remaineth John 9 41. Bot to help the mind and memory of those who are sensible of their weakness but are willing to hear and see Let us gather up briefly that which hath been said out of Rev. 1.10 as followeth The day called the Lords Day is some particular day well known to the Churches of Christ otherwise it was in vain and to no purpose for the Apostles to have spoken a word of the Day And this day called the Lords day was a Holy Day otherwise it could not have the holy name proper unto holy things and holy time And that the day called the Lords Day is the first day of the week this hath been proved both by the Testimonies of all Churches in all ages though cavelled against by some in late times yet this their Testimony may well pass for legal Testimony in any Court of Justice upon Earth and they who oppose it must be legally condemned for Liars And more then all this it hath been infallably proved by the Word of God and his Works that the first day of the Week is the very day which the Lord by his Prophets foretold he would make to be the day in which above all other dayes we should rejoyce Psal 118 24. And with his Almighty hand he hath performed it by the working of his mighty power which he wrought in Christ Jesus when he raised him from the dead Eph. 1.20 And in this very day revealing himself to his Disciples as the exalted head of his Church and People And in this very day Commissioning his Apostles and breathing the Holy Ghost in the same day upon them to impower and enable them in all things respecting their work as Apostles of Christ and particularly by the Holy Ghost guiding the Apostles to settle the first day of the Week in all the Churches of Christ as it is the Lords day and our Christian Sabbath but more of this in that which followeth And thus that which the Lord hath wrought according to his Word may well pass or divine Testimony in the Court of Consecience that the first day of the week is by Divine Institution the Lords Day and our Christian Sabbath And now let us proceed in the second place to prove that the first day of the week which the Lord hath made by his word and works to be the Lords Day and our Christian Sabbath was settled by the Apostles in all the Churches in the primitive time First By their Doctrine Secondly By their Practice 1. By their Doctrine for for the clearing of this let us consider Heb. 4.8.9 Where the Apostle doth by his Doctrine inform us of a Rest which remaineth to the People of God and another day of Rest and to make way for the Argument let us open that Scripture 1. First he speaks of a Sabbatism so the Word in the Original is a Rest resembled by the seventh day Rest spoken of in the third and fourth verses and by the Rest in the Land of Canaan mentioned in the seventh and eighth verses 2. This is another Rest and therefore another day for this Rest thus in 8 9 verses and I shall at present content my self with Pareus his Exposition until I meet with a better that 〈◊〉 in the Psalms to which the Apostle had respect did speak of another Rest and a day of Rest which is neither the seventh day Rest nor the Rest in the Land of Canaan but signified and exemplified by the one and shadowed out by the other and the Apostles demonstration of this Doctrine may be expounded by ad sjunctive Syllogisme Arg. Either it is of the first rest of God in which he ceased from the Works of Creation or of that rest in Canaan or of some other rest and of another day of rest but not of the two former and therefore the conclusion of the Apostle is in the 8th and 9th verses of another Sabbath of rest 3. This rest and day of rest spoken of by the Apostle remaineth so it is express in the words of the 9th verse which remaining properly belongs to this rest intimating by this his Doctrine that the other rest the seventh day rest is removed for the remaining signifieth the stability and permanency of this Gospel rest and the day of that rest but the removing of the thing shaken that those things which cannot be shaken may remain Heb. 12.27 The rest on the seventh day and that day of rest was miserably shaken by the sin and fall of man which brought the Curse not only upon himself and his Posterity but upon the works of Creation and therefore the Lord did not only threaten to destroy Man but likewise to destroy the Beasts the Creeping things and the Fowls of the Air for saith the Lord it repenteth me that I have made them Gen. 6.7 Thus was the seventh dayes Sabbath which was a memorial of Gods resting from and complacency in his works of Creation shaken by Mans sin and Gods curse upon the Creatures because of Man and the Commandment for the sanctifying the seventh dayes Sabbath did remain as a hand-writing against sinful and fallen Man as other Ordinances and Hand-writings did until Christ comes and brings in better Ordinances and a better day of rest which remaineth as the Apostle by his Doctrine instructeth us 4. The Rest and day of Rest which remaineth is that into which Christ first entred and at length did perfectly possess and into which he leadeth his People but Christ entred into his rest the first day of the week when he rose from the dead and at length he passed into the full possession of the Mansions and resting places ver 14. and he that entred into his rest ceased from his Works as God did from his ver 10. 5. The remaining of this day of Rest is spoken of in the present tense it is said therefore there remaineth a Rest so that it is that which at present the people of God do possess although the perfection of it is reserved for them when they shall come to the Mansions prepared by Christ for them Joh. 14.2 2 Pet. 1.11 the words being thus opened the Argument now follows Arg. That if the People of God have another day of Rest which is not the seventh day rest but that which Christ doth lead them into by his own Example and by way of communion with him who entred into his rest in the first day of the week then the first day of the week is the day of our Gospel Rest and of our Christian Sabbath and consequently a cessation of the seventh dayes Sabbath but the proof of all these particulars we have in the former and concerning Christs entring into his Rest on the first day of the Week I shall yet speak more fully concerning that as I shall meet with it in some of the Objections of John Rogers In the second place to prove that the Apostles by their Doctrine did settle the first day of the week
