».

THE WORKS

OF

ARCHBISHOP BRAMHALL.

THE

WORKS

MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD,

JOHN BRAMHALL, D.D.

SOMETIME LORD ARCHBISHOP OF ARMAGH, PRIMATE AND METROPOLITAN OF ALL IRELAND.

A LIFE OF THE AUTHOR,

AND A COLLECTION OF HIS LETTERS.

VOL. V.

OXFORD :

JOHN HENRY PARKER. MDCCCXLV,

OXFORD :

PRINTED BY T. SHRIMPTON.

PREFACE.

THE present volume contains Part the Fourth (and last) of Archbishop BramhalFs Works, which with the Index com pletes the publication. The volume consists, partly, of several tracts upon various theological subjects, written at different periods, but published for the first time, after BramhalFs death, in the folio edition of his Works, and reprinted here from that edition ; and partly also, of three sermons, being the whole of those published by Bramhall himself during his lifetime, reprinted also from the folio edition, as the original sermons in their separate form have not been met with. A consider able number of sermons, in addition to these three, were it appears prepared by Bramhall for publication, but were acci dentally destroyed a. And some funeral sermons of his are also mentionedb. The criticism of Dean Comber however0, who records the occasion and circumstances under which one of these was delivered, is so far borne out by the three sermons still existing and here published, that it is not pro-

8 See the Life of Bramhall, above in in York (i. e. the Cathedral) on Mon-

vol. i., p. xxxiv. day July 13, 1668, at the Summer As-

b For Mr. Slingsby, Lord Stafford's sizes, by Will. Bramhall, Rector of

secretary, who was slain in the civil Goldsbrough and one of his Majesty's

wars, at Gisborough Jan. 15, 164§ Chaplains (4to. York 1668), is errone-

(Whitelocke's Memor., p. 63). His ously attributed to Archbishop Bram-

body was carried to York, and buried hall in the Preacher's Guide, in the Cathedral there, after a sermon e Bramhall, says Comber (as just

by Bramhall, "who" (says Rush- quoted, p. 140), "was not either by

worth, vol. v. p. 774), "had a large ex- nature or study much of an orator."

perience of him." Also for Sir Chris- And compare what Vesey himself says

topher Wandesford (Dean Comber's of him in his Life, above in vol. i. p.

Mem. of Wandesford, p. 140), whom xiv. ; and the quotation from Thurloe's

he had attended at his death (id. ibid. State Papers, given above in vol. iii.

p. 132). Another sermon, entitled "The p. 23. note f. Loyal Prophet," preached at St. Peter's

PREFACE.

bable the loss of the remainder has much diminished their author's reputation. The Sermon upon the Restoration (Discourse iii.) has been lately reprinted by Mr. Brogdend; and the Discourse to Sir Henry de Vic, of Persons dying without Baptism (Discourse v.), has also found a place in another series of republications6. Of both of these, of the other two Sermons (Discourses ii.f, iv.), of the Answer to Captain Steward's Papers (Discourse vi.), and of the Reply to S. N.'s Guide of Faith (Discourse vii.), such account as is needed, may be found in the notes to the several Discourses and in vol. i. pp. xxxiii., xxxiv. Some account may be found also in the last-named place of the first Discourse in the volume, upon the Sabbath and Lord's Day. This, there is no doubt, was written about 1658 or 9 in Holland, although not published until 1677, after the author's death, in the folio edition of his Works g. It is not so plain however to whom it was addressed. The case stands thus. It appears from the tract itself h, that a friend (unnamed) had requested BramhalPs opinion on the subject of it, some time apparently in 1658, in general terms ; and that Bramhall had accordingly com plied with his request by a " discourse" upon the question,

d Illustrations of the Liturgy and curious, that the very same prayer (for Ritual of the United Church of Eng- this Liturgy or rather Directory was in land and Ireland, vol. iii. pp. 471-502. use and frequently reprinted as late as 8vo. Lond. 1842. The Speeches at the at least 1635), is quoted by the Cove- end of the Sermon are omitted, and nanters themselves in the very same the Sermon itself not very carefully or year (164|), — in which the Sermon accurately reprinted. was preached, in the " Declaration of

e Tracts of Anglican Fathers, vol. II. Reasons for assisting the Parliament

Ft. viii. pp. 153-159. Lond. 8vo. 1841, of England against the Papists and

where it is reprinted from the folio Prelatical Army, by the General Assem-

edition very carefully and accurately, blyof the Kirk of Scotland" (Rushw.,

with the exception of a (seemingly in- vol. vi. p. 472) ; where the aid given to

tentional) alteration, obviously incor- the Scots against the French (as men-

rect, in p. 174. 1. 27. of this edition, tioned below p. 89. note a), and subse-

the line being there read thus, " there quently against "the general Popish

may not be the same invincible rieces- faction" (in 1573, in the capture of

sity " &c. Edinburgh Castle by English troops

f The prayer from the Scotch Liturgy when held for the Queen by Kirkaldy of

(so to call it), prefixed to the Sermon Grange), are assigned by them as rea-

before the Marquis of Newcastle (be- sons (not for supporting the king but)

low pp. 89, 90), appears to have struck for assisting the English rebels.

