The Christian Sabbath Vindicated, Part 1 · Chapter 3
CHAP. III.
Every Law of the Decalogue, is a Morall and Perpetuall Law.
WEE have one Rule more to adde,I. The third Rule, Every Law of the Decalogue is Morall. to know a Law to be Morall, though but Poſitive, and that is, [Every Law of the Decalogue, or every one of the tenne Commandments, is a Morall and Perpetuall Law.] This Rule we finde, doth not paſſe currant with the contrary party, and only or principally becauſe of the fourth Commandment, which they are unwilling to honour with the title and dignity of a Morall Law; without ſome qualification or diſtinction. The others indeed they yeeld Morall, but not this, as knowing they looſe their whole cauſe, unleſſe they refuſe the fourth Commandment. We therefore, who have undertaken the ſpeciall defence of the fourth Commandment: muſt take ſpeciall paines to maintain the whole Decalogue together (and ſo that Law, as one of the tenne) to be Morall and Perpetuall, by arguments which are common to all thoſe Lawes together. Concerning which we thus proceed.
Firſt for the ſtating of the Queſtion,II. The queſtion ſtated. we premiſe this conſideration. That by any of thoſe Lawes being in force, we mean, that it is in force in the Words of it, according to their Litterall and Gramaticall ſence, and not in any myſticall or Spirituall meaning; or forſaking the words to fly only to a generall equity, as ſome ſpeak. For both all Lawyers ſay, and reaſon it ſelf ſhewes: That a Law is no longer in force, then the Words of it are in force: at leaſt thoſe that contain the ſubſtance of it. And therefore to forſake the Words, and fly only to a Spirituall meaning or generall equity: is in true conſtruction,As well may we ſay that the whole ceremoniall or Iudiciall Law, is ſtill in force, as any command of the Decalogue whoſe words are not in force, but only a Spirituall meaning, or generall equity. to flye from the Law, and forſake it altogether, and pronounce it Void. For the Spirituall meaning, or Generall equity, are precedent to a particular Law: and have no need of ſuch a particular Law to confirme or hold them up. For they would have been in force, though that particular Law had never been: we mean though thoſe Words (which now are ſaid to be voyd) had never been given for a Law; and are no leſſe ſtrong when that particular Law is made voyd altogether. So that that particular Law is altogether made voyd, when the Words of it are rejected, as no longer obligatory, Therefore we ſay, by a Law in force we underſtand the Words of each Commandment, in their ſubſtance, and according to the Literall and Gramaticall ſence of them, which that we may evince to be true of all the Tenne Commandements, we thus argue.
III. 1. Argument. From the Teſtament of the Church in all ages.Firſt, we Alledge the Teſtimony of the Church of God many wayes notified. 1. In the Vniverſall uſage of the Name of the Decalogue, or Tenne Commandements, (derived from God himſelf firſt, who ſo denominates, then Exod. 34. Deut. 4. and Deut. 10.) Taken up by all Churches at this Day, and continued through all Ages of the Church unto this day. 2. In putting all of them, in the Words and ſyllables, into their Catechiſmes to be taught in the very Words of them, unto all Children and ignorants, (only indeed the Idolatrous Church of Rome, hath left the 2d. wholly out of their Catechiſmes, as too groſſely contradicting their abhominations of Image making, and Image-worſhipping.) 3. Accordingly, Expounding all of them in all Catechiſticall Sermons and Treatiſes. Though in them we confeſſe, they do diverſe of them, Forſake the Words of ſome Commandements, and particularly of the fourth too much. 4. But further, the Reformed Churches in many places, if not in all, have all the Tenne Commandements at large written upon the Walls of their Churches, that he that runs may read them, and learn (even from thence) that they hold them all perpetuall. 5. They appoint them to be all publikely repeated in the Church every Lords day. 6. Our Church of England hath gone beyond all in this,This was penned while the book of Common Prayes was in uſe in the Church, and highly magnified by thoſe who are Adverſaries in this Cauſe: againſt whom it ſtill remains a convincing Argument. requiring, beſides all the former things, 1. A promiſe of the obſervation of them by the childe that is to be baptized, (viz. from the Sureties in the childes name.) 2. The Sureties that preſent the childe to Baptiſme, by a particular charge after it is baptized, That they ſee it be taught, as a chiefe neceſſary thing, the Ten Commandements in the Engliſh tongue. 3. After the ſolemn publike rehearſall of them ſeverally and diſtinctly, all the Congregation to ſay, Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this Law. 4. And finally, at the cloſe of all to ſay, Lord have mercy upon us, and write all theſe thy Lawes in our hearts, we beſeech thee.