and the Scripture doth not say it then we are like the Papists Reply The Reply is that we have already proved that the Scripture saith that the first day of the Week is the Lords day and therefore Iohn R. doth falsely Reproach us and I might say that he that will hold to the letter of a Scripture although contrary to the spiritual scope of that and other Scriptures is like the Papists in their defence of Transubstantiation from those words this is my Body But Iohn R. doth hold to the letter of the fourth Command respecting the seventh dayes Sabbath contrary to the command of Christ in the Gospel and that which is most spirituall and proper scope of that command as appears by the former arguments and more shall appeare in that which follows therefore in this John R. is like the Papists Qu. 2. Is not Rest meerly due and proper to succeed Labour Ans John R. granteth that Rest necessarily follows Labour and that God rested on the seventh day after his six dayes work was ended Qu. 3. Was not Jesus Christ as he was God equall with the Father and as he was God Man was Lord of the Sabbath he himself declareth in the fourth Command and requireth Man to do the like by the Command Ans John R. his Answer is that Jesus Christ as he was God was equal with the Father all things was created for him and by him But John R. saith the next part is an assertion yet not a solid one in this case for as Jesus Christ was God he was commander of the Sabbath yea the whole Law but as he was Man he was made of a Woman under the Law And further Iohn R. saith but if thou hast reference to the Scripture Mar. 2.28 which saith Therefore is the Son of Man Lord of the Sabbath Day he doth not say God Man but the Son of Man Reply The Reply to Iohn Rogers is 1. First He grants that Christ as God is the Commander and Lord of the Sabbath 2. Secondly He denies him to be the Lord of the Sabbath as he is God Man to which the Reply is Reply By God-Man is meant God and Man personally united that is the Son of God having assumed a humane nature into personal union with his Divine nature is both God and Man and if he be not Lord of the Sabbath as he is God and Man then he is not head over all things as he is God and Man Eph. 1.21.22 then not Mediator as God and Man 1 Tim. 2.5 And the Argument he gives now follows For saith Iohn Rogers as he was Man he was made of a Woman and made under the Law hence his Argument is if Christ as a Mâ—n was made of a Woman under the Law then as God-Man he is not Lord of the Sabbath If this be good Divinity then let Iohn R. proceed to say that because he was Man made under the Law therefore as God Man he is not head of his Church and is not the Mediatour and as God Man he shall not return to be the Judge of the World this is so far from being solid that it is contrary to the frame of Gospel Scriptures 2. Secondly He argues from Mark 2.28 his Expositions are these but if thou hast reference to that Scripture which saith the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath he doth not say God Man but the Son of Man whence his Argument is if the Scripture saith that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath then Iohn Rogers judgeth it is not a solid assertion to say Christ as God Man is Lord of the Sabbath Reply My Reply is that if Christ the Son of Man be Lord of the Sabbath it s either as he is the Son of God or as the Son of Man or as he is God and Man not as the Son of God considered without being the Son of Man for the words are express that the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath 2. Secondly Not as the Son of Man this Iohn Rogers granteth to be too low because thus he was under the Law and therefore it must be as he is God Man that he was Lord of the Sabbath and yet Iohn Rogers saith this is not a solid assertion but he hath given no solid Argument to the contrary but that which fights against it self Only a Question from hence he doth propound I find it to be so long winded and yet so short spirited as to any reason belonging to the Question in hand that I can hardly spare Pen Ink and Paper to Transcribe it but we must have it as it is These are Iohn Rogers his words I shall propose a Question in this matter if in Scripture it is said That the Man was not made for the Woman but the Woman for the Man and in Scripture the Man is called the Lord of the Woman why then if the Sabbath was made for Man and not Man for the Sabbath is not Man Lord even of the Sabbath day for though a Man be Lord of his Wife yet he ought not to put her away in respect of the Law of God that hath made those two one so likewise the Sabbath though man be Lord of it in respect it was made for him and not him for it yet by virtue of Gods command ought not to prophane it yet if in case it was so that Man must either omit the deed of mercy to Man or prophane the Sabbath by doing the deed of mercy to the Man he ought to prophane the Sabbath and do the deed of mercy in respect the Sabbath was made for Man and not Man for the Sabbath for God hath preferred the Man above his Sabbath not making him for the Sabbath but the Sabbath for him for in this respect God hath made him Lord even of the Sabbath day Reply The Reply to all this is That all this is nothing to the Question stated and who knows not but God wiâ—l have Mercy rather than Sacrifice whether on the Sabbath day or any other tâ—me Qu. 4. Was not the work of Redemption as great and Godlike as the work of Creation and so worthy of Rest and a memorial upon its finishing Ans Iohn R. his Answer is the work of Creation was the greatest work that ever was for it was the Creating of all things and the work of Redemption the mercifullest work that ever was to Gods Elect for by it they were redeemed And forasmuch as the God and Father of all things ought to be obeyed as that one Law giver who created all things and commanded all that the seventh day should be kept holy in respect of Creation ought to be obserâ—eâ— by resting from Labour as he did and that because he commanâ—ed it And forasmuch as our Lord Jesus Christ hath redeemed Gods Elect by his body and blood and appointed for a Memorial of the same Baptism and the Lords Supper to be observed by the Redeemed ones he ought to be