Bramhall ; as he refers to it again five s See above in vol. i. p. xxxiii.

years later in his Fair Warning, c. xiii. notes f, g ; and below p. 74. note n.

(vol. iii. p. 283, Disc. i. Ft. ii). It is h Below pp. 9-11, 74.

PREFACE.

addressed to no particular controversy upon it, but treating generally upon the immutability of the ordinance of the Lord's Day, and upon the authority on which the change rests from the seventh day to the first. A fragment of a letter still exists, and has been printed above in vol. i. of this edition (pp. xcviii-ci. as Letter XI. of the series), which, as re gards the place whence it was written, and in its contents, agrees exactly with the "discourse" thus described; and this fragment, which was copied and preserved by Bp. Barlow, is endorsed by him as addressed to Dr. (Nicholas) Bernard, sometime Dean of Ardagh and Chaplain to Archbishop Ussher, a person certainly upon terms of friendship with BramhalP. If this letter be identical with the discourse, and if Bp. Barlow's endorsement be correct, it follows, that the tract (which was addressed to the same friendj who had elicited the preliminary "discourse") was likewise addressed to Dr. Bernard. It appears however further, from other pas sages in the tract, that subsequently to writing this " dis course," Bramhall accidentally met with a book written by the friend to whom he had addressed it, and with another by Dr. Heylin, either in answer to this book or to which it was an answer, and which last he describes as " in part upon the subject" of the Sabbath questionk ; that he was induced upon this to write a formal treatise upon the point (viz. the tract itself), in order to moderate between the two1 : and that sub sequently still, after his treatise was nearly completed, he received from England two books then just published by Dean Bernard1", containing certain papers of Archbishop Ussher's (at that time recently dead), and two among the rest upon the Sabbath question, and the abrogation of the Irish Articles -, of the existence of which, and of the con troversy between Bernard and Heylin, which had arisen from

! See below p. 74. ' Ibid.

J Below p. 11. m Below pp. 74. 81. notes n. p.

* Below p. 11.

PREFACE.

them (or at least of Abp. Ussher's share in it), and which had in fact prompted the question originally put to him by his friend, he had been up to that time entirely ignorant. If Bernard then was really that friend, it seems inexplicable, that he should be mentioned by Bramhall in the closing section of his tract in terms, which seem to imply that then (while finishing the work) the Bishop had for the first time become aware that he was at all concerned in the matter. And if the terms in which Bernard is mentioned be not thought necessarily to imply this (which however they appear to do), it remains still inexplicable, on the same supposition, how Bramhall should then for the first time have discovered Ussher's connection with the dispute (which he affirms in plain words) ; since there is no book of Bernard's upon the subject which is not made up almost entirely of Ussher's own writings, and with Ussher's name prominently placed in the title-page, and no work of Heylin's in answer to Bernard which is not expressly directed in point of fact against Ussher rather than against his Chaplain11. Nor can we suppose, what, if allowable, would remove this difficulty, that the first section of the tract (where the treatises of Heylin and his opponent are mentioned) was written, as well as the last section, subsequently to the remainder of the work, and that one of Bernard's books described in the latter is to be identified with the " trea tise" of the friend alluded to in the former. For the words of the first section are inconsistent with such a supposition ; not to mention, that Bernard's books were sent to Bram hall from England, while Heylin's tract and his adversary's

n Heylin's Reply to Bernard is en- in some others. To which is added

titled, " Respondet Petrus or the An- an Appendix in Answer to certain

swer of Peter Heylin D.D. to so much passages in Mr. Sanderson's History

of Dr. Bernard's Book entituled the of the Life and Reign of K. Charles,

Judgment of the late Primate of Ire- relating to the Lord Primate, the Ar-

land &c. as he is made a Party to by tides of Ireland, and the Earl of Straf-

the said Lord Primate in the Point of ford, in which the Respondent is con-

the Sabbath, And by the said Doctor corned." Lond. 4to. 10158.

