The Christian Sabbath defended against a crying evil in these times of the antisabitarians of our age: wherein is shewed that the morality of the fourth Commandement is still in force to bind Christians unto the sanctification of the Sabbath day. Written by that learned assertor of the truth, William Twisse D.D. late prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines.

Defensio Thesium de Sabbato.

13 I Take notice of Tertull. Iustin Martyr:] true; but they alter not my judgement: And why? I finde in them onely a bare as∣sertion, and that of a thing so remote from their times, that they could not know it otherwise then by relation. From the Scripture they had none; happily they had it from some Jewes. Galatinus alleadgeth some. But I oppose Jewes to Jewes. Philo Iudaeus de opificio Mundi not onely is of a contrary o∣pinion, but holdeth also that it was a feast common to all Nations, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And peradventure some such thing is meant by Hesiod his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. And it is not unlike∣ly that God made the observation of the day a memoriall of the Creation. But I will not enlarge that discourse. It shall suffice that Philo Iudaeus, and Aben Ezra also and others thinke otherwise, whose judgement our Ortho∣dox Divines doe, if not all, yet for the most part follow. Read them upon the second of Genesis.

14 What the Patriarks did in point of religion, I thinke they did it by Divine direction. Yee know that 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 did never please God; wherefore the Mo∣saicall Lawes (other then those that had reference to the Church as nationall, and delivered out of the Egyptian bondage) are to be thought not introducto∣ry, but declaratory. Out of question those that concer∣ned the substance of the service which stood in sacri∣fices, and I thinke concerning the circumstance of time, and place.

The place; for there where God appeared, there did they erect their altars: yea, and in the story of Re∣becca it is plaine that shee went to a set place to consult the Lord. And why shall not the time come under the same condition?

15 The 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 must receive an answer from that which is added in confirmation of the 13 Thesis. It is but an ungrounded conjecture.

16 Where had Rhenanus that opinion? his varying from those whom I answered on the 13 Thesis sheweth that hee was not of Iustin Martyr or Tertullian his opi∣nion, and yet giveth no reason that may move to cre∣dit him, or countervaile what I have alleadged for my opinion.

18 Yes, there is more, if you compare Deut. c. 5. with Exodus c. 20. but I meant not onely that, but other passages which make the Sabbath a signe of Gods re∣sidence sanctifying the Jewes, &c. which I expressed in the next thesis.

19 Bedes conceipt may passe for an allegory built upon a witty accommodation of the literall sense which other fathers observed before him. But that cannot be the literall sense of the Commandement. You will not deny it, if you grant that the Sabbath was insti∣tuted before the fall, which I thinke more then pro∣bable, though the Broughtonists hasten the fall before the Sabbath. And I cannot without good reason yield that the patriarchs had no set time for divine service, I meane a weekely time.

31 True it is, that Christ did rest from suffering upon the seventh; but the last enemy death was not apparently overthrowne untill the reunion of his soule, and body, till he rose againe for our justification, &c. Therefore did the apostles make that the consummati∣on of redemption in Christs Person.

35 You cannot finde in all the 14. to the Romans that the Apostle is positive in the doctrine of dayes, he expres∣seth a mutuall indulgence untill men had attained 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 concerning the liberty from Moses Law. Neither doth he beare out the Gentiles against the Jewes, but qualifie rather the destempered zeale of the Gentiles that were too hot against the Jewes; Sensus dictorum sumendus est ex causis dicendorum, It is plaine that there was a questiō, whether the Christian gentile should be pressed to observe the ceremonies whereun∣to the christian Jewes were pertinaciously addicted? but never was there (for ought I read) a question whe∣ther the Jewes should keepe the Lords day? for I think they never refused it. Had there been such a quarrell, I would enlarge the sense of that Chapter, as you doe, to our question, but seeing there was not, I see not how it should be reasonably done.

36 I say not that the Apostles imprinted any holinesse upon the first day of the weeke; It was Christs re∣surrection that honoured that day, which (I say) the Apostles were to respect, not arbitrarily, but necessari∣ly. You may perceive the reason in my Theses. You cannot observe from the beginning of the world any other inducement to the institution of feasts, but Gods worke done on the day; If it were not a continued worke, as the dwelling in Tabernacles.

But you thinke the Apostles did not prescribe the obser∣vation of that day; No? you confesse they made choice of it, and were moved so to doe by the reason which I alleage, And were they not scattered over all the world? & where they came did they not all give the same order for the sacred assemblies? And shall we thinke that this could be done with∣out an apostolicall prescript?

