A treatise of the Sabbath and the Lords-day Distinguished into foure parts. Wherein is declared both the nature, originall, and observation, as well of the one under the Old, as of the other under the New Testament. Written in French by David Primerose Batchelour in Divinitie in the Vniversity of Oxford, and minister of the Gospell in the Protestant Church of Roven. Englished out of his French manuscript by his father G.P. D.D.

CHAPTER First.

Establishment of the opinion most admittable concer∣ning the originall and institution of the Lords day.

1. The first day of the weeke was kept from the beginning of the Christian Church in remembrance of Christs Resurrection, not for any necessity in the thing it selfe.

2. Not also by obligation of the fourth Commandement.

3. The state of the Question: whether this day be an institution of IESUS CHRIST, or of his Apostles; or whether the faithfull, of themselves, without any Commandement, made choice of it.

4. The first opinion hath no solid foundation: The second hath.

5. First argument against the first opinion: There is no record in

the whole New Testament, that Christ or his Apostles ordai∣ned that day, &c.

6. Second argument, the first day of the weeke was not equally kept by all Christians, till Constantine by an imperiall Law tyed them unto it, as also to the sixt day, which wee call Fri∣day.

7. First observation upon the imperiall Law of Constantine con∣cerning the first day of the weeke.

8. Second Observation upon the same Law, concerning the sixt day.

9. Whence it is cleere, that both were of Ecclesiasticall institu∣tion.

10. Third argument, the first Christians especially in the East ob∣served for the space of three hundred yeeres and more, the se∣venth day of the weeke with the first day.

11. Confirmation of this truth by the Councell of Laodicea, and sundry Fathers, &c.

12. Which shew evidently, that the Christians in those dayes belee∣ved not that the first day of the weeke was by CHRIST or his Apostles subrogated to the Iewish Sabbath.

1 IT is plaine, and generally agreed on, that the first day of the weeke was kept from the beginning of the Christian Church, and that undoubtedly upon the consideration of the Resurrecti∣on of CHRIST, which came to passe on that day. Yet this ob∣servation was not grounded upon any necessity of the thing it selfe, obliging Christians to keepe that day of the weeke, rather than ano∣ther. For, as it hath beene shewed before, it is impossible to expli∣cate with shew of reason, either what morall necessity one day of seven hath in it, more than hath another number, or wherefore it was necessary that the day of the week that Christ rose in, should be kept in the Christian Church, rather than the day wherein he was borne, or the day wherein he suffered on the Crosse, or the day wher∣in hee ascended into heaven. Or if the day of his Resurrection must be observed, why these others of his birth, death and Ascensi∣on ought not to be also kept weekely. The resurrection of Christ might, did give occasion unto the observation of that day, but that it was a cause obliging necessarily, and having a fundamentall rela∣tion,

or that CHRIST by his Resurrection on that day inten∣ded to sanctifie it particularly to the Christian Church, cannot bee proved.

2 Neither also hath the fourth Commandement obliged Christi∣ans to observe this day. For it injoyned the last day of the weeke precisely, and not the first, and in that respect was ceremoniall, which also hath beene shewed. And therefore the observation of the first day of the weeke cannot be grounded upon the tearmes thereof. For the foundation thereof should be absurd and unreaso∣nable, thus. God ordained under the Old Testament, as a point of ceremony and of order for that time, the last day of the weeke, wherein hee rested from all his workes: Therefore in vertue and through obligation of this Commandement, men are bound under the New Testament to observe the first day of the weeke, wherein God began to apply himselfe to the production of his works. Who seeth not the manifest absurdity of such an illation? Therefore this observation of the first day of the weeke, must of necessity bee attributed to some other free and voluntary institution made con∣cerning it in the New Testament.

3 Here beginneth a new question, whether the institution therof be divine, or Apostolicall; If it was our Lord Iesus Christ that ordained it after his Resurrection, to be kept by all Christians du∣ring the whole time of the New Testament, if the Apostles also injoyned it to all the faithfull till the end of the world, so that they are all bound to the observation thereof by the institution of Christ, or of his Apostles: Or whether the faithfull did not, of themselves, without any commandement, through respect to the Resurrection of our Lord Iesus Christ, keepe the day wherein it came to passe, as also to make a distinction thereby between them and the Iewes, and to shew that they were made free from all Iewish observations, types and figures, amongst which was the Sabbath day, and that they observed not a day in quality of type and figure, but onely for orders sake, and for Ecclesiasticall government, to apply themselves together to the exercises of Religion, and for that cause had changed the seventh day of the Iewes into another: which usage and custome, as very fit and convenient, being begunne first amongst a few, faire and softly prevailed, and was established with the Christian Religion amongst all those that imbraced it,

and since that time hath continued in the Christian Church till this day.