PREFACE.

were accidentally found by him in a friend's possession,, so that the last-named could not be identical with either of the for mer ; and, lastly, that Bernard's books could neither of them be rightly described as a t treatise by him' upon the Sabbath question, inasmuch as the fragments which are contained in them upon the subject, are not his at all, but Archbishop Ussher's. On the other hand, the Letter above referred to tallies so well with the description given of the " discourse," that it is hard to suppose them distinct. It is still less likely, that Bp. Barlow, who probably took his copy of the Letter from the original, should have endorsed a wrong address upon it. And in addition to this, it does not appear, that there was ever any treatise of Heylin's which could be said to be "partly" upon the Sabbath question, except his reply to Bernard0. It appears on the whole, then, that Brarn- halPs tract was probably addressed to Dean Bernard, although the editor can offer no explanation of the difficulties above suggested, which lie in the way of the supposition.

Subjoined to this Preface, for want of a better place, will be found a Letter of BramhalPs printed by Whitaker in his History of Bichmondshire, the existence of which was un fortunately not known to the editor until the first volume of the present edition was printed off p. It should have appeared

0 The only other book of Heylin's Consecration of the Bishops in Dub-

upon the subject at all in his History lin by the Lord Primate in the year

of the Sabbath which is about nothing 1660," appointing (Sunday) January

else : not to add, that it was published 27. (166fl) for the Consecration (see the

so long before as 1636. Life of Bramhall in vol. i. p. xiii), and

P Some letters of Bramhall' s upon signed " Jo. Armachanus." It con-

the state of the Irish Church, addressed sists of a rather minute programme of

to Laud, besides that found among the the Procession, Service, Anthem, &c.,

State Papers and printed above in vol. i. to be used upon that occasion, sent by

pp. Ixxix-lxxxii, are mentioned in the the Primate "to those concerned, to

Strafford Letters, vol. i. pp. 212, 331 ; the end that all tkings might be done

ii. p. 101: but are unfortunately not in order;" and is printed at length

preserved. And a curious paper, which in p. 338. of vol. ii. of a book by one

may serve to illustrate Bramhall's opi- Richard Baron called The Pillars of

nions respecting rites and ceremonies Priestcraft and Orthodoxy Shaken (8vo.

(see above in vol. iii. p. 170, and below Lond. 1768).

pp. 123, 2 15), has been rescued from ob- The opportunity may be here taken livion in a dissenting publication of the of clearing up two difficulties respecting last century, though with no very friend- dates, in Bramhall's Life, of no par ly motives ; entitled, "The Manner of ticular importance unless for the sake

PREFACE.

as the first of the series then published, being earlier in date than any of them.

The following quotation, professedly taken from Arch bishop Bramhall, which is found in a posthumous work at tributed (although upon grounds far from conclusive) to Bp. Kenq, is here added for the sake of its contents. Some thing to a similar purpose may be found in the Preface to the Replication to the Bishop of Chalcedon (in vol. ii.) and elsewhere in other works of Bramhall, but the passage itself does not occur. Whence Ken (or the author of the tract) derived it, the editor is entirely ignorant.

" He was a wise and good and reverend son of my bosom who said, ' that in the greatest maturity of his judgment and integrity of his conscience, when most redeemed from juve nile errors, popular fallacies, vulgar partialities, and secular flatteries, he declared, to the present age, and posterity, that since he was capable to move in so serious a search and weighty a disquisition as that of religion is ; as his greatest design was, through God's grace, to find out, and persevere in, such a profession of Christian religion, as hath most of truth and order, of power and peace, of holiness and solem-

of accuracy. In vol. i. p. xi. note a. terms and with less authentic infor- the writer in the Biographia Britannica mation ; and any doubt upon the sub- is shewn to be mistaken in the date ject is removed by a letter of Laud's he assigns for Bramhall's return to to Strafford, then Viscount Wentworth, England upon the Restoration. It ap- dated July 30, 1631, from which it ap pears (from White Kennet's Register, pears that Bramhall was at that date p. 288), that he had misunderstood his intended for the Prebend but not yet own authority ; the Public Intelligence appointed. (Straff. Letters, vol. i. p. which he quotes, of Oct. 23, 1660, 58).

containing the tidings of Bramhall's ' Bp. Ken (as is supposed), in a arrival in that month, not at London, tract entitled, " Expostulatoria : or, but in Dublin. In the same volume, The Complaints of the Church of p. xvii. note D, a discrepancy is no- England against I. Undue Ordination, ticed between Bp. Yesey and Browne II. Loose Prophaneness. III. Un- Willis respecting the date of Bram- conscionable Symony. IV. Encroach- hall's appointment to his Prebend at ing Pluralities. V. Careless non- York ; the former supposing it to have Residence, now reigning among Her preceded Abp. Matthews' death in 1628, Clergy. To which is added a List of the latter assigning it to June 13, 1633. the non- Residents," &c. &c.8vo. Lond. Willis, who had access to the York 1711. pp. 8, 9 (publ. after Ken's death) Registers, and gives a precise date, — speaking in the person of the Church would be more probably right than of England, and quoting from " Arch- Vesey, who speaks only in vague bishop BramhaU."