37. & 43. I conjoyne them, because one answer will cleare both; Let us then first agree, what it is for a thing to be Liberae observationis. The Questonist in his interpretation, which commonly is received,

leaveth a possibility for an alteration by humane auctority, if any reason shall perswade a conveniency so to doe; though so long as publike auctority com∣mandeth it, he will have it dutifully observed.

Whereupon will follow a Consectary or two. First, that this Law doth not immediately bind the conscience, because Merè humani Iuris positivi.

Secondly, that Extra scandalum, a man may trans∣gresse it. For example, a Tradesman may worke in his Chamber, if no body bee privy to it.

If this be the Commentary upon Libera observatio (and if it be well inquired into, you will finde that I doe not mi∣stake the meaning) then I prof sse I cannot like of such a Libera observatio.

For I am perswaded that if all Christendome should meete, and have never so plausible a ground, they cannot alter the day de jure, though de facto they may; but it is worse then previshnesse so to doe. And why? they cannot alter the first ground, Christs ri∣sing upon that day. Secondly, they cannot alter the uniforme order that upon that undenyable ground was set down by the Apostles themselves, which were infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost.

And out of these grounds I deduce, that the Law doth im∣mediately bind their conscience.

And that it is to be observed, even where it may be transgressed without any scandall.

Christ and the Apostles were not absolutely bound to lay such a foundation of the Lords Day, and so it was Liberae in∣stitutionis; but they having layd it, I deny that it is now Liberae Observationis; so that under God I know no power that can alter it.

The Fathers speake of the Jewish Sabbath, and Allegorize that as it was carnally used by the Jewes. But we shall wrong the Fathers, if we thinke they held that there was no Morality in the Letter of the Commandement.

For though there were a mystery figured in it, yet they doe not deny that there was a morall proportioning of time for Divine Service prescribed therein, which is the seventh part of the weeke.

It is one thing to say that all our life time we must be religious in our conversation, and keepe a spiri∣tuall Sabbath; another thing to affirme that we must not have a solemne weekely day, wherein to intend onely Divine worship.

This last point the Fathers doe not say, the former they doe, and to argue from their Omission, is to ex∣tend their words beyond their meaning; at least, their meaning is not adaequate to the sense of the Com∣mandement.

No nor to their practise; For they did constantly ob∣serve a seventh part of the weeke, which I say is the first prin∣ciple contained in the fourth Commandement.

Though I deny not but there is moreover a limita∣tion to the seventh day from the Creation exprest, which Christ and his Apostles altered; but this alte∣ration cannot overthrow the first principle; they may both well goe together.

To the particular allegations out of the Fathers I will an∣swer no more then, that what they say is true, but doth not contradict what I hold. For the mysticall sense doth not o∣verthrow the literall of the Commandement. And they un∣derstand the seventh day precisely from the Creation▪ which we confesse altered, and speake not of the divine Ordinance, for the apportioning of time, but the carnall observation of the Jewes.

And your answer to the first Question grounded on the Fathers words may passe for good; but there is more in the Commandement then so.

Your Answer to the second I cannot so well approve, be∣cause it is Exclusive.

As for your third answer, That the fourth Com∣mandement is not the Law of nature, but a positive law; take the Law of Nature for Morall Reason, then I think there is more then meere positivenesse in it. For morall reason teacheth to honour the day whereon the work is done; and that morall reason which gave this in charge was Apostolicall, and so of a comman∣ding power in both. And then you see that it is nei∣ther meerely positive, nor meerely naturall, but mixt, and so binding accordingly, ut supra ad Thesin. 37. & 43.

You adde two Questions.

1 Whether seeing the Lords day succeeds the Jewish Sab∣bath, wee are to keepe it in the same manner, and with the same strictnesse?

First I hold in my Theses, that our Lords day doth properly succeed the Sabbath instituted at the Crea∣tion.

Whereupon I separate all the Accessories from Moses Law.

Secondly, The Jewes did misconstrue the strick∣nesse of their Sabbath, as appeareth by the many corrections of our Saviour in the Gospell, and his Generall Rule: The Sabbath was made from man, not man for the Sabbath.

Thirdly, They held that they might not so much as kindle a fire, or dresse Meat upon that day, groun∣ding their conceipt upon the Texts that are Ex. 35. & cap. 16.

But both Texts seeme to be wrested; for that Exod. 35. about kindling a fire, must be limited by the verse going be∣fore, and is not to be understood of any other kindling of fire, then for following of their Trades or Servile workes, as they are called. And so Munster, Vatable, and others upon that place censure their mistake.

