A37049:792
A37049:792
London: printed for Dorman Newman, 1675
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
5. Arg. That there is a morality in a Seventh day, we may argue from four famous and main Witnesses.
The 1. whereof, is the general practise of all Christians (I say nothing of Heathens) Apostles, and generally all in the Primitive times have ever thought that one day of seven is to be observed, and have in less or more accordingly observed it.
2. As the Pra •tise of all, so the Judgment and opinion (which is often more sound than m •ns practises) of all, doth confirm it: Was there ever any Churches that did not in all their Catechisms and Canons, take in this fourth Command with the rest? do not all Writers, who comment on the Decalogue, comment on this Command, and urge the sanctifying of the Lor •• day from it?
3. Take men • Consciences for a third Witness, and it will be found that for no sin, do they more frequently and more sharply challenge, then for Profaning of the Lord's day: The Conscience directly making use of this Command, and of the M • mento, and other reasons in it for aggravating of that sin, when yet it will say nothing for the Seventh day; but this first-day of seven it presseth most exactly, neither will any reason all •aged against its morality quiet it; and the more te •der that Christians be, the more will they find a pressure of Conscience for obedience to this Command; and the more easily will they be convinced of, and sadly challenged for, the least breach of this Command.
3. Take men • Consciences for a third Witness, and it will be found that for no sin, do they more frequently and more sharply challenge, then for Prophaning of the Lord's day: The Conscience directly making use of this Command, and of the M • mento, and other reasons in it for aggravating of that sin, when yet it will say nothing for the Seventh day; but this first-day of seven it presseth most exactly, neither will any reason all •aged against its morality quiet it; and the more te •der that Christians be, the more will they find a pressure of Conscience for obedience to this Command; and the more easily will they be convinced of, and sadly challenged for, the least breach of this Command.
4. God's Dispensations of Blessings or Plagues, especially in spiritual things, bear witness to this Truth: Doth not experience tell us, that those who make mo •t Conscience of keeping this Command, are often, yea, ever the most thriving Christians as to universal holiness and tenderness, and most near and intimate Communion with God? and will not the unsuitable sanctification of but one Sabbath, or the interruption of their wonted seriousness therein, give them a sore back-set? and on the contrary, doth it not appear that those who are gross and untender in this, are often gross and untender in all manner of Conversation, and are followed with spiritual plagues of hardness, deadness, and Hypocrisy at the best, or else fall into gross outward acts of profanity, or into errors in judgment, which are the bad and sad effects of profaning this day, on them who pr judg themselves of the bl •ssing of it; and if the blessing of this Law continue, must not the Law it self be moral and perpetually binding? the obedience whereof, hath this blessing perpetually more or less annexed to it, as the profanation thereof hath usually Plagues, at least spiritual.
4. God's Dispensations of Blessings or Plagues, especially in spiritual things, bear witness to this Truth: Doth not experience tell us, that those who make mo •t Conscience of keeping this Command, are often, yea, ever the most thriving Christians as to universal holiness and tenderness, and most near and intimate Communion with God? and will not the unsutable sanctification of but one Sabbath, or the interruption of their wonted seriousness therein, give them a sore back-set? and on the contrary, doth it not appear that those who are gross and untender in this, are often gross and untender in all manner of Conversation, and are followed with spiritual plagues of hardness, deadness, and Hypocrisie at the best, or else fall into gross outward acts of prophanity, or into errours in judgment, which are the bad and sad effects of prophaning this day, on them who pr •judg themselves of the bl •ssing of it; and if the blessing of this Law continue, must not the Law it self be moral and perpetually binding? the obedience whereof, hath this blessing perpetually more or less annexed to it, as the prophanation thereof hath usually Plagues, at least spiritual.
There are some Objections that are moved against the morality of this Command; I shall speak to three of them which are most insi ••d on.