PREFACE.

nity, of Divine verity, and Catholic antiquity, of true charity and holy constancy : so he could not (apart from all pre judices and prepossessions) find in any other Church or Church-way, antient or modern, either more of the good he desired, or less of the evil he would avoid, than he had a long time discerned, and, upon a strict scrutiny, more and more observed, in the frame and form, in the constitution and settled dispensation, of the Church of England/ ' No where/ says he, ' Diviner mysteries, no where sounder doctrines, holier morals, warmer devotions, apter rituals, or comelier cere monies. All which together, by a meet and happy concur rence of piety and prudence, brought forth such spirituals and graces, both in their habits, exercises, and comforts, as are the quintessence and life, the soul and seal, of true reli gion ; those more immediate and special influences of God's Holy Spirit upon the soul, those joint operations of the Blessed Trinity, for the Justification, Sanctification, and Sal vation of a sinner/ "

A. W. H.

October, 1845.

LETTERa.

NOBLE SIR,

Amongst so many and so importante occasions to have but once thought upon a poore country friend had bene suffi- ciente : but as it is I thanke you, and rest yet more obliged. Your goodness makes a burthen imposed to seeme a curtesy, and a favor done to be a benefitt received. Practise and emploiment to a lawyer is beneficial, and may deserve thankes, but to you p'judiciall, only it affordes you matter for some virtue to worke upon. Day and night do not more duly succeed one another, than our hopes and feares of your success have done. Nowe we seeme to sayle in the haven, having intelligence of his Majestie's most gracious answerl) ; yet even now, whilest I am writing this letter, I heare newes of some disgusts, to speak plainly, a dissolution0. But your known wisedomes will not suifer me to hold it a thing possible. We offer dayly for you the tribute of our prayers. And when we heare of an happy end of this long session d, will then stile it parliamentum beatwn, beatus ante obitum nemo. My good friend and neighbour Mr. Moody is come upp to solicite you about his old hospitall business. I know how propense you have allwayes bene to do him good, and how needless it is for me to interpose my suite. It goes hard, that they must judge of superstition who doe not know what is superstition ; that a diamond should be forfeited because it hath a specke or flawe ; that piety should grow to be a

a From Whitaker's History of Rich- b Viz. the answers of Charles I. to

mondshire, vol. ii. pp. 152, 153. It the Petition of Right, June 2 and

was " found among the papers at Kirt- June 7, 1628.

lington," Wandesford's house in York- c Parliament was not dissolved until

shire, and was " written ahout the year March 10, 162f; but messages from

1628, when Bramhall was Sub-dean of the King were brought June 2 and June

Ripon, and when Wentworth and Wan- 5, declaring his intention of ending the

desford were on the point of changing Session on June 10.

their political connexions" (Whitaker, rt The Session began March 17,

ibid.) See also the Life of Bramhall, 162|. in vol. i. of the present edition, p. iv.

LETTER.

supplanter of charity, and the warrant of a parlament be no security from the process of an ordinary courte6. But I forgett myself and crave pardon. God bless you, keep you. And for mine owne parte, I shall rest a dayly oratoure for your whole house in general, and to yourself in speciall.

A most observante and

obliged friend,

JOHN BRAMHALL. Ripon, June 18.

To his right worthy Frind Christophere Wandesford, Esq. at his Chambers in Westminster, these.

c This refers of course to Mr. Moody ; culars of his business were, further than hut it does not appear what the parti- the letter itself hints at them.

CONTENTS OF VOL. V.

Page

Discourse of the Sabbath and Lord's Day. Part iv.

Discourse i.* 3

Sermon on 2 Sam. x. 12, before the Marquis of Newcastle, being then ready to meet the Scotch army, preached in York Minster, Jan. 28, 164i Part iv. Discourse ii. 87

Sermon on Ps. cxxvi. 7, preached at Dublin April 23, 1661, being the day of his Majesty's Coronation : with two Speeches in the House of Peers. Part iv. Discourse iii. Ill

Sermon on Prov. xxviii. 13, preached in St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin, June 16, 1661, before the Honourable House of Commons, at their solemn receiving the Sacra ment. Part iv. Discourse iv. ... 145

Short Occasional Discourses written while in exile : . 1 65

Viz.

