A brief ANSWER to a late Treatise OF THE SABBATH DAY.  Digested Dialogue-wise between two Divines, A. and B. A. 
BRother▪ you are happily met?  B. 
And you Brother also.  A. 
I would I might spend an hour or two with you in private conference, in a point wherein I have of late been not a little perplexed.  B. 
Why, what is the matter, Brother?  A. 
Have you not seen a late Treatise of the Sabbath Day, published by an eminent Antistes in this Church?  B. 
Yes: I have both seen, and perused it.  A. 
I pray you what think you of it?  B. 
I think it is a very dangerous Book.  A. 
What mean you by that?  B. 
I 〈…〉 to the Author, if it were well examined before 〈…〉.  A. 
How so, I pray you?  B. 
Because it overthrows the doctrine of the Church of England in the point of the Sabbath.  A. 
Pardon me; that seems to me impossible.  B. 
Why?  A. 
Because he saith expressly in the very title page of his book, that it containeth A Defence of the Orthodox all Doctrine of the Church of England, against Sabbatarian novelty. And therefore I am confident, he will look to make that good.  B. 
But be not too confident, you know the Proverb, Fronti rara fides. The foulest causes may have the fairest pretences.  A. 
That is true you say. But yet I cannot be persuaded, that so great a Personage, would so far overshoot, as to give that advantage to those, whom he makes his adversaries. Nay you know his Book is dedicated to the Archbishop of Canterbury; by whose direction, and that according to his sacred Majesty's command, he was set upon this work, both for the preventing of mischief, (as himself saith in his Epistle dedicatory to the said Archbishop) and to settle the King's good subjects, who have long time been distracted about Sabbatarian questions. Now if he maintain not, but (as you say) overthrew the doctrine of the Church of England, he will have small thanks from his sacred Majesty for his pains, who is the Defender of the Faith of the Church of England, and hath often solemnly protested, and that in his public 
* Declaration about the dissolving of the Parliament. And, Declaration before the 39 Articles.  Declarations in print, that he will never suffer therein the least innovation. And what thanks then can he expect from the Archbishop, trow you? And in stead of preventing, he will pull on greater mischiefs; and in stead of settling the King's good subjects, he will fill their minds with greater distractions. And therefore, Brother, in so saying, you lay a heavy charge upon him. It's dangerous so to charge a person of that dignity, and esteem in the world. Take heed therefore what you say. You know also that he is a great Scholar, deeply learned, a reverend Father of the Church so as his judgement is taken almost for an Oracle. And you know also what is said in a late Book, allowed by authority, that the holy Fathers in God the 
Communion Book Catech expounded by Beve.  Bishops, are to be guides in Divinity unto the whole Clergy of inferior order, so as all Priests are to submit unto their Godly judgements in all matters pertaining unto Religion. And the reason is given, because the Fathers of the Church now and always, do in the great 
Pag. 20.  mystery of Godliness comprehend many things, which the common people do not, yea also some things, which Ministers of the inferior order do not apprehend. So as it is expected of those holy Prelates, that we must lay our hand on our mouth, when they speak, and be altogether regulated by their profound Dictates.  B. 
I remember well the book. And I cannot but wonder, that those passages were not expunged, with many others, when the book was called in, and then the second time published. You know we live in a learned age, and we deny the Pope's infallibility, or that it can convey itself, as from the head, and so confine itself within the veins of the body of the Prelacy; or that a Rotchet can confer this grace ex opere operato. And believe me, Brother, when we see such a Papal spirit begin to perk up in this our Church, is it not high time, trow you, to look about us? Shall we stumble at noon day, and in this Meridian of the Gospel close up our eyes, and become the sworn vasals of blind obedience? No, no. In this case therefore were Goliath himself the Champion, I would, by God's grace try a fall with him.  A. 
Brother, such a resolution had need have a good ground to stand upon. And being a matter of such moment, it requires our best zeal and strength, especially to vindicate the doctrine of our reverend Mother the Church of England, which we have sucked from her purer breasts. Nor only so, but to vindicate her name from reproach. For if it be so, as you have said, that the doctrine of our Church is by that book overthrown: then consequently (as I conceive) she must deeply suffer, and be wounded through the sides of those, whom he so often in his book brandeth with the odious name of Novel Sabbatarians.  B. 
Brother, you conceit a right. For in truth, all those calumnious and odious terms, which he gives to those, whose opinions (except Brabournes only) he impugneth in his Treatise; as, venomous serpents, noisome Tares, pestilent weeds, and unclean beasts (terms to be abhorred of all true Christians) and in a word, Novel Sabbatarians: they all result upon our dear Mother, the Church of England. For who are the most of those, or rather all, whom he thus stigmatizeth? Are they not, or were they not in their time, the true bred children of the Church of England, all unanimously professing and maintaining her Orthodox doctrines? Can therefore the mother be free, when her pious sons are so traduced and reproached, and that for defending those very doctrines, which by her means they sucked from the breasts of both the Testaments?  A. 
That must needs follow, I confess. Now than I pray you, satisfy my earnest desire in this, by declaring how he overthrows the doctrine of the Church of England in this point of the Sabbath.  B. 
I will make it most clear unto you. Now the doctrine of the Church of England concerning the Sabbath, is most clearly and fully set forth in the Book of Homilies; which Book the 35 Article (to which all we Ministers do subscribe) doth commend, as containing a Godly and whole some doctrine, and necessary for these times; and therefore judged to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently, and distinctly, that they may be understanded of the people. Now the Homily of the time and place of prayer, part. 1. showeth, that our Lord's Day is grounded upon the fourth Commandment in the Decalogue; in these words: Whatsoever is found in the Commandment, appertaining to the Law of nature, as a thing most Godly, most just, and needful for the setting forth of God's glory, it ought to be retained and kept of all good Christian people. And therefore by this Commandment, we ought to have a time, as one day in the week, wherein we ought to rest, yea from our lawful and needful works. For like as it appeareth by this Commandment, that no man in the six days ought to be slothful or idle, but diligently to labour in that state, wherein God hath set him: even so God hath given express charge to all men, that upon the Sabbath Day, which is now our Sunday, they should cease from all weekly and work day labour, to the intent, that like as God himself wrought six days, and rested the seventh, and blessed and sanctified it, and consecrated it to quietness, and rest from labour: Even so God's obedient people should use the Sunday holily, and rest from their common and daily business, and also give themselves wholly to heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service. So that God doth not only command the observation of this holy day, but also by his own example doth stir and provoke us to the diligent keeping of the same. Good natural children will not only become obedient to the Commandment of their Parents, but also have a diligent eye to their do, and gladly follow the same. So if we will be the children of our heavenly Father, we must be careful to keep the Christian Sabbath Day, which is the Sunday, not only for that it is Gods express Commandment, but also to declare ourselves to be loving children, in following the example of our gracious Lord and Father. So the Homily. And again, as followeth:  
Thus it may plainly appear, that Gods will and Commandment was to have a solemn time, and standing day in the week, wherein the people should come together, and have in remembrance his wonderful benefits, and to render him thanks for them, as appertaineth to loving, kind, and obedient people. This example and Commandment of God, the Godly Christian people began to follow immediately after the Ascension of our Lord Christ, etc. So the Homily, and much more. Whence we plainly observe these conclusions: 1. That all Christians ought and are bound in conscience of the fourth Commandment to keep the Lords Day holily. 2. That by the force of the fourth Commandment, one day in 7. is perpetually to be kept holy. 3. That the keeping of the Lords Day is grounded upon, and commanded in the fourth Commandment, and so is not of humane institution. 4. That the Lords Day is and may be called our Christian Sabbath day, therefore it is not jewish to call it so. 5. That this day is wholly to be spent in holy rest, and duties of sanctification, and therefore no part of it to be spent in vain pleasures, and profane pastimes. Now the Author of the Treatise doth overthrow all these conclusions, as is to be seen throughout his book.  A. 
I pray you show some instances hereof.  B. 
