A Defense of the Sabbath Day, Chapter 3 · Commentary · Section 3
SECT. III.
I come now vntounto the ſecond maine queſtion, which is to know, whither it can be proued that any one Lords day, is a Sabbath day, by Gods ordinance, or not. For, I deny not only that eueryevery Lords day is a Sabbath conſtantly, and weeke by weeke: but alſo I deny that there is ſo much as any one Lords day, a Sabbath day.
For the better ſcaning of this point, I will examine all their Scriptures, & all their reaſons, which they produce in this caſe.
Firſt for their Scriptures; I hauehave reade ouer many the workes and writings of the patrons of this Lords day, to ſee their grownds for it, but yet among all the textes of Scripture which they alleage, I can no where find a Commandement for it alleaged by them, out of any parte of the new Teſtament: and this ſeemeth to me a ſtraung thing: if you demaund of them who is the Authour of this new Sabbath, they will tell you Chriſt: in the next place, if you demaund of them, where Chriſt left any commandement for it, by himſelfe, or by his Apoſtles; here they are at a non plus, they can finde no com. for it in all the new Teſtament; no nor any exhortation to keepe it; nor promiſe or threatening to thoſe who keepe, or profane it: now this at the firſt entrance, doth breede a ſhrewd ſuſpition, that this new Sabbath, is but ſome forgery, when there is neither commandement, nor exhortation for it in the booke of God; neither promiſe to them who keepe it, nor threatening to them who profane it; when the old Sabbath was ſet vp, it was done by an expreſſe Commandement; and can there a new Sabbath come into its roome, with out a Commandement? was God more carefull to inſtitute a Sabbath in memory of the Creation, then Chriſt was to ſet vp a Sabbath in memory of the Redemption?
Furthermore, the new ordinances which Chriſt ſet vp in the Goſpell, as Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper, Chriſt was mindfull to leaue commandements for them expreſly; as for Baptiſme, Goe therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them &c. Mat. 28.19. & for the Lords Supper, Take, eate: this is my body whith is broken for you &c. 1 Cor. 11.24.26. now this Lords day, is affirmed by them, to be an ordinance of the Goſpell, & a new ordinance of the new Teſtament, & inſtituted in memory of the Redemption; & is it likely that Chriſt would leaue commandements for ſome of his new ordinances, & not for the reſt? This Lords day, (if it be, as they make vsus beleeue) it may well be counted by the Church a third Sacrament; for it is to be kept in remembrance of Chriſt, like as are the two other Sacraments of Baptiſme, & the Lords Supper: yea, and this new Sabbath, wich is or may well be, a nevv Sacrament alſo, is of as great vſe, if not of greater, then the tvvo Sacraments of Baptiſme and the Lords Supper: for, Baptiſme remembreth a man of Chriſt but once in his life time, in a ſpeciall ſorte: & the Lords ſupper, putteth vsus in minde of Chriſts death but once a quarter; but this nevv Sabbath, & nevv Sacrament, ſhould put vsus in minde of Chriſt once a weeke; ſo as this vvould be very vſefull aboue the others; novv can vvee thinke, that Chriſt vvould be ſo mindfull as to leaue Comm. for the ij Sacraments, & be altogether vnmindfull to leaue a commandement, for the Lords day, to be a Sabbath, if euer he had meant it ſhould be a Sabbath? and for the Apoſtles, ſome fanſy that Chriſt left a commandement vvith them, Act. 1.2. but let it then be ſhovvne; vvhere is it vvritten I marueile? nay, can vve thinke that if Curiſt had giuen the Apoſtles a commandement to deliuer to the Church, that they durſt hauehave concealed it? could this hauehave ſtood vvith their faithfulneſſe? The conſideration of this one point, is enough to make any man to ſtagger, & the vvhole building to totter: their caſe is aboue 50 in the 100 the vvorſe for this, that they are inforced at the firſt onſet, to confeſſe, that they can ſhevv no commandement for the Lords day, from either Chriſt the founder of it, or his Apoſtles: The Saturday Sabbath, hath a commandement to authoriſe it; but the Sunday Sabbath hath none; vvherefore I ſhall make my choiſe of the Saturday Sabbath, let them that liſt, chooſe the Sunday Sabbath.
Hence this one note vvould be obſerued, that ſince there is no Commandement for the Lords day, therfore it followeth, that the Patrones thereof, muſt fetch all their grownds for it, by reaſon, collections, & conſequences out of Scripture; now how feeble a thing mans blind reaſons is, vvho knoweth not, that knowes himſelfe? how liable are vve to miſtake; yea how ſubiect to fallacies & to be deceiued thereby, are the beſt Logiceans, eſpecially in the Matters of God: ſo that if reaſon may poſſibly err, & be deceiued, thē may they be deceiued that ſtand for the Lords day, yea though I in ſtead of oppoſition, ſhould ioyne with them, & all men ſay Amen to them: for reaſon and conſequences are their beſt guide & direction: ſo then at the beſt, the foundation of our Lords day Sabbath, hath but the ſandy foundation of mans blinde & ſhallow reaſon.