4 Although the first of these opinions were true, it cannot inforce the morality of a seventh day of rest, but only, that the first day of the weekes was instituted by IESUS CHRIST, or his Apo∣stles, as a point of order, whereunto, in such a case, the faithfull should be bound by the necessity of a divine and apostolicall com∣mandement. But I see not that this opinion hath any solid ground, whereas the second is well founded. For there is nothing found in the New Testament concerning the observation of the first day of the weeke, importing a commandement of Christ, or of his Apostles, neither is there any such commandement inferred, but by remote and most weake consequences, and it is more likely that all the places alleadged to that purpose denote onely a simple usage among some Christians in those dayes, which by succession of time hath beene setled, and is become universall.

5 Indeed, if Iesus Christ, or his Apostles by expresse commande∣ment from him, or by divine inspiration, had ordained that day, as a point so necessary, as it is thought to be, I doubt not but their com∣mandement should have beene expressely set downe in the books of the New Testament, as are all other ordinances of necessary things; and that in them we should finde reprehension against those that had neglected the observation of that day, as in them there are repre∣hensions against all kinde of sinners. But seeing there is no such commandement to bee found in them, that it cannot bee gathered from them but by consequences which are of no force, that no man is blamed in them for the inobservation of that day, whereas under the Old Testament God taxed so often and so sharply those that kept not his Sabbaths, this is to mee a most firme and assured proofe, that neither IESUS CHRIST nor his Apostles have or∣dained it.

6 I adde, that if had beene an ordinance of Iesus Christ or of his Apostles, undoubtedly the Apostles and other Ministers of the Gospell, when they found and established the Christian Churches had established the observation of this day, as a point of the will of Iesus Christ, and of his service under the New Testament, and it had beene kept equally by all the Churches. For why had they not received it, as well as the other points of the Christian Religion and

doctrine of the Gospell, sith the same authority obliged them ther∣unto? Now this is most true, that the observation thereof was not practised throughout them all, and became not universall & wel set∣led, but by the commandements and constitution of the Emperours.

There diverse imperiall constitutions for the observation of the first day of the weeke, Eusebius in the fourth booke of the life of Constantine Chapter 16. and after him Sozomene in the first booke of his Ecclesiasticall History, and in the 8 Chapter, relateth, that Constantine the first made a Law, and ordained that on Sunday which is the first day of the weeke, and on Friday, all publike judg∣ments should surcease, that all other affaires should be intermitted, that on these dayes all should apply themselves to serve GOD by prayers and supplications, and that so he reverenced Sunday, because on it Iesus Christ rose from the dead, and Friday, because on it hee was crucified.

7 This passage is considerable; For it sheweth, that Sunday was not observed throughout al the Churches, but that it was used as a work∣day, and that on it common pleas and publike judgements were practised, whence we may conclude, with a great shew of truth, that it was not an institution of Christ, nor of his Apostles: For if it had beene, questionlesse the observation thereof had beene better known and practised, and Christians had thought themselves more obliged unto it, for the commandement of Christ and of his Apo∣stles, then for any imperiall constitution. The writers of that sto∣ry telling also what reason Constantine had to make a constitution concerning the observation of Sunday, say simply, that he made it, because on it Iesus Christ rose from the dead, which indeed hath al∣wayes beene the foundation of this usage, but they say not, that it was because Iesus Christ and his Apostles had ordained, which they ought not to be silent of, if that had been true, and it had been need∣lesse to alleadge any other reason.

9 This is also worthy to be marked, that Sozomen joyneth the Fri∣day with the Sunday, and saith, that Constantine ordained that day, as wel as this day: That day, because on it Christ was crucified; this day, because on it Christ rose againe: Which sheweth plainely that the day of Christs Resurrection is not of it selfe more obligatory to make christians keep it, then is the day of his passion upon the Crosse, or of any other of his actions or sufferings: That the one may

yeeld as just and peremptory a cause thereof, as the other, that Christ also had not given a commandement more expresse and more ne∣cessary for the one then for the other, but had left all this to the li∣berty of the Church. For if he had given a particular commande∣ment concerning Sunday, it had bin in Constantine a great temerity to ordaine another day, in equall ranke with that which Christ had ordained, because he ought to thinke, that Christ had good reasons for the institution of that day, which had not beene valuable for any other day, and that by the institution of one day in the weeke parti∣cularly, and of no moe, he would have all Christians to know, that no man ought to attempt to institute any other, besides that which he had instituted.