Pag. 23. his words are, This position (to wit, that the fourth Commandment is properly and perpetually moral, and is for quality and obligation, equal to the other nine Commandments,) (which for many years hath reigned in Pamphlets, Pulpits, and Conventicles, and is entertained as an Oracle by all such as either openly profess, or do lean towards the Disciplinarian Faction) is destitute of truth. These are his words. Which comparing with the words of the Homily of our Church already cited, are found quite contrary. For the Homily saith, that the fourth Commandment is a Law of nature, and aught to be retained and kept of all good Christians; in as much as it commands one day of the week for rest; and God hath given an express charge to all men, that the Sabbath Day, which is our Sunday, should be spent wholly in heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service. So as this man doth most unjustly condemn all those Godly Preachers, that have for so many years maintained the express doctrine of our Church in their writings and Sermons; and so he flatly condemneth our Church, and her doctrine of the Sabbath; wherein she is more clear and sound, than any Churches in the world. And long may this doctrine still flourish amongst us, maugre all the malicious opposers thereof, who are so bold as to affirm, that it is destitute of truth.  A. 
I assure you, I begin now to suspect the man; that he hath not dealt uprightly in the cause.  B. 
Nay it is passed all suspicion; for his words are so express, that they can admit of no favourable interpretation, but that they condemn the clear Doctrine of our Church, touching the perpetual morality of the fourth Commandment, for one day in the week, and so our Lord's Day, or Sunday, the first day of the week, our Christian Sabbath day, which God hath given express charge to all men to keep holy.  A. 
I confess the words of the Homily are most clear, without all ambiguity, or obscurity. But yet the Author seems to acknowledge some morality natural to be in the fourth Commandment. For pag. 135. he saith, Our resting from labour in respect of the general, is grounded upon the Law of nature, or the equity of the fourth Commandment.  B. 
This is nothing to the purpose, to acquit him from being an adversary to the express doctrine of our Church. Dolosus versatur in universalibus (it was the speech of King james.) The natural morality of the fourth Commandment, is not in general, to imply some individuum vagum, some certain uncertain indefinite time for God's worship: For the Commandment is express for a certain day in the week, for the Sabbath day; Remember the Sabbath day to sanctify it. It saith not, Remember to set apart and allow some time for the service of God; but it determines the time, and day; lest otherwise being left undetermined, man should forget God and himself, and allow no time or day at all for God's service; or if he did, God should be beholden to him for it. But it is a Law of nature, that every Lord and Master should have the power in himself, to appoint, not only the kind of service, but the time when it should be performed of his servants. As Alexander 
Alex. d'Ales P. 3. q. 32. m. ar.  d'Ales saith, upon the fourth Commandment, The time of this rest it is not in man's power to determine, but Gods. Again, the adversary acknowledgeth an equity in the fourth Commandment. What equity, if as it bound the ancient people of God to one day in the week, it do not also bind the Christian people to keep one day in the wee●●nd if it be the equity of the fourth Commandment, to prescribe one day in seven: then they are very unjust, that deny the keeping of the Lords day to be grounded upon the equity of the fourth Commandment. It were well, if they would stand to equity. But this doth our adversary fly from: For he saith in the next words, The particular form, and circumstances of resting, 
Ibid.  are prescribed unto us by the precepts of the Church. Our spiritual actions, according to that which is main and substantial in them, are taught by the evangelical Law. Their modification and limitation, in respect of ritual and external form; and in regard of place, duration, gesture, habit; and other external circumstances, are prescribed by the Law of the Church. So he. Thus you see, how he limits the prescription of circumstances, (which comprehend time, place, persons) and namely, Duration, when, and how long God shall be served, unto the prescription of the Law of the Church: which he expresseth more fully, pag. 270. saying, It was in the free election of the Church, to appoint what day, or days, or times, she thought good, or found convenient for Religious duties; for the evangelical Law hath not determined any certain day, or time; and those actions or circumstances, which are not determined by Divine precept, are permitted to the liberty and authority of the Church, to be determined and appointed. So he. But clear it is, that the Church of England disclameth all such power, but ascribes all authority of prescribing a time and day of holy rest unto the Lord of the Sabbath, who hath expressed his will and pleasure herein in his Law of the fourth Commandment; as our Homily saith.  A. 
But the Homily seems to favour his opinion, saying, that Godly Christian people began to choose them a standing day of the week, etc. And therefore it seems to be at the Church's choice.  B. 
Our choice doth not necessarily imply a power of institution. We are said to choose life, and truth, before death and error: are we therefore the authors of them? Again, our choice herein is according to God's Commandment. Thirdly, the Homily saith expressly, that those Godly Christian people, did in their choice follow the example and Commandment of God. Now what example had they, but Christ's rising and resting on that day, after the example of Gods resting the seventh day? And for Commandment, they had both the fourth Commandment, and an Apostolical precept, 1. Cor. 16. and that place in the Revelation, appropriating this day as holy to the Lord, and so ratified by God himself. And who were they which taught those Godly Christian people, to keep this day? viz. the Apostles. And therefore we must put a vast difference between the unerring Apostles, and the succeeding Churches, so as the Homily is clear against him.  A. 
But see, this seems to me the main knot of the whole controversy, namely about the designation of the particular and special time, consecrated to God's worship, whither it be comprehended and prescribed in the fourth Commandment, or depends upon the determination of the Church. The Adversary confesseth a natural equity in the fourth Commandment, that some time is to be set apart for the service of God, but indeputate, and left at large to the liberty of the Church to determine and limit the special time, when, and how long; what portion and proportion is to be allowed. Now although you have a little touched upon this point already: yet considering it is the main hinge of the whole matter in question, and the main ground, whereon the whole weight of the controversy relieth: I pray you a little more fully to elucidate this point, and the rather (not only for the settling of my judgement) but for the clearing of our Homily from all false interpretations, which the Adversary might make for the eluding of those things, which you have observed out of it.  B. 
Your motion is very opportune, and no less important. For the Adversary doth the more easily play fast and loose in the mist of his generalities, while, though he cannot, or dare not for shame utterly deny the morality of the fourth Commandment, (which all Divines do hold) yet he denies any particular, special, determinate time to be commanded or limited therein; but will have that wholly put and placed in the power of the Church. It will be requisite therefore to stop this hole, that he may not have the least evasion, but by the cords of strong reasons, be bound and forced to confess, that either the fourth Commandment doth prescribe and determine a set, certain, fixed proportion of time. consecrated by God himself unto his solemn and sacred worship: or else, that it commands to us Christians no certain time or day at all, and so the morality of it (if ever it had any) is quite abolished, and no other Law or Commandment now binds us, but the precept or practice of the Church. This is the very sum and upshot of the matter.  A. 
Sir, I conceive and apprehend it to be so.  B. 
Now I shall prove, and make it evident, that the fourth Commandment either prescribes a certain proportion of time, and a fixed day consecrate to God, and in that very respect is perpetually moral, binding us Christians to the same proportion: or else, if it determine no set proportion of time, but leaves it at large to the Church to proportionate, whither longer, or shorter; then there remains no such obligatory equity in the fourth Commandment, as to bind the Church to appoint and allow such or such a proportion of time; but that if this time, which the Church appointeth, be either one day in 20, or 40, or 100, or one day in the year, or so, or but one piece of a day in such a revolution of time, and not one whole or entire day, much less one whole day in every seven; the Church in this sinneth not, as being not guilty of the breach of the fourth Commandment, which bindeth us christian's to no certain proportion of time, as the Adversary himself would have it, but in this respect is now abrogated. His words are: 
* Pag. 90.  The fourth Commandment, in respect of any one definite and special day of every week, was not simply and perpetually moral, but positive and temporary only. Which assertion of his, as it is directly, and in terminis, contrary to the doctrine of our Homily fore-alledged, which saith: By this Commandment (the fourth) we ought to have a time, as one day in the week, etc. and this appartaineth to the Law of nature, as a thing most Godly, most just and needful for the setting forth of God's glory, and therefore aught to be retained and kept of all good Christian people. So the Homily. No, saith D. Whi● one day in the week was but positive and temporary only; and therefore not appartaining to the Law of nature, as a thing most Godly, most just, and needful for the setting forth of God's glory, and so ought not in that respect to be retained and kept of all good Christian people. But we will not press him down with the bare authority of our Church, without showing the grounds and reasons, whereupon it is grounded.  