1. Of Persons dying without Baptism; to Sir Henry de

Vic. Part iv. Discourse v. . . . 167

2. An Answer to two Papers, brought by Captain Steward, Of Protestants' Ordination, and the Ministry of Reconciliation : with a Letter to Miss Cheubien.

Part iv. Discourse vi. . . . . 181

An Answer to S. N.'s Objections against Protestants' Ordi nation in the Twentieth Chapter of his Guide of Faith. Part iv. Discourse vii. 193

THE WORKS

ARCHBISHOP B RAM HALL,

PART THE FOURTH ;

CONTAINING

THE DISCOURSES ON MISCELLANEOUS SUBJECTS,

15RAMHALL.

DISCOURSE I.

THE CONTROVERSIES

ABOUT

THE SABBATH AND THE LORD'S DAY,

WITH

THEIR RESPECTIVE OBLIGATIONS;

CLEARLY, SUCCINCTLY, AND IMPARTIALLY, STATED, DISCUSSED,

AND

DETERMINED. BY JOHN BRAMHALL, D.P.,

BISHOP OF DERRY.

CONTENTS.

Page

SECTION THE FIRST.

The author's fears and doubts. .... .9

satisfied. . 1 1

[A. Of the Sabbath.] SECTION THE SECOND.

The question concerning the name Sabbath impertinent. . . ib*

And [concerning] heathenish festivals. . . . . .12

And other weekly holy-days. ... . ib.

SECTION THE THIRD.

Two questions concerning the Sabbath.

SECTION THE FOURTH.

I. First, whether it were a moral (or natural) law. . . ib.

Natural reason dictateth not the holiness of one day in the week more

than another. ... .14

First reason; — [from the testimony of man's own conscience.] . ib.

Second reason ; — [from the impossibility of the same day of

the week being observed by all mankind. . . ib.

Third reason; — [because the day has been changed.] . .15

An objection answered. . . . .16

Fourth reason ; — [from the grounds of the commandment of

tlie Sabbath.] . . . . . .17

Moral upon supposition a contradiction. . . .18

SECTION THE FIFTH.

II. The positive law of the Sabbath. ib.

6 CONTENTS.

Page

SECTION THE SIXTH.

First promulgation pretended, Gen. ii. • 19

1. Gen. ii. 3. no precept. ... • ib.

First reason. . . . . . . 20

Second reason. .... .21

The first Sabbath. . . ib.

2. The meaning of Gen. ii. 3. . ib. The opinion of the Fathers. . . 22 Authorities answered. . . . . . .23

[Origen. :. . ib.

St. Cyprian. . .24

St. Basil and St. Gregory Nazianzen. . . . .25

St. Athanasius. . . . . . . ib.

Epiphanius.] . . . . . . .26

SECTION THE SEVENTH.

The law of the Fourth Commandment. . . . .28

[Conclusion.] . . . . . . . ,29

[B. Of the Lord's Day.] [SECTION THE EIGHTH.

Of the Lord's Day, the question not so great as some imagine. . 30

SECTION THE NINTH.

Five questions. . .... . . 32

SECTION^THE TENTH.

I. First, by what authority the Sabbath was changed. . . . ib.

[If not by our Lord's, — which there is no cause to doubt, — at least

by that of the Apostles. . . . . . , ib.

Undeniable, that the Lord's Day is an Apostolical tradition.] . 33

First objection ; — [that this would render it only a human law. . 36

It is not a prudential constitution merely. . . .37

Second objection ; — [that there is no precept in Scripture for the change of day. . ib 1. It is immaterial whether there be a formal precept. . ib. — whether there be a written precept. . 38 3. It is not so clear that there is no precept of the kind re corded in Scripture. . ib Conclusion.] .... 41

CONTENTS.

Page

SECTION THE ELEVENTH.

II. When the Lord's Day began first to be observed. . . 41

[Through the whole Church immediately after the Apostolic age. . 42

And in the days of the Apostles themselves. . . 43

Rev. i. 10. .... • ib.

The Judaico-Christian observance of the Jewish Easter and of

the Jewish Sabbath or Saturday.] . .44

1 Cor. xvi. 2. . . 47

[Acts xx. 7. . « 1S

Acts ii. 1.

Passages in the Gospels.

Conclusion.] • • . ->8

SECTION THE TWELFTH.

III. Why the weekly festival changed from Saturday. . ib.

SECTION THE THIRTEENTH.

IV. Whether the Lord's Day may be changed. . . . .61

[Such a change unlawful. , . . . . .62

1. No sufficient authority. . . ib.

2. The ground of the ordinance prohibits a change. . . 63

3. The perpetuity of the duty prohibits a change.] . ib.

SECTION THE FOURTEENTH.