to his station and work as he had opportunity in relation to God or Man this is called a fulfilling of all righteousness Mat. 3.15 2. Secondly There is an actual fulfilling of the Law literally and in this sence the Priest in his Labour in Sabbath duties of his Office might be said to prophane the Sabbath Mat. 12.5 And a fulfilling spiritually and finally according to the true scope of the Law and thus he was said to be blameless and so may we if we keep that day holy which Christ hath appointed as most suitable to Gospel times and the most spiritual scope of the fourth Command although we prophane the seventh day Sabbath 3. Thirdly To come nearer to the Text mentioned Christ came not to make any destructive change of the Law but to fulfil it and therefore to make a perfecting or persective change And the Godly Learned do note that the word to destroy the Law signifies to dissolve or pull it in pieces Christ came not to dissolve or pull the Law in pieces and leave the wills of Men to a lawless liberty but to bring in a stricter holiness and righteousness and a more perfect Administration and edition of the Law and this is expresly his scope and Christ himself expounds his meaning in the following part of the Chapter in Mat. 5. whilst Christ gives a more spiritual exposition than the corrupt Pharisees did who did cleave to and pervert the Letter of the Law as this Jewish Sabbatarian doth the letter of the fourth Command but when Christ changeth the seventh day Sabbath to the first day of the week that is the Sabbath from the seventh day of the week to the first day of the week with respect to the commemoration not only of the old Creation which is subjected unto corruption but the new Creation the work of Redemption which shall remain what destructive change is this of the Law in any one jott or tittle of it and no more reason for any to complain of a change then they had when Christ changed and made water into wine if John Rogers cannot chuse but refuseth this Gospel wine yet let him not scorn and scoff at us for our thankful receiving of it And if Beza be in so good credit with J. R. as he seemeth to intimate let him credit Beza in this matter also who attesteth that in an ancient Copy he had found it thus Recorded That the Apostle had given order for the Collections in the first day of the week with this added the Lords Day 1 Cor. 16.2 But seeing this Judaizer and others of his perswasion have so wrested this Text Mat. 5.17 we shall add one consideration more for the clearing of the same and our Argument is this Arg. As Christ came to fulfil the Law so likewise he came to fulfil the Prophets so it is expressed in Mat. 5.17 think not saith Christ that I am come to destroy the Law or the Prophets I am not come to destroy but to fulfil But Christ did fulfil the Prophets their prophecies by performing and answering the scope and end of the same and by changing the Prophecies into performances Oh most happy and glorious change without which the Prophets their Prophecies could not have been fulfilled this was far off from a destructive change of one jott or tittle of the Prophecies So likewise Christ did fulfil the Law and particularly that Law the fourth Commandment by performing and answering the scope and end of it and by changing not the Sabbath as a Sabbath but by changing of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the week and this was no destructive change of one jott or tittle of the fourth Command but a most happy and glorious change with respect to the glory of the Law-giver and the good of his People which blessed ends are more fully and perfectly attained by the change than could possibly be by a seventh day Sabbath as is more fully explicated in my Catechism so that the fourth Command complains not it is wronged not a jott or tittle of it destroyed no more than when vessels of Brass or Earthen Vessels are turned into Gold and that which is less perfect is turned into that which is more perfect for though the Law of God is ever perfect as to the time and subject for whom it is fitted and so as the seventh day Sabbath as it respected the time and subjects for whom it was fitted but yet when the first day of the week is appointed by the Lord of the Sabbath as most suitable to Gospel times and the subjects of Gospel Administrations now that which was less perfect respecting this time and state most give place to that which is more perfect and in this the fourth Command is not destroyed but fulfilled the Law being no Enemy to the Gospel but like Moses and Aaron do kiss one another upon the Mount of the Lord and thus doth the fourth Command and our Christian Sabbath Qu. 11. Whether do you well knowing these Arguments are pleaded and accordingly practised in all Christian Churches and our Laws thereupon founded to disturb our Peace offend our Consciences oppose our Government before you gave us conviction either by writing or otherwise when as you were left to enjoy your own perswasion in private Ans To which John R. his Answer is as followeth I am willing to refer it to the Judgement of God whether I have done well or not well who knows whether you have stood for his truth or I but to say pleaded and practised in all Churches I know it to be otherwise both by Books and Reasonings and as for the Laws respecting these things I know no Authority you have to make such Laws for there is one Law-giver who is able to save or to destroy respecting the things as to matter of Worship you ought to have been obedient to his Laws and not to have adventured to make Laws for him founding them upon notions and so become despisers of his Laws and persecutors of those which will worship God by his own Laws and whatever you think of it it is God opposeth you by us wherein you act in darkness and not Govern according to his will and as for our not giving you conviction as you say you are so far from receiving conviction from our hands that you would not give us liberty for to make our lawful defence but use your unreasonable power by preventing us of lawful plea and also we did write the first time we were brought before you Iohn Allyn the Secretary being Judge which was before you had any first-day Law as since you have made wâ— not knowing then but that we should have had liberty to have pleaded our innocency but was forthwith took away by the Constable and not suffered to make our defence being fined ten shillings a piece and committed to the Prison and no Law of God or of this Colony produced to convict us by which we