Now first observe we the words of the Commandment, Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy: which words (saith the learnest Zanchie) are the very moral substance of the fourth Commandment. The Lord saith not, Remember to sanctify some convenient, and sufficient time, as the Church shall think fit. The Commandment prescribeth a certain and set time, yea a day, the Sabbath day, one day in the week, which is the Sabbath day. Again it teacheth us what day in the week the Sabbath day is, to wit, the Sabbath day of the Lord thy God: that day in the week, wherein the Lord our God resteth, must be our Sabbath day. So that as the Commandment prescribes unto us a weekly Sabbath day to be sanctified: so God's Precedent and example points out unto us, what or which day in the week we must rest on, to sanctify it. And this is not only the natural equity (which the adversary in general confesseth) but the very natural Law and substance of the fourth Commandment, to prescribe a set solemn day in the week to be sanctified, and not to leave it in the power of man, or of the Church to appoint what time they please. The reasons are these: 1. because the Commandment expressly limiteth one set day in the week, being the Sabbath day of the Lord our God, as hath been said. Now the Commandment prescribing a set and fixed day in the week: what human power shall dare to alter it into an indefinite time (call it what you will, convenient, or sufficient) to be appointed at the pleasure of man? This is with the Papists to commit high sacrilege, in altering the property of God's Commandments. For upon this ground, of a general equity, they have been bold to suppress the second Commandment, saying, it is comprised in the first. As they have robbed the people of the cup in the Sacrament, saying, the blood is contained in the body, under the forms of bread. So our adversary, imagining a general (I wot not what) equity in the fourth Commandment, of some certain uncertain time for God's public worship, doth thereby destroy the very property of the Commandment, which expressly prescribeth the Sabbath day in every week.  
A second reason, why it is not left in the power of the Church to prescribe what time men please, is, because as it is God's prerogative, as a Master, to appoint his own worship and service, so the time, wherein he will be served. This God himself commandeth in the fourth Commandment. Now as the King will not take it well, that any meddle with his prerogative, and arrogate that to himself, which is the King's right: so God is justly offended, when men presume to assume to themselves that power, which is proper and peculiar to God alone. If any will take upon him to coin money, by counterfeiting the King's stamp and name: his act is treason: how then shall they escape, if presume to coin what time they please for God's solemn worship, though they set the counterfeit stamp of God upon it. Now the Sabbath day is of the Lords own making and stamping, and therefore called the Lords day.  
A third reason, why it is not left in man's power to institute the solemn day of God's worship, his Sabbath day, or to appoint him what proportion of time they please, is, because an indefinite time must either bind to all moments of time, as a debt, when the day of payment is not expressly dated, is liable to payment every moment; or else it binds to no time at all. For if the Law of God bind us not to an express determinate time, or day, consecrate to his service: then the not allowing of him a set time, or day, is no sin at all. For what Gods Law commands not, therein man is not bound. And where no Law is of a set time or day, there is no transgression, if a set time, or day be not observed. So as, by this reason, if the Law of the fourth Commandment prescribe no set sacred time, or day for Rest and sanctification, it is a mere nullity. For, to say there is a natural equity in it for some sufficient and convenient time, and yet no man can define what this sufficient and convenient time is, nay all the wits and heads in the world put together, are not able to determine it: is, as to say, there is a world in the moon, consisting of Land and Sea, and inhabitants, because there are some black spots in it; which yet is not a more lunatic opinion, then that is presumptuous and absurd. Hath not the profane world found by woeful experience, & that of late days, within these two years last passed, wherein men have taken a liberty to profane and pollute, but a part of the Lords day: that this is a most horrible sin? And a sin it cannot be, but as a breach of one of God's holy Commandments. For where there is no Law, there is no transgression. The profanation (I say) of the Lords day is clearly showed to be an horrible presumptuous sin, and in special a bold breach of the fourth Commandment, by those many markable judgements of God, which have fearfully fallen upon fearless Sabbath breakers, and that (I say) within these two years last passed, the like whereof cannot be paralleled in all the Histories of all the Centuries since the Apostles times. Which alone (if men were not altogether possessed with the spirit of stupidity, and of a croced conscience) were sufficient to teach their dull wits, that the fourth Commandment is still in force, commanding the Sabbath day to be sanctified, the profanation whereof we see so terribly punished by divine revenge. A point also, which our Homily hath noted, which were sufficient to admonish the adversary of his presumptuous oppositions thereunto.  A. 
Sir, you have abundantly satisfied me in this point, and I suppose every rational man, and true bred-sonne of the Church of England. And surely I wonder so learned a man should commit so fowl an error, as not to search better into the Doctrine of our Church, so clearly expressed in the Homily.  B. 
You need not wonder at it; we have all known him to do as great a matter as that. For was not his hand to the Approbation of a Book in print (though afterwards called in by Sovereign Authority) which contains and maintayns many sundry Tenants, both Pelagian and Popish, flat against the clear Doctrines of our Church; and whereby he hath as yet made no public recantation, to remove the scandal from the Church of England, and to satisfy so high an offence given? Yea in stead of Recantation, I myself have heard him in open Court speak against both justification; that a man might be justified to day, and damned to morrow; and against Election of some to eternal life; and against the 
In the High Commission, at the Censure of Th. Brabourne.  sanctification of the Sabbath, saying, I say, there is no sanctification of the Sabbath, but Rest, Rest only. And therefore cease to wonder, that this man should be so fearless, either privily to undermine, or apertly to oppugn the express doctrines of our Church.  A. 
Yet I cannot but wonder, how he dare be so bold, and upon what grounds he should thus impune bear himself.  B. 
The grounds I examine not, as pertaining to those that are more judicious, and in highest place over the Church, but the fact cannot be dissembled.  A. 
But perhaps he will say, this is your private interpretation of the Homily; and of a sort of factions Sabbatarian novelists. But what instances can you bring of any, that were eminent in this Church for learning and parts, and not any way inclined to the Disciplinarian Faction, that concur with you in the same judgement and understanding of the doctrine of our Church, laid down in the Homily?  B. 
First, the words of the Homily (as you have heard, and as every one may plainly see) are so express, clear, and full, that they cannot possibly admit of the least ambiguity. And for instances, I could give many. I will content myself with two witnesses, enough to establish the matter. What say you to the learned Hooker, and to the learned Dr. Andrew's? were these any way inclined unto the Disciplinarian Faction? or were they novel Sabbatarians?  A. 
No surely; I think D. Wh. himself will not say so of them, but will admit them for very competent witnesses in this cause, as without all exception.  B. 
