A Threefold Treatise of the Sabbath, Chapter 11 – Chapter 12
CHAP. XI. Of ſome Objections which may bee made againſt it, anſwered.
Object. 1.
IT is not commanded in the New Teſtament, Ergo, hee inſtituted it not.
Anſ. 1. If it were not, yet might hee bee the Inſtitutor of it, by his reſting, bleſſing, and obſerving the day, as his Fathers reſting, and bleſſing the ſeventh day, was his inſtitution of it, as is proved in the firſt Treatiſe.
2. I have ſhewed, that Chriſt gave Commandements of the things pertayning to the kingdome of God, whereof the obſervation of this day is one. And therefore hee gave Commandement concerning this day.
Object. 2. It is not expreſly commanded.
Anſw. 1. This objection is made before, to which I have in part anſwered.
2. I anſwer further, that our book of Homilies telleth In Homily of Prayer.us againe and againe, that there is expreſſe Commandement for it: The Authors of this book ſay there is; The Objectors ſay there is not: ſet one againſt the other. To the book all the Miniſters in the Church of England have ſubſcribed, but not to this Objection againſt it.
3. I anſwer, there is in the New Teſtament no formall expreſſion of any of the other Commandements of the firſt Table, neither of the firſt, nor ſecond, nor third, becauſe they ſtood in force, and therefore no need formally to expreſſe them: no more need was there for any ſuch expreſſion of this.
Firſt, becauſe the fourth Commandement ſtood ſtill in force, as well as the reſt: for firſt, Chriſt did challenge Lordſhip over this fourth Commandement, in his aſſumed humane nature, Matth. 12. 8. to ſhew that in his ſtate of humiliation, hee loſt not his authoritie over it: Secondly, becauſe the changing of the ſeventh day into another day, was not the taking away of the fourth Commandement, but only the accommodation of the ſame Commandment to our Lords day, for the continuation of it ſtill. For if the fourth Commandement bee not obſerved in keeping of this our Lords day, then will it follow,
1 That either there is no fourth Commandement, and ſo not ten Commandements, which number hath bin obſerved without addition, or diminution, to this day, the ſpace of 3221 yeeres in Gods Church, both of the Jewes, and of the Gentiles: or elſe if it be one of the Tenne, as God gave it, Exo. 20. for one of them, then have we lived in ſinfull neglect of this Commandement now this 1600 yeeres.
2 It will follow that Chriſt hath loſt his Lordſhip of it, or ſuffered one of his Fathers Commandements to be careleſly neglected; neither of which may bee granted without indignitie offered to Chriſt, and his truth.
3 That Chriſt had not come to fulfill, but to deſtroy the Law, contrary to Matth. 5. 17. for if he neither kept the former day, but took it away, nor ordeined certainely in the roome of it another day, he had deſtroyed this Law.
4 It alſo will follow, that the Sonne ſhould not be honoured of all men as they have honoured the Father with the fourth Commandement, and with a ſet day by his appointment for his publick worſhip and ſolemn ſervice: But all men ſhould honour the Son, as they honour the Father, Ioh. 5. 23. And therefore with this fourth Commandement, and with a ſet day by his appointment for his publick and ſolemne worſhip and ſervice ſhould he be honoured.
Object. 3. The taking away of the ſeventh day appointed by God, diſanulleth the Commandement it ſelfe.
Anſw. Not ſo, for we muſt wiſely underſtand and diſcerne betweene the ſubſtance of the Commandement, and circumſtance; between the ſubſtance of the Commandement it ſelfe, and the accommodation thereof unto a day: See the other Treatiſe,The Commandement is, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy: This only is the Commandement, ſo by Moſes it is cleare (note it well) in Deut. 5. 12.
The application and accommodation of the Commandement was unto the ſeventh day, which day may be taken away, as not of the ſubſtance, but a circumſtance of the Commandement of the Sabbath & reſt day, applyed unto that ſeventh day, and yet the Commandement be ſtill of force: As for example in the accommodation of another precept thus;
Honour the King, 1 Pet. 2. 17. This is a Commandement, whoſoever is King: The accommodation of that may be thus: Saul is King, this is not of the ſubſtance of the Commandement, yet while Saul is King, we are commanded to honour King Saul, but in time Saul is taken away, nevertheleſſe the Commandement, Honour the King, is of force to another perſon in his ſtead, as David ſucceeding, the Commandement is, honour King David. The ſame Commandement which bindeth me to honour the King, bindeth me to honour Saul while he is King: And when Saul is taken away, and David appointed in his ſtead, I am bound by the ſelfe ſame Law to honour David.
