The Sabbath Vindicated

Broad.

M Aster Breerewood in his Treatise of the Sabbath.

1. Nature teacheth to set apart some time for the worship of God, but not one day in seven, nor a whole day, neither yet to forbear all work in that time as the Israelites were bound to do on the Sabbath.

2 God's Commandment touching the Sabbath, was first given in the wilderness, it being limited to the Jews Sabbath, only the Jews Sabbath is vanished, and God's Commandment was not, nor could not, be translated from the Jews Sabbath, to the Lord's day.

3 We are bound to keep the Lord's day not by any divine Commandment, but by the constitution of the Church only.

Thus hath Master Breerewood written in his book, and more I do not write in mine, but it will be said yet in answer to an objection, he will have the generality of God's Commandment to be moral and perpetual. Answer. It is true, and I cannot sufficiently marvel thereat.

The Objection he frameth against himself is this. If the old Sabbath vanished and God's Commandment was limited, and fixed to that day only; then is one of God's Commandments perished. Hereunto to he answereth that the generality of that Commandment is a Law of nature and remaineth. But if there be a generality of that commandment how was that commandment limited and fixed to the Sabbath only? Further he should have considered that the like may as well be said of the precepts of Holy-days. Nature teacheth to have sometimes of vacancy, for one reason God appointed the Sabbath to be a time of vacancy, for other reasons the holy-days. Shall not the law of nature now be the general of all these precepts indifferently, as well of the precepts of the holy-days as of the precepts of the Sabbath.

Answer.

In this thing I must take Master Breerewoods part against you, for hereby is the moral law of God kept entire without a mayme, which is very requisite, seeing that the Decalogue is granted to be an explanatory reinforcing of the law of entire Nature imprinted in us by creation (but much defacedby our fall) and being honored with those eminences of priority, & signs of perpetuity immediately from God himself upon Mount Sinai, Such as were his twice writing them with his own finger, and voted also by his Spirit through the mourth of Moses to be the Ten Commandments 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 1 Deut. 4. and put into the Ark as perpetual rules for the Catholic Church, whereof it was a Type. None of all which Prerogatiues was the Ceremonial law crowned withal, for that it was as a vanishing shadow suitable only to the Hemispheare of those times. But the decalogue being the very Law of Nature explained and redelivered, must as well now as ever have for its substance a general aim at all men; though in some circumstances it may be more peculiar to the Jews then others, by reason of the time, place, and people, to whom it was renewed; Like as almost all other Scripture is for substance common and for circumstances proper, because they were most an end written occasionaly. Put case then that this Commandment was given only to the Jews (as you affirm) and so were abrogatiue; yet may the Law of Nature be well presupposed and included in it; (as you yourself afterwards acknowledge, it is in your 8. Chapter in the answer you give there to the fifth opinion) for who knows not that in those ten words much more is meant then manifested, So that if so it be granted that the Law of Nature and this Law be not the same in all points yet are they not two divers laws but the same in substance And thus much in effect Master Breerewood affirms in his second Tract: pag. 3. Moral (saith he) is that which pertaineth to manners; 1. Either by the instinct of Nature as belonging to the inward Law written in our hearts: or Secondly, by the instruction of Discipline as being of the outward Law pronounced of God, as that of observing the seventh Day: so that it may beetermed Natural, as being, not of the institution of Nature; but of the disciplining of Nature: Not of Nature as it w • s f • rst ordained of God, but as after informed by him. For indeed this fourth Commandment both as it was at first instituted in Paradise, and now revived on Mount Sinai, is but the law of Nature explained and enlarged according to the will of God in this particular for reasons and uses, whereof created nature was not capable but by revelation. And what though the Law of nature be the generality, as well to the precepts of the Jewish holy-days as of the Sabbath, this shows the superexcellency of the Sabbath above them therefore, and its equality with nature seeing God makes use of it so especially, to exhibit the commandment of nature by, amongst the Laws thereof.

