The Morality of the Fourth Commandment Still in Force, Consideration of lecture · Section 4
And the next begins with this queſtion, what then? ſhall we affirme that the Lords day is founded on divine authority? and the anſwer is, For my part (without prejudice to any mans opinion) I aſſent unto it; how ever the arguments like me not, whereby it is ſupported; well therefore, let us lovingly and candidly, as it becomes the gates of the muſes, conferre about theſe arguments. Firſt, this inference offends me; That in the cradle of the world, God bleſſed the ſeventh day and ſanctified it; therefore all men are bound to ſanctifie it by the Law of Nature: ſince I both doubt, whether the Patriarches did obſerve it before Moſes time, and have learnt alſo that the Law of nature is immutable; Doctor Andrewes in his patterne of Catecheticall Doctrine writes ſaying, This is a principle, that the Decalogue is the Law of nature revived, and the law of nature is the Image of God. But let us conſider the argument. It is one thing to except againſt the antecedent, another to except againſt the inference made herence: As touching the Antecedent, it is one thing, what God hath ordained, and may be another thing, what the Patriarches obſerved; we ſay God ordained it in as much as hee commanded it in theſe words, Therefore God bleſſed the ſeventh day and hallowed it, that is, commanded man to ſanctifie it as hath beene proved: and is alſo confeſſed; only to helpe themſelves, as it were at a dead lift; they ſay, thoſe words in Geneſis, are uttered by way of anticipation; as much as to ſay; becauſe God reſted on that day, therefore God commanded man to reſt on the ſame day, and ſanctifie it, but when? 2500. yeeres after; for the unreaſonableneſſe of which interpretation, and the incongruitie thereof unto the ſame words, repeated in the fourth commandement; I appeale to that which I have formerly diſcourſed he reupon: Now if God from the beginning ordained the ſeventh day to be kept holy; wee leave it to every ſober conſcience to judge, whether it be not moſt likely, that both Adam and the holy Patriarches obſerved it; for we inſiſt not in this argument upon humane obſervation, but meerely upon Divine inſtitution. And though God did from the beginning command it, yet it followeth not, that all men are bound to ſanctifie that day, unleſſe they have ſome evidence of Gods command, wherewith we are made acquainted by the Scriptures. If the law of nature be meant a light of nature convincing us, we doe not infer herence or at all maintaine (nor any that I know) that in this ſenſe, all or any are bound to keep the ſeventh, or a ſeventh day holy; but onelyonly by vertue of Gods command. Yet this wee profeſſe, that ſeeing it is generally confeſſed that by the very light of nature ſome time is to be ſet apart for Gods ſervice. Wee cannot deviſe in reaſon any better courſe, then to ſet one day in ſeaven apart for this; conſidering the firſt diviſion of dayes is into weekes, and if a ſeventh part of our time be in reaſon to be conſecrated unto God, wee thinke it more convenient to ſet one intire day in ſeven apart for this, then the ſeventh part of every day, becauſe the other buſineſſes of every day are apt to cauſe diſtraction from the Lords ſervice. And as I have but erſt diſcourſed; it is more fit the Maſter ſhould appoint unto the ſervant what proportion of ſervice hee ſhall performe unto him; then that this ſhould be left to the diſcretion or liberty of the ſervant. 1. both the honour of the Maſter requiring this. 2. and the good of the ſervant; for hereby hee ſhall be aſſured of the better acceptance at the hands of his maſter. And ſo for the particular day, it is fit the Maſter ſhould marke out that alſo unto him by ſome prerogative ſet upon the day, as hee did the ſeventh day, by finiſhing the worke of Creation, and by his reſt thereon from his workes to call man to an holy reſt from his, ſo to be more free for the ſervice of his Creator. In which caſes, both touching the proportion of the time, and particularity of the day, the Law being made, it ſhall continue immutable and unalterable by the will of the Creature; but mutable, and alterable according to the will of the Creator: ſo that things being well diſtinguiſhed, and rightly conſidered and ſtated, I ſee no bug-beare of inconvenience in all this. Neyther doe I ſee any reaſon why the ſpending of one day in Gods holy worſhip as a morall and perpetuall duty, ſhould ſeeme diſtaſtfull to any. Since