But here vntounto they are redy to reply, that neceſſary conſequence out of Scripture, is as ſound as Scripture it ſelfe: vvhere vntounto I anſwer, 1. That the compariſon made of mans reaſon, with Gods vvord, is vnbefitting; for be it that neceſſary conſequence is ſound, and very ſound; yet, ſeing conſequence is by force of manes reaſon, it is not fit that it ſhould be compared & equalled with the neuer erring vvord of God. 2. I anſwer, tis true that neceſſary conſequence is very ſound indeed, but then the difficulty is, to knovv, when a conſequence is neceſſarily true, and vvhen not: for many men take their conſequences to be neceſſarily true, which are but contingent and doubtfully true: But to paſſe by this point, let it be noted, that theſe men vvho doe ſo aduance mens reaſon, and conſequences, and talke ſo much for conſequences, and of neceſſary conſequences; thers no men vſe neceſſary conſequences leſſe then they doe; in ſomuch as I begine to queſtion it, that they talke beyond their skill, vvhen they talke ſo before the people, of neceſſary conſequences; for, if they knew vvhat they ſaid, vvhen they ſo ſpeake, vve ſhould ſinde them vſe this neceſſary conſequence, in their diſputations, and arguments framed by them for the Lords day Sabbath: for, it is in this argument, and vponupon this occation, that they talke ſo of neceſſary conſequences; thereby inſinuating vntounto common people, that they hauehave neuer erring Neceſſary conſequence, for their Lords day Sahbath: But heere I challeng them, any of them all, to ſhew me but one argument, out of any Text of Scripture for the Lords day Sabbath, vvhichwhich ſtandes by force of neceſſary conſequence: vvhichwhich if they can not doe, as I know vvell they cannot doe it, then are they but vngodly bragadoceans & proud boaſters, to prattle of neceſſary conſequences, as if forſooth they meant it, to proue all they ſay by neceſſary conſequence, but when they come to it, they flinch, giuegive in, and doe nothing leſſe; this is but one of their trickes, to delude the people withall.
Becauſe vve are vponupon the point, let me ſhew you ſome of their neceſſary conſequences; as 1. Chriſt appeared to his Diſciples vponupon the Lords day; Therefore the Lords day muſt of neceſſity be a Sabbath day. 2. Chriſt roſe vponupon the Lords day, ergo, eueryevery Lords day after, muſt neceſſarily be a Sabbath. 3. The holy Ghoſt deſcended on the Lords day; ergo, it cannot poſſibly be otherwiſe, but it muſt be a Sabbath. 4. Peter preached once on the Lords day, & at an other time, I know not how many yeeres after, Paul preached a ſermon too on the Lords day; Therefore of neceſſity it muſt be a Sabbath day. 5. There vvas a collection for the poore on the Lords day. Therefore it muſt be a Sabbath, a poore conſequence. 6. It vvas called the Lords day, therefore it muſt be a Sabbath day. As much as if they had argued thus neceſſarily, it vvas called Sunday; therefore it muſt be Saturday. Theſe & the like are the neceſſary conſequences, which they vſe, who talke ſo much of neceſſary conſequence; the very mention whereof, is enough to loath a mans ſtomake, vntounto vomiting.
Here cometh in an obiection; ſay they, if you muſt hauehave a command. for the Lords day, ſhew vsus you then, where we hauehave a com. for the Baptiſme of infantes. 1. I anſwer, you doe vvell to confeſſe that you hauehave no comm. for your Lords day, for it is ſo indeed. 2. If you aſke me vvhere vve hauehave any com. to baptize infants, my anſvver is, that I neuer reade of any yet; and therefore I take it to be an indifferent thing, at the libertie of the Church, to baptiſe vvhen infants, or of riper yeeres: if therefore, you can ſhew a Com. for Baptiſme of infants vvhichwhich I cannot, then is there reaſon you ſhould alſo ſhew a Com. for your Lords day; but if you can ſhew none, no more then I, then is your Lords day, but an indifferent thing, and at the liberty of the Church as Baptiſme of infants is: this is a rule, that vvhat is not commaunded nor forbidden, that is indifferent: ſo then, as the Church may baptiſe one ſooner, or later; ſo the Church may keepe your Lords day, and they may refuſe to keepe it, if they pleaſe: and this is the higheſt pitch of honour that you can raiſe your Lords day to, that it is an indifferent thing, ſo as the Church may Reſt vponupon it or vvorke vponupon it; keepe it, or refuſe to keepe it, at hir pleaſure: for, a commaunded thing or day, it is not by your owne confeſſion.