Page images
PDF
EPUB

observing the seventh day after the creation, with all the ceremonial additions to it, is everlasting, and can never be abrogated. But then the seventh day ought to flow from the essence of God; for whatever doth not flow therefrom can be abrogated. The Socinians, Mennonites and others assert that Christ hath, as a new Lawgiver, wholly abrogated the fourth commandment, and that we are not bound any longer to observe a weekly sabbath. There are two principal opinions in the church the one, that this commandment is ceremonial, and therefore abrogated under the New Testament; the other, that it is moral, and that Christians are still bound to observe it.

In order that we may understand this difference rightly, we must know what we must understand by ceremonial, and what by moral. A thing is ceremonial, when it is a type, that is, when it shadows forth Christ, and his benefits, and must cease with his coming; or it is ceremonial, as far as it is an outward usage of the church, which conduceth to a proper ordering of religious worship, as preaching with our head uncovered, sprinkling thrice in baptism, and celebrating the Lord's supper sitting. A thing is also moral in a twofold respect; it is moral, when it hath an inward virtuousness, flowing from the essence of God, the reverse of which God cannot either command or permit with pleasure, as to love God; and in this respect the first, second, and third commandments are moral. Or a thing is moral, when it is virtuous only because God, according to his free and sovereign will, commands it for an everlasting rule, the reverse of which he might nevertheless also command. That God can command or forbid a thing to be an everlasting rule, which nevertheless flows not from his nature, will not be gainsaid, when it is considered, that God hath a sovereign authority, and that he hath actually forbidden and commanded several matters, which do not flow from his nature; for instance, God forbids us to marry with our kindred, and yet the sons of Adam were obliged to marry their sisters. If now the commandment, which forbids incest, flowed from the essence of God, he would not then have permitted it; for he could have created two human couples, who were not related one to the other, and could have ordered their children to marry each other. Can any man deny that baptism and the Lord's supper are enjoined on the church of the New Testament for everlasting ordinances; but they nevertheless do not flow from the holy essence of God.

We shall now be able to apprehend in what sense divines call the fourth commandment ceremonial or moral. They who call it ceremonial mean that it is typically ceremonial, and that Israel declared,

by observing it, (a) that their works were unclean, and that the purification from sin was not yet accomplished; (b) that sanctification from the guilt of sin should be accomplished by the sacrifice of Christ; (c) that Christ, having effected this, should rest from that work on the sabbath in the grave, and (d) that there should be a rest under the New Testament from the burthensome ceremonial service. From which it therefore necessarily follows, that the fourth commandment is now abrogated, like the other ceremonial laws, and that the keeping of the sabbath is injurious to the gospel.

They who look upon the fourth commandment to be moral do not say that the seventh day, either after the creation, or after the six workingdays, flows from the holy nature of God, but that it is given to the church for an everlasting ordinance by God, as an absolute sovereign, and that this command is thus still obligatory on us now under the New Testament. And that they may not engage in a mere strife about words, nor dispute at random, they distinguish between the sabbath, as it is enjoined in the fourth commandment, and between the circumstances and appendages, which God, agreeably to the nature of the legal economy of the Old Testament, annexed to the sabbath, and which related to the Jews only; as many particular ceremonial and civil commandments, enjoined upon Israel in the books of Moses, must be referred in one way or other to this or that commandment of the ten commandments, and are nevertheless distinct from the ten commandments as moral. Thus we must refer the law of ceremonies to the second commandment, which determines the manner of divine worship, as an appendage of that command; and the civil law hath its foundation in the fifth command: thus also the command which forbids adultery had its appendages under the Old Testament, as the manner in which they should detect and punish adultery. And so the fourth commandment had also its appendages, which, as being ceremonial, obliged the Jews only: for instance, (a) that they should observe particularly the seventh day after the creation; thus also the second article of the synod of Dordt speaks concerning the sabbath; for that did not affect the essence of the fourth commandment, since that day was commanded, only because the first sabbathday happened on the first seventhday after the creation. It is indeed evident, that they they did not observe the seventh day after the time of Joshua, when "the sun aud moon stood still about a whole day," Joshua x. 13, nor after the time of Hezekiah, when "the sun returned ten degrees, by the degrees, in which it was gone down," Isaiah xxxviii. 8. (b) That Israel should double their sacrifices on the sabbath, (c) That God superadded