9 Constantine had beene guilty of farre greater rashnesse and in∣discretion, by making Friday, which was of his institution, equall to Sunday, which Iesus Christ had ordained, yet he did so, as is ma∣nifest by the words of Sozomen who maketh no ods betweene the ordinance made for Friday, and that which was made for Sunday. But seeing Constantine in what hee did, did nothing amisse, it is evident thereby, that the observation of Sunday was not of divine institution, but of usage and custome only, which was not received every where, nor well practised where it was received, because it was not esteemed necessary. Wherefore Constantine by his consti∣tution made it necessary, adding another like unto it for Friday, all this is flat contrary to the assertion of those, which to prove that Sunday is of divine institution, yeeld this reason of their opinion that no humane authority can sanctifie a day. And lo, Constantine sanctified Friday, ordaining that it should be imployed in exercises of Religion only: wherof we shall speake againe something hereaf∣ter, God willing.

10 Socrates in the fifth booke and 21 Chapter of his Ecclesiasti∣call story, marketh sundry customes in the Churches about the day of their assemblies, which some kept in one day of the weeke, some in another: And saith expressely, that Iesus Christ and his Apo∣stles have not ordained any thing concerning holy dayes, but have only given precepts of godlinesse, and of an holy life: And it is most likely, that the Christian Churches, which in the beginning God assembled among the Iewes, kept not for a long while any other day, for the exercise of their religion, saving the 7th and last day of

the week: And it is a thing most certain, that many Churches of the Gentiles, especially in the last more than three hundred yeeres after Christ, observed the Sabbath day of the Iewes with the Sunday, and made of the one a day of devotion, as well as of the other.

Saint Ignatius Martyr, an hundred yeeres after Iesus Christ, in * 1.1 his Epistle to the Magnesians, exhorteth the Christians to observe the Sabbath, not after the manner of the Iewes, which there he de∣scribeth, but after a spirituall and holy manner, such as hee setteth downe, and addeth, that after they had observed the Sabbath, they should also observe the first day of the weeke. The Councell which met in Laodicea, in the fourth age after Christ, ordained, that Chri∣stians must not keepe the Sabbath day, and rest in it after the man∣ner of the Iewes, which sheweth, that till then they observed it. Nay, according to the translations which we have, the Councell did not forbid them absolutely to keepe the Iewish Sabbath, but permitted it unto them, if they would, with this caveat, that it were not after the fashion of the Iewes, and that they should pre∣ferre Sunday before it.

Saint Athanasius, in the homily of the seed, saith of himselfe, and of other faithfull Christians, that they assembled together on the Sabbath day, not through malady of spirit, for Iudaisme, but to worship the Lord of the Sabbath. Gregory of Nisse calleth these two dayes, to wit, the Sabbath day and the Lords day, brethren. Sozomene in the seventh booke and 19 Chapter of his History saith, that at Constantinople, and almost in all other parts of the Easterne Church, the ecclesiasticall assemblies met together on the Sabbath day, and on the day following. Socrates in the sixt booke and eight Chapter of his History, calleth the Sabbath day and the Sunday the weekely feasts wherein Christians came together in the Churches: and in the foresaid 21 Chap. of the fifth book, amongst many diverse customes of the Churches of these times, concerning their assemblies and exercises of Religion, he alleadgeth a frequent and common observation of the Sabbath.

12 Which sheweth, that the Churches beleeved not Sunday to be of divine institution, and subrogated to the Sabbath by our Lord Ie∣sus Christ. For if they had beleeved any such thing, they had not observed another day: But knowing they had no particular com∣mandement for any day of devotion, they observed both the Sab-

〈1 page missing〉〈1 page missing〉

because it had beene a long while a solemne day of devotion ordai∣ned of God to the Iewes, and Sunday, because it was made honou∣rable by the Resurrection of our Lord Iesus Christ.

This that we say shall be better seene; by the consideration of the reasons which are broached to prove, that the institution of the first day of the weeke to be a holy day, is of God himselfe, of Iesus Christ, and of his Apostles.

Notes

• * 1.1

  11 Concil. Lao∣dicen. Can. 29. Non o∣portet Chri∣stianos ju∣daizare, & in Sabbatho vacare, sed operari eos in eadem die, domini∣cum praepo∣nendo eidem diei. Si hoc eis placet, vacent tan∣quam Chri∣stiani. Quod si inventi fuerint ju∣daizare ana∣thema sint.