it is apparant that God commanded it unto his people of the Jewes; and for 1600 yeares it hath beene continually obſerved by Chriſtian Churches unto this day; and I make no doubt, but it ſhall hold till Chriſts comming; though from the beginning of the World it was never found to be ſo hotly oppoſed as at this day. And why ſhould any man ſtick in acknowledging it to be morall; when never any man buſied himſelfe to finde out any ceremoniality in reference to the proportion of one day in ſeven? Neither doe I thinke ever any man called it judiciall, but Azorius profeſſeth it to be rationi maximè conſontaneum moſt agreeable to reaſon: and no man that I know hath at any time ſet himſelfe to deviſe a proportion of time to be ſpent in Gods ſervice, more agreeable to reaſon then this. And as for the third offence taken (for I know not any that give it) The fourth Commandement is brought by none that I know to prove that the Lords Day is now become our Chriſtian Sabbath; but ſuppoſing it to be our Sabbath, as the booke of Homilies ſayth it is; and our Saviour ſignified that Chriſtians ſhould have their Sabbath, as well as the Jewes had theirs, Math. 24. 20. wee produce the fourth Commandement to prove, that wee ought to ſanctifie it, and that we may the better ſanctifie it, to reſt from all workes that hinder the ſanctification thereof; And indeed the Commandedement is ſo drawen, as to command one day in ſeaven to be obſerved, and whatſoever is that ſeventh preſcribed by lawfull authority, to ſanctifie it, and abſtaine from all works whereby the hallowing of it is diſturbed; and all this we take to be morall, namely the worſhipping of God in a certaine proportion of time preſcribed by him, and to that purpoſe to reſt from workes, not for any myſterious ſignification ſake, as did the Jewes; wee thinke the practiſe of the Church in the Apoſtles dayes is ſufficient to inferre the apoſtolicall, and divine inſtitution thereof; from hence Athanaſius, Cyrill, Auſtin, and the Fathers generally, (for I know not one alleaged to the contrary) ſo take it. And the Lords Day hath no other notion in Scripture language, then a day of the Lords inſtitution; and this is confirmed in that it comes in the place of the Jewes Sabbath, which is called in Scripture, the Lords holy day Eſay 58. and Pſal. 118. 24. of the day wherein Chriſt was made the head of the corner, having beene formerly refuſed of the builders, it is expreſly ſaid, that it is the day that the Lord hath made; and thereupon wee are called to rejoyce and be glad in it. And it hath this congruity in the cauſe of its inſtitution to the firſt Sabbath; that as on the ſeventh day the Lord reſted from his worke of Creation, ſo on the firſt day of the weeke the Lord Chriſt riſing from the dead, then reſted from his worke of redemption. And laſtly Chriſt bringing with him a new Creation is it ſtrange that he ſhould bring with him a new Sabbath? and no day ſo fit for this, as the day of his Reſurrection. And laſtly whoſoever doth not reſt ſatisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church; muſt hee not be driven to acknowledge an ordination more then humane, requirable thereunto? Of the neceſſity of my conſequences, and evidence of expreſſe Scripture formerly mentioned, I leave it to the indifferent to judge; and to none ſooner then to Doctor Prideaux himſelfe, none being more able to judge of conſequences then hee, being ſo verſed therein, and I am well perſuaded of the indifferency of his affections, and had thoſe writings in the canvaſſing of this point beene extant before this Lecture of his which hath ſince come to the light of the preſſe; I am apt to conceave that either hee would have given way to that which ſeemes in my judgement to be the truth, or repreſented good reaſon of his diſſenting from it. The Apoſtles example, nor ſo onelyonly, but drawing the Churches generally to the ſame practiſe, doth argue a conſtitution; yet more is brought for the confirmation of the authority of the Lords Day then example. That of ſearching into the veyles and ſhadowes of the old Teſtament to finde this inſtitution is a myſtery unto mee, and ſo farre am I from that courſe, that I know none guilty of it; The ancient Fathers ſometimes doe expatiate this way, for the ſetting forth of the honorable condition of the Lords Day; but they build not doctrines thereupon; which if they had done in ſome particular caſe advantageous to our adverſaries, it had beene enough to have cryed us downe.