Consequence from Scripture is either a necessary Consequence and being according to Scripture is of as full force as any plain Scripture as John Rogers granted in his Answer to the first Question or else it is a Consequence seemingly deduced from Scripture but is really a perverting of and contrary to the Scripture as some unlearned and unstable who wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction 2 Pet. 3.16 and then it is far off from being of the same force with the Scripture But we have given Iohn Rogers necessary deductions from plain Scriptures in the Old and New Testament to prove that the first day of the week is the Lords day and our Christian Sabbath and it is in vain for Iohn R. to deny this until the Arguments be confuted Qu 7. Iohn Rogers his seventh Question Whether or no there be a possibility to take out the day commanded out of the fourth Commandment and put in one of the six working dayes in the room thereof and not alter one jott or one tittle of the former Law if there be a possibility of such a thing or ever such a thing was I desire a Copy of it may be sent me to the Prison as soon as may be Ans My Answer to this seventh Question is that I have already proved in my Reply to his Answer to the tenth Question that this change of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the week is no destructive but a perfecting change and so far from destroying the Law in a jott or tittle of it that it is a fulfilling of the Law as really and fully as the performances of Prophecies are the fulfilling of Prophecies and it is too late for John Rogers now to question whither that be possible to be done which is already certainly performed and done as we have proved already and as for some fragments of Objections and Cavils which I. R. hath gathered out of some late Authors and yet if all these be put together he is unable to defend his seventh day Sabbath And it is as possible for I. R. to hinder the charge of the Moon as he can hinder the change of the seventh day Sabbath seeing it is founded upon the works of Creation which is given to change but who can hinder the stability immutability of the first day of the Week the Lords day which is grounded upon the unchangeable work of our Redeemer according to an immutable and everlasting Covenant And if it be not possible for I. R. yet to see the reason of this but admire at his legal light and despise Gospel visions Behold ye despisers wonder and perish for I work a work in your dayes a work which you shall in no wise believe though a man declare it unto you Act. 13.41 and yet those who have the Revelations of the Spirit of Wisdom in the Gospel shall say this is the Lords doings it is marvellous in our eyes this is the day which the Lord hath made Save now I beseech thee O Lord blessed is he that cometh in the Name of the Lord Psal 118.23 24 25 26. And if he that despised the Law of Moses and particularly did prophane the seventh day Sabbath was so severely punished as Iohn R. did note of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy who hath despised the Gospel Commandment and particularly the Lords day the Christian Sabbath the Ordinance and Institution of Christ which he hath by his Blood purchased Heb. 10.28 29. And thus I have done likewise with Iohn R. his Questions at present and if I. R. or any for him shall undertake to make a Reply to that which hath been said I expect they should answer my Arguments interminis according as they are in the frame and method of them I do not intend for the future to trouble my self with an Answer to such Lax Discourses as have nothing of the frame of an Argument with them And thus at present I have done speaking to Man but this I may say Oh Lord I have not desired the woful day that which came out of my â—ips was right before thee be not thou a terror to me thou art my hope in the day of evil Jerem. 17.16 17. And if in any thing I have said for matter or manner or in any respect whatsoever I have erred let it not be confirmed but confuted and let me be convinced but if that which hath been said be according to thy Holy Word revealed by the Apostâ—es of the Lord Jesus let those who do or shall oppose be converted and repent of this their Wickedness and pray God if perhaps the thought of their heart may be forgiven them or else let them be confounded and cut off Act. 8.22 Gal. 5.12 And whereas the Plague is come into a neighbouring Plantation and some Families already shut up the Lord have mercy upon them and humble us deeply for our great unfruitfulness and especially for our prophanation of the Lords Dâ—y what is the cauâ—e of this so fierce wrath to let loose a Spirit of Error anâ— Delusion thus to rage that those who received not the love of the truth may be delivered up to believe a lye and damned that have pleasure in unrighteousnesâ— 2 Thess 10.11 12 And whilst some rise up that they might cast down the Christian Sabbath under a pretence of advancing the seventh day Sabbath Oh Lord let not the evil one prevail with the prophaneness of others to cause them to neglect holy time and holy things Do good O Lord to those that are good and to them that are upright in their hearts As for such as turn aside to their crooked wayes the Lord shall lead them forth with the workers of iniquity but peace shall be upon Israel Psal 125.4 5. Decemb. 12. 1682. JAMES FITCH Senior FINIS