Even ſo is the accommodation of this fourth Commandement, Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy: this is the Commandement what day ſoever it be applyed unto. The accommodation is, the ſeventh day is the Sabbath day to keep it holy: this the Commandement doth binde us unto, as long as the day is unchanged and not taken away: But the day being altered, yet the Commandement abideth, and is of forc…, when another day is appointed in its roome, as is now our Lords day. And therefore the Commandement is, Remember the Lords day to keep it holy.
From whence here note, that as the taking away of Saul took not away the Commandement of honouring the King, and Davids comming in Sauls ſtead held up the practice of the ſame Commandement: Even ſo the taking away of the ſeventh day took not away the authoritie of the fourth Commandement, and the bringing in of the Lords day in ſtead thereof, holdeth up the practice of it, and by it we are bound to obſerve this day, as the Jewes their day: And therefore may we pray as our Church teacheth us:
Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this Law: And that without any Judaizing at all.
CHAP. XII. That this day cannot be changed.
WEe have heard how that the day is of a divine inſtitution, and therefore is not ſubject to alteration by man: The Church, ſaith our learned Doctor On Rev: 1. 10. In Caſes of Conſc. ca. 16. In his Theſis.Fulk, hath no authority to change it; ſo holds Maſter Perkins: Biſhop Lakes ſpeaking of Chriſts reſurrection giveth this reaſon, ſaying, as no man can change the work to another day, ſo no man can therefore change the day: This is an undoubted rule in Theology, ſaith that learned man.
2. What honour and dignity the Holy Ghoſt giveth unto a day, cannot by the authority of man be taken from it, to put it upon any other day: but the firſt day of the week hath by the holy ſpirit this ſuperſcription ſet upon it, The Lords day; therefore it is not alterable by any, to any other day, to call that the Lords day.
3. If the Church can change it, then hath the Church authority to weaken the grounds on which the obſervation of the day was firſt ſetled, but that ſhe hath not; or elſe can bring better reaſons for the alteration, elſe it were folly to alter it: but there never was hitherto, nor now is, nor ever ſhall be, any ſuch reaſon to alter the day, as there was for ſetling of the day (to wit) the bleſſed reſurrection of the Lord Jeſus; of the excellent glory of which work yee have heard before: Therefore the Church cannot change it into another day.
4. Whoſoever changeth one thing for another, in matters of an high nature, muſt have equall power with the firſt Inſtitutors, or receive authority ſo to do from them: But the Church hath not ſuch authority in her ſelfe, or by delegation from either Chriſt, or from his Apoſtles: And therefore cannot change the day.
5. It hath beene ratified by many Synods, by ancient Councells, by Imperiall Conſtitutions, and Edicts of Kings, eſtabliſhed by the Lawes of Kingdomes and Countreys, as it cannot be altered.
6. The long continued cuſtome of obſerving it, from the firſt day in the Apoſtles time by the whole Primitive Church, and by all Chriſtian Churches ſince in all ages, for theſe 1600 yeares without any gain-ſaying, maketh it unalterable, it being obſerved upon ſuch grounds, as is before mentioned.
To conclude, to what purpoſe is it for any now to hold the change thereof, when never from the beginning, there was ever any one particular Church, any Synod, or Councell, or any Orthodox writer in ancient times, attempted it; Nor ever durſt any power on earth goe about it. But all the holy Fathers, and piouſly learned have with free conſent endeavoured the ſetling and honouring of this day, as may appeare in their writings and praiſes of the ſame, as ſhall be manifeſt in the next chapter.
It is not therefore changeable, either abſolutely or practically; nor have Chriſtians at any time, ſaith Biſhop White, judged it reaſonable or convenient to alter ſuch an ancient and well grounded cuſtome, which is commonly reputed to bee an Apoſtolicall tradition. To this let me adde in the laſt place, the judgement of that reverend Authour of the Antidote; That ſeeing the obſervation of the Lords day hath beene confirmed by ſo many Conſtitutions Eccleſiasticall and Imperiall, and hath withall continued with ſuch uniforme 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 doe ex plenitudine poteſtatis) ought not to attempt the altering of it to any other day of the week.