In all which it cannot be avoyded, but it muſt be acknowledged,IV. Otherwiſe guilty of a double ſin. 1. That All generally agree in avouching our Rule, [That all the Decalogue is perpetuated to this day: and every one of the ten Commandements, in the very words of it, concerne us all as well at this day, as any people or perſons in any former age ſince it was firſt given] Or elſe they are very unwiſe in all this, to ſay the leaſt that can be. But indeed more muſt be ſaid: For hence it will follow alſo, 2. That if the whole Decalogue be not now in force, and that there be not ten Commandements now perpetual, but nine or eight only: and ſo if the words of any one of the ten be not now at all in force, no more then the Law of the Paſſeover, or thoſe of the other Jewiſh Feſtivals, (as ſome private men have been bold to ſpeak this kind of language) then is the Church univerſally in all Ages, and at this day in all parts of the World, undeniably and grievouſly guilty of a double ſinne:
1. In laying a fearfull ſtumbling block before all her children, 1. In laying a ſtumbling block before children.in the very name of the Decalogue, or Ten Commandements, there being not ſo many now to us: And ſpecially in teaching all ignorant perſons the words of them all, and moſt of all, the words of the 4th. Commandement, (which are ſo many and ſo plaine, for but ſix dayes work together, and then a ſeventh dayes reſt to be kept holy) which while they heare, and muſt learne, and repeat the words conſtantly; they cannot but think, but the very words bind them, and not a meere generall equity only, (or we know not what ſpirituall meaning) far remote from the words: For that they believe, that ſhould only have been taught them now, if that only had been in force; and they not to be troubled to learn a great many words, which doe not at all concerne them, (there being no ſuch thing to be looked to, as the words pretend commanded by God) and which are only apt to enſnare their conſciences in needleſſe ſuperſtition and ſcrupuloſitie. Therefore we muſt needs confeſſe, that though the Church of Rome be Idolatrous in making and worſhipping of Images, yet are they wiſer in their generation, and more true to their Principles, in leaving out the ſecond Commandement wholly, and never teaching it at all to their children, and common people, than thoſe Churches ſhould be (and are) that hold any one of the Commandements, not now in force, according to the words of it, and yet ſtill teach them in their Catechiſmes, and cauſe their children to learne them.
2. In taking of Gods name in vaine.But ſecondly, hence muſt alſo needs be concluded, That they are all alſo guilty of a fearfull taking GODS Name in vaine, to teach thoſe words for his Commandement, which hath not been his Commandement theſe 1600 yeeres: And our Church moſt of all, in making all, from day to day, ask GOD forgiveneſſe for that which is no fault, (for where no Law is, there is no Tranſgreſſion) and praying to him to incline our hearts to keep this or that Law, and to write all theſe Lawes in our hearts, as His Lawes, if any of them be no longer a Law to us, nor to be kept by any neceſſity of his Divine commandement. What, ſay we, can this be judged to be leſſe then an horrible taking of GODS Name in vain, contrary to the expreſſe words of one of the ten Commandements, the Third namely, (immediately foregoing the queſtioned quarrelled Fourth) which alſo is undeniably perpetuall, even by the Law of Nature.
Theſe things we earneſtly wiſh all Diſputers, and namely of the Reformed Churches, and moſt ſpecially of our Church, ſeriouſly to weigh, and to put it home to their Conſciences, in cold blood, whether they will caſt all thoſe imputations upon the whole Chriſtian Church, and upon our own particularly: or how they can avoyd it, if a very Heathen were to be Judge in this particular, unleſſe they grant, as we here argue, that all the Commandements of the Decalogue are ſeverally and joyntly, in their words and plain ſenſe, univerſally and perpetually Morall.