V. Of the manner of sanctifying the Lord's Day. . . . .64

[1. According to the law of nature. . . ib.

2. the evangelical law. . . . .6/5

3. the positive law of God. .... 66

4. human laws. . . . 67

Conclusion.] .... . . ib.

SECTION THE FIFTEENTH.

Objections out of the Homilies considered. . . . .68

[The Homily of the Place and Time of Prayer.] . . ib.

SECTION THE SIXTEENTH.

The conclusion concerning my Lord Primate. . . . .73

[1. Respecting the Sabbath and Lord's Day. . . .77

2. the Irish Articles. . . . . .80

3. the Earl of Strafford.] , 83

DISCOURSE I.

THE CONTROVERSIES

ABOUT

THE SABBATH, AND THE LORD'S DAY:

[FIRST PRINTED AT DUBLIN, A.D. 1676, AMONG THE AUTHOR'S COLLECTED WORKS&.]

SECTION THE FIRST.

You desired my judgment of the true state of the question The concerning the Sabbath and the Lord's Day, indefinitely, without intimating any particular question now agitated doubts about them. Whereupon I suspected, that either Theophilus BrabourneV recanted error, of the perpetual morality of the Jewish Sabbath and an absolute necessity that all Christians were obliged to observe it everlastingly, had been revived to trouble the Church ; or that Anabaptism had spread its roots wider and deeper in England of late, which doth not allow so much as a relative holiness of one day, or one place, or one person, more than another0; or, at the least, that the

a [For an account of this tract, and " A Defence of that most Ancient and

of the person to whom it was probably Sacred Ordinance of God, the Sabbath

addressed, see the Preface to the pre- Day" (Lond. 4to., reprinted 8vo. 1660,

sent volume.] according to Watts) ; and in 1654 by a

b [Theophilus Brabourne was "an third in answer to a Mr. Collings. He

obscure schoolmaster, or, as some say, was summoned before Abp. Laud in

a minister, of Suffolk" (Wood, Ath. 1634 or 5, and compelled to conform.

Oxon. ii. 541. ed. Bliss), who in 1628 See Heylin's Life of Laud, Pt. II. pp.

published a book supporting the doc- 257, 258; and Fuller's Ch. Hist., bk.

trine mentioned above, entitled "A XL c. ii. § 32.]

Discourse upon the Sabbath Day, viz." c [See Fred. Spanheim's Historical

(among other points) "that It is Not Narration of the Original &c. of the

Abolished, and that the Lord's Day is Sect of the Anabaptists, c. iv. p. 34. as

not the Sabbath by Divine Institution" translated into English and published

(Lond. 4to.); which he followed in at London, 4to. 1646.] 1632 by a second, under the title of

10

DISCOURSE OF THE SABBATH

PART IV.

opinion of some eminent divines had sprouted up higher than formerly it used to do in our coasts, who have asserted a power and liberty to the Catholic Church, or to any parti cular Church, to translate the public assemblies of the present Church from the Lord's Day to any other day in the week, and to make that to be their Lord's Day ; yea, with such a latitude as not to bind the Church to the septenary number, which, if it thought fit, might set apart one day in eight or ten for the service of Godd. And although none of these did ever actually change the day, nor any of them ever go about to change it, that I have read of, except one6 (neither do I condemn him, but leave the credit of the story to the author), yet I feared, lest this bold licentious age, under the mistaken notion of Christian liberty, (like Africa) might produce some such new monster : and according to my suspicion I applied

d [Such a doctrine was held by many eminent doctors in the Roman schools; as, e.g. Tostatus, Suarez, and (though less broadly) Thomas Aquinas: for whom see Heylin, Hist, of Sabb., Pt. II. c. vi. § 1, 2. But Bramhall doubt less refers to the similar doctrine held by nearly all the Reformers upon the sub ject, e. g. by Calvin (see the next note), Zuingle, Bullinger, &c. ; of whom also a list with proofs may be seen in Heylin, ibid. § 6. (and see also his Respondet Petrus, sect. ii. pp. 17 — 19. 4to. Lond. 1658) ; where their doctrine on the sub ject is summed up under three heads, " 1. that the keeping holy one day of seven is not the moral part of the Fourth Commandment, or to be reckoned as a part of the law of nature; 2. that the Lord's Day is not founded on Divine commandment but onely on the autho rity of the Church;" and " 3. that the Cliurrh hath still authoritie to change the day and to transferre it to some other." — Tindal and Frith are the only two Englishmen quoted by Heylin, but the former is one of the most extreme of the party. — " As for the Saboth," he says, " a great matter, we be Lords over the Saboth, and may yet chaunge it into the Monday or any other day, as we see neede ; or may make every tenth day holy daye onely, if we see a cause why : we may make two every weeke, if it were expedient, and one not enough to teach the people. Neither was there any cause to chaunge it from the Saterday then to put difference be-

twene us and the Jewes, and least we should become servauntes unto the day after their superstition : neither needed we any holyday at all,if the people myght be taught without it" (Tindal, Aun- swere unto Maister More's first booke, c. xxv. Works, p. 287. Lond. 1573).]