And that it is a mistake against the meaning of the Commandment, I gather from hence: For the Jewes that will not put their owne hands to kindle a fire, will hire Christians to doe it for them; as if the Commandment did not reach Servants and strangers within their gates; and they offend as much in doing it by others, as if they did it by themselves. But so doe they use to abuse the Scripture, and confute their Glosses by their owne practice.

As for the 16. Chapter of Exod. which seemeth to forbid the dressing of Meat, I hold that mistaken also. Read the Chapter and mark whether you can finde that upon the sixth day they were to dresse any more then served for that day, and to lay up the rest undressed untill the Sabbath; at what time (I hope) they were to dresse it before they did eat it.

And indeed only the providing of Manna is there forbid∣den, and a promise (whereof they had experience) that it would not putrifie upon the Sabbath, though they kept it till then, whereas upon other dayes it would.

And in this sense doe I understand the severe pu∣nishment of him that gathered sticks upon the seventh day, it was because he then made his provision, and did it, it should seeme, with an high hand. Numb. cap. 15.

As for recreations I can say nothing, but that seeing the Lords day is to be the exercise of that life which is spirituall, and as a foretast of that which is eternall, it were to be wisht that wee did intend those things as farre as our frailty will reach.

But Vivitur non cum perfectis hominibus, and wee must be content to have men as good as we may, when it is not to be hoped they will be as good as they should.

Yet we must take heed that we doe not solemnize our feast vainly as either the Iewes or Gentiles did.

Against whom Nazianzene is very tart, & Tertul. in his Apolog.

In the Civill Law we finde a dispensation for Husbandmen in case of necessity, contrary to the Jewish policy, Exod. 34.

Which is followed by our Law. Edward. the 6.

Wee may in apparrell and diet, be more liberall and costly on feasts then on other dayes.

〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were Corporall feasts joyned to the Eucharist, wherein the rich did feed the poore.

Which afterward for inconvenience was removed out of the Church.

I meane the Corporall feast (although in Saint Austins confessions you shall find, that in Saint Ambrose days there were 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 at the Toombs of Martyrs which Saint Ambrose tooke away.

But though the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were taken out of the Church, yet upon those dayes the rich relieved their poore Brethren.

Which they little thinke of, that for feare of breaking the Sabbath have taken away Hospitality.

Some men are over-nice in this point, more nice then Christ himselfe, Luc. 14. who on the Sabbath went to a feast, and that was to a wedding feast▪

And why not? seeing the Sabbath is Symbolum Aeternae, not only quietis, but Laetitiae; therefore resembled to a feast without the toyle of Acquisition.

So that the Sabbath is not violated by feasts, if wee exceed not Necessitatem Personae, though Naturae wee doe.

Now Necessitas Personae requireth that more be imployed in providing feasts; as a Kings diet then a Subjects, a Noble then a Common mans, a Colledge then a single Person:

But we must take care Ne quid nimis in victu, joy &c. Alogia which S. Austin reproves Epist. 86. ad Ca∣sulanum must not be used.

And we must keepe the Apostles rule; Whether wee eat or drinke, we must doe all to the glory of God.

And it were to bee wished, that the old practice, whereof there is a Patterne in the Kings house, & some

Cathedrall Churches, were every where in use.

That at six a Clock in the Morning Prayers, were every where appointed for Servants and such as were to prepare dinner, to goe then to Church, at whose returne the Masters might goe with the rest of their familie.

As for other recreations, if they be not opposite or prejudiciall to Piety, they may well stand with the solemnizing of the Sabbath and other feasts.

Too much Austerity doth rather hurt then good; especi∣ally in those dayes, wherein Indulgence, where of we have Pat∣ternes in Gods Synchoreticall Lawes, is extorted from those that are in Authoritie, by the generall corruption of the time.

Wherefore I would distinguish in such cases be∣tweene the Precept and permission.

The Precept sheweth whereunto men should tend and be exhorted; and it were to be wished they would follow, and keepe the Lords Day, as they are directed by the Canon and Injunction.

The Permission sheweth what must be tollerated for the hardnesse of mens hearts.

Vacation from bodily labour is required both Per se; for it is a figure of our freedome from those Ani∣mall toyles in the Church Triumphant, and also Propter aliud, that we may the better intend our spi∣rituall life.

To conclude all, seeing all agree that it must be obser∣ved, and differ onely upon what ground and how farre; see∣ing to fetch the authority from God, and to keepe it with all reasonable strictnesse maketh most for Piety, in a doubt∣full case, I incline thither, though I condemne not them that are otherwise minded, wishing that sobriety of judge∣ment to all in such disputes, which Saint Paul commendeth Rom. c. 14.

FINIS.

Notes

• Thes. 1.
• In Decalog.
• 2.
• Gen. 25.
• Thes. 49.