But now in that opinion, wherein you and Master Breerewood jump, I must differ from you both, to wit, that now only the general Law of nature remains (which is that some time is to be sanctified to God's worship) and that this fourth commandment, which you call God's special commandment, is utterly abrogated. For as for the Law of nature which consisteth only in an indefinite sequestering of some time to the service of God, it comes infinitely short of that compleatnes and solemnity of time which our necessity requireth, and which God deserveth at our hands, and which (if he may be his own spokesman) he commandeth also. Indeed to set apart some time as perhaps an hour in a Day, or some such like time for prayer or meditation, it may be nature or conscience would affirm it requisite; but to set a part so much time, and in so solemn manner as (it seems) God looks for, and our state requires, neither nature nor conscience will so prompt us, either now, or (as I think) in innocence. And therefore as I may well conclude that, that first institution of God concerning the Sabbath, was rather a supply to nature then any Law in nature (which our Antisabbatarians unnecessarily labor to disprove) and superadded of God after created nature by immediate and special revelation; So I have just cause to believe that this was for many special and perpetual respects. For left God his solemn and public worship to have been arbitrarily ordered by nature, and not have by himself determined a special time therefore, it would have fallen out very cross to God's intentious, either being slenderly and seldomely performed, or at least very confusedly and disjoyntedly, seeing that so many men have so many minds, and so many several and various occasions, which by man would never have been determined at once (to have kept so solemn and complete a portion of time as it seems God expected, especially seeing nature never suggested it) if God by an over-ruling mandat had not put it past posse and velle: which he who is not the God of confusion wisely foresaw and prevented. So that though some time even by nature is taught to be set apart for God's worship (which I deny not) yet I say, that this is more private and personal, not so solemn and public as God would have it, and therefore may be arbitrary without disorder and distraction, which the other cannot if left to man's free-will, and therefore is purposely revealed of God, and is no law innate in nature because of the reason aforesaid; for nature doth not discern of numbers: or why God should chose to be worshipped on the seventh day rather then on the eight or ninth: but a commandment on the by, of equal force, antiquity and perpetuity with nature, prescribed as a rule coincident with nature for the Church of God in all ages to imitate. And to this purpose speaks Marius; Since (saith he) it is the Law of nature that some time be peculiarly insinuated for the worship of God, it was meet that that should be determined by a positive Law.

But against this, it will be objected: Why might not time as well as place, be left to the disposition and authority of Man to appoint? seeing, that time and place be alike necessary in nature to all actions.

I answer, time and place are in nature alike necessary to all actions in genere, but so is not this or that particular time or place; save where by positive Law it is made so: God did appoint the seventh day for solemn worship and left all places at liberty, till it pleased him to design one only place for Sacrifice-worship under the Law, the necessity whereof being now abrogated by the Gospel, the place is left to choice. One time may agree to all the world for worship, but so cannot one place.

Again it will be objected, that Bishop White, pag. 33. layeth it down as an essential Character, that Laws and Preceps merely positively moral oblige, only the Persons or State, or Nation and Republic upon which they are imposed by the Lawgiver, or to whom they are published by a legal promulgation. So pag. 38. If it be a precept merely positive it can oblige those people only upon whom it was imposed: Also pag. 77. he saith flatly, that although the seventh day Sabbath had not been a legal Ceremony, yet if it were only a positive moral precept, the obligation hereof ceased under the Gospel. So that by this rule the Sabbath should not be of universal obligation being only positively moral.

To all which himself gives the Answer pag. 27. where he saith, Laws positive are common and general either for all mankind, as the Law of Polygamy and Wedlocke with in some degrees mentioned, or else for one nation Republic or Community of people. So that we see through forgetfulness his Character doth not hold, but that a positive moral Law may be perpetual and universal (as well as national) of which sort we have reason to reckon the Sabbath, because it and the Law of Polygamy (which he instanceth in) were Twins, both brought forth in the state of Adams innocence.

Broad.

I praise God for the coming forth of Master Breerewoods book, for though there be some difference between us, yet mean Scholars are able to judge of it, might I have spoken with him I doubt nothing, but that we should soon have accorded in less then an hou • es space.

Answer.

I could wish you had perused Master Richard Byfields reply to Master Breerewoods book, before you had sent abroad this Manu-script, that so you might have thanked God for that which had been thank worthy. But that you may not be a stranger to him, I will be bold to bring you acquainted by putting you the oftener in mind of him in this my Answer. Touching the substance of your difference mentioned in the Margin, I have already spoken to it, and shall have more occasion as I go along.

