwered, that he knew the man, and was beloved of him, and often was wont to feaſt with him. Some interpret this, as if St. Ambroſe fared delicately on the Lords day (on which day, and the Sabbath, and when the birth-dayes of Martyrs were celebrated, Paulinus reports he was wont to dine) becauſe on that day Noble men were entertained by him: but Paulinus relates not that Ambroſe did entertain to a Feaſt Count Arbogaſtes on the Lords day. Arbogaſtes boaſteth in Paulinus, that he often feaſted with Ambroſe, but whether he ſpoke the truth in this, is a queſtion, although cAn. 375. n. 24.Baronius reporteth it for a truth, who yet mentions not the day on which he held this feaſt. Arbogaſtes alſo glories, that he was beloved of Ambroſe; but it's eaſie to conjecture, that there was but ſmall friendſhip between Ambroſe and Count Arbogaſtes, whenas Ambroſe ſo hated his ſacrilege: for which cauſe Arbogaſtes being incenſed, vowed that he would make a ſtable of the ChurchIdem. of Millain, and would try how the Clergy could fight. Therefore it's not certain, whether what he ſpake of the feaſt was true. He might perhaps inſinuate to the King, who highly eſteemed Ambroſe the Biſhop of Millain, that he was prized by him ſomewhat, that he might be more highly regarded of the King. However it was, when Ambroſe himſelf would never be preſent at a feaſt aPoſſid de vita Aug. cap. 27.in his own countrey, being invited; it may be judged, whether it's likely that he would invite others to a feaſt on the Lords day, who refuſed to be preſent at other mens feaſts himſelf.
Laſtly, if it were granted that Ambroſe did entreat Count Arbogaſtes at a Feaſt, whether will any believe it, who conſiders the auſtere life of Ambroſe, chaſtizing his body with that diſcipline (as Paulinus ibidem) that he obſerved a daily Faſt, that he would diſtain himſelf with feaſts on the Lords day, which hindred the exerciſes of Religion, either publick or private? Nay, truly. He might perhaps dine on the Lords day, as the cuſtome of the Church required: but we muſt not believe that the grave Father did fare ſo daintily on that day, as that he could not attend the duties of piety: concerning which nature of feaſts, we are here ſpeaking: in which number that is to reckoned, which Baronius mentions out of Gregor. Turonenſ. aAn. 484. n. 142.who tells us of a certain Presbyter, invading the Biſhoprick of Avergue, after the death of Sidonius Apollinaris, who, when the Lords day came, having prepared a banquet, commanded that all the Citizens ſhould be invited into the Church: a wickedneſs indeed beſeeming the author, that he who had ambitiouſly invaded the Biſhops See, againſt the Canons of the Church, ſhould violate the Lords ſolemnity by his feaſt, that hindred the duties of Divine worſhip: which unlawful example, I hope no body that reliſheth any thing of Chriſt will follow. And now I will conclude with St. Auſtin, bEp. 86. ibidem.that none can rightly deny, that a Chriſtian may on the Lords day be refreſhed with a moderate and ſober dinner, and alſo will affirm with that grave Father, that thoſe who fear God muſt not riot on the Lords Day.