V. Why this Argument is firſt.And this Argument we have firſt propounded, not as preferring the Teſtimony of the Church before the Scriptures, or Scripture-reaſons: but a little to ballance the Prejudice of Diſputers, who charge us with Novelty, and Singularity, and Judaiſme, and Puritaniſme, (any thing to make our Cauſe odious) when yet we maintain nothing in this, but what we have been trained up to by our Catechiſme, &c. and neceſſitated unto by the forementioned conſiderations of the Churches recommendation of the whole Decalogue, and all the words of it. And for our part, we muſt confeſſe, that (beſides our Churches particular recommendation of the fourth Commandement, in the Homily of the place and time of Prayer, of which hereafter) the perpetuitie of the whole Decalogue is ſo neceſſarily involved in all theſe Acknowledgements, and Profeſſions, and Practiſes, that we wonder where their Logick, their Reaſon, or their Divinitie and Conſcience hath been all this while, that could ſubſcribe to the Book of Common Prayer, and urge others ſo to it, as they have done, and yet not hold the words of the fourth Commandement perpetuall. And if we were of their opinion, we know not which way we ſhould ever dare ſo much as to read the Ten Commandements publikely, (unleſſe as a ſtory in the 20. of Exod. or 5. of Deut.) much leſſe ever teach any childe or ignorant perſon any Cathechiſme (of any of the Reformed Churches) which containes all the words of all the Commandements, (the Fourth and all) thereby to teach them any words which are now wholly out of date. And if the ſhifts our Diſputers have made to evade from the force of this Argument, doe ſatisfie their own Conſciences, we ſhall rather ſtill admire then envy them. To themſelves we now leave it. Mean time we forget not the uſuall grand Objection, That if this be ſo, then we muſt ſtill hold to the Jewiſh ſeventh day. But that we deny for the preſent; and there is a proper place reſerved for the full ſcanning of that, to which we referre it.
And ſo proceed to a ſecond Argument,VI. Arg. 2. From the eminent priviledges of this Law. which we thus propound: [Thoſe Lawes (though but Poſitive) which God in a moſt extraordinary and ſingular manner hath honoured and priviledged above all other Lawes, namely by a moſt rare and admirable delivering, recording, reſerving, are Morall and Perpetuall: But ſuch are all the Lawes of the Decalogue: Ergo.]
To ſtrengthen this Argument, we will firſt illuſtrate the Minor in the ſeverall parts of it, and then further preſſe and confirme the Major. Accordingly we propound (as we have named) three things, as moſt rare and ſingular priviledges, wherewith God hath honoured theſe Lawes of the Decalogue, and no other.
1. In the delivery; in reſpectFirſt, In the Delivery, it was with the greateſt Majeſty that ever God ſhewed from the beginning of the World, and that again in a threefold reſpect: 1. Of the Auditory; 2. Of the Terrour accompanying it; 3. The Voice.
1. Of the Auditorie.1. For the Auditory, which was the whole multitude of the People of Iſrael then, ſix hundred thouſand men (beſides women and children, to ſay nothing of the mixed multitude that came with them out of Egypt, Exod. 12.38. and were ſtill among them, Num. 11.4.) All theſe gathered together at once, (after a three dayes ſolemne preparation of them for that very purpoſe, Exod. 19.) to hear this Law of the ten Commandements, and nothing elſe.
2. The Majeſty and terrour.2. For the immediate Antecedents and Concomitants of the Delivery, moſt terrible Thunders, and the voyce of a Trumpet exceeding loud, which ſo affected their eares, that the people trembled in the very Camp, before they came to the Mount, Exod. 19.16. and moſt frightfull lightenings, and fire, and the mountain of Sinai altogether on a ſmoke; which ſo affected their eyes, that they afterward cryed out, This great fire will conſume us, Deut. 5. And the whole Mount quak'd and ſhak'd ſo, as with the terrour of all together, even Moſes himſelf ſaid, I Exceedingly feare and quake, Heb. 12.21.
3. The voice of God himſelfe.3. For the Voice delivering thoſe Ten Commandements (and no more) moſt dreadfully great, and ſaid to be, in a ſpeciall manner, the voice of GOD, which they that heard it, deſired and prayed never to heare any more, leſt they ſhould die. Nor was there ever ſince the Worlds foundation till that day, nor ſince that day to this, nor ever ſhall be again, till the laſt day, the day of the Worlds diſſolution, (when an account ſhall be taken of the tranſgreſſions of this very Law) ſuch a concurrence of wonders, in ſo mighty an aſſembly; ſo Majeſticall a Preacher, and ſo terrible a combuſtion and concuſſion of Heaven and Earth, the while theſe Lawes were delivering.