First then for Mr. Hooker: He in his fifth book of Ecclesiastical Policy, Sect. 70. hath these words: If it be demanded, whether we observe these times (to wit, holy days) as being thereunto bound by force of Divine Law, or else by the only positive Ordinances of the Church: I answer to this, that the very Law of nature itself, which all men confess to be God's Law, requireth in general no less the sanctification of times, then of places, persons, and things unto God's honour. For which cause it hath pleased him heretofore as of the rest, so of time likewise to exact some parts by way of perpetual homage, never to be dispensed withal, nor remitted; again, to require some other parts of time, with as strict exaction, but for less continuance, and of the rest which were left arbitrary, to accept what the Church shall in due consideration consecrate voluntarily unto like Religious uses. Of the first kind amongst the jews, was the Sabbath day: Of the second, those Feasts which are appointed to the Law of Moses; the Feast of Dedication invented by the Church, standeth in the number of the last kind. The Moral Law requiring therefore a seventh part throughout the age of the whole world to be that way employed, although with us the day be changed, in regard of a new revolution begun by our Saviour Christ, yet the same proportion of time continueth, which was before, because in reference to the benefit of Creation, and now much more, of Renovation thereunto added by him, which was Prince of the world to come, we are bound to account the sanctification of one day in seven, a duty which Gods immutable Law doth exact for ever. So he there. Where you see, how in terminis he agreeth and jumpeth with the express doctrine of our Church in the Homily, touching the perpetual morality of the fourth Commandment, We are bound (saith he) to account the sanctification of one day in seven (which before he saith is now the Lords day) a duty which Gods immutable Law doth exact for ever. The second instance is the late Reverend and learned B. of Winkc. who in his speech in the Star-chamber, (which with 
B. Andrew's speech in Starte-chamber against Mr. Traske.  other of his works hath been by the great diligence and care of the now Archbishop of Cant. published in print) confuting Trasks opinion about the jews Sabbath, hath these words: It hath ever been the Church's doctrine, that Christ made an end of all Sabbaths, by his Sabbath in the grave. That Sabbath, was the last of them. And that the Lords day presently came in place of it: Dominicus, etc. The Lord's day was, by the Resurrection of Christ, declared to be the 
Dominicus dies, Christi resurrectione declaratus est Christianis, & ex illo coepit habere festivitatem suam. Aug. p. 119. c. 13  Christians day; and from that very time (of Christ's Resurrection) it began to be celebrated, as the Christian man's Festival. For the Sabbath had reference to the old Creation; but in Christ, we are a new creature, a new creation by him, and to have a new Sabbath. And a little after: The Apostles, they kept their meetings on that day. On that day they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (that is) held their synaxes, their solemn assemblies: to preach, to pray, to break bread, or celebrate the Lords Supper, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Lords Supper on the Lord's day: For, these two only (the Day and the Supper) have the Epithet of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Dominicum, in the Scriptures; to show Dominicum is alike to be taken in both. This, for the practice then: If you will have it in Precept; The 
* Thus D. Andr. is point blank against  Apostle gives it (and in the same word still) that against 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (the first day of the week) the day of their assembly, every one should lay apart, what God should move him to offer to the Collection for the Saints, and 
D. Wh. who pag. 270. (quoted before) saith, that the evangelical Law hath not determined any certain day or time. Yet lo here a certain day determined by the evangelical Law, delivered by the Apostle.  then offer it; which was soever in use. That, the day of oblations. So have you it in practice and in precept, both, etc. And after: A thing so notorious, so well known, even to the heathen themselves, as it was (in the Acts of the Martyrs) ever an usual question of theirs (even of Course) in their examining, What? Dominicum Servasti? Hold you the Sunday? and their answer known; they all aver it, Christianus sum, intermittere non possum. I am a Christian, I cannot intermit it. And besides others he cities Athanasius, who shows the abolishing of the jews day, and the succeeding of the Lords day, in place of it, and that so full, as no man can wish more. Last of all, he both quotes, and commends the Council of Laodicea, for that Canon 29. That Christian men may not judaize, or grow jews; that is, not make the Sabbath or Saturday, their day of rest; but that they are to work on that day, giving their honour of celebration to the Lords day. So he. I will add only a brief note of the same Author in one of his Sermons; on those 
Serm. 1. of the gunpowder treason, on Psa. 118 23. 24.  words: This is the day, which the Lord hath made: The day of Christ's Resurrection, made by God, Dies Dominicus; and to it, do all the Fathers apply this verse. So he. I might here also add what is said in that Book, which is entitled, A Pattern of catechetical Doctrine, and printed at London 1630. which though it 
A Pattern of catechetical Doctrine. And, the whole Decalogue succinctly & judiciously expounded.  have not Dr. Andrew's name prefixed unto it; yet it is well known, it was his work, (even ex ungne Leonem) being his catechetical exercise in Cambridge, as I have been credibly informed, and whereof I have the Manuscript by me, which I keep as an Antiquity. I know the book will not very well relish with our adversaries palate. For there (pag. 233.) are these passages. Quest. But is not the Sabbath a ceremony, and so abrogated by Christ? Answ. Do as Christ did in the cause of divorce; look whither it were so from the beginning; Now the beginning of the Sabbath was in Paradise before there was any sin, and so before there needed any Saviour, and so before there was any Ceremony, or figure of a Saviour. Object. And if they say it prefigured the rest that we shall have from our sins in Christ. Answ. We grant it (as coming in afterwards Deuter. 5. 15. as it is in my Manuscript) and therefore the day is changed, but yet no Ceremony proved. 1. From the Law. 1. By the distinction between the Law and a Ceremony, Deut. 4. 13. 14. the Law came immediately from God: the Ceremonies were instituted by Moses. 2. It were not wise to set a Ceremony in the midst of moral Precepts 
‡ So there should be confusion. Manuscr. . 3. This is a principle, that the Decalogue is the Law of Nature revived, and the Law of Nature is the image of God; now in God there can be no Ceremony, but all must be eternal: and so in this Image, which is the Law of Nature, and so in the Decalogue. Secondly from the Gospel, Eph. 2. 4. all Ceremonies were ended in Christ; but so was not the Sabbath; for Mat. 24. 20. Christ biddeth them pray, that their visitation be not on the Sabbath day: so that there must needs be a Sabbath after Christ's death. 3. Those which were Ceremonies were abrogated, and not changed: but those which were not Ceremonies were changed: as the Ministry from the Levites, to be chosen throughout the world: the seats changed: so here the day changed from the day of jews, to the Lords day. Rev. 1. 10. So there. And my Manuscript addeth, And yet a Sabbath, Act. 1. 12. So that this lasteth as long, as the Church militant. So there. Now from the premises in this instance, we observe, what was the judgement of that learned Prelate, and how consonant to the doctrine of our Church in the Homily, touching the Sabbath. He shows plainly, that the Lords day coming in place of the old Sabbath day, and so becoming our Sabbath day, is by necessary consequence grounded upon the fourth Commandment, the Law whereof is perpetually, because naturally moral. So as hence I might frame this argument: That day, which comes in place of the old Sabbath day, is commanded in the fourth Commandment: But the Lord's day is come in place of the old Sabbath: Therefore it is commanded in the fourth Commandment. The Minor is clear in D. Andr. and so from all the Fathers universally. The Major is no less true; for if the fourth Commandment command the Sabbath day to be kept perpetually in all ages (as saith our Homily) and that Sabbath day of the jews is now abolished, and an other day, the Lords day is now come in place of the old, and is the Christians Sabbath day: then of necessity, doth the fourth Commandment command us Christians to keep the Lords day, as our new Sabbath day. For instance: One is made a present heir, yea and Lord of such an inheritance: he enjoyeth it for his life; but when he dies, his next heir succeeds him in the full title. So here. If they object, But Quo jure, by what right doth the Lord's day take the place of the Sabbath day? I answer with D. Andrew's, and all the Fathers, out of the Psalm, God made it so: And Christ's Resurrection declared it to be so: and the Apostles observed it so; yea and commanded it so too.  A. 
I remember the Treatiser confesseth, that the Apostles 
Pag. 211. & 189.  themselves at sometimes observed this day; as Act. 20. 7. 1. Cor. 16. 2.  B. 
At sometimes only? what? no oftener, than he finds expressly mentioned? This is like him in Oxford, who in his Sermon said, that the jews kept the Sabbath, but once in 40 years, during their abode in the wilderness. This he gathered, because he found it but once mentioned. But he might have found it twice, if he had looked well. So as this is a most beggarly kind of reasoning. And how injurious an imputation is it to the Apostles, to say, that they kept the Lords day sometimes, when as they taught and commanded others to observe it weekly; as hath been noted; did Christian people immediately after Christ's Ascension observe this weekly day: and did not the Apostles themselves? This is too grossly repugnant both to good reason, to our Homily, and to the witnesses produced.  A. 
These two witnesses and instances I perceive come full home to the Homily. Only one thing I observe, that D. Andrew's calls the Lords day our new Sabbath. This is a very rare thing, and that which the adversary in his book doth much except against, not 
☜  enduring that the Lords day should be called the Sabbath day. And I remember one passage in it, wherein he quarrels H. B. for saying, that the ancient Fathers did ever usually call it the Sabbath day. Wherein he saith he hath wronged and wrested S. Augustine in those places by him alleged.  B. 