AN EXPLANATION OF THE SOLEMN ADVICE Recommended by the COVNCIL in Connecticut Colony to the Inhabitants in that Jurisdiction Respecting the Reformation of those EVILS which have been the Procuring Cause of the late Judgments upon New-England By Mr. James Fitch Pastor of the Church in Norwich 1 Sam. 7.3 And Samuel spake unto all the house of Israel saying If ye do return unto the Lord with all your hearts then put away the strange gods and Ashtaroth from among you and prepare your hearts unto the LORD and serve him only and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines 2 Chron. 19.4 And Jehosaphat c. BOSTON IN NEW-ENGLAND Printed by S. Green for I. Vsher of Boston 1683. To the Reader COncerning those Brief and Nervous Discourses which are emitted herewith the Reverend and Worthy Author had no thoughts of Publishing them until such time as others did Importune him thereunto As for the first Treatise it was thus occasioned In the distressing time of the late War with the Indians in N-England many of the Rulers both Civil and Ecclesiastical in Connecticut Colony being sensible that publick Judgements seldome come but as Intimations of Heavens displeasure and that then of all Men the Leaders of the People are concerned to enquire into the Causes of the Lords Controversie 2 Sam. 21.1 they did accordingly meet for that purpose The Ministers drew up in writing what they conceived to be the mind of God respecting the solemn Question before them which Result was approved of by their Magistrates and Recommended to the Consideration of the Inhabitants in that Jurisdiction This faithful Servant of Christ did wifely take hold on that opportunity in his publick Ministry to insist upon both the Malady and the Remedy which there is so great cause to be enquiring into and did reduce his Instructions into a Catechetical Method for the better edification of the younger sort in his Congregation Sundry Persons of Worth and Judgement hapning to be present at some of those Exercises were very earnest to have them made more publick to gratifie whose desires the Worthy Author has been prevailed with to grant the Copy of what was more inlargedly viva voce delivered A Discourse of this nature is very seasonable and needful and I hope will be blessed for the good of many As for the small tractate respecting the Christian Sabbath the Author has so far as I am able to discern with very good judgement and in few words asserted and proved the Truth whose confirmation he has undertaken The most plausible Argument which our Jewish Sabbatarians insist upon is their pretending the Morality of the fourth Commandment Nor do we deny but that by virtue thereof a seventh part of time or one day in the Hebdomadel Revolution ought to be kept as an holy Rest unto God But it is evident that some expressions in the Decalogue do in a peculiar manner respect the Jewish State This is true of the Preface to the Moral Law and of the promise annexed to the fifth Commandment and some particulars in the tenth Commandment are accommodated to the then state of Israel And why some Expressions in the fourth Commandment may not be so too our seventh day Men have as yet given us no solid and sufficient reason Nay the Learned Jews themselves acknowledge it to be so And therefore they are not offended when they see Christians doing servile works upon the seventh day of the week for they say the Gentiles are not obliged to the strict and legal observation of their Sabbath The Jews in Amsterdam told Jackson Sands and other keepers of the seventh day that except they were also Circumcised their observation of that day was groundless There is no place in the New Testament which the Iews do so much object against Christians as Mat. 5.17 18. They perversely cavil and say that the Apostles did act contrary to the Doctrine of their Master Christ by telling Men that they ought not to observe the Ceremonial Law R. Maimon In misna L. 1. C. 9. has a whole Chapter full of Blasphemy against those who teach that the Law is destroyed in whole or in part The most Judicious and Learned of our Writers acknowledge that the place mentioned has respect both to the Ceremonial and to the Moral Law And that as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is set in oppposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as destroying is opposite to fulfilling christ did not evert the ceremonial Law he did himself conform to the ceremonies of the law and require other men to do so as long as the author of that law did see meet to continue it and every way fulfilled those Types which pointed at the Messiah that was to come Our Iewish Sabbatarians who abuse those words of Christ to countenance their Error might as well from thence argue that the Ceremonial Law is still in force For its certain it was not abolished until every tittle contained therein was fulfilled It has been objected that Christians in the Primitive times observed the seventh day The Christian Iews in the Apostles time had a religious respect not only for the seventh day Sabbath but for Circumcision and other Ceremonies until such time as the Iudaical World was utterly destroyed but the Apostles never allowed Christianized Gentiles so to Iudaize The Ebionites kept the seventh day but they were never accounted true Christians The Constitutions which pass under the Name of Clement L 7. C. 24. commend the observation both of the seventh and of the first day of the week And Eusebius speaks of some that observed both dayes Such Christians were certainly leavened with Iudaism At this day the Abyssine Christians observe the seventh day they also observe Circumcision and if Men will Iudaize in one particular it is not to to be wondred at if they be left to Iudaize in more Of later times there have not been many of any great Fame or Note in the World that have stood up for this Opinion There was in England formerly Braborn and Trask but they afterwards recanted Within these few years Mr. Bramfield of Sherborn was strangely drawn away into this Error But his weightiest Objections are answered with great judgment and candour by the Reverend Mr. William Ben of Dorchester in Dorset a Man whose Conversion was occasioned by a Sermon of his own after which he continued an eminent Light in the Church of God for fifty years together and than whom I never knew Man upon Earth that did maintain a greater intimacy of Communion with God Nor has Mr. Bramfield made any Reply to Mr. Ben's Book so far as I have seen or heard As for the present Jewish Sabbatarians in Connecticut Colony they out-do all their Predecessors as to Insolent Behaviour being arrived unto that height of impudent Prophaneness that they fear not in the sight of the Sun to bid defiance unto the Christian Sabbath by following the servile works of their particular Callings on the
