A sovereign Antidote Against SABBATARIAN ERROVRS.  
OR, A Decision of the chief Doubts and Difficulties touching the SABBATH.  
Wherein these three Questions( beside others coincident) are clearly and succinctly determined, viz. 

I. Which is the fittest Name whereby to call the Day of Christian Weekly Rest, whether Sabbath day, Lords-day, or Sunday?  
II. What is the meaning of that Prayer, appointed to be used by our Church: Lord have mercy upon us, and incline, &c. as it is repeated and applied to the words of the fourth Commandment.  
III. Whether it be lawful to use any Bodily Recreation on the Lords-day? and if so, what kind of Recreation?    
By a Reverend, Religious, and judicious Divine.  
LONDON: Printed by Thomas Harper for Benjamin Fisher, and are to be sold at his Shop in Aldersgate-street at the sign of the Talbot. 1636.   

To the READER.  
IT is a matter of great use and necessity to have now in remembrance the admonition of the Apostle, and teacher of the Gentiles, Remember them, which have the rule over you, obey them, and submit yourselves. Hebr. 13.7.17. and esteem them very highly in love, for their works sake, 1. Thes. 5.13. And it is not without reason; because in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, they work the work of the Lord, and they watch for our sake, as they that must give account. 1. Tim. 3.15. 1. Cor. 16.10. Heb. 13.17. whose office is so honourable, that God himself not onely hath given a charge, that every man that will do presumptuously, and will not bearken unto the Priest, the man shall be put away from Israel, but hath also severally this inobediency punished: The wrath of the Lord arose against his people, and gave them into the hands of the king of Chaldees, because they mocked the messenger of God, and despised his words, and misused his Prophets. Deut 17.12. 2. Chron. 36.16.  
Yet this is the contumacy and madness of some boasters, and some unthankful men, which no otherwise, but as Jannes and jambres withstood Moses, 2. Tim. 2.3. so they them, whom Divine Oracle hath adjudged to be worthy of double honour: 1. Tim. 5.17. saying in effect to them as konrah did( with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty Princes) to Moses and Aaron; Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy every one of them: Wherefore then lift you up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord? Num. 16.3.  
The experiment of these things gives every day our England, in the business of the Sabbatarians, who measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves amongst themselves, even as in times past, the Scribes and Pharisees for a pretence make long prayer, devour widows houses, Mat. 23.14. so they creep into houses, and in a shape of sanctimony( is it through the envy, or strife, or ignorance, I cannot tell) they cast a snare upon the silly consciences of men, making concision in the Church of the Lord, and so the middle wall of partition which Christ hath broken down, Ephes. 2.14. they do renew, and this doing, show themselves to be the deceitful workers.  
Therefore to avoid this confusion, we bring forth in the light this discourse penned for private satisfaction, and now approved to be printed for the public edification of the Church. Wherein the excellent Author seems to have imitated them which have the Art to make Roses grow sine spinis, without a thorn, and yet be as faire and fragrant as any other: so that his Pedalean pen delivered us a theological decision of Sabbaths difficulties, sine spinosis& paedagogicis argutiis; yet punctually to the mind of Christ, and the Church. Worthily therefore may it be presented to the Church of England, and to be accepted of thy favour.   

A DECISION OF THE chief Points and Difficulties touching the SABBATH, written to a private Friend: and now published for the satisfaction of others.  
Sir,  
I Have now sent you but a naked summary of my Thoughts, concerning the three Questions; abstracted from all those Explanations, Reasons, Testimonies of Authors, Removals of Objections, and other such Enlargements as might have given further both lustre and strength thereto. Howsoever, by what I presently sand, you may see what my opinion is: which I shall be ready to clear, so far as my understanding will serve, in any Particular, wherein you shall remain doubtful: and as ready to alter, when any man shall instruct me better, if he bring good evidence either of Reason or Scripture for what be affirms.  
March 28. 1634.   

The Questions are: 

1. WHich is the fittest Name whereby to call the Day of our Christian weekly Rest? whether, Sabbath, Lords-day, or Sunday?  
2. What is the meaning of that Prayer appointed to be used by our Church; LORD have mercy upon us, and incline, &c. as it is repeated after, and applied to the words of the fourth Commandment.  
3. Whether it be lawful to use any bodily Recreation upon the Lords Day? and if so, then, what kind of Recreations?    