VII. 2. The writing of them by God himſelfe.Secondly, Theſe Laws being thus pronounced & given out, God in the next place takes a moſt ſingular order for the recording of them, truſts not Moſes himſelf with the writing of them, but a firſt and ſecond time Himſelf writes them, and that upon two Tables of Stone; and the ſecond writing is more obſervable then the firſt, as more abundantly teſtifying, that God meant to have it obſerved, that Himſelf would write theſe Lawes, which yet He did to none elſe beſides theſe: for though he put Moſes to hew new Tables of ſtone, Exo. 34. (after that he had broken the firſt, in zeale and indignation againſt Iſraels idolatrie in the Golden Calfe, Exod. 32.) yet he puts not over the writing upon the Tables to Moſes, but Himſelfe, we ſay, with his own finger (as the Scripture phraſe is) did write them again, and ſo (again we ſay) He never wrote any other Lawes beſides theſe.
Thirdly, When they were thus written,VIII. 3. The reſerving them alone in the Ark. He doth not (as we may ſay) truſt any Man, or Men, with the keeping of them, but takes a moſt ſingular order to have them moſt remarkably under His own cuſtodie, His own hand or wing; for He appointed an Ark to be made, on purpoſe to keep them in, which Ark was the principall ſigne of His preſence, among that people, untill the Babyloniſh Captivity, and his prime Ordinance, and call'd his glory, his face, his ſtrength, in divers places of Scripture; and was alſo covered with the Mercy-ſeat or Propitiatory, which was a moſt ſingular Type of Chriſt. In this Ark were theſe Lawes kept, and no other, nor nothing elſe: as to intimate, that of all the Lawes, He took moſt care for theſe. And ſo, giving to theſe Lawes firſt (of any number of Lawes together) the Title of His Covenant, and of the Teſtimonie, See 1 King. 8.6.21.(and though other Lawes afterward were taken into the Terme of His Covenant, and the Scripture mentions His Teſtimonies in the plurall, yet there was ſomewhat eminent in theſe, as being firſt ſo intituled, and ſo moſt properly thoſe termes belonged to them.) From thence was the Ark called the Ark of the Covenant, and the Ark of the Teſtimony; and even the Tabernacle called the Tabernacle of Teſtimony, as implying ſtill, that theſe were the chiefeſt Lawes, which he moſt regarded of all that he gave out to men. And thus we ſuppoſe the Minor is ſufficiently confirmed.
And by conſidering of all theſe together, the Major may be put out of all juſt Queſtion; in as much as it cannot (we ſuppoſe) with any reaſon be imagined, that God, intending to make ſome of his Lawes perpetuall to the worlds end, ſhould ſingle out theſe Ten from all the reſt, and give them this preheminence in all theſe reſpects, as He doth, above all others, and call them (together) again and again, the ten words, (the Decalogue) and not mean to make them, and every one of them perpetuall: As alſo declare, that even by theſe very things, He would have them all to be taken for perpetuall, by all his people, untill the Worlds end. Each of theſe Prerogatives (ſingle) hath a great weight in it, to recommend theſe Lawes; But all of them together doe make ſuch a ſtrong chaine of obligation, and doe ſo wonderfully difference theſe from all the reſt, as that we cannot but think that any conſcience, that deſires to give God, our great Law-giver, a good account of his obedience, and holding himſelfe bound to any of the Lawes of God, had need to produce a most certaine demonſtration, againſt any of theſe Lawes, to prove it to be repealed, if he will reckon himſelfe no longer tyed to it. We ſay, he had need have a demonſtration, not meerly againſt any circumſtance annexed to any Command, or any particularity belonging to it; but againſt the body, and ſubſtance, and formall words of it: which becauſe we have not yet met with in all our Diſputers bookes, we dare not count our ſelves looſe from the bonds of any one. And what they ſay againſt the Fourth in ſpeciall, we ſhall hereafter conſider in due place. Mean time we forget not that there are Exceptions againſt both the Propoſitions of this Argument,IX. The Argument confirmed, by which we ſhall ſpeak to, when we have firſt produced a four-fold further Teſtimony to confirme our Major: 1. A Prophet; 2. An Apoſtle; 3. An Ancient Father; and 4. One of our Adverſaries.
1. The Prophet Jeremie.1. The Prophet is Jeremiah, who, in the name of God, ch. 7.21. thus calls for obedience to theſe Lawes, as preferring them far before Sacrifice, &c. [I ſpake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings and ſacrifice; But this thing I commanded them, ſaying, Obey my voyce, &c.] Now what is properly the voyce of God, diſtinguiſhed from the law of Sacrifice, and the like ceremonious commandements, but the Ten Commandements, which were delivered by the voyce of God? And becauſe they were His voyce, therefore they were of ſingular and perpetuall regard.