1. Obj. This Law is not mentioned, as being renewed or confirmed, in the New-Testament.
Answ. 1. It's Authority dependeth not on the mentioning of it so in the New-Testament; the Law is God's Word, and hath its Authority as well as the New-Testament.
2. What if some other clearly mo •al and binding Law had been omitted, or not mentioned in the New-Testament, as there seemeth to be no palpable and expre •s Command again •t Images, though there be against will worship; sure, it is enough that it is not repealed in it, so it is here, as is said.
3. Sundry other positive Laws are binding, which are not mentioned in the New-Testament, such as these, For a man not to Marry his Sister or his Aunt, &c.
4. It will be •ound on the matter to be confirmed, when we shall see what warrant there is for the Lord's day, which is one of seven, and yet is clearly holden forth in the New-Testament: But this Command, as also that relating to Idolatry, are so little mentioned, because the I •w •, after the Captivity, were not so much in the defect of obedience to these Commands, but were rather disposed to a superstitious excess, which maketh Christ often rectify that abuse of the fourth Command, but never to annul it. The third Command also anent Swearing might be said to be abrogated, because it is not so positively asserted in the New Testament.
4. It will be •ound on the matter to be confirmed, when we shall see what warrant there is for the Lord's day, which is one of seven, and yet is clearly holden forth in the New-Testament: But this Command, as also that relating to Idolatry, are so little mentioned, because the I •w •, after the Captivity, were not so much in the defect of obedience to these Commands, but were rather disposed to a superstitious excess, which maketh Christ often rectifie that abuse of the fourth Command, but never to annul it. The third Command also anent Swearing might be said to be abrogated, because it is not so positively asserted in the New Testament.
2. Obj The Apostle, Rom. 14.5, 6. Gal. 4.10. & Col. 2.16. seemeth to cast away difference of times, especially of Sabbath-days; which could not be, if this Command were moral.
Answ. The Apostle cannot be understood simply to cast away the observation of all days as a bondage, & so to make all times alike: For 1. That would contradict his own practise, and the practise of the other Apostles: for it is clear that they differenced the first day of the week from other days, and one day. […] special is called The Lord's-day, which other days of the week are not. 2. If all times be a-like simply, and all making difference be there reproved, then could there be no time set apart to be observed by men, to the marring of that indifferency: ⟨p. 206⟩and if so, then hath the Christian Church been still in a palpable gross sin; for if the keeping of a day by virtue of God's Command, marr that indifferency, much more will the keeping of a day by mans command, and so there could never be a Sabbath. 3. We must therefore understand these places not as casting all days and times simply, but ceremonial and Jewish days, or days invented by men, because the scope of the places runneth that way, viz. against the bringing in of ceremonial worship as necessary, which while some weak ones, not yet sufficiently informed, did still practise, as Rom. 14. the Apostle would not have them hastily condemned in Days, more than Meats; yet is there still a difference betwixt Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Supper and other meats, which this discourse of the Apostle taketh not away; so is it in days. And in these Epistles to the Galatians and Colossians, he speaketh of days, and not (as would seem of the weekly Sabbath, which is ordinarily called a day) as taking in all the extraordinary Feasts of the Jews, which is the more probable, because the c •remonial Law was pressed on them as still necessary, by false Teachers: or he speaketh of mere Jewish days, and so of the Seventh day which they kept; for it's of such observation of days as was sinful, and brake them off from Grace and the Gospel, as other ceremonies did; that he speaketh of: but that cannot be said of all days, or of keeping one day of seven: Therefore this cannot be meant there.
Answ. The Apostle cannot be understood simply to cast away the observation of all days as a bondage, & so to make all times alike: For 1. That would contradict his own practise, and the practise of the other Apostles: for it is clear that they differenced the first day of the week from other days, and one day. 〈…〉 special is called The Lord's-day, which other days of the week are not. 2. If all times be a-like simply, and all making difference be there reproved, then could there be no time set apart to be observed by men, to the marring of that indifferency:
3. Obj. The fourth Command precisely commandeth the Seventh day from the Creation to be kept; but that is not moral; therefore, neither is the Command so.