Broad.

I published not long since a treatise of the Sabbath having this Title, Tractatus de Sabbatho in quo doctrina Ecclesiae primitivae tractatur & defenditur. And for proof, that the Doctrine of the primitive Church was such, as is therein taught and declared, besides certain sayings of Augustine and others. I alleged the testimony of Master Calvin in his institutions. If any be able to show that we (Master Calvin I mean and myself) have mistaken the Doctrine of the primitive Church in this matter. I greatly marvel, that they have not gone about it hitherto. If none be able to show this, as it seemeth none are (for doubtless many want no will) then is it no less to be marveled at. That the Doctrine of the primitive Church findeth no better entertainment amongst English Protestants. Is it credible that the primitive Church should not keep one of God's Commandments? That such a grievous error should befall the godly learned Fathers, as to esteem that Commandment shadowish and temporal, which is moral and perpetual?

Answer.

Here you would seem to beg credit to your opinion by Master Calvin's authority who because he quoteth the exposition of the ancients in this case, you would insinuatingly persuade to give some countenance to your Tenet. But that the World may know, how he held in this particular, his opinion is sufficiently manifested in his commentary on Gen. 2. where he saith, that first God rested, and that then he blessed this rest, that in all ages among men it might be holy, or he de • icated every seventh day to rest, that his example might be a perpetual rule. Moreover we must know (saith he) this exercise is not peculiar to one either age or people only, but common to all mankind. Wherefore when we hear that by Christ's coming the Sabbath was abrogated, this distinction must be taken to. What appertaineth to the ordering of human life, and what peculiarly agreeth to the old signs. That the Sabbath figured the mortification of the flesh (I say) was temporal, but that from the beginning it was commanded men that they should exercise themselves in the worship of God it ought deservedly to endure even to the end of the World. And besides this, he that observeth what follows upon 'his instance of the ancients in his institutions, shall find that there he saith how that though they say true, yet they touch but half the matter. And therefore doth he largely discuss it afterwards, wherein he showeth his opinion to be thus much, that the institution of the Sabbath for the better and more solemn performance of God's worship and refreshment of his creature, was with a perpetual intent, because of necessary use to all men in all times, but in regard it was again given to the Jews it had somewhat peculiar in it, which by Christ is abrogated, and yet the force, use and reason of the commandment in regard of its substance, as it was given both at the first, and as it was repeated doth still remain. So that he confesseth that there was something peculiar to the Jews which hung at it, but that withal there is a substance in the commandment it self which it is sacrilege to violate, the use thereof being universal both to persons and times, so that in alleging him you bring in, testem sine testimonio.

And put case there was some what, that was more proper to those people and those times, then to these in this fourth commandment as well as in the first and fifth (for as I have said, almost all scripture had some circumstantial peculiarity and propriety to those people and those times to whom it was immediately given, which yet nothing hindered the universality of the substance) yet as the reasons in those commandments evangelically construed are of present force and being, even in these our times, though the letter strictly construed be not: so this commandment, or the Sabbath may have somewhat more proper to them in it (for so is that manner of expression the stranger within they gates) or at least belonging to it (such as was their not preparing Manna, and kindling of fires) which yet is so far from extinguishing the whole commandment, as that the very type it self is of lively use to us under the Gospel, and of present force and being also (although not therefore of a like religious nature to us as it was to them) but in an Evangelical sense, that is in respect of the inward and spiritual holiness thereof, not properly of the outward and literal. For though the outward Sanction of that rest being admitted to be typical may be extinct, because that the typicalnes of things are not properly parts but accidents, and conducing helps to our profession and worship that live under the Gospel: which if true and real is spiritual, John. 4. Yet is not the holy use of this rest extinct, either as it is conducing or necessary to the present sanctifying of the Lord's day, or as it is significative, pointing us to, and minding us of our heavenly Sabbatism.

Obj. But you will say, how can we reject the typical holiness and yet retain the sense?