To the first Question.  
I. Concerning the Name Sabbathum, or Sabbath, I thus conceive: 

1. That in Scripture, antiquity, and all ecclesiastical writers, it is constantly appropriated to the Day of the jews Sabbath, or Saturday, and not at all( till of late yeares) used to signify our Lords-day, or Sunday.  
2. That to call Sunday, by the name of the Sabbath-day ( rebus sic stantibus) may for some respects be allowed in the Christian Church, without any great inconvenience: and that therefore Men( otherwise sober and moderate) ought not to be censured with too much severity, nor charged with judaism, if sometimes they so use it.  
3. That yet for sundry other s, it were perhaps much more expedient, if the word Sabbath( in that notion) were either not at all, or more sparing used.    
II. Concerning the Name, Dominica, or the Lords-day: 

1. That it was taken up in memory of our Lord Christs Resurrection, and the great work of our Redemption accomplished therein.  
2. That it hath warrant from the Scripture:( Apoc. 1.10.) and hath been of long continued use in the Christian Church, to signify the first Day of the week, or Sunday.    
III. Concerning the Name, Dies Solis, or Sunday: 

1. That it is taken from the course of the Planets, as the Names of the other Dayes are: the reason whereof is to be learned from Astronomers.  
2. That it hath been long and generally used in most parts of the world.  
3. That it is not justly chargeable with heathenism: and that it proceedeth from much weakness( at the least) if not rather superstition, that some men condemn the use of it, as profane, heathenish, or unlawful.    
IIII. Of the fitness of the aforesaid three Names compared one with the other.  
That according to the general matter or occasion of speech, each of the three may be fitter in some respects, and more proper to be used then either of the other two, viz. the Name Sabbath, when we speak of a time of Rest, indeterminate, and in general, without reference to any particular Day. And the other two, when we speak determinately of that Day which is observed in the Christian Church.  
Of which two again: 

1. That, of the Lords-day, is fister in theological and ecclesiastical use.  
2. That of Sunday, in the Civill, Popular, and common use: yet so; as None of these three be condemned as utterly unlawful, whatsoever the matter or occasion be; but that every man be left to his Christian liberty herein, so long as superior authority restrains it not. Provided ever, that what he doth herein, he do without vanity or affectation in himself, or uncharitable judging or despising his brother, that doth otherwise then himself.     

To the second Question.  
The words of that Prayer( Lord have mercy, &c.) repeated after the fourth Commandement, evidently import( as in each of the other ten.)  
I. An acknowledgement of three things: viz. 

1. That the words of that particular Commandment contain a law whereto we are subject.  
2. That it is our bound duty to endeavour with our utmost power to keep the said law.  
3. That our naughty hearts have of themselves no inclination to keep it, till God by the work of his grace incline them thereto.    
II. A double supplication: viz. 

1 For Mercy in respect of the time past, because we have failed of our bound duty heretofore.  
2 For Grace, in respect of the time to come, that we may perform our duties better hereafter.    
But how far forth, the words of the fourth Commandement are to be taken as a Law binding Christians, and by what authority they have that binding power, is the main difficulty.  
For the resolution whereof, it may suffice every sober-minded Christian to understand the Prayer appointed by the Church, in that meaning which the words immediately import; and without over curious enquiry into those things which are more disputable, to believe these few points following, which ought to be taken as certain, and granted, amongst Christians: viz. 

1 That no part of the Law, delivered by Moses to the jews, doth bind Christians under the gospel, as by virtue of that Delivery, no not the 10. Commandements themselves: but least of all, the Fourth, which all confess to be( at least) in some part, ceremonial.  
2 That the particular determination of the time, to the seventh day of the week, was ceremonial; and so the obl●gation of the fourth Commandement in that respect( though it were Juris Divini positivi to the jew) is ceased, together with other legal Ceremonies since the publishing of the gospel, and binds not Christian consciences.  
3 That the substance of the fourth Commandement in the general,( viz. that some certain time should be set apart from secular employments, to be sanctifide to an holy rest for the better attending on Gods public and solemn worship) is moral and perpetual; and of Divine Right, as a branch of the law of Nature, whereto Christians under the Gospel are still bound.  
4 That, de facto, the Lords-day or Sunday is the time appointed to us, for that purpose, by such sufficient Authority, as we stand bound in conscience to obey: Absque hoc, whether that Authority be immediately Divine, or mediately, through the power of the Church.    
This is sufficient to regulate the judgement and conscience of every ordinary Christian: yet, it is not unlawful for Scholars soberly and fairly to argue and debate( a little further) matters which are questionable, for the better finding out of the truth. And  
The points are two: viz. 