e [" Apud quern" (scil. CALVIN) "agitatum diu ferunt de transferenda solemnitate Dominica in feriam quin- tam" (scil. Thursday); — Joh. Barclay, Paraenesis ad Sectaries, lib. i. c. 13. p. 160> as published at Cologne in 1617 cum permissu superiorum : — quoted by Heylin. Calvin himself in his Institutes goes nearly as far as this : — " Si quis hanc numeri observationem ceu nimis argutam fastidiat, nihil impedio quo- minus simplicius accipiat ; Dominum cerium diem ordinasse" &c. ; — " ita tamen ut supe.rstitiosa dierum observatio arceatur" (Calv., Instit., II. viii. 31. p. 99. ed. Amstel. 1667, and margin);— and again ; — " Non sine delectu Domi- nicam quern vocamus diem veteres in locum Sabbathi subrogarunt ;" — and a little further ; — " Neque sic septena- rium numerum moror ut ejus servituti Ecclesiam adstringam; neque enim Ecclesias damnavero, quae alios con- ventibus suis solennes dies habeant, modo a superstitione absint" (Id., ibid., 34. p. 100). Barclay was the author of the once celebrated Argenis, and is cer tainly a prejudiced witness. An ac count of him may be found in Bayle, in the 2nd. edit, of the Biogr. Brit., and in Chalmers.]

AND LORD'S DAY. 11

my discourse to the establishing of the perpetual necessity of DISCOURSE observing the Lord's Day by all Christians, and the immuta bility of it. Neither do I shrink now from any thing I said then.

Since, I found by chance in the hands of a friend two satisfied. treatises, the one yours, the other Dr. HeylinV, written in part upon this subject. I confess, my cursory view of them was not sufficient whereupon to ground an exact discussion of the differences between you, but sufficient to direct me to 908 the true state of the question j which, if I conceive rightly, doth not much concern those things which are truly contro verted at this day in the Christian world. I shall deliver you my judgment clearly and succinctly, rather paring away what seemeth to me superfluous, than adding any thing that is heterogeneous, to encumber the question.

[A. Of the Sabbath.]

SECTION THE SECOND.

As, first, I boggle not at the name of Sabbath applied to The ques- the Lord's Day, so we understand it rightly of an analogical earning1" Sabbath. The immutable law of nature doth require, that ^{J!^6 God be worshipped, and that some time be set apart for the imperti- worship of God. This indefinite time was limited to the seventh day by the positive law of God, as the day peculiarly designed to the public worship of God ; which ordinance was to last as long as the Jewish polity ; but that being expired, the first day was set apart to Christians for the same end. So, without controversy, our day succeedeth their day in the performance of that everlasting duty, which by the law of nature we owe to God. Those days which are designed to the same end, are capable of the same denomination. To be a sabbath, or a day of " rest," is common to them both. Yet, I confess, I judge other names more proper than that of Sabbath; either Sunday, in a civil dialect, or the Lord's

f [There is some difficulty in ascer- in sect. xvi. pp. 73, 74. An account of taining what " treatises" are here in- the matter may be found in the Preface tended, arising from what is said below to the present volume.]

12 DISCOURSE OF THE SABBATH

PART Day, in an ecclesiastical. But to imagine, that because our - day succeedeth theirs in the performance of that moral duty which we owe to God, therefore an express commandment to sanctify their day doth oblige us to observe our day, or therefore our Lord's Day is subject to the rules of the Jewish Sabbath, is just such another mistake, as if a man should argue thus, — Baptism succeedeth circumcision, therefore God's injunction of circumcision to Abraham doth oblige us to be baptized, or therefore all the laws of circumcision do bind Christians in Baptism. As the Sacraments are diverse, Jewish and Christian, so are their grounds.