Concerning that, I have spoken with H. B. and he saith, he will answer, and make good what he hath said against his adversary. And he told me, that howsoever indeed those words, ever usually, might give advantage to the adversary to carp, yet being rightly understood, they may pass currant enough. For by, ever usually, he meant, that all the ancient Fathers, although they always distinguish between the Lord's day, and the jews Sabbath day, yet they ever took and observed the Lords day in stead of the old Sabbath day; and ever used it for the rest-day or Sabbath day of Christians; Rest-day, and Sabbath-day being all one. And H. B. told me, that if D. Wh. took advantage of that, he could as easily 
Pag. 207.  take advantage of that speech of his, where he saith, This name (Sabbath) is not given it (the Lord's day) in holy Scripture, or by any of the Godly Fathers of the Church. Now (saith H. B.) was not S. Augustine a Godly Father? And he, not only in those places, quarrelled by D. W. and which H. B. will more fully clear from his cavils, but more plainly, and without all ambiguity, in his 251. Sermon de Tempore, speaking of the Lords day, he hath these very words: Ac ideo etc. 
* Aug. de Temp. Ser. 251. De eo quod scriptum est vacate, & videte quoniam ego sum Deus. Ac ideo sancti Doctores Ecclesiae decreverunt omnem gloriam Iudaici Sabbatismi in illam (Dominicam) transfer, ut quod ipsi in figura, nos celebraremus in veritate & observemus ergo diem Dominicam fratres, & sanctificemus illam, sicut antiquis praeceptum est de Sabbato, dicente Legislatore, A vespere usque ad vesperam celebrabitis Sabbata vestra. Videamus ●e otium nostrum vanum sit, sed a vespera diei Sabbati, usque ad vesperam diei Dominici sequestrati à rurali opere, & ab omni negotio, soli Divino cultui vacemus. Sic quoque sanctificamus ritè Sabbatum Domini, dicente Domino, Omne opus non facietis in eo.  And therefore the holy Doctors of the Church have decreed to transfer all the glory of the judaical Sabbath, or Sabbatisme, unto the Lord's day, that what they observed in a figure, we might celebrate in truth. Let us therefore Brethren observe the Lords day, and sanctify it, like as it was commanded them of old, concerning the Sabbath, the Lawgiver saying, From evening to evening ye shall celebrate your Sabbaths. Let us take heed that our Rest be not vain, but from the evening of the Saturday unto the evening of the Lords day, being sequestered from rural work, and from all business, we may be vacant only for the worship of God. Thus also we duly sanctify the Sabbath of the Lord, as the Lord saith, Ye shall do no work therein. So he. And a little before in the same Sermon: Dominicum ergo diem, etc. Therefore the Apostles, and Apostolical men, established the Lords day to be therefore observed with a Religious solemnity, because in it our Redeemer arose from the dead. And which is therefore called the Lords day, that in it we abstaining from terrene works, or the allurements of the world, might only attend to God's worship, etc. So Augustine. And you see he speaks this, not as his own particular opinion, but as it was the Tenet of the whole Catholic Church. So as the whole ancient Catholic Church did not only observe, but call the Lords day the Sabbath of the Lord, which they kept in place of the old Sabbath day. Thus did H. B. inform me. And I remember Hilary calls it so, saying; Though in the seventh day of the week, both the name and observance 
[Hilar in Psalm. explanato Prologus] Come in septimo die Sabbati sit & nomen, & observantia constituta: tamen nos in octava die, quae & ipsa prima est, perfecti Sabbatum festivitate laetamur.  of the Sabbath be established: yet we on the vl day, which also is the first, do enjoy the festivity of the perfect Sabbath. Lo here this Father also calls the Lord's day the day of our perfect Sabbath. But this suffice.  A. 
It is a very pregnant place for his purpose, and sufficient to answer fully all the cavils, which are brought to the contrary; so as if H. B. do but allege this one place, it will clear all the other. But Sir, here is a huge clamour, especially of late days, raised against the name of Sabbath applied to the Lords day. I pray you, may it not be called the Sabbath day? And what doth our Church hold concerning this?  B. 
That the Lords day may be called the Sabbath day, I make no question. And that for many reasons: 1. Because it is our Rest-day: 2. The Apostle calls our rest a Sabbatisme. 3. The very name of Lords day imports so much, as being the Lords holy day, as 
Heb. 4 see Zanchy de hominis creatione. lib. 1. cap. 1. Sect. 36.  Esa. 58. 13. and that day whereon the Lord rested from his work of Redemption; and so sanctified by him, and to him.  A. 
D. Wh. denies, that Christ upon the day of his Resurrection rested from the work of Redemption.  B. 
I conferred with H. B. about this, because it much concerns him to quit this question, seeing on Christ's resting on that day, he grounds the Sabbatisme of it, as agreeable to the fourth Commandment. And in my judgement, if he can evince and clear it, it will prove unanswerable. And he tells me, that he hath in two several Treatises in Latin against Theo. Brab. fully cleared it, and remooved all objections and cavillations, that either Th. Br. or F. Wh. have or can bring to the contrary. And he purposeth to do the like to D. Wh. And he made it very clear to me, that Christ's Rest from the work of Redemption from sin on the Cross, and from death in the grave (which was a branch of that work) began not, till his Resurrection. As for his Ascension, that was into the place of rest; but his Resurrection was into the state of rest. As for D. Wh. his objection, with Th. Brab. that Christ laboured on that day: H. B. shows it to be absurd and ridiculous, seeing Christ arose with a body glorified and impassable, so as his actions that day could not be called a labour, that thereby the new Sabbath should be broken. But you ask me, what our Church holdeth concerning this, that the Lords day is called the Sabbath day. In brief, I have observed, that in the Homilies it is no less than ten several times called expressly the Sabbath day; 
☞  8. times in the Homily forecited, and twice in the third Homily of Rebellion. Also Canon 70. in the Articles of the two last Triennial visitations of London. In K. james his Proclamation May 7. 1603 twice. In an exhortation at a general Fast set forth by him in the first year of his Reign. In Archbishop bancroft's visitation Articles for Canterbury, Art. 75. 76. I might compile a whole volume of instances in this kind. Yea there seldom comes forth a Brief, but it calls it the Sabbath day. But least neither the Church of England in her public doctrine, nor the pious works of her grave and learned sons, may perhaps satisfy the Adversaries importunity: yet I hope the writings of his more pious, and no less learned brother D. john White, (and those also both republished, and vindicated by Fr. White, from the Jesuits calumnies, white died black etc.) will a little qualify him. How D. john White doth not only call the Lords day the Sabbath day, as once Sect. 38. 1. 
The way to the true Church.  and twice Sect. 43. digress. 46. 6. but he also condemns all profane sports and recreations on that day, and among the rest dancing for one. And for this he allegeth the example of the Papists, as the most notorious Sabbath-breakers in this kind.  A. 
Doth he so, Sir; This seems strange to me, that so great a Clerk, as Fr. White, should so far forget himself, as not to remember what his brother hath write. Surely if it be so, it will be a cooling card, and no small disgrace to his Lo; when so worthy and reverend a Brother shall be brought as a witness against him. But I pray you for my better satisfaction, relate to me the very passages and words of D. john White.  B. 