2. The Apoſtle James.The Apoſtle is St. James, who in the 2. chap. of his Epiſtle, urging to the obedience of all the Commandements of the Law, one as well as another; and ſaying, that otherwiſe, he who offends in one point, is guilty of all, ver. 10. That we may be ſure to know what Law he meanes, Jam. 2.10. explained.he inſtances in two of the Commandements of the Decalogue; and to prove his ſaying good, he alleadges this Reaſon for it; That He who ſpake one of theſe, ſpake alſo the other, ver. 11. [He (the ſame God) who ſaid, Thou ſhalt not commit Adultery, ſaid alſo, Thou ſhalt not kill, &c.] Where plainly he doth two things: One is, that [He makes all the Lawes which GOD ſpake together, (as He did theſe two he names) to be Perpetuall alike; becauſe they were ſpoken alike (one as well as another) by the ſame Lawgiver GOD, at the ſame time, and in the ſame manner.] The other is, that [He makes this an argument of their Perpetuitie, that GOD did ſpeak them:] Which muſt be underſtood of his ſpeaking of them in a ſingularly Majeſticall manner, as we have ſhewed above. And we ſay, that whoſoever ſhall goe about to interpret the word [ſaid] of any other kinde of ſpeaking then this, (if referring it to God) will wholly make void the Apoſtles argumentation, and make him bring for a proofe that which had no ſtrength at all in it: For (thus) a Ceremonious Jew might have retorted this Argument upon him; He that keeps not Circumciſion, breaks the whole Law; For He that ſaid, Thou ſhalt not commit Adultery, ſaid alſo (even to Abraham, long before He gave that Commandement to Iſrael) Every man-childe among you muſt needs be circumciſed. What anſwer can now be made hereunto, to preſerve the authority of the Apoſtles argument, but this, That he meanes it of GODS ſpeaking in his Majeſtie, when He delivered the ten Commandements: And ſo whatſoever He ſaid at that time, and in that manner, doth ſtand ſtill in force, and even by vertue of ſuch a Majeſtick ſpeaking and delivery of it. But of other kindes of ſpeaking it holds not.
But if any object, that the Margent of the Text reads it,And vindicated. That Law which ſaid (and that the Article (ὁ) will agree to foreign, which is expreſt in the verſe before, as well as to foreign, which is not named) we anſwer; This variation will neither prejudice our cauſe, nor our Argument at all, if it be rightly conſidered. For of what Law ſpeakes the Apoſtle? It muſt needs be granted, of the written Law. Where ſay we either in the Book of Moſes at large, or particularly in the Decalogue; and ſo in the two Tables of ſtone. Not the former; for then the forementioned Ceremonious Iew, might again have come upon him with this: That Law which ſayth, Thou ſhalt not kill, ſayth alſo, Thou ſhalt not eat ſwines fleſh; ſo by eating ſwines fleſh, a man is a tranſgreſſor and breaker of the whole Law; For this is as well found in the Law of Moſes, written by him, as the other: Therefore of neceſſity, it muſt be meant of the Decalogue, the Law of the Tenne Commandements, conſidered as one Law together, and ſo, though the ſeverall Commandements be ſo many diſtinct branches, with reference to each other; Yet are they joyned, in one bulk, and body together, as one perpetuall Law, as ſpoken altogether, and written altogether; and that in ſuch a manner, as no other Lawes were: Neither will it be poſſible to ſatisfie the Apoſtles drift, and make his argument good, unleſſe we thus interpret it. And therefore we muſt needs take Liberty, to account, both Papiſts tranſgreſſours, for breaking the 2d. Commandement: Becauſe he that ſaid (or that Law that ſaid) Thou ſhalt have no other Gods but me; ſaid alſo, Thou ſhalt not make to thy ſelf any graven Image. And ſo our adverſaries, tranſgreſſours, for breaking the fourth Commandement: Becauſe he that ſaid (or that Law that ſaid) Thou ſhalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, ſaid alſo, Remember the Sabbath Day to Sanctifie it, &c.
Prim. p. 180. 181.Nor is this place eluded; by the anſwers, which one of our adverſaries attempts, or rather makes a ſhew, to give it: For he meddles not at all, with the Force of the Apoſtles argumentation; But inſiſts principally upon the words, of offending in one point; having firſt denied the inobſervation of the Sabbath, to be, under the New Teſtament, a ſinne, becauſe the Law, ſo farre as it commands the Sabbath, obligeth not any more.