And [con- Secondly, neither do I trouble myself about those autho- heathen- rities or testimonies which are brought out of heathenish vais!eS writers, to prove that the seventh and eighth days were esteemed holy by therng; because I esteem the whole dis course to be impertinent to our present controversy. For neither were those observations universal (as all the laws of nature are), nor the worship Divine worship, nor the object the true God ; neither did they ground their worship upon right reason, but upon heathenish lies and fables. I might add, that they who make some of these allegations, do mis take the day of the month for the day of the weekh. And other Thirdly,, I quarrel with no man about the other weekly

wppk.lv

holy-days, holy-days besides the Lord's Day; that is, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday. The two former were never esteemed festivals by the Church, but fasts1. Saturday was kept festi val indeed, but neither universally in all places, nor perpe tually in all agesJ. Sunday alone hath been observed ever more and every where. All these impertinent debates, concerning the name of the Sabbath, or other heathenish or Christian holy-days, I do willingly pass by in silence.

s [See, for instances, Heylin, Hist, of from Homer, Linus, and Callimachus,

Sabb., Pt. I. c. iv. § 8 — 10.] as though they were parallel to the

b [The example is set by no less an Jewish Sabbatical periods. But it was

authority than Clement of Alexandria left to more modern divines (e.g. Arnes,

(Strom., lib. v. Op. torn. ii. p. 713. Medull. Theol., II. xv. 10. p. 294.

Oxon. 1715), and from him and one Amstel. 1648) to quote them as di-

AristobulusbyEusebius(Dem.Evang., rectly relating to the seventh day of

lib. xiii. cc. 12, 13; pp. 667, 668 ; 677, the week instead of to that of the

678. Paris. 1628), of quoting from month.']

Hesiod (Op. et Dies 768) such lines ! [See the authorities in Bingham,

as, " Upcarov eV 77 rerpas re nal e^So/*?? XXI. iii.]

," and others of a similar kind J [Ibid., XX. iii.]

13

SECTION THE THIRD.

DISCOURSE I.

Then to give you my sense of this present controversy Two ques- clearly and succinctly. — The main questions which concern ceming the the old Sabbath, are two : first, whether the law of nature (which is properly the moral law) doth prescribe to all man kind the sanctification of this or that seventh day in parti cular, or any seventh day in the week indefinitely ; secondly, if the law of nature do not prescribe it, whether it were imposed upon mankind by any positive law of God.

SECTION THE FOURTH.

To the first question I answer, that a law may be called I. First, moral, either from the end, that is, to regulate the manners a were a of men ; and in this sense, without doubt, the law of the natural) ' Jewish Sabbath was, and the law of the Christian Lord's law- Day is, a moral law. Or a law may be called moral from the duration of it ; which is not made upon temporary respects, nor alterable according to the various exigences of times or places or persons. So a perpetual law is called a moral law, though it be no express precept of the law of nature. In this sense also, without doubt, the law of the Sabbath was a moral (that is to say, a perpetual) law ; I mean, respectively to the Jewish Church, or so long as that Church, religion, and polity did continue. Therefore it is called a " perpetual Exodxxxi. covenant," and a " sign bet ween " God and them "for ever." Thirdly, the moral law, in the most strict and proper sense, doth signify the law of nature ; that is, the dictate of right reason, that such and such things are good, [so] that it is disagreeable to the intellectual nature to omit them, and such and such things bad, so thatk it is disagreeable to the intellectual nature to practise them, or approve them. Now, 909 before I answer positively, whether this law of nature do pre scribe the observation of a seventh day, it is necessary to premise this distinction : — the law of nature is sometimes taken strictly, for the principles of moral honesty, and con clusions drawn evidently from them, which natural reason

k [" So bad that," in the folio edition; apparently by a misprint.]

14

DISCOURSE OF THE SABBATH

PART IV.

Natural reason dic- tateth not the holi ness of one day in the week more than ano ther.

First

reason ; — [from the testimony of man's own con science.]

Second reason ; — [from the impossi bility of the same day of the week being observed by all man kind.]

doth dictate to all intellectual creatures; and sometimes more largely, so as to comprehend not only such principles and conclusions adequate to them, but moreover all such things as reason dictateth to all men to be consentaneous or agreeable to those principles or conclusions. In this second sense, it is undeniable, that the seventh day's Sabbath and the Lord's Day are both founded upon the law of nature : that is, the law of nature doth prescribe, that some time be set apart for the worship of God; and, in pursuance hereof, the positive law of God, or of the Church, doth set apart one day in the week for this time. But in the first and more proper sense, the law of nature dictateth nothing of our weekly account, or of the holiness of any one day in the week more than the rest.

My reasons to make good this assertion, are four.— The first is taken from the testimony of every man's own conscience. Let any man examine the practical notions of God and of religion, which he findeth dictated to him by natural reason ; and if his mind be serene, not clouded with unruly passions, nor diverted by exorbitant desires, especially if he have not extinguished those