1 Concerning the observation of a weekly Sabbath, whether it be of necessity, to keep one day of every seven: and by what right we are tied so to do.  
2 Concerning the change of the jewish Sabbath into the Lords-day, and by what Authority it was done.    
I. Touching the observation of a weekly Sabbath, there are these three different opinions: viz. 

1. That it is de jure Naturali, as a branch properly of the Law of Nature.  
2 That it is properly and directly de jure Divino positivo, established by Gods express positive ordinance in his word.  
3 That it is merely de jure Humano& Ecclesiastico, introduced by authority, and established by the custom and consent of the catholic Church.    
Touching which three opinions, I leave it to the judicious to consider, 

1 Whether the last of them might not hap to be of evil consequence, by leaving it in the power of every particular Church, at her pleasure to change the old proportion of one in seven( which hath continued ever since Moses) into any other greater or less proportion of time.  
2 Whether the two former opinions( though they indeed avoid that inconvenience) do not yet stand on such weak grounds otherwise, that they are by many degrees more improbable then the third.  
3 Whether a fourth opinion going in the middle way might not be proposde with greater probability, and entertained with better safety then any of the former three: viz. That the keeping holy of one day in seven, is of Divine Positive Right; taking jus Divinum in a large signification, not for that which is primarily, properly, and directly such, according to the tenor of the second opinion: but including withall, that which is secondarily, consequently, and analogically such.    
For the better understanding whereof, we are to consider, 

1 That those things are de jure Divino in the first and strict sense, which either are enjoynd by the express ordinance and command of God in his holy word: or may be deduced therefrom, by necessary, evident, and demonstrative Illation. In which sense, there are not very many things de jure Divino, in the New Testament.  
2 That for a thing to be de jure Divino in the latter and larger sense, it sufficeth, that it may be by human discourse upon Reasons of congruity, probably deduced from the Word of God, as a thing most convenient to be observed by all such as desire unfeignedly to order their ways according to Gods holy will.  
3 This kind of jus Divinum may be reasonably discerned by the concurrence of all or the chiefest of these four things following: viz. 

1 A foundation of equity for the thing, in general, either in the Law of Nature, or by virtue of Divine Institution.  
2 An Analogy held for the particular determination, with such laws and directions as were given to the jewish people in the old Testament, so far as the Reason of equity holds alike.  
3 Some probable insinuations thereof in the Scripture of the new Testament.  
4 The continued practise of the Christian Church, so far as the condition of the times in the several Ages thereof would permit: for, Lex currit cum praxi.    
Fourthly, that all these do in some measure concur for the observation of a weekly Sabbath: as upon examination of the several particulars, will easily appear.    
This distinction of Ius Divinum is to be observed the rather, because it may be of very good use( if rightly understood and applied.) 

1 For cutting off, the most material instances usually brought by the Romish party for maintenance of their unwritten traditions.  

Secondly, for the clearing of some, and silencing of other some controversies in the Church disputed Pro& Con with much heat, viz. 

1 The government of the Church by Bishops.  
2 The distinction of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons.  
3 The exercise of ecclesiastical censures, as suspension, excommunication, &c.  
4 The building and consecrating of Churches for Divine service.  
5 The assembly of Synods upon needful occasions, for maintenance of the truth, and settling of church-affairs.  
6 Prohibition of Marriages to be made within certain degrees of consanguinity and affinity.  
7 Baptizing of Infants born of Christian Parents.  
8 
Maintenance of the clergy by tithes. And sundry other things.  
Some of which( have been doubted of) in that prime and proper sense, but yet all or most of them in my understanding seem at least to be de jure Divino, in the latter and larger sense and signification.      
Thirdly, For the right bounding of the Churches power, that she be neither denied her lawful liberty in some things, nor yet assume to herself a greater power then of right belongs to her, in other some: For, 

