49. It is known that many things are usually objected against the truth we have been pleading for, namely, the morality of a sacred rest to God on one day in seven, from its relation to the law of crea- tion, and the command for it in the decalogue; and it is known, - also, that what is so objected hath been by others solidly answered and removed: but because those objections or arguments have been lately renewed and pressed by a person of good learning and reputation, and a new re-enforcement endeavoured to be given unto them, I shall give them a new examination, and remove them out of our way.
SECT. 48-50.] OF THE CAUSES OF THE SABBATH. 873
50. It is then objected, in the first place, Disquisit. de Morali- tate Sabbati,’ p. 7, “That the command for the observation of the Sabbath is a command of time, or concerning time only, namely, that some certain and determinate time be assigned to the worship of God, and this may be granted to be moral; but time is no part of moral worship, but only a circumstance of it, even as place is also: therefore the command that requires them in particular cannot be moral, for these and the like circumstances must necessarily be of &@ positive determination.”
Ans. (1.) The whole force of this argument consists in this, that time is but a help, instrument, or circumstance of worship, and therefore is not moral worship itself, nor a part of moral worship, - norcanso be. But this argument is not valid; for whatever God
requires by his command to be religiously observed, with immediate respect unto himself, is a part of his worship. And this worship, as to the kind of it, follows the nature of the law whereby it is com- manded. If that law be merely positive, so is the worship com- manded, however it be a duty required by the law of nature that we duly observe it when it is commanded; for by the law of nature God is to be obeyed in all his commands, of what sort soever they are. If that law be moral, so is the duty required by it, and so is our obedience unto it. The only way, then, to prove that the obser- vation of time is no part of moral worship is this, namely, to mani- fest that the law whereby it is required is positive, and not moral; for that it is required by divine command, of the one sort or the other, is now supposed. And, on the other side, from the considera- tion of the thing itself naturally, as that it is an adjunct or circum- stance of other things, no consequence ariseth to the determination of the nature of the law whereby it is required.
(2.) Time abstractedly, or one day in seven absolutely, is not the adequate object of the precept, or the fourth commandment, but it is a holy rest to be observed unto God in his worship on such a day; and this not a holy rest unto God in general, as the tendency and end of all our obedience and living unto him, but as an especial remembrance and representation of the rest of God himself, with his complacency and satisfaction in his works, as establishing a covenant between himself and us. This is the principal subject of the com- mand, or a stated day of a holy rest unto God in such a revolution of days or time. This we have proved to be moral ‘from the foun- dation and reason of it, laid and given in the law of nature, revived
and represented in the fourth command of the decalogue. Now, though place be an inseparable circumstance of all actions, and so
1 Our author refers toa work by a learned Dutch divine, Andrew Essenius. It
appeared in 1665.—Eb.
374 OF THE CAUSES OF THE SABBATH. [ EXERC. III.
capable of being made a circumstance of divine worship by divine positive command, as it was of old in the instance of the temple, yet no especial or particular place had the least guidance or direc- tion unto it in the law of nature, by any works or acts of God whose instructive virtue belonged thereunto; and therefore all places were alike free by nature, and every place wherein the worship of God was celebrated was a natural circumstance of the aetion performed, and not a religious circumstance of worship, until a particular place was assigned and determined by positive command for that pur- pose. It is otherwise with time, as hath been showed at large. And therefore, although any place, notwithstanding any thing in the law of nature, might have been separated by positive institution unto the solemn worship of God, it doth not thence follow, as is pre- tended, that any time, a day in a monthly or annual revolution, might have been separated unto the like purpose, seeing God had given us indication of another limitation of it in the law of creation.
51. It is further objected, Disquisit. p. 8, “That in the fourth commandment not one in seven, but the seventh day precisely, is enjoined. The day was before made known unto the Israelites in the station at Marah, or afterwards at Alush, namely, the seventh day from the foundation of the world. This in the command they are required to observe. Hence the words of it are, that they should remember NaW0 DNS, that same Sabbath day, or that day of the Sabbath, which was newly revealed unto them. This command, therefore, cannot be moral, as to the limitation of time specified therein, seeing it only confirms the observation of the seventh-day Sabbath, which was before given unto the Hebrews in a temporary institution.” And this is insisted on as the principal strength against the morality of the command. I shall first give you-in my answer in general, and then consider the especial improvements that are made of it.