I will. In Digress. 46. the title whereofis, Naming certain 
Ibid. Sect 43. Digress. 46. n. 6.  points of the Popish Religion, which directly tend to the maintenance of open sin, and liberty of life. Now among many fowl and profane practices (as he calls them) this he notes for one, namely the profanation of the Sabbath, in these words: That they hold it lawful on the Sabbath day, to follow suits, travel, hunt, DANCE, keep fairs, and such like. This is it that hath made Papists the most notorious Sabbath-breakers that live. So he. And 
Ibid Sect. 38. n. 1.  Sect. 38. n. 1. he saith: Let it be observed, if all disorders be not most in those parts among us, where the people is most Popeholy, etc. And for mine own part, having spent much of my time among them, this I have found, that in all excess of sin, Papists have been the ringleaders, in riotous companies, in drunken meetings, in seditious assemblies and practices, in profaning the Sabbath in quarrels and brawls, in stageplayss, Green's, Alice, and all heathenish customs, etc. Thus this reverend Divine, Candore notabilis ipso, whom all the jesuitical smoke out of the bottomless pit cannot besweere or besumdge, or dye black with all their black-mouthed obloquys.  A. 
Surely these are very pregnant passages. And it makes me tremble to think, and amazeth me, how one White is so contrary to another; as also, how the Libertinism dispensed now a days on the Sabbath, tendeth to bring us Protestants to be like to the Papists in their profane times, in taking up their heathenish savage, and barbarous manners and customs.  B. 
We have all of us cause to lament what we see, and to fear yet more sinful mischiefs to follow, if they be not prevented.  A. 
I begin to blame my own negligence, I did not think that our Church, and the Archbishops and Bishops themselves, and K. james and others had so familiarly used to call the Lords day the Sabbath day. And it seemeth, that D. Wh. hath not well read over out own Church Records, how skilful soever he profess himself to be in Antiquity, tanquam in aliena republica, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; or as the Lamiaes, who abroad carried their eyes in their heads, but at home closed them up in a box. Otherwise, I suppose he would not so frequently brand all those for novel Sabbatarians, who call the Lords day the Sabbath day.  B. 
What is his reason, I know not. Let him look to it. Me thinks the very reading of the fourth Commandment every Lord's day, might stop his mouth; saving that he hath found out many inventions to elude the nature and property of this Commandment, as pag. 158. 159. etc. which I hope H. B. will meet withal.  A. 
I shall be glad to see it. And yet I somewhat correct my former conceit of D. Wh. For I find, he hath read the Homily and Injunction, as pag. 224.  B. 
Indeed I thank you for minding me of it. I remember he 
Pag. 224.  quotes the Homily in one place of his Book (and that is all as far as I have observed) where he hath picked out one little piece, to maintain his Christian Libertinism in point of labour on the Lord's day. But it is altogether perverted by him for works of great necessity, as scathfire, invasion of enemies, etc. God allows on the Sabbath. And the Injunction of Queen Eliz. 20. he there also no less perverteth, while he confounds the Lord's day with other holy days, which the Injunction doth clearly distinguish for that liberty, which it dispenseth with, touching work in harvest time is not spoken of the Lords day, or Holy day, as it is there called, and set alone by itself, but of holy and festival days only, of human institution.  A. 
And I thank you for this observation. And falling here upon work on the Lord's day, I am occasiotied to ask your judgement of those passages of his, touching Recreations on that day, in which argument he hath spent many leaves.  B. 
But without any good fruit. And as his discourses hereupon are large, so they require a large confutation, which I hope H. B. will perform. For the present, a little to satisfy your request, thus much: He distinguisheth Recreations into two sorts: 1. Honest and lawful. 2. Vicious and unlawful. For his definitions, or descriptions of them, I pass them by, as requiring a larger answer. In sum, I note his pitiful enterfeering by equivocations, contradictions, and the artifice of his purest natural wit, in spinning a curious web of so fine a thread, as wherewith though he may think to cover himself, yet it is pervious and penetrable to every eye. He saith, All kinds of Recreation, which are of evil quality, 
Pag. 229.  in respect of their object; or which are attended with evil and vicious circumstances, are unlawful, and to be refrained upon all days, and at all seasons. But if they be used upon the Lord's day, or on other Festival days, they are sacrilegious, because they rob God of his honour, to whose worship and service the holy day is devoted: and they defile the souls of men, for the cleansing and edifying whereof the holy day is deputed. And pag. 259. he relates out of ancient Imperial Edicts, that all obscene, lascivious, and voluptuous pastime▪ are prohibited, etc. And yet pag. 266. he hath these words: This seemeth to me to have been a prime motive to our Religious Governors, of allowing the people of the Land some Recreations (not prohibited by our Laws) upon the holy days. For if they should (upon Puritan principles) restrain them wholly from all repast▪ the Holiday would be more unwelcome to them, than the plough-day: and beside, it might engender in people's minds a distaste of their present Religion, and manner of serving God. So he. Where I note sundry poor and pitiful shifts and shu●●lings. For first, pag. 258. he saith, Also our most gracious and Religious Sovereign is the Lords Vicegerent, to restrain the abuse, and scandalous profanation of the Lords day: And he is a noble Successor of those glorious Princes, which in ancient times, by their Royal and Imperial Edicts and Constitutions, prohibited on this day, All obscene, lascivious, and voluptuous pastimes, etc. If then I might be so bold, I would ask him, what he thinks of promiscuous meetings of wanton youth in their May-games, setting up of Maypoles, dancing about them, dancing the Morris, and leading the ringdance, and the like: unto which D. Wh. in the former passage, 266. doth not obscurely point as it were with the finger. Are not these obscene, or lascivious and voluptuous pastimes? And if so, are they not prohibited by Royal and Imperial Edicts and Constitutions of those glorious ancient Princes, whereof our most Gracious and Religious Sovereign, the Lords Vicegerent, for restraining the abuse and scandalous profanation of the Lords day, is a noble Successor? Lo then, what a monstrous Contradiction is here.  A. 
But do ancient Emperors in their Imperial Edicts prohibit such Recreations on the Lord's day?  B. 
I will give you one instance, in stead of many. Carolus M. 
Caroli M. Leges Ecclesiast. lib. 6. cap. 202.  Placuit, It is our pleasure, that all the faithful do reverently observe the Lord's day, in which the Lord rose again. For if Pagans, for the memory and reverence of their gods, do celebrate certain days, and the jews do carnally observe the Sabbath: how much more ought this day to be honourably celebrated of Christians, that on this Holiday they attend not upon vain fables, or idle chat, or songs, or dances, or scoffings, standing in the cross-ways, or streets, as they usually do; but that they have recourse to the Priests, or some wise, and good man, that they may profit by their preaching and good discourses, such as concern the soul. In like sort also les shepherds, or keepers of cattle, by going and returning into the fields, and home again, do so, that all may know such to be true, and devout Christians. So he. And his Son, Ludovicus Pius, in his additionals, repeating the selfsame Constitution of his Father verbatim, doth add these words: 
Ludovic. Pius ibid. Additio c. 9  Proinde, etc. Therefore it is necessary, that first Priests, Kings and Princes, and all the faithful, do most devoutly give all due observance, and reverence to this day. So he.  A. 
A most noble instance, and home. For I perceive this Imperial Decree condemns all dancing, especially on the Lord's day. But let me not interrupt you.  B. 
To proceed then upon the former passages: Secondly, I note how poorly he plays the Divine, or Doctor, by giving indulgence of more liberty to such as have queasy stomaches, and cannot digest those wholesome meats, which Gods word, and all sound Divines and Doctors do prescribe. This is just, as if a sick Patient should refuse some bitter pills or potions, which are for his health, complaining he cannot endure the bitterness of them: and then forsooth his palate must be pleased with some delicious thing, which corrupts the stomach, and feedeth the disease. Or as if a wanton boy must be permitted so many hours play every day, because he hath learned one lesson, and complains the task is too hard to learn more. Or as if a Servant, being set about his Master's business, though it be otherwise easy and tolerable, yet complains it is too hard a task, and therefore he must have liberty to take his pleasure one part of the day. And surely this follows by good reason, from the greater to the less, from God's day to man's day, and from God's service to man's service. Give man a power thus to dispense with a part of the Lords day, which is an incrochment upon the fourth Commandment, according to the doctrine of our Church: and why may not man assume to himself a power (as the Pope doth) to dispense with servants, or children, by allowing them sometime, wherein they shall be free from the control of their Masters and Parents?  