to be our Christian Sabbath we may see in 1 Cor. 16.12 1. That which is there exprest is by way of precept and injunction for so the Apostle saith he had given order concerning the collection of the Saints and therefore not left it as a matter of indifferency or liberty but whosoever did neglect this did transgress the Apostolical precept and order 2. This order for the collection for the Saints was not only sent to the Churches at Corinth but to the Churches at Galatia so that it was an order and injunction common to the Churches 3. The order did not only respect the collection it self but the time and day of it that upon the first day of the week let every one lay by him in store as God hath prospered him so it is express in the 2 d. verse now the Argument follows Arg. The first day of the week was either a common and indifferent day or a holy day the day of the Christian Sabbath but no common and indifferent day for how could the Apostle by his injunction and order make it necessary for the Churches to attend this work of mercy collection for the Saints on the first day of the week if it was but a common day and thus esteem one common day above another contrary to his Doctrine Rom. 14.5 far be it from us to think that the Apostle could so contradict his own Doctrine but it was because the first day of the week was made to be a holy day and such works of mercy are very suitable unto the day 2 Arg. Or thus the Apostle did order collection for the Saints to be on the first day of the week either because it was the Christian Sabbath or for some other reasons but I have so long waited to heâ—r of some other reasons why the Apostle should lay an injunction upon all Churches to have such an honourable respect to this day without any consideration of it as the Lords Day and Christian Sabbath and all the Objectors and Cavillers against the first day of the week the Lords day have not brought forth the least appearance of any reason to the contrary that I confess I begin to think that the Opponents themselves within themselves have received a Sentence of despair of giving any reason only they have travelled and brought forth one poor Objection that there is not a word spoken of a Sabbath here and who saith there is but the Argument is taken from the Apostles Order and by Apostolical Order advanced the first day of the week above any other day and that the reason of this is either because it is the day of the Christian Sabbath or for some other reason which never yet was brought to light and therefore we conclude as in the former that the Apostle by his Doctrine did settle the first day of the week to be a holy day a Christian Sabbath Now in the next place concerning the practice of the Apostles the practice of the Churches of which much may be said in order to their attendance to holy Duties in the first day of the week because it was a day separated for holy Worship but at present we may consider Acts 20.7 First it was a Church assembly there spoken of for it is said the Disciples came together 2. Secondly the end for the sake of which they came together it was for the sake of religious duties that they might partake of the Lords Supper called breaking of Bread in this place as in Act. 2.42 and did not go alone without other Religious performances viz. Prayer and hearing the Word Preached 3. Thirdly It is spoken of as a custom and usuall practice of the Disciples therefore it is said on the first day of the week when the Disciples came together Paul having waited for and taking this opportunity to Preach to them for he abode seven dayes among them but this was the last day his being ready to depart on the morrow as is exprest in the 7th verse Arg. Hence the Argument is Paul and the Disciples with him either kept the Seventh day Sabbath or the first day of the week a Christian Sabbath or else they kept no Sabbath at all if they had kept the seventh day Sabbath that was the day before this First day of the Week then they had a meeting after a Sabbath manner for Religious Duties then the Evangelist would not have spoken of this Meeting on the First day as the only Church Meeting of the seven dayes of the Apostles abode amongst them therefore it was the first day of the Week in which Paul and the Disciples assembled and kept as a Christian Sabbath Much more hath been said by others and I have somewhat more in readiness to say if the occasion calleth for it and God giveth opportunity But at present having proved that the first day of the Week was by the Lord himself made by his Word and by his Works to be the Lords day and our Gospel and Christian Sabbath and his Apostles were guided by the Holy Ghost to settle it in the room and place of the seventh day both by their Doctrine and by their Practice we proceed to make Reply to John R. his Answers to the Questions And concerning his Preface to his Answers I shall at present omit it until I come to his Conclusion and then consider both his Preface and Conclusion together these and the Superscription being to the same Purpose and the same for substance Quest 1. The first Question Are not just and necessary Consequences from Scripture to be taken for the mind of the Holy Ghost in Scripture or else how shall we Answer the Papists against the error of Transubstantiation John R. his Answer is Ans If the Consequence drawn from Scripture is agreeable to the Scripture and no wayes contrary to the Scripture it must be granted truth because it speaks what the Scripture speaks But as to the Papists John R. saith they had no Scripture that said a piece of Bread was the body of our Lord or that our Lord was turned into a piece of Bread or that Bread was turned into our Lord for our Lord did not say to his Disciples Take eat this Bread is my Body as the Papists did affirm therefore they said that which the Scripture did not say so do you say that which the Scripture doth not say for you call the first day of the Week the Christian Sabbath but the Scripture doth not you call every first day of the Week the Lords Day but the Scripture doth not so Reply The Reply to Iohn R. his Answer follows His Answer consists of two parts 1. First partly of a seeming Concession granting that Consequences drawn from Scripture and agreeable to Scripture are truth c. 2. Secondly he compareth us unto the Papists for saying that which the Scripture doth not say and the Argument he gives is If we say the first day of the Week is the Lords day