Answ. 1. We refuse the whole Law as a covenant, and yet we retain it as a rule, for the perfection of that Church respectively to the foregoing times (which is called the time of nature) belongs to us; but the imperfection of it respectively with our Church, ended with it self, and belongs not to us.

2. If the Sabbath had had its original after a Jewish manner, to have been instituted upon the fall, and so to relate to Christ, then we could have retained it no more then the rest, but we derive this from the primitive institution in paradise principally, and from the Jews only by way of enforcement or conveyance, as we do water first from the fountain and then from the pipe. And though this rest had in it a typical signification at first, yet never a typical sanction, but only by accident of the Jewish discipline then, when types were in fashion; (as I may so speak) like a fresh River which running through a piece of the Sea is made brinish, but being quit of it, it re-assumes its own nature.

So that then the commandment is not abrogated as a special commandment, but the speciality which belonged to the Sabbath, or to this general commandment is rather ended, which did consist of those occasional interventions of Manna, kindling fires, and double sacrifices, and (if you will) of the foresaid sanction of the very rest it self (which as I have said being significative, happily had in their times an holiness belonging to it) which did peculiarly belong unto the Jews, and which were no parts of the substance of this commandment, which in that respect is as well common to us as to them, the reason annexed being of like and equal force to all from the creation. For the annexing of extrinsical and adventitious circumstances, doth not any whit harm the nature, and morality of the Sabbath, no more then Paul's circumcising of Timothy (which in respect of the season was needful) did annul, or do injury to baptism: nor then a sign of an Inn or shoppe being pulled down, annulles or impaires an house.

So that their rest is common to us but in a riper sense, for the growth and stature of our times so much overtopping theirs, the Lord looks that we should answer his expectation, as well as obey his commandment, in sanctifying a more excellent and Evangelical Sabbath to him, then ever they were able to do. The Church of the New Testament (saith Master Perkins ) hath more knowledge and more grace then the people of the Old Testament had, and in that regard ought to have more zeal and greater alacrity in the worship of God then they had, that it may exceed the Jews according to the measure of grace received. The Arguments of love being not so forcible to prompt obedience, in the time of the Jews, as in ours, they being under the old covenant, and the Spirit not so stirring then, as now, the obedience was rather performed to the commandment then to the commander; For God in their time passed under the name of a Lord, implying them to be servants, and their obedience to be serviceable obedience, but now in our times he passeth under the name of a Father, implying us to be sons and our obedience to be filial and spiritual. And yet as spiritual obedience was, even then, due to God, and expected by him, though not with that eminency of expectation, as of us: So the types and Sacramental umbrages which now are of use to us (being performed in conscience to God's commandment) have their holiness suitable and respective to our times; but not in that degree, not in that kind of positive and intrinsical holiness as in the times of the Jewish nonage. Like as in the spring time while the sap is weak and but coming, all that we expect from trees is flowers, but when a riper seasoninsueth, then we look for riper fruit; so that then the prime and beauty of these flowers ceaseth, though their virtue remain. And by the punishment that God so severely annexed to the not performing the rites of the two Sacraments, we may see the extraordinary nature of things of that kind then, in the time of their Pedagogie; for he that was uncircumcised and that eat leavened bread in the passover, was to be cut off.

