The Doctrine of the Sabbath, Thesis 58 – Thesis 62
Thesis 58.
If any think that there is a peculiar manner of holinesse, and of worshipping God herein required, which is not required in any other Commandment; it may bee readily granted, if by peculiar manner of sanctification, be meant a more speciall degree and manner of exercising the whole worship of God, in respect of such a time: but it doth not therefore follow, that any new kinde of worship (which Wallaeus hence pleads for) is required herein:Wal. dissert. de 4. praec. c 6. for this higher degree and speciall manner of worship is not the substance of any new worship, it being onelyonly a peculiar degree of worship,In hoc quarto praecept… aliquem peculiarem sanctificationis modum mandar… quae in aliis praeceptis non mandatur, a nobis qu… que extra controversiam deb…t coll…ari, …um in his decem verbis Tautologia supervacu… non committ…ur. Wal. Ibid. and therefore varies not the kinde: And if the three first Commandments enjoyne the worship it selfe, then they doe command the highest measures and degrees also severally, for where any duty is required, the highest degree and extension of it is also therewithall required. Hence therefore it still followes, that this peculiar manner of exercising holy duties upon this day, is chiefely with reference and relation to the time which God hath sanctified, that herein hee might be in a speciall manner worshipped and served: And verily Wallaeus foreseeing the blow, had no other way to expedite himselfe from making the three first Commandments, either to be meere cipers, or the fourth Commandment from labouring with a needlesse Tautology, but by flying for refuge to this peculiar manner of holines which he thinks is required herein, and not in any of the rest; but what hath been said may be sufficient to clear up the ungroundednesse of this mistake.
Thesis 59.
A little errour is a great breeder, and begets many more; and hence it is that Wallaeus among many others, that he might make the worship it selfe to be required in the fourth Commandment, disputes therefore against those who place the instituted worship of God▪ directly under the second Commandment, which if hee could make good, he had then the fairer probabilities to shew that the worship it selfe was required directly in the fourth Command; which principle if it was granted, would expose the morality of the Sabbath to sorer blowes and bruises then perhaps appears at first blush: It may not therefore be amisse, but bee rather of speciall use for the clearing up both of the meaning and morality of the fourth command,Wal. diss. de 4 praes. cap. 51 to demonstrate, that the instituted worship of God, (which Wallaeus cals, Cultus externus & instrumentalis salutis nostrae, per auditum verbi & sacramentorum usum, &c.) is directly required in the affirmative part of the second command.
Thesis 60.
The clearing up of this, depends much upon a right and true understanding of two things in the second Commandment;
1. What the graven Image and likenesse is.
2. What is meant by those words. [Love me and keep my Commandements.]
Thesis 61.
First, Graven Images, after which the whole world almost hath been enticed, and gone a whoring from the true worship of God; were worshipped two wayes: 1. Terminativè, i. When people terminated their worship upon the dumb Idols themselves, as if they were gods, without looking any further to any God more supreame and glorious: This is the sinne of many of the ignorant sort of Papists by Bellarmine's owne confession, as also many of the brutish sort of the blinde heathens: And this kinde of worship and Idolatry is directly forbidden, not in the second, but in the first Commandment; and that appeares upon this undenyable ground, to wit, that if the first Commandment expressely enjoynes us to have no other God but Jehovah, to trust in, pray to, love, feare no other God but Jehovah, then for any to have and worship such Images as their gods which are not Jehovah, is directly forbidden here: Hence therefore it undenyably follows, that by the making to our selves a graven Image, in the second Commandment, somewhat else must be understood then the worshipping of Images terminatively as gods. 2. Or else they were worshipped relativè, i. Relatively or in reference to the true God, as meanes and helps, In which, At which, and by which, the true God was worshipped: And thus the learned and well instructed Papists maintaine their abominable worship of Images, whether graven or painted, crosses, crucifixes, &c. to be good and lawfull; for say they, we doe not worship, nor are wee so senselesse as to honour the Image, or Crucifix it self, but onelyonly as helps to devotion, to carry our hearts to God and Christ, resembled by these Images: Thus also the Jewes of old, they did never worship the Images themselves, but God in them and by them: They were not growne so soon, so extreamly sottish, as to thinke that the golden Calfe was the true God himself which brought them a few weeks before out of the land of Egypt, but it was a visible help to carry their hearts to God onelyonly, and therefore the Feast was proclamed to Iehovah, Exod. 32.4, 5. Micha's Idolatrous mother professeth that shee had dedicated the eleven hundred shekels of silver to Iehovah to make a molten Image, Iudg 17.3. she was not simple (no not in those confused and blinde times) to thinke that the Image was Iehovah, nor did her son Micah think so, and therefore he doth not say, Now I know that the Teraphim will blesse me, but that Iehovah will now blesse me, having set up an Image for his service. Nay verily, the wisest and best instructed among the Heathens did never think that the Idols and Images themselves were God, but they only worshipped God by them; which if any doubt