As for Judaiſme, I have often ſhewed, how little colour there is for any ſuch imputation to be caſt upon us, but rather upon our adverſaries: I ſee no cauſe to range the Petrobuſian with the Ebionite, but were they yoake-fellowes, whereof I finde not the leaſt evidence; yet ſhould not wee draw with them under the ſame yoake; Chemnitius his diſcourſe I have formerly examined ſomewhat at large; The voluntary conſecration of it by Chriſtians no man hath cauſe to embrace, who profeſſeth himſelfe not ſatisfied with the bare ordinance of the Church, as but erſt the Doctor did. Of Brentius I have ſpoken enough; yet well fare him that profeſſeth the authority of the day to be ſo farre divine, that he who ſhall neglect it, or raſhly breake it, doth forthwith become worſe then the Jew or Infidell. As for the Arminians, what reſpect ſoever they pretend to the patterne of the primitive Church, like enough they could be very well content with the Socinians, to make all dayes equall in uſe, as well as they are in nature, or in reſpect of any myſterious ſignification; I leave Azorius to refreſh himſelfe with the juyce of his owne diſtinction; It is well that Suarez comes ſo farre as to profeſſe that practically it is not alterable by the Church. As for Calvin, Bucer, Chemnitius, and the reſt, who are onelyonly ſayd to affirme that ſtill the Church hath power to change the Lords day to ſome other, I finde no ſuch thing in Calvin, and Bucer: as for what Chemnitius delivers hereupon, in my judgement hee ſayth no more then Calvin: though ſome particulars in him I have found to be weake enough, upon diſcuſſion in the 6 Section, of my anſwer to the Preface: having there met with the ſame names, named to the ſame purpoſe. It is not credible to mee they ſhould give power to the Church to bring us backe to the Jewiſh Sabbath: in that caſe who ſhould ſavour moſt of Judaiſme? or preferre us to the Turkes feſtivall day which is the Friday. To be inſtituted in memory of our redemption, admits an ambiguous ſignification; That bringing with it a new Creation, and ſo requiring a new Sabbath; as Biſhop Andrewes diſcourſeth and Athanaſius 1200 yeares before him; No day had a better marke for this to be preferred into the place of the Jewes Sabbath then the day of Chriſts Reſurrection; yet conſidering that not that day of the yeare; but that day of the weeke is called in Scripture the Lords Day, this maketh it evidently to ſavour of Divine inſtitution, yet it is well that here it is acknowledged to be expreſly of traditions Apoſtolicall. Beza addeth, & vere Divinae, on Revel. 1. 10. I truſt we ſhall ever give due reſpect, both to Law, and Goſpell; and the better concurrence wee finde of them for the maintenance of any doctrine of ours, the more cauſe wee ſhall have to rejoyce therein without feare of cenſure for the mixing of them, or framing any Sabbaticall Idoll out of them. It is not the firſt time I have read of ſome ſuch aſperſion in Rogers his preface to his Analyſis of the Articles of the Church of England; And the next yeere was printed D. Willet upon Geneſis dedicated to King Iames, where on the. 2. ch. 3. v. he concludes his diſcourſe on this argument after this manner; But theſe allegations are here ſuperfluous, ſeeing there is a learned treatiſe of the Sabbath already publiſhed of this argument (meaning D. Bownds diſcourſe thereon) Which containeth Girded at by Mr. Rogers.a moſt ſound doctrine of the Sabbath, as is layd downe in the former poſitions, which ſhalbe able to abide the triall of the Word of God, and ſtand warranted thereby, when other humane fantaſies ſhall vaniſh: howſoever ſome in their heate and intemperance, are not afraid to call them Sabbatarian errors, yea hereticall aſſertions, a new Iubily, Saint Sabbath, more then either Iewiſh or Popiſh inſtitution; much leſſe doe wee feare the ſtory of the Jew of Teukesbury; Solomon hath taught us that the righteous ſpareth his beaſt, and in our Saviours dayes the Jewes themſelves though very ſuperſtitious in the obſervation of their Sabbath, yet ſhewed mercy towards their beaſts in leading to them to water, and helping them out of the ditch on their Sabbath day. But God can give men over into a minde voyd of all judgement, as to the deſtruction of their ſoules, ſo to the temporall deſtruction of their bodies alſo, and that as in the way of profanenes, wherof we have manifold experience, ſo in the way of ſuperſtition. Now ſuch ſtories are pretty flouriſhes, and pleaſing to the judicious, provided they are to purpoſe, and ſound argument hath not beene wanting to juſtifie the doctrine they maintaine: but when they are out of ſeaſon, or ſupply the want of better argument, they want their grace, and are pleaſing only to the ignorant or partialiſt. At length I am come unto the laſt Section.