And therefore did God intend their rest (as may well be gathered) to be a positive part of their sanctification, because of the typical use thereof, which yet he doth; not do to us, and yet he accounts our not resting a profanation of the Sabbath, and all employments which hinder his worship and conduce not to the sanctifying of that day to be sins. Like as Christ who, whilst he was upon the earth, accepted small things at his Apostles hands, but after he was ascended and had given gifts unto men he looked for other services: or as a Pater-familias that having a boy and a man to wait at his table, the boy if he can fill a cup of beer, and shift a trencher, by reason of his non-age, he is willing to take it as a good part of his service, but to his man he gives better wages, and therefore expects better service at his hands, he looks that he should be able to furnish and disfurnish the table with grace to his Master, and yet not to neglect those lesser things. Or (which better expresseth my meaning) as of children we require a bodily service in saying their prayers and graces and catechism, and though they have little, or no understanding and sense of that they say, yet we take it in good part till they attain to more knowledge and ripeness of years, and then we look for suitable performance thereto. Even so the Lord he expects from us an high degree of sanctifying his Sabbath, even a ravishment of Spirit, which service we can never perform if we do not rest. A Christian and Evangelical use therefore of this Sabbatical rest is still in force to us, though the Jewish sanction may be determined, for their precise resting was with respect to the formal holiness in the rest; but we are to rest with respect to its final holiness of furthering God's more substantial worship, and the spiritualizing our own minds by it, and thus doth the whole commandment for substance and use remain to us, the difference being only in some occasional circumstances. as 1. Because the Sabbaths rest was significative from the beginning it might in their times (as I have said) carry with it a typical or external holiness (as their other types had which notwithstanding were of afar different nature and institution to this, for they were appointed since the fall and occasioned by it, and in themselves temporary, but this was before the fall, and given forever to the whole Church for a standing type) which yet it doth not to us, and yet so as the primary force and use of this is no less appertaining to us then them. For so, that other ordinance which was instituted in innocence (marriage) it also lasted in respect of diverse circumstances of their times and discipline, which yet we retain pure from the first institution. Secondly, we under the Gospel have also an alteration made of the individual but not of the numeral day, for we now keep the seventh day (according to the commandment, remember that thou keep holy the seventh day ) but not theirs. Thirdly, in respect also of the reason whereupon the commandment was enforced upon them, to wit, God's resting from the creation; For whilst the law or first covenant was in force, the creation was in force, which still remains with us, but subordinated to the adequate reason of our Sabbath; where to use Master Dowes words pag. 24. All laws being on • lie positive (though made by God himself) admit mutation (at least) when the matter concerning which, or the conditions of the persons to whom, they were given is changed. (For as the Jewish types, so many gross and sensitive grounds and reasons are pilled of, and swallowed up by the coming of Christ, and more spiritual ones risen in their stead) As we see it very apparent in the 65. Isa. 17. I will (saith God) create a new Heaven and a new Earth, and the former shall not be remembered nor come into mind. Which to me seems a pertinent prophecy of the alteration of the Sabbath from the Jews day to ours; it being as much as to say, that in comparison of the excellency of the things that shall be under the Gospel, the other things shall be nothing worth: Sence shall be swallowed up of Spirit, types of truth; And though the creation be admirable of it self, and so also is at this day, the consideration of it being exceeding useful, yet nothing comparable to our redemption: Our rejoicing in the one is nothing comparable to our rejoicing in the other. As a right worthy Doctor ( Sibbes by name) observes, God's last works are his best works, the first being but preparatives and occasions of the later; the new Heaven and the new Earth are the best; the second wine, that Christ created himself, was the best: Spiritual things are better then natural. And Master Dow pag. 27 saith as muc • that the reason Drawne from the example of God who rested upon the Sabbath, namely, when the creation was finished, endured only till the time of the new creation, in which all things were made new by Christ, at which time it ceased, or at least, a second reason taken from the new covenant coming in place, the former both reason and day (become now old) are passed away; And behold all things are become new. For this work of redemption or new creation being the greater may deservedly take place of the other; and as the Prophet Jeremiah, speaking of the deliverance, that God would vouchsafe his people from the Babylonish captivity, saith: Behold the days shall come (saith the Lord) that it shall no more be said, the Lord liveth that brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, but the Lorth liveth that brought them up from the land of the North: so may we say of the day appointed for his worship, that the day wherein he finished the work of creation shall no more be observed, but the day wherein our Lord Christ, by his resurrection from the dead finished the work of our redemption.

Thus speaks Master Dow.

And how ever in other things the constitution of the Jewish Church and ours differ, yet in this they are united, the Sabbath being first ordained, before there was distinction made, or wall of partition built, for an ever-lasting sign between God and his Church for his sanctifying it, and a perpetual rule of duty and practice chalked out to his Church, for the direction of his more solemn worship. Like as was his marrying of Adam and Eve in innocence, both a perpetual type of that union which is between God and his Church, as also a perpetual rule for the ordering of that affaire amongst mankind ever after: both which were alike given in innocence, and were alike both perpetual rules and perpetual types unto his Church.

Broad.