Answ. This Objection goeth upon that mistake, as if the very Seventh day were still commanded in it, as the main sub stance of it, which our next discourse on the true scope and meaning of the Command will clear; so that if a Seventh day, and not that Seventh day be commanded as the main substance of that Command, that Objection falleth. 2. There is a difference to be put betwixt the mandatory part of the Command, and what is further added for pressing the observation of it, or for ex • plaining its meaning: The precept strictly is, Rememb •r the Sabbath day to keep it holy: It saith, Remember the Sabbath, or the Holy rest, what-ever day it shall be on; and so it is said in ⟨p. 207⟩the close, that, He Rested the Seventh Day, but that, He Blessed the Sabbath: Drawing it still from the Seventh precisely, to the Sabbath: Even as in the Second Command: This is, 1. commanded in special, that no Image be made, then. 2. This in general, that all Gods Commandment concerning His Worship, even such as were Ceremonial, for the time, should be observed with, what-ever others should be given: So here this Fourth commandeth expressly▪ One of the Seven; because the Recurrency of that time is bounded: and generally, what-ever Seventh the Lord shall be pleased to pitch on.
Answ. This Objection goeth upon that mistake, as if the very Seventh day were still commanded in it, as the main sub •tance of it, which our next discourse on the true scope and meaning of the Command will clear; so that if a Seventh day, and not that Seventh day be commanded as the main substance of that Command, that Objection falleth. 2. There is a difference to be put betwixt the mandatory part of the Command, and what is further added for pressing the observation of it, or for ex • plaining its meaning: The precept strictly is, Rememb •r the Sabbath day to keep it holy: It saith, Remember the Sabbath, or the Holy rest, what-ever day it shall be on; and so it is said in ⟨p. 207⟩the close, that, He Rested the Seventh Day, but that, He Blessed the Sabbath: Drawing it still from the Seventh precisely, to the Sabbath: Even as in the Second Command: This is, 1. commanded in special, that no Image be made, then. 2. This in eneral, that all Gods Commandement concerning His Worship, even such as were Ceremonial, for the time, should be observed with, what-ever others should be given: So here this Fourth commandeth expresly One of the Seven; because the Recurrency of that time is bounded: and generally, what-ever Seventh the Lord shall be pleased to pitch on.
We have said the more on this, because it doth not only clear the true Scope of the Command, but showeth the necessity of the Observation of that time, which the Lord hath sanctified for himself. 3. We should put a difference also betwixt Ceremonial and Mutable: All the Judicial Laws are Mutable; and the Decalogue it self, in respect of it's Curse; and, as it was a Covenant giving Life, is Actually changed and abolished: Yet is not for that to be reputed Ceremonial, and not Obligatory: (Though all Ceremonials be Mutable, yet all Mutables are not Ceremonial.) Besides, this change is not in the matter. Why may not therefore, the Seventh Day in Order, (which was observed from the Creation, to the Resurrection of Christ,) be changed to the First Day of the Week, which is a Seventh Day in Number still, without abolishing the Morality of the Fourth Command?
We have said the more on this, because it doth not only clear the true Scope of the Command, but sheweth the necessity of the Observation of that time, which the Lord hath •anctified for himself. 3. We should put a difference also betwixt Ceremonial and Mutable: All the Judicial Laws are Mutable; and the Decalogue it self, in respect of it's Curse; and, as it was a Covenant giving Life, is Actually changed and abolished: Yet is not for that to be reputed Ceremonial, and not Obligatory: (Though all Ceremonials be Mutable, yet all Mutables are not Ceremonial.) Besides, this change is not in the matter. Why may not therefore, the Seventh Day in Order, (which was observed from the Creation, to the Resurrection of Christ,) be chainged to the First Day of the Week, which is a Seventh Day in Number still, without abolishing the Morality of the Fourth Command?