Answer to Two Books of the Sabbath, Part 6
His ſecond inſtance.
Mr Cawdry in page 258. thus writeth; We ſhall give light to our aſſertion by comparing the time of worſhip, and the worſhip it ſelfe: comparing the fourth Commandement with the ſecond Commandement; the ſecond Commandement doth not directlly and expreſly command the particular ſervices, as Sacrifices, Circumciſion, the Paſſeover, &c. yet all theſe fall under the generall Obligation of the ſecond Commandement by way of conſequence, as ſpeciales to a generall: The like may be ſaid of the ſervices of the New Teſtament Baptiſme and the Lords Supper, &c. and theſe ſervices are reduced to the generall morality of the ſecond Commandement; juſt ſo (we thinke) it is in the fourth Commandement; the ſpeciall day, the ſeventh day, was not directly and expreſly commanded in the fourth Commandement, no, nor the Lords day, yet both fell under the Obligation of the fourth Commandement as ſpecials to a generall. To this I anſwer.
1. Suppoſing, but not granting, that Sacrifices, &c. Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper were commanded in the generall in the ſecond Commandement, yet the Saturday-ſeventh-day-Sabbath, and the Lords day were not both commanded in the generall in the fourth Commandement.
As for the Lords day it was not thought on at the giving of the Law on mount Sinai in the wilderneſſe, how ſhould it then be commanded in the fourth Commandement? Nor can it be underſtood in the fourth Commandement, for this is for the day called by its proper name (as ſhall hereafter appeare) Sabbath day; Remember the Sabbath day, now the fourth Commandement binds to Saturday, properly called Sabbath day, cannot bind to Sunday, or Lords day, the day following.
Againe the fourth Commandement ſaith, The ſeventh day is the Sabbath, which is Saturday the laſt day of the weeke, but the Lords day is Sunday the firſt day, and beginning of the weeke following; now how ſhould a bond of one hundred pound to be paid on the ſeven…h day of May be underſtood to bind to the day following the eighth day of May without a forfeiture of the Bond? Or a bond to be paid on Saturday the ſeventh day of the week, but to be forfeited if it be not paid till Sunday after the fi…ſt day of the next weeke? When the fourth Commandement binds to the ſeventh and laſt day of the weeke, it cannot bind to the firſt day of the weeke, the Lords day; ſo you ſee that the Lords day was not commanded in the fourth Commandement in the generall, no more than in the particular.
Now as for the Saturday-ſeventh-day-Sabbath, this indeed was commanded in the fourth Commandement, but not generally, as is ſuppoſed, comprizing under it Saturday and Sunday, both as ſpecialls: for Saturday the ſeventh day was no generall but a ſpeciall, ſingle, and individuall day, as is granted me, But I ſuppoſe Mr Cawdry underſtands his one day in ſeven to be the generall, and Saturday and Sunday the ſpecialls; but to expound the fourth Commandement of one day in ſeven is a falſe Expoſition, and as yet Mr Cawdry hath not proved it to be the ſenſe and meaning of the fourth Commandement; yet here and before he takes it for granted, and ſuppoſeth one day of ſeven to be the genus or general of the fourth Commandement; but this his ſuppoſition is but petitio principii, a begging of the queſtion of me before he ha…h proved it.
Thus you have ſeene by my anſwer, that Mr Cawdry hath not by his ſecond inſtance vindicated himſelfe from this Paradoxe in expounding the fourth Commandement for one day of ſeven; nor hath he proved that the fourth Commandement may be expounded for one day of ſeven.
2. Whereas Mr Cawdry makes Sacrifices, and the Paſſeover, Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper to be ſpecialls, under the generall Obligation of the ſecond Commandement, what doth he but mingle Ceremonials with Morals? And ſo confound the morall and the ceremoniall Laws; making Sacrifices, Circumciſion, and Paſſeover to be commanded in the morall Law, as in the ſecond Commandement? methinks Sir, it beſeemes not a Divine of your ranke thus to jumble together Morals and Ceremonials. 2 Sacrifices and the Paſſover were Goſpell, I ſay. Goſpel vailed under ſhadows, typing out Chriſt; Baptiſme and the Lords Supper are Goſpell alſo, pointing to Chriſt; now Sir, will you mingle Law and G…ſpell together? Saying, Sacrifices, and the Paſſeover, Baptiſme, and the Lords Supper fall under the Obligation of the ſecond Commandement? Will you confound Law and Goſpell? for the ſecond Commandement is Law, and a part of the morall Law; now to thruſt theſe Evangelicall things into the ſecond Commandement, is to jumble together the Law and the Goſpell; I confeſſe, you may as well thruſt and crowd the Lords day into the fourth Commandement as you may crowd Baptiſme and the Lords Supper into the ſecond Commandement, but both are but Carter-like done.
3. Whereas Mr Cawdry in this inſtance, and in two or three paſſages of his before, makes the Saturday, and the Sunday or Lords day to be ſpecies, or ſpecialls under the genus or generall of one day in ſeven in the fourth Commandement; how can he make this Logicke good? Suppoſe we that his one day of ſeven were the genus, ſince all Logicians know that the genus muſt have two ſpecies at leaſt, theſe two daies cannot be the ſpecies: for during the old world, as he cals it, untill Chriſt the fourth Commandement, under one day of ſeven, had but one ſpecies, namely, the Saturday-ſeventh-day-Sabbath as himſelf confeſſeth oftentimes, and ſince Chriſt, if the Lords day be a Sabbath, as he ſaies, and be alſo packt, or patcht, I may rather ſay, into the fourth Commandement, yet then from Chriſts time unto our times there hath been but one ſpecies under his genus, of one day in ſeven in the fourth Commandement, as the Sunday or Lords day; now, how can Mr Cawdry make his one day of ſeven to be a genus, when it ever wanted two ſpecies? As both before Chriſt, and ſince Chriſt; his divinity, in expounding the fourth Commandement for one day of ſeven, is like his Logick in making a genus to ſubſiſt with but one ſingle ſpecies.