This book being the last, I intend to write of this Argument, my desire is it should be read of many before it be published, that if just exceptions can be taken to ought I have written, or that an objection of moment be not here fully answered, I may know it, and afterwards may alter or add as there shall be cause, John 3. 21. He that doth truth cometh to the light that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought in God.

Broad.

2. Treatises,
• 1. Concerning the Sabbath or seventh day.
• 2. Concerning the Lord's day, or first of the Weeke.

YEe observe days and months and times and years, I am afraid of you, least I have bestowed on you labor in vain.

Answer.

You play the Soldier in the On-set, at first discharging your greatest ordinance to impress the greater fear, but as you use the matter you miss the mark.

For this place of the Galath, falls far short of your aim, as you might have perceived, if without prejudice you would have perused Master Perkins upon that place, whose whole discourse thereof is worth inserting, if it were not too long.

And if you examine the context you may perceive, how that the Apostle was angry at the Galatians, for leaving Christ the substance, and betaking themselves, even in point of justification, to the carnal observation of Jewish shadows and ceremonies, which in comparison he calleth beggarly Rudiments, and he the rather termed them so, because they were then utterly useless and insignificative, being fulfilled and so abrogated.

But the Sabbath is, for the equity and substance of it, still of the same use as ever, to wit, fit for the be • ter procuring of man's refreshing, and God's more solemn worship. Nor is it in-significative, or ever shall be, till we sing a requiem to our souls in heaven: For as it concluded our creation, so shall it our salvation: And therefore by no means to be numbered with the observation of days, and months, and years (seeing that the Apostles themselves observed the Lord's day weekly or Sabbatically, and not monthly or yearly, as were the Jews Sabbaths and Holy-days, but in relation to the fourth commandment one in seven, as knowing it to be a perpetual rule, not a temporary and vanishing ordinance) which pertained to the bondage and servitude of weak and beggarly Rudiments, of which the Apostle here only speaks.

And as it was far from the Apostles thought, to reckon any of the ten commandments as a weak and beggarly Rudiment; so let it be abhorred of all Christian hearts and ears.

But may some say, is not the signification of the Sabbaths institution abrogated by Christ's resurrection, and the coming of the Lord's day?

The Sabbath is altered not abrogated, and the signif • cation subordinated, not annulled, being instituted upon an universal and perpetual reason, for the Sabbath was no proper Jewish type, but the Churches type in that wherein it was typical, (as we may see in the fourth, Hebr. 9. There remaineth therefore Sabbatismus a Sabbath-rest to the people of God; which words, Willet in 2. Gen. saith, conclude that both the type remaineth, that is a Sabbatism, and the signification of the type everlasting rest; And as you may further see 12, Matth. 8. in these words, The Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day, which words compared with the verses foregoing; show that the Sabbath is of a ceremonious nature, for Christ there ranks it among things ceremonial in a ceremonial sense, but with a note of inequality; (as it is implied in that word Even of the Sabbath-day ) and is, as the rest of the moral Law, of equal continuance with the Church; which for this cause was revived to the Jews, because at that time they were the only Israel and Church of God, but now translated to us under the Gospel (the partition wall being broken down) with an alteration of circumstance according to the season, as (Isaiah) was prophesied in the fore • quoted place of Isa. 65. 17. And whereas Doctor Heyly • part. 2. pag. 27. saith, That it is not probable, that the Apostle Paul, who so opposed himself against the Sabbath, would erect a new, this had not been (saith he) to abrogate the ceremony but to change the day. I answer, that by the coming of Christ some things suffered alteration, as well as others abrogation: wherefore the Apostles were to preach only the abrogative types and ceremonies to be abrogated (of which sort I prove the Sabbath to be none) and according to the nature of the new creation to alter the other, of which sort the Sabbath was, and therefore suffered subordination not abrogation: And therefore hath the Scripture recorded it to us 〈◊〉 the name of the first day of the week, or the first day of seven (before it style it the Lord's day) in a s • gnificant opposition to the old antiquated last day of the week. I will conclude this Answer with Master Hookers authority (who was a confident maintainer of the morality of the fourth commandment as you may see in his Eccles. Pol. pag. 377.) who speaking upon this place of the Galath. saith: That for as much as the Law of the Jews by the coming of Christ was changed, and we thereunto no way bound, Saint Paul, although it were not his purpose to favor invectives against the special sanctification of days and times to the service of God, and to the honor of Jesus Christ, doth notwithstanding bend his forces against that opinion, which imposed on the Gentiles the yoke of Jewish legal observations, as if the whole World ought forever, and that upon pain of condemnation to keep and observe them, such as in this persuasion hallowed the Jewish Sabbaths the Apostle sharply reproveth saying, ye observe days and months and times and years, &c.