Mean time he touches not at all, in his anſwer, the ſtrength of the reaſon, whereby the Apoſtle proves his ſentence: But contrary in the allegation of our argument, he enervates both it, and the Text it ſelfe particularly, (viz. The ſcope of it) namely, by altering the Apoſtles words, and inſtead of inſtancing in two Commandements of the Decalogue, as the Apoſtle doth, verſ. 11. (wherein we place the ſtrength of our argumentation, as we have ſaid before) he only generally ſaith, and that in another Character then the Text is in (as if it were our inference, not the Apoſtles) [The ſame God which injoynes the one of theſe Points, hath injoyned all the reſt.] By which generall expreſſion, becauſe a heedleſſe reader may happen to be deceived; we make bold to aske him, what points be thoſe the Apoſtle means? Did not he himſelf ſay for us, that he ſpeaks of the Law of the Decalogue? (and if he would deny it, the inſtances, verſ. 11. will conſtraine him again to grant it) whereupon we urge him thus, further. If Saint James ſpeake of the Decalogue, then of the words of the Decalogue, as God ſaid them (or as the Law ſaid them) as they were ſpoken by God, and written by him. And if ſo, then either he muſt deny (the fourth Commandement, to have been with the reſt, ſpoken by God, and written by him) or deny Saint Iames his argument, (that becauſe one Commandement of the Decalogue binds now, therefore another doth;) or deny his own denyall, that the fourth Commandement in the very words of it is now in force: let him take his choice. And if now himſelf or any for him think to urge us by the ſame argument, to the old Jewiſh ſeventh Day, as commanded by the fourth Commandement, which they do oft, and continually, we muſt as oft and continually deny, that it was commanded in the Decalogue directly, and as the ſubſtance of the fourth Commandement, and of this we ſhall give good account in due time and place. Mean time, we let paſſe the reſidue of what he ſaith to this place of Saint Iames, becauſe it goes altogether upon that ſuppoſition. And counting our ſelves to have made good our two firſt Teſtimonies, of the Prophet and Apoſtle; we come to a Third, of an ancient Father.
Namely, Irenaeus, who thus ſpeakes for us [God,3. Irenaeus. …. 4. c. 31. the better to prepare us to Eternall Life, did by himſelfe proclaime the Decalogue, to all the people, equally, which therefore is to be of full force amongst us, as having rather been enlarged, then diſſolved by our Saviours comming in the fleſh.] Upon which words, the Hiſtorians evaſion, is frigide, and flaſh, when thus he gloſſes.Hiſt. of Sab. Part 1. p. 66. [Which words of Irenaeus, if rightly conſidered, muſt be referred to that part of the fourth Commandement, which is indeed Morall; or elſe the fourth Commandement muſt not be reckoned, as a part or member of the Decalogue, becauſe it did receive no ſuch enlargment, as did the reſt of the Commandements, by our Saviours Preaching, but a Diſſolution rather, by his practiſe.] But this Gloſſe corrupts the Text, making an exception, where the Father made none; and beſides, it proceeds upon a miſpriſion of the ſence and ſcope of that Commandement, ſuppoſing the ſeventh day Sabbath, to be directly commanded in it; and one in ſeven to be but Ceremoniall: whereas the contrary (we hope) ſhall be manifeſted in both: which if it be done, this Commandement hath as well received enlargement, as the reſt, By the ſubſtitution of the Lords-day, in ſtead of the old Sabbath, and the Religious obſervation of it. But of this, in time and place convenient.
4. The adverſe party themſelves, C. D. p. 8.Laſtly, One, even of our Adverſaries, thus pleads our cauſe: [The Precepts of the Morall Law are ſummarily comprehended in the Decalogue, which have this Prerogative peculiar to them, that they were delivered, not by Moſes, but by God himſelfe, and by him written in Tables of ſtone, and preſerved in the Ark, to ſhew their degnity above others, and to note out the Perpetuitie (note that) of obſervance which was due unto them.] This is an ingenuous confeſſion, if he would be conſtant to it: But whether it be his miſpriſion, or his miſdevotion to the fourth Commandement, he afterward comes in with his Exceptions, That this is to be underſtood of the Decalogue, as far as it is Morall. Though in ſo ſaying, he doth either expreſly contradict himſelfe, or ſpeak non-ſenſe in one of theſe Aſſertions. But becauſe this Exception lies chiefly againſt the fourth Commandement, we will remit it thither: And now proceed to conſider the common Exceptions againſt the two Propoſitions of this Argument of ours, which are theſe that follow in the next Chapter.