Thirdly, I note what a great blemish he fastens upon our Religion, as if it were either too rigorous, or too licentious. Too rigorous, by laying no other burden upon them, but that of Christ, which though in its own nature it be light and easy, yet to the sons of Belial it seems insupportable, and intolerable. As if sanctity, and purity of life were an over rigid preciseness, and a Puritan principle. Or too licentious, by giving indulgence, and dispensation to loose Libertines, and teaching men to become more filthy still, and to be as the unclean Beasts, that chew not the Cud, or as the sow that is washed, to return to their wallowing in their profuse and profane sports and pastimes, when no sooner they are out of the Church, but they run to their excess of riot. And here I cannot but record an excellent passage in Nazianzen, to shame the impudence of these times. This Godly Father, reproving the loose carriage of Christians in his time, especially on the days of solemn and sacred assemblies, as on the Lords days, saith: Postquam, etc. After they are gone out of the Church, casting 
Clem. Alex. Poedag. lib. 3 c. 11. near the end. He lived about the year of Christ 200.  aside all that instruction, they had there learned, they fashion themselves to the vulgar, with whom they converse; or rather laying aside the false and counterfeit vizard of gravity, they are discovered to be such, as they were not known to be before: and having seemed to give some reverence to God's word, while it was preached, they leave it: and out of the Church, they fall to delight and sport themselves in an impious manner, and with love songs, with the noise of Minstrels, as piping, clapping the hands, being full of strong drink, and defiled with all kind of muddy and dorty pleasures. And whilst they chant it over and over, they who celebrated the honour of immortality, by and by fall to a most wicked recantation; Let us eat and drink, for to morrow we shall dye. And these are not dead to morrow, but indeed are now dead unto God; burying the dead, that is, themselves, in the grave of death. So he. Which liberty even the Papists themselves, and Bellarmine abundantly, do with open voice declaim against, and are ashamed of, so far will they be from being willing to be drawn to such a Religion, by the motives of such liberty. And herein doth our Treatiser miserably abuse the Scripture, and so turn the Grace of God into wantonness. For pag. 257. he saith, The Law of Christ is sweet and easy, Mat. 11. 30. and, his Commandments are not grievous, 1. joh. 5. 3. And what then? Is Christ's Law so sweet and easy, as that it gives indulgence to profane Libertinism? This is to make the Gospel a sweet fable, as that Atheistical Pontifician said. Or as an other in his Sermon, upon those words of Christ, The son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day: thence inferred, that Christ had given us liberty to play on the Sabbath. And this the Treatiser calleth 
* Pag. 268.  Christian liberty, and on the contrary, the holy and Religious keeping of the Lords day, a superstitious judaical fancy, and 
* Pag. 249.  rigid Ordinances of our Sunday-Sabbatarians. Whereas the ancient Godly 
* See Aug. de Consensu Evangelist. l. 2▪ c▪ ●7.  Fathers called the loose profaning of the Lords day by dancing and revelling, a jewish Sabbatising. A point well to be observed.  
Fourthly I observe a very improper, and so untrue speech; where 
☞  he saith▪ If they should (upon Paritan Principles) restrain them wholly from all repast. Who (I pray you) do restrain the people from all repast on the Lord's day? Or is profane sport a repast, to feed the humour of the rude vulgar? It seemeth so. And liberty to youth is as their meat and drink.  
Fiftly pag. 266. he saith: Some Recreations (not prohibited by our laws) our Religious Governors allow upon Holidays. And pag. 232. Civil recreation, not prohibited in terms, neither yet by any necessary consequence from the law, cannot be simply unlawful. And pag 231. No just law, divine, Ecclesiastical, or Civil, doth totally prohibit the same. To this I reply, that those sport's fore-specified, are prohibited by law, both divine, Ecclesiastical, and Civil. 1. by divine law: as 
* Gloss Interlin. Haec sunt opera tenebrarum.  Rom. 13. 13. 
* Opera carnis ibi. M. Bucer▪ de Regno Christi. lib. 2. ca 10. Scripta Anglicana.  Gal. 5. 21. 1. Pet. 4. 3. In the fourth commandment for as Bucer saith: writing to K. Edw. 6. His diebus. On these, to wit, Holidays, the works of the flesh are not to be allowed, nor profane businesses, nor licentious sports, nor unseemly drink, and other vicious pleasures. Indeed the people are to be allowed honest recreations at fit seasons: but seeing God hath so severely forbidden works profitable for the body, to be done on days sanctified to his Name: how much more greivously is he offended, when th●se days are profaned with wanton, and for the most part wicked works? Six days (saith he) thou shalt do all thy work; to wit, such as concerneth the sustentation, or else the recreation of this present life: but the seventh day is the Lords Sabbath, on it thou shalt not do any work: not any, which the Lord himself hath not commanded to be done on that day: but those which he hath commanded, they are all most religiously to be observed on the Holidays. And of so weak and slippery faith are we all, as the daily renewing and confirming of the same is very necessary for us. Whereas most men more greivously offend and provoke God's Majesty on these days, then on other days. By all means therefore it is the office of your sacred Majesty against this so great dishonour of God, and lawless profanation of his Holidays, to revive the authority, of God's law, and therein also to follow the examples of pious Princes, etc. So he.  
Secondly: Those foresaid sports are prohibited by Ecclesiastical laws, for all Counsels do universally condemn them. To instance 
Concil. Mediolan. 4.  one or two. The Council of Milan. Nefasesse, etc. It is impious, that sacred days instituted for the commemoration of the greatest benefits of God, and to render our best praises unto him, should be transferred to those things, which most of all abhor from that service: as leapings, sports, dances, interludes or shows, which being enticements to filthy pleasures, do much delight the Devil, the enemy of man's salvation. And another of Milan: That no sports, or vain sights, 
Concil. Mediolan. 1.  dance, leaping, be used at all in Cities, suburbs, town, or any where eye on the Holidays. And yet another Council at Milan: Quoniam, 
Concil. Mediolan. 3.  etc. Because it is found by too much experience in this Province, that in these corrupted times and manners, that people for the most part never meet at dancing, merriments, leapings, and the like, without many, and those most grievous offences of God, and that both by reason of filthy thoughts and obscene speeches, dishonest actions, corruption of manners, and most pernicious bats to all the lusts of the flesh, perpetually coupled with them, and also of murders, brawls, dissensions, whoredoms, adulteries, and many other evils, the most frequent consequences thereof, wherefore on Holidays we prohibit leapings, sports, dance, etc. Now these Counsels were kept in Italy. Yea a Council 
Conc. Rom. anno 826. Conc. pars 3. Bin.  at Rome, but more ancient: Of Feast not to be made upon Holidays; and, On Holidays dancing not to be used: There be some, and specially women, which on Holidays by their bawling, singing filthy songs, holding and leading dances, so imitating the guise of Pagans, do bring it among Christians, such, if they come to the Church, with lesser sins, they return from it with greater. And if upon admonition they desisted not, Leo 4. denounceth excommunication against them. Lo here, this Council at Rome saith, that dancing on Holidays is a heathen guise, brought in among Christians. 
Can. Conc. Colon. anno 1563. explic in Deoalogum.  Shall I add one more. The Council of Colen: deinde impingunt. Again, they offend against this Precept, who on Holidays are intent upon sports, pastimes, dice, leaping, dancing the ring, who are vacant for revel, drink, superfluous pomp, who defile the Holidays with wicked talk, and filthy songs: such doth the Council of Carthage, and of Toledo, decree to be excommunicate. For holy solemnities and feasts are not therefore instituted, to serve our filthy lusts, or that we should collect together our sins, but that we should altogether abandon them, and not to celebrate them with corporal refection or recreation, but spiritual rejoicing. And how is it possible, that in dances the sanctification of the Sabbath should be kept, where modesty itself is not secure from snares. So the Council. But what need we go further, than our own Homily forecited, which saith, that in pride, in excess, like rats in brawling, fight, quarrelling, wantonness, toyish talking, and filthy fleshliness, God is more dishonoured, and the devil better served on the Sunday, or Sabbath day, then upon all the days of the week beside. Now though moris dances and may-games, and the like, be not here condemned in terminis, yet by consequence they be: sith they are the inseparable companions, and most pernicious occasions of inflaming the lusts, and of manifold mischiefs; as hath been noted. Therefore by just Ecclesiastical laws such sports are prohibited.  