of,Vid Rain. de Eccles. Rom. Idol. l. 2. c. 3. let him but read Doctor Rainolds, who by pregnant and most evident proofs demonstrates, that neither the Iewes, nor the Heathens in their deepest apostacies, did ever worship their Images any other wayes then relatively, as helps and meanes of the worship of the true God; and hereby sets forth the abominable Idolatry of the Romish Church, for such a worship of their Images, which even themselves condemne in the Idolatrous Iews and Heathens, who had as much to say for their Image worship as the Papists have: Hence therefore it followes, that if the graven Image in the second Commandment, was not worshipped as God, but onelyonly as a means devised and invented by man to carry the heart unto God, then (by a usuall Synechdoche in every command) all humane inventions and institutions, and devised meanes of worship, or of carrying the heart better unto God, are forbidden in this Commandment; and if all humane institutions and devised meanes of worship, be herein directly forbidden, then certainly All divine institutions and meanes of worship, and consequently All Gods instituted worship, in Ministry, Sacraments, &c. is directly commanded in the affirmative part of this second Command; and consequently not in the fourth Command: And if all Orthodox Divines condemn the Popish relative worship of Images, as directly crosse and contrary to the second Command, I then see no reason why any should question, but that all the instituted meanes of worship (Images as it were of Gods owne devising) should belong to the affirmitive part of the same Command. The second thing to be explained in this Commandment is, What is love to God and keeping of his Commandments, which we read of in the close of the Commandment? Love to God is here opposed to Hatred of God, and those that Love him, to those that Hate him: Now this Hatred is not hating of God at large (for there is a hatred of God in every sinne, Prov. 1.29. and 8.36.) but in particular, when it appeares in this particular sin of setting up of Images and mens inventions, forbidden in this Commandment, which therefore sets down the proper punishment for this sin: So by love of God, is not meant love of God at large (which is seen in keeping every Command) but in particular, when we love God in his owne Ordinances and institutions. Look therefore as hatred of God in setting up mans inventions and institutions (which superstitious persons thinke to be much love to God) is here condemned in the negative part of the Commandment; so on the contrary, love to God in closing with him and seeking of him in his owne Institutions, whether Word or Sacraments, &c. is here enjoyned in the affirmative part of this Command, and consequently not (as Wallaeus would have it) in the affirmative part of the fourth Command, Keeping my Commandments being set downe as a fruit of this love, and both together being opposed to hatred of God: Hence by Commandments, cannot be meant in generall, all the ten Commandments (as some imagine upon miserable weake grounds, which I lift not to mention) but in speciall, Gods Institutions and Ordinances commanded in speciall by him, to which humane inventions and Images of mens heads and hands, are commonly in Scripture opposed, and are therefore condemned, because not commanded, or because none of his Commandments, Ier. 7.31. Deut. 12.30, 31. Matth. 15.9. If therefore (againe) Gods Institutions and Commandments are here enjoyned in this second Commandment, they cannot bee directly required in the fourth Command. These things being thus cleared, the objections of Wallaeus are easily answered: For first, he saith, That from the negative part of this second Commandment cannot be gathered such an affirmative part as this is,Object. 1. viz. That God will be worshipped by the Word and Sacraments. But that this assertion thus barely propounded, but not proved, is false, appeares from what hath been said concerning the true meaning of the negative part of this Command: For if humane inventions, under the name of graven Image bee forbidden, then Divine Institutions, such as Word and Sacraments bee, are here commanded, and from that negative any ordinary capacity may readily see what the affirmative is. Hee saith again secondly, That if instituted worship was contained under the affirmative part of the second Commandment,Object. 2. then this Commandment is mutable, because God was thus worshipped one way before Christ, and another way since Christ; but (saith he) the second Commandment is morall, and therefore immutable, and therefore such mutable worship cannot be enjoyned herein. But we have *Vid. Thes. 34formerly shewne that although this Commandment be morall and immutable in respect of it selfe, yet in respect of the application of it to this or that object or thing commanded, it may be in that respect mutable: For it is an immutable law that God must be worshipped with his owne worship, such as hee shall institute (and this is the summe of the second Commandment it selfe) yet the things instituted (wherein there is onelyonly an application of the command) may be mutable: the second Commandment doth not immutably binde to the observance of this or that particular instituted worship onelyonly: But to observe Gods instituted worship, and to attend his appointments, which is the onelyonly morall law and rule in the affirmative part of this Command. Hee thirdly objects, That the worshipping of God in Word and Sacraments, Object. 3.