Thus you see how Master Hookers opinion was concerning this text of Paul, only to cry down those obsolete Jewish observations, and nothing less then to impeach the authority of the fourth commandment or the Lord's day, as you may plainly discern by turning over leaf to pag. 378. where he layeth down three sorts of holy times, thus, saith he: It pleased God heretofore to exact some part of time by way of perpetual homage never to be dispensed withal, nor remitted, again to require some other parts of time with as strict exaction but for less continuance, and of the rest which were left arbitrary to accept what the Church should in due consideration consecrate voluntarily unto religious uses. Of the first kind amongst the Jews was the Sabbath-day. Of the second those feasts which were appointed by the Law of Mos • s; The Feast of Dedication invented by the Church standeth in the number of the last kind. The moral Law requiring therefore a seventh part throughout the age of the World to be that way employed, although with us the day be changed in regard of a new revolution begun by our Savior Christ, yet the same proportion of time continueth which was before, because of reference to the benefit of creation, and now much more of renovation thereunto added by him which was Prince of the World to come, we are bound to account the sanctification of one day in seven a duty which God's immutable Law doth exact forever. Thus you have Master Hookers opinion both of this text of the Gal. The morality of the fourth commandment, the perpetuity of the Sabbath, and the authority of the Lord's-day.

Broad.

A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, Gal. 5. 9.

Chrysost. on Gal.

Why but they retained the Gospel only they would have brought in a Jewish rite or two, and yet the Apostle saith that thereby the Gospel is subverted, to show how but a little thing, being untowardly mingled, marreth all.

Luther on Gal. 2.

Paul had note here his own business in hand but a matter of faith. Now as concerning faith, we ought to be invincible and more hard if it might be then the Adamant stone, but as touching charity we ought to be soft, and more flexible then the reed or leaf shaken with the wind, and ready to yield to everything.

Broad.

A treatise of the Sabbath.

FOr as much as I know not, whether taking my book in hand thou mindest to read it over to the end. I have therefore thought good (by way of prevention) in the beginning to let thee understand, that howsoever there be difference in opinion among the Godly learned, yet they all for ought I know agree in this, namely, that the Lord's-day had his beginning in the time of the Apostles, and being of so great antiquity, so generally received, and so profitable to the Church of Christ, that it ought to be observed of thee according to the practice of good Christians from time to time, and the godly laws of our most Christian governor living at this present. I charge thee therefore as thou wilt answer it before God's judgment • ear, that thou dost not take occasion hence to spend the Lord's-day more licentiously; and so to dishonor God the more, when thou hast more cause to honor and praise his holy name. If thou dost, know assuredly that the Son hath not yet made thee free▪ for none dare willfully abuse our liberty purchased by Christ, unless themselves do still continue the very bond slaves of sin and Satan,

Answer.

Your admiration is worthy commendation, for it is the part of every honest man to preserve the practice of piety, and especially in this point of the Sabbath, in the which God so often in Scripture involueth the sum of all Religion, and indeed it is God's and the Churches ancient Land-mark, which being removed, opens a gap to all licentiousness, and that being once let in, which is so much thirsted after by the ignorant and common people, then farewell all Religion.

For as Doctor Denison notes upon the 13. Neh. 2. That where the Sabbath is not sanctified, there is neither sound Religion nor a Christian conversation to be expected, as he is quoted by Edward Chetwin D. D. and Dean of Bristow in his second Edition of the straight gate and narrow way to life, Pag. 90. Who himself saith in the same page, that the profaning the holy Sabbath of God (for so he terms it) is contrary to God's moral precept still in power. And therefore if you have Faith I wish you would have taken Saint Paul's advice, and have had it to yourself in this point. For how you will preserve the duties of the Sabbath, and yet with the same breath cry down the authority of the Sabbath, and how you will maintain solemn worship without solemn time (which God ever allotted to that end) I see not, nor you know not.