to this certain motives, which related to Israel only; as the promise of a long life in the land of Canaan was added to the fifth commandment, as a motive to that people; so God gives in the repetition of the law, Deut. v. a motive derived from the deliverance of Israel out of the Egyptian bondage, to induce them to suffer their bondmen also to rest on the sabbathday. (d)" the strict observance of the same day, prescribed to the Jewish people in particular," was also ceremonial, as the synod of Dordt speaks. God required that "who ever did any work on the sabbathday, should be put to death," Exod. xxxi. 15. xxxv. 2. Numb. xv. 32-36. But we may reasonably doubt whether Israel was obliged to keep this sabbath so strictly as some have imagined, as if "they might neither bake, nor seethe aught on the sabbath, that no man might go out of his tent, nor kindle fire in his habitation on that day," according to Exod. xvi. 23, 29. xxxv. 3, for when the Lawgiver saith, xvi. 23, "Bake that which ye bake, and seethe that which ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you, to be kept until the morning," he doth not then order that they should bake and seethe all that they had before the sabbath, and that they should lay up until the morning that which should be left of what they had baken and sodden: for this law seems to distinguish between that which was baken and sodden, and that which was left, and thus neither baken nor sodden, which might then be prepared on the sabbath; if it should nevertheless be thought, that this passage forbids baking and seething on the sabbath, we must conceive that it had respect only to preparing the manna, which was attended with considerable labour. See Numb. xi. 8. But it was not an universal law for if " they might prepare as much food on the paschal sabbath, as every man should eat," Exod. xii. 16, and if Solomon and Nehemiah needed so much food every day for their households, as is mentioned 1 Kings iv. 22, 23. Neh. v. 17, 18, we may then believe that they might prepare at least their necessary food on the weekly sabbath. The words, "that the people should not go out of their place," Exod. xvi. 19, respected the gathering of Manna, which was their daily employment: but it was no command, that they should always abide in their houses on the sabbath; for that would have hindered the worship of God. Might not the Israelites "kindle fire" on the sabbath, Exod. xxxv. 3, that cannot be understood without any limitation, because kindling fire was necessary for children and weakly persons, and in the winter: but we must understand these words of the fire, which they used for ther daily callings, or for building the tabernacle; for so this law, Exod. xxxv. 3, is connected with Exod.

xxxi. where they are commanded to rest even from the work of the tabernacle. And we must believe when the Jews censured the Saviour and his disciples so often, on account of the liberty which they used, according to the law of God, on the sabbath, that it proceeded from a misunderstanding of these commandments.

These things many divines consider as ceremonial, to which the Jews only were obliged, and which are abolished under the New Testament. They look upon these things, either as typically ceremonial, or as circumstances, which tended to a proper regulation of the Jewish worship.

The question therefore is, whether the sabbath of the fourth commandment is typically ceremonial, and consequently abolished, under the New Testament; and whether Christians therefore are not obligated to observe the day of rest by virtue of the fourth commandment; or whether Christians are obligated by virtue of the fourth commandment to celebrate and observe one day after six workingdays, as a day set apart for publick worship, and to abstain for this purpose from their daily labours. We deny the first of these opinions, and maintain the second, and will confirm it with proper arguments.

But before we exhibit our arguments, we will show that this opinion of ours is also the doctrine of the church of the Netherlands. This appears from the forms of union, to which all the ministers of the church of the Netherlands oblige themselves by their subscriptions. The synod of Dordtrecht saith, "that the morality of the fourth commantlment consists herein, that a certain and fixed day is ordained for the worship of God, and so much rest, as is necessary for divine worship, and a holy meditation on it.. The Jewish sabbath being abolished, the day of the Lord must be solemnly sanctified. This day hath always been observed from the times of the apostles in the ancient catholic church. The same day must be so dedicated to the, worship of God, that we rest from all our works, except such actions as pertain to charity, and present necessity, and that we also abstain from such pleasures and amusements, as hinder divine worship." And our catechism saith, "God requires in the fourth commandment, that the ministry of the gospel, or the office of preaching, and the schools be maintained; and that I, especially on the sabbath, that is, on the day of rest, diligently frequent the church of God, to hear his word," &c. Are not these moral duties, which ought to be observed by Christians under the New Testament, as well as they behooved to be observed by the Jews under the Old Testament? It is truc, the instructor saith, that according to the fourth command

ment, "the schools ought to be maintained;" it is also true, that we do not go to school on the day of rest; nevertheless the instruc of would not teach thereby, that the sabbath was in this respect ceremo nial and typical; for they did not go to school under the Old Tes tament neither on the sabbath; but he means that this was necessary, in order that the sabbath might be celebrated by preaching on it. Neither doth the catechism intimate that it considers the fourth commandment as typically ceremonial, when it saith that it requireth also "that we rest all the days of our lives from our evil works, and yield ourselves to the Lord, to work in us by his holy Spirit, and thus begin in this life the eternal sabbath;" but it saith this, in order to explain the commandment in its greatest extent, as it explains the other commandments; for this spiritual keeping of the sabbath belongs to, and follows from the celebration of the sabbath. See what we say of these things in the sequel. All this, saith the instructor, of which we have declared, that we would abide by it, is enjoined in the fourth commandment, and so he intends that it was enjoined on the Jews also. If now the fourth commandment be wholly ceremonial, it doth not then concern us. Or shall we say the fourth commandment typified this to us, and so it concerns us : but is the fourth commandment therefore moral? If it be affirmed, then all the ceremonial commands are moral. If it be denied; what morality will there then be in the fourth command? And we must surely say, as we are obliged, that the fourth commandment is with respect to the essence of it, moral, and so our opinion is taught in the forms of union.

If this were only the doctrine of our church, we should not have a sufficient warrant to embrace it, but the word of God obligeth us to consider it, as a certain truth. For that teacheth us,

1. That the sabbath was instituted by God, even before the fall after his own example. This Moses teaches us, Gen. ii. 23, "On the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his works which he had made: And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his works." That with these words God instituted the sabbath after his example, and that this passage re lates not to that seventhday only, but to all the following days also, and that this is not an anticipated account, we have just now seen in our explanation of the fourth commandment. Paul teaches us this also, Hebr. 3-9. It was his design to prove that, the words of Psalm xcv. 11, "I sware that they should not enter into my rest," ought to be understood of the blessed rest after this life, for which we must VOL. II.

2 K

« PreviousContinue »