&c. is never opposed in all the Scripture to the worshipping of Images. But this is false; for Gods Institutions (of which Word and Sacraments are a part) are frequently opposed to humane inventions, the worship appointed by God to the worship devised by man: Images of Gods devising, are oft opposed to Images of mens owne inventing; the voice of God which was onelyonly heard with the eare, is opposed to an Image or similitude which might bee seen, Deut. 4.12. A graven Image, a teacher of lies, is opposed to the Lords teaching of truth, and also to his presence in his Temple, which was the seat of instituted worship, Habak. 2.18, 19, 20. The worship of Images which God would have abolished, is opposed to the worship of God by Sacrifices and Ceremonies, in the place which God should chuse, Deuter. 12.1. to 20. but yet he tels us, That to worship God in Images, and to worship him in Spirit and Truth (which is inward worship) are opposite: as also the lifting up of pure hands in every place, John 4.28. 1 Tim. 2.8. Hee tels us also that acknowledging of God in his Immensity and Infinite Majesty, are opposed to Image-worship, Rom. 1.20, 21, 22. Isa. 40.22. Bee it so: But will it therefore follow, that to worship God according to his own Institutions▪ is not to worship him in Spirit and in Truth? Is it rather a carnall than a spirituall worship, to attend on God in Word and Sacraments? May we not lift up pure hands in the use of Gods own institutions? Is not Gods Immensity and Majesty acknowledged and seen in the use of his owne Ordinances, as well as creatures and providences? I confesse the blinder sort of Heathens might worship stocks and stones and Images of creeping things, and four-footed Beasts, in the place of God himselfe terminatively, and God might account of all their Image-worship as such, though used relatively, and hence the opposition may well bee made between worshipping them as God, and an infinite God; and this worship (as was said) fals then under the first Commandment: but assuredly this Image-worship which the Apostle condemnes, Rom. 1.21, 23. in debasing the infinite Majesty, and limiting it to this and that Image wherein they did worship it, is forbidden (being only relative worship) in the second Command: For I think the Apostle in Rom. 1. hath an eye principally at the most lascivious Idolaters in the world, viz. the Egyptians, among whom principally we read of those Images of creeping things and foure-footed beasts, in their Hier… gliphicks: and yet we know that all that base worship did set out something or other of the Deity, which therein (and so relatively) they did worship. But I must not enter into the Discourse of these things here: sufficient is said to cleare up this point, viz. That Gods instituted worship fals directly under the second, not fourth Command.
Thesis 62.
It is true, that the exercise of publick worship of many together, is to be at this time upon the Sabbath, but doth it follow that therefore this publick worship it self falls directly under this command? For if publick Assemblies bee (as some think) a part of naturall worship, so as that the light of nature directs all men dwelling together as creatures, to worship God together publickly as Creator, then this worship fals directly under the first (not fourth) Commandment, where natural worship is directly commanded; but if publick Assemblies be considered as distinct Churches politically united and combined, publickly to worship God; then such Churches considered thus as politicall, not mysticall Assemblies, do fall directly under the second Command, as parts of instituted worship: for as all devised formes of Churches, whether Diocesan, Provinciall, Nationall, Universall (being the inventions of man to further the worship of God) are condemned directly in the second Command: … all such Churches as are framed into a spituall policy, after the fashion and patterne of the Word and primitive institution, are (with leave of Erastus and his disciples) enjoyned in the same Commandment, and therefore not in the fourth.Gom. Inv. sent. & Orig. Sab. ca 5. Prim▪ par. 2. cap. 6. Sect. 15. Gomarus and Master Primrose therefore do much mistake the mark, and scope of the fourth Commandment, who affirme, That as in the three first Commandments, God ordained the inward and outward service, which hee will have every particular man to yeeld to him in private and severally from the society of men every day, so in the fourth Commandment he enjoyneth a service common and publick, which all must yeeld together unto him, forbearing in the mean while all other businesse. But why should they think that publick worship is more required here than private? Will they say that the Sabbath is not to bee sanctified by private and inward worship, as well as by publick and externall worship? Is not private preparation, meditation, secret prayer and converse with God, required upon this day, as well as publick praying and hearing the Word? If they say that these are required indeed, but 'tis in reference to the publick, and for the publick worship sake, it may be then as easily replyed, that the publick worship is also for the sake of the private, that each man secretly and privately might muse and feed upon the good of publick helps; they are mutually helpfull one to another, and therefore are appointed one for another, unlesse any will thinke that no more holinesse is required upon this day than while publick worship continues; which we hope shall appeare to bee a piece of professed prophanesse: In the meane while, looke as they have no reason to thinke that private worship is required in this command, because the exercise of private worship is at this time required; so they have as little reason to thinke that the publick worship it selfe is herein enjoyned, because the exercise of it is to be also at such a time. It is therefore the time, not the worship it self, either publick or private, which is here directly commanded: although it be true that both of them are herein indirectly required, viz. in relation to the Time.