obeyed in the same as God the Father in the other so that both these works have some thing to keep them in memory by the appointment of the Workmen Reply The Reply to John R. his Answer is First He saith the work of Creation is the greatest work and his reason is because God made all things The Reply is That if the work of Creation be the greatest then the work of Redemption is not so great as the work of Creation but a work is greater or lesser according to the greatness of wisdom power and goodness manifest in it but the wisdom of God shining in the work of Redemption excels the wisdom shining in the work of Creation 1 Cor. 2.7 wisdom in a mystery and the power made manifest in Redemption is greater than in Creation called the exceeding greatness of his power towards them that do believe Eph. 1.19 And for goodness to finners John R. cannot but confess it is the mercifullest work and yet he denieth that a day shall be appointed for a memorial of this greatest work but as it is worthy of a Day so the Lord hath appointed the first day of the week for that end as hath been proved by the Scriptures abovementioned and therefore it is in vain for John R. to deny it Qu. 5. The fifth Question is Was not the work finished at the Resurrection of Christ on the first day of the week when he entred into his rest as God did into his Ans John R. his Answer is The price was paid as soon as the Sacrifice was offered and the dead raised but the work of Redemption as yet not perfected in us for we are yet under the bondage of corruption Rom. 8.23 but to say that Christ entred into his Rest on the first day of the week I cannot for he did assemble himself with his Disciples after his Resurrection being seen of them forty dayes before he ascended up into Heaven and upon the day of his Resurrection did eat with his Disciples and did travail with them which was Labour Reply The Reply is that Iohn R. denieth that the work of Redemption was finished because it is not finished in us Whence his Argument is That if Redemption be not perfected in Believers then not finished by Christ but this is false reasoning for want of distinguishing between the work of Redemption and the work of Application Christs work of Redemption may be finished although the work of the Holy Ghost as sent from the Father and the Son to apply Redemption may not be finished and is not in this life perfected to the Elect. Obj. The second Objection is That Christ was not entred into rest on the first day of the week and his reason is because he assembled with his Disciples did eat and travail c. Reply The Reply is Either Christ was on the first day of the Week in a state of Humiliation or a state of Exaltation if in a state of Humiliation then his Resurrection was no degree of his Exaltation contrary to Rom 1.3 4 Eph. 1.20 21. if he were in a state of Exaltation then in a state of blessed and glorious Rest And although there are divers degrees of his Exaltation as his Resurrection Ascention Session at the right hand of the Father and his return at the last Day to be the Judge but Resurrection is one degree of his Exaltation and of his Rest and therefore he was entred into Rest although for the conviction and confirmation of His Disciples he did shew himself and by some sensible signs make it manifest that it was himself that very humane nature which had suffered death was raised that he that descended was raised and is the same also that ascended into Heaven Eph. 4.10 Qu. 6. Did not Christ allow this to be called his Day as the Sacrament is called his or the Loras Supper Ans Iohn R. his Answer is I cannot say that ever the first day of the week was called the Lords Day and therefore cannot say whether he allowed it or no I know that the Cup which our Lord communicated to his Disciples they called it the Lords Cup and the Table at which they saâ—e to communicate of the Bread and Wine they called the Lords Table and the Apostle Iohn calleth that Day in which the Lord communicated to him those Visions in the Revelations the Lords Day but what day of the Year or of the Week I cannot tell Reply The Reply to this is there hath been Arguments given of all forts to prove both from humane and divine Testimony the word and works of the Lord the Doctrine and Examples of the Apostles of Christ that the first day of the Week was that very day called the Lords day Rev. 1.10 and if John Rogers was asked who his Father was he would be ashamed to say he could not tell and yet he cannot but know that as to humane Test mony there is more clear and infallible proof that the first day of the week was called the Lords Day than he can have who his Father was this being the Testimony of all the Churches in all Ages from the primitive time to this very day until of late some few haâ—e risen up and raised the Objection But besides all these Arguments from the Scripture have been given to prove it and if yet Iohn R. will say he cannot sell we must leave him to his â—gnorance and he ought not to be offâ—nded with us and revile us because we do know Qu. 7. Did not Christ countenance and allow his Apostles in the practice and solemnization of that day in proper Sabbath Ordinances Ans His Answer is before saying not that I know the Ordinance of the Sabbath is rest to Man and Beast for so God ordained in the fourth Command after the six dayes work to rest Qu. 8 Are not Christ and his Apostles therein to be a pattern for Christians to follow and so vertually a divine Institution Ans Iohn Rogers his Answer is that the eighth Question is answered by the Answer to the seventh and the answer to the seventh was the same with the Answer to the sixth viz. that he could not tell that he did not know and thus he makes a quick dispatch of Answers to the Governours Questions But in this he is like those who when the Question was asked them concerning the Baptisme of John whence was it from Heaven or of Men they reasoned with themselves saying if we shall say from Heaven he will say unto us why did you not then believe him but if we shall say of Men we fear the People for all hold John as a Prophet Mat. 21.25 26. and therefore they concluded it was safest for them to say we cannot tell ver 17. Thus likewise if Iohn R. should say that the Patern and the Examples of the Apostles respecting Worship and particularly concerning the Sabbath ought to be followed then he knows it would be said why do you not follow