1 In things that are merely de jure Humano, every particular Church hath power in herself from time to time to order and alter them at her pleasure, and may exercise that Power, when shee thinks fit.  
2 Things that are de jure Divino in that first sense, the universal Church may not( much less any Particular) at all take upon her to alter: but must observe them inviolably, whatever necessities or distresses she be put to.  
3 Things that are de jure Divino in the latter sense, every particular Church( but much more the universal) hath power to alter in case of necessity: but the exercise of that power is so limited to extraordinary cases, that it may not be safe for her at all to exercise it, unless it be for the avoiding of mighty inconveniences not otherwise to be avoided.      
II. As for the other controversed Point, touching the change of the Day from the last of the week or Saturday( which was the jews Sabbath) to the first of the week, or Sunday, which is our Lordsday: my opinion is, that the observation of the Lords day among Christians, instead of the jewish Sabbath; 

1 Is not grounded on any Command given by Christ to his Apostles.  
2 Nor yet upon any apostolic Institution given by the Apostles to the Churches in that behalf: but;  
3 That it was taken up by the succeeding Church, partly in imitation of some of the Apostles who used, especially, in the Churches of the Gentiles;( for in the Churches of the jews the old Sabbath was still observed) to celebrate their holy Assemblies the first Day of the week in honour of Christ and his Resurrection: and partly for avoiding of judaism, wherewith false teachers in those first times were ever and anon attempting to enthrall the Christian Church.  
4 That the observation of the Lordsday having been confirmed by so many Constitutions, ecclesiastical, and imperial; and having, withall, continued with such uniform consent through the whole Christian world for so many Ages ever since the Apostles times, the Church( not to dispute what she may or may not do ex plenitudine potestatis) ought not to attempt the altering of it, to any other Day of the week.     

To the third Question: Touching Recreations.  
IN this matter much need not to be said, there being little difficulty in it; and his Majesties last Declaration in that behalf, having put it past Disputation: I say then; 

First, for the thing. No man can reasonably condemn the moderate use of lawful Recreations on the Lords-day, as simply & de toto genere unlawful.  
Secondly, for the kind: Albeit there can be no certain Rules given herein ( as in most indifferent things it comes to pass) by reason of the infinite variety of circumstances, to fit with all particular cases; but that still, much must be left to private Discretion: yet, for some Directions in this Point, respect would be had( in the choice of our Recreations.) 

1 To the public laws of the State: Such Games or sports as are by Law prohibited, though in themselves otherwise lawful, being unlawful to them that are under obedience of the Law.  
2 To the condition of the Person. Walking and Discoursing which to men of liberal education, is a pleasant Recreation, is no way delightsome to the ruder sort of people, who scarce account any thing a sport which is not loud and boisterous.  
3 To the effects of the Recreations themselves: Those, being the meetest to be used, which give the best Refreshing to the body, and leave the least impression in the mind. In this respect, Shooting, Leaping, pitching the bar, Stoole-ball, &c. are rather to be chosen then Dicing, and Carding.    
Thirdly, for the use. That men would be exhorted to use their Recreations and Pastimes on the Lords-day in godly and commendable sort: For which purpose, amongst others, these Cautions would be remembered. 

1 That they be used with great moderation, as at all other times, so especially, and much more on the Lords-Day.  
2 That they be used at seasonable times, not in time of Divine Service.  
3 That they be so used, as they may rather make men fitter for Gods Service the rest of the Day, and for the Works of their Vocation the rest of the week, then any way hinder or disable them thereto by over-wearying the body, or immoderately affecting the mind.  
4 That they use them not doubtingly: for whatsoever is not of Faith, is sin. he therefore that is not satisfied in his own judgement, that he may lawfully, and without sin, use bodily Recreations on the Lords-day, ought by all means to forbear the use thereof, lest he sin against his own conscience.  
5 That they bee severer towards themselves then towards others, in the use of their Christian liberty herein: not making their own opinion or practise, a Rule to their Brethren. In this, as in all other indifferent things, a wise and charitable Man will in godly wisdom deny himself many times the use of that liberty, which in godly charity he dare not deny to his Brother.        
FINIS.  

PErlegi brevem hunc Tractatum de Sabbato, in quo nihil reperio sanae fidei, aut bonis moribus contrarium.  
Tho. Weekes: R. P. Ep. land. Cap. Domest.   

LONDON, Printed by THOMAS HARPER for Benjamin Fisher, and are to be sold at his Shop in Aldersgate-street at the sign of the Talbot. 1636.