Thirdly, They are prohibited by just Civil laws. Besides those instances fore-alleged of the Edicts of Charolus Mag. and Ludovicus Pius his Son: we may to the honour of our nation, and the eternal fame of our religious King Charles, produce the first Act of Parliament in I. Caroli, the prime gem in his Royal diadem; and which deserves to be written in golden Characters. Forasmuch as there is nothing more acceptable to God, than the true and sincere worship and service of Him, according to his holy will, and that the holy keeping of the Lords day is a principal part of the true service of God, which in very many places of this Realm hath been, and now is profaned and neglected by a disorderly sort of people, in exercising and frequenting Bearbaiting, Bull-baiting, Interludes, common plays, and other unlawful exercises and pastimes upon the Lord's day, etc. That from henceforth, etc. there shall be no Bear-baiting, Bull-baiting, Interludes, common plays, or other unlawful exercises or pastimes within their own Parishes, Hence it is plain, that all manner of sports and pastimes are unlawful on the Lord's day; for Bearbaiting and Bull-baiting are prohibited, as unlawful on this day, which else are made lawful on other days. And therefore dancing, May-games, Morrices, and the like, how ever men may account them lawful on other days, yet for the very reasons aforesaid, forasmuch as they are prohibited as unlawful by Imperial Edicts of ancient Kings and Emperors, of whom our most gracious and religious sovereign is by the Treatiser acknowledged to be the noble, successor, in restraining the abuse, and scandalous profanation of the Lords day: on this day at least, they are unlawful. I will add but one instance more, and that is out of justinian, where he set down this Imperial Constitution. Die Dominico, etc. On the Lord's day, which of the whole week is the first, 
justinian. Cod. 15. tit. 5.  all pleasures of sports and pastimes being denied to the people through all Cities, let the whole minds of Christians be occupied in the service of God: and if any shall on this day be taken up with the madness of jewish impiety, or with the error and franticness of brutish Paganism, let him know, that there is a difference to be put between the time of prayers, and the time of pleasures. Yea so religiously was this day observed, as if the Emperor's birthday fell upon it, it must be put of to another day of the week; and saith the Constitution, If the people sh●ll show less reverence towards us then, than they were wont, let no man be offended with it, because men do give greatest honour to our clemency, when the world's obedience is entirely yielded to the virtues and merits of Almighty God. So there. In fine, in a 
* A necessary Doctrine for a Christian man.  book set forth by King Hen. 8. and inscribted to his loving and faithful subjects, which before had been set forth by the 
* Printed 1537. The Institution of a Christian man.  whole Clergy of the Realm, with the names of 21. Prelates, besides many Doctors, prefixed unto it, & approved by both the houses of Parliament: are these passages, 
* Upon the fourth Commandment.  Against this Commandment generally do offend all they, which will not cease from their own carnal wills & pleasures, that do not give themselves Entirely and wholly, without any impediment unto all holy works, and that not only in the house of God, but also in their own houses; but (as commonly is used) pass the time either in idleness, in gluttony, in riot, or other vain, or idle pastime; which is not according to the intent and meaning of this Commandment, but after the usage and custom of the jews, and doth much offend God, and provoke his indignation & wrath towards us. And it is added in the Clergies 
* Institution fol. 77. 2.  book, for as S. Austen saith of the jews, they should be better occupied, labouring in their fields, and to be at the plough, then to be idle at home. And women should better bestow their time in spinning of will, then upon the Sabbath day to lose their time in leaping, & dancing, and other idle wanton, lose time▪ So there. Now tell me Brother, what think you of this, that those Prelates and Clergy of England in the very first duskish dawning of the morning, should be so clear, orthodox, and zealous in the point of the Sabbath, and now in the Meridian of the Gospel so many, with their eyes closed up, do with both hands fight against this truth?  A. 
I confess it is to me no small matter of wonder. But Sir now that you have so fully cleared the point about Recreation from all the subterfuges of him, that hath so moiled himself to make some thing of nothing, and therein also have vindicated the Laws both Divine, Ecclesiastical and Civil, from giving any countenance or connivance to such Recreations: there remains yet one thing to be cleared, and that is, about the judgement of the reformed Churches beyond the Seas, which the opposite author pleadeth to be all for him.  B. 
It's true. And I cannot but smile, when I think of it. That they, which make no bones even in open Court to vilify the prime pillars of those Churches, yea and to nullify the Churches themselves, as if they were no true Churches, as having no lawful Ministers, because no Prelatés to put them in orders: should notwithstanding deign to grace them so much, as to call them in, and to account them competent witnesses in the cause. But a bad cause is glad of any Patron, or Advocate to plead for it, though the Client have openly stigmatised him for a 〈◊〉. But what stead will the Reformed Divines stand him in? Certainly in the point of Sports and Recreations they will utterly fail him, yea and disclaim him too. In the point of the Institution of the Lords day, indeed, and the obligation of it to Christians, a great part is for him, though the better part is for us. This is confessed of us.  A. 
But I pray you, are they against him in the point of Sports and Recreations? I have been credibly informed, that the contrary report hath made a strong impression of persuasion in some gentle and generous breasts, whose credulity subtle insinuations can prevail so with, as to make them believe the Moon is made of green cheese. I pray you therefore clear this one point, and I will weary you no longer at this time, the night now drawing on apace.  B. 
In a word then. True it is, that many and most of those Churches, for the vulgar generality, come far short of the due esteem of the Lords day in point of practice. But yet, for the Ministers of the 17. Provinces Reform, and of the neighbouring Churches in Germany, even all those; that were of the Council of Dort, did unanimously make some Canons and Decrees, jointly to petition the State's General of the United Provinces, for the reformation of the manifold profanations of the Lords day. For in the 14. Session are these words: Ne autem, etc. And lest the people on the Lords days in the afternoon, being taken up with other affairs or exercises, be withdrawn from the afternoon-sermons, the Magistrates are to be supplicated, that they by more severe Edicts prohibit all servile, or daily works, and especially sports, drink, and other profanations of the Sabbath, whereby the afternoon time on the Lords days, and specially in villages, is usually spent, that so by this means also they may be brought to those afternoon Sermons, and so may learn to sanctify the whole Sabbath day. And D. Wallaeus in his Preface before his Treatise of the Sabbath, hath set down so much of the Synods Petition to the States, as was drawn into form for this purpose, in these words: Vt gravissimae illae, etc. That these most grievous and manifold profanations of the 
Sess. 177.  Sabbath, which are daily committed by Fairs, wakes, banquets of societies, Watchmen, Neighbourhoods, Marriages; by the exercise of Arms, by hunting, fishing, fowling, playing at ball, by Histrionical acting of Comedies, by dance, Port-hale of goods, drink; & that many other like things, which in these Countries do every where abound, to the great scandal & reproach of the Reformed Religion, and to the great hindrance of God's worship, may be most strictly prohibited etc. So the Synod. Thus in one brief view you see the unanimous judgement of the Divines of that Synod, for the due sanctification of the Lords day, or Sabbath day, as they often call it: although the stream of a wicked custom in point of practice hath made an universal inundation in those Provinces, which (I fear) will (in time) drown them up in their profaneness. And the Synods judgement in the point of Institution by Divine authority and that from the fourth Commandment, seems to be no less sound and consentient, sith they so often call the Lords day the Sabbath day, and so zealously plead for the due sanctification thereof. 〈◊〉 enough of this.  A. 
Sir, I heartily thank you for this your sweet conference, which I could be content might last yet a whole summer's day, but that (as I said) the day now bidding us▪ farewell, leaves us to bid one another good night.  B. 
And so good night to you Brother.  A. 
And to you also, good Brother.  
Deo gratias. Octob. 2. 1635.