them and if he should say that their Example ought not to be followed by Christians this would be so un-Gospel-like and un-Christian like and therefore Iohn R. concludes it is best for him to say he cannot tell Qu. 9. If the old Jewish Covenant be expired and sundry Ordinances about time and place c. altred why not the time of the old Sabbath alterable by the Lord of the Sabbath upon a Gospel account as a memorial of Redemption Ans Iohn R. his Answer is I know not what thou dost mean by old Jewish Covenant I know no Covenant in Scripture by that name if thou dost mean the Covenant which the two Tables of Stone the Tables of the Covenant which did contain the ten Commandments which Israel did enter into a Covenant with God by engaging to perform the same which Covenant they brake and perished in the Wilderness for the same God did ordain by the hand of Moses Ceremonies as a figure of the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ at this time at Mount Sinai when Israel entred into the Covenant of works to shew that there was mercy to be obtained by Jesus Christ though the first Covenant was broken by them that is to say upon Repentance and Faith Now though the first Covenant which was dedicated with the blood of Bulls and Goats and accompanied with many Rites and Ceremonies which were figures of the Mediatorship of Jesus Christ which Rites and Ceremonies are done away but none of them placed in the two Tables for that Law is spiritual and it is as easie by Gods Decree for Heaven and Earth to pass as for a tittle of it to fail Now the other Law contained in the former Covenant called the Hand-writing of Ordinances which was nailed to the Cross of Christ which did contain meats and drinks New Moons and Sabbaths which Sabbaths was besides the Sabbaths of the Lord but Gods seventh day-Sabbaths were commanded by the mouth of the Lord with an audible voice written with the finger of God in Stone death inflicted upon the breaker of it Exod. 31.12 Reply The Reply is this John Rogers his Answer is full of confusion jombling the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace together 1. First The Covenant of Works was made with Adam 2. Secondly The Covenant of Grace may be considered either as Ceremonially and Legally Administred and this John R. calls the Covenant of Works or as it is attended with Gospel Administrations and there the Question ariseth Whether another day might not be more suitable upon a Gospel account than the seventh day Sabbath and what reason doth Iohn R. give to the contrary I confess I begin to grow weary of forming his Arguments for him because I find it more difficult to find out his reason and to form it for him than to answer it and could even determine for the future that if he cannot or will not form his Arguments himself I shall leave them as I find them covered with darkness and void of form but if there be any face of reason in this his Answer at length it is That the seventh day being commanded in the Decalogue is therefore unalterable but we have proved that Christ hath altered it and by the Holy Ghost guided his Apostles to settle the first Day of the Week the Lords Day and our Christian Sabbath and because I shall meet with this Objection more fully in the next Answer I proceed to that Qu. 10. Is there not room left in the Words of the fourth Command for the seventh Day to be altered and our Lords day to be sanctified by the Lord of the Sabbath See the Preface of the Commannment Remember the Sabbath to keep it holy and the Conclusion only saith the Lord blessed the Sabbath and when the seventh day is named it saith only is and not shall be for ever so observed Ans John R. his Answer is No there is no room for the seventh day is the very day commanded and Jesus Christ hath left it upon Record that it is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass than one tittle of the Law to fail and hath forbid his Disciples for entertaining such a thought in these words saying think not I am come for to destroy the Law and again saith he For verily I say unto you till Heaven and Earth pass one jott or tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law who dare therefore attempt such a thing against Gods Law given in such a terrible manner being spoken by his own mouth the Earth trembling at his Word and so terrible was the sight that Moses said I exceedingly fear and quake and not only so but the Son of God testifying that it shall abide as long as Heaven and Earth as is already specified threatning also any that attempt such a wicked act saying Whosoever therefore breaks the least of these Commandments and shall teach Men so c. therefore who dare attempt such a presumptuous act against Gods Law and Christs confirmation of the same Law and what is that to purpose in the Preface and Conclusion seeing the day commanded is the seventh day and no other so that Sabbath is proper only to the seventh day and no other but as to the conclusion of the commandment some Translate it therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and ballowed it which is most agreeable it being taken from Gods seventh day rest Gen. 2.3 See Beza's Translation Exod. 31.12 and death not infflicted upon any ceremonial Law but Excommunication but death upon the prophaning of the seventh day Sabbath the Reply is Reply Iohn R. in this Answer is fled to his seeming Fort and he knows if he be driven out from this that neither he nor any for the seventh dayes Sabbath have any Castle nor Covering for their conceited confidence but the scope of the Question if rightly stated and plainly expressed is That a Sabbath as a Sabbath is first and last in the Precept and shall not be changed but the particular day is secondarily specified and is mutable as other positive Laws are the Lord having reserved a liberty to himself to change them according to his Royal pleasure and who shall say he hath done iniquity And as for Iohn R. his Argument so far as it hath any colour of reason in it is That seeing Christ came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it and that in every jot and tittle of it and therefore not to change the seventh dayes Sabbath into the first day of the Week and to this we shall positively and plainly Reply 1. First There is that which may be called an actual fulfilling in all and every particular point and duty required in the Decalogue but Christ did never actually fulfil the particular Duties of Parents to Children of a Husband to a Wise and many other particular points and duties contained in the Decalogue and yet his fulfilling all and every one of those Duties which had any suitableness