And therefore what you weakly endeavor to build up with one hand, you powerfully pull down with the other, for an error in Doctrine (especially tending to libertinism) is likelier to take place among men (where always the greater part is the worse) then a bare persuasion tending to restriction. It is as if a man should let slip a Grayhound at an Hare, and then command him to lie down at his foot.

And therefore you might have done well, like a good Physician first to have applied that receipt (how that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump) upon yourself before you had prescribed it unto others. But to prevent the spreading of this poisonous leaven, I am desirous to give you a timely opposition by contending for the truth.

Broad.

CHAP. I. 1. What day God sanctified in the beginning.

G Od having finished the creation in six days rested on the seventh day and was refreshed, whereupon he blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. The day which God sanctified in the beginning was the seventh and no other, even as the day wherein he commanded the Israelites to kill the passover was the fourteenth day and no other of the first month, the one is as expressly set down as the other, and the reasons wherefore God sanctified the seventh day, and commanded the Israelites to kill the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month are alike unchangeable. For as it cannot be that the Angel should pass over the Israelites houses on any other day of the fourteenth, so neither can it be that God should rest on any other day.

Answer.

It is no doubt but the seventh day was the day that God only rested on, and sanctified to a different use from the rest of the days, for having employed these in creating things necessary for man's corporal good, he designs him this day for his spiritual benefit, and his own special glory, (whereas it is alleged by some, Bishop White pag. 42. Doctor Heylin pag. 10. That God imposed no other Law on Adam then that of the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge. To this I answer:

1. That there was another Law imposed upon him even in innocence as appears Gen. 2. 24. to wit, the Law of having but one wife and loving her.

2. That this Law of the Sabbath was a Law not of the nature of the other where on his estate depended, but a Law of indulgence, whereto he both should and would readily have confented (because of the blessing and benefit which should have redounded to him thereby) had he continued in in innocence and not lost himself and it before.)

And questionless there was no other reason why he, that could have made all the World in a moment, should yet contrive and spin out the work of creation into six days space, but only to this end, that he might give an example to mankind (which was then in Adam ) forever to set a part the seventh day to his more special and solemn worship. And the reason (of God's resting from the creation) why it is annexed as a reason of the commandment is, because at that time there was no better thing, nor greater commodity, no nor any greater work for God to rest from, or thing wherein God was more seen then in the creation. And therefore was the Sabbath appointed on that day (having the honor to conclude the creation) in memory of God's goodness to man, and upon occasion of his refreshment therein, till a greater good should befall him, and a work wherein God should be more glorified, and then that reason to be subordinated not annulled (because the creation still remaineth as a less good even unto us under the Gospel) but as the Law is to the Gospel, or the Old Testament to the new, or as the Prophets were to the Apostles and Ministers; not in the sense as the ceremonies were to Christ, to receive an absolute expiration the one by the other; for it was of no such shadowish nature; and yet not so unchangeable, but that it is as well subject to subordination upon occasion, as the Jews deliverance out of Egypt was to their after deliverance out of Babylon; For man was more happy, and God (as I may say) more refreshed in ceasing from the work of our redemption then of our creation.

And therefore is Anno Mundi worthily changed into Anno Domini: And the name of the Sabbath into the Lord's-day; For denominatio omnis fit a majori. And for this cause although in relation to our redemption we celebrate the first day of the week for order, yet it is the creation that makes this first day to be the seventh in number, and good reason. For seeing God in the creation divided time into the revolution of seven, how can or dare any that knows the creation break the order of time by God established, and think of another division as of. 6. or 8. &c. seeing from the beginning it was not so, especially seeing it was purposely done of God for the Sabbaths sake, who else could have finished the creation in the twinkling of an eye (which solemn contrivement sure was not to create a Jewish abrogative type) and therefore is accordingly observed under the Gospel, only mutatis mutandis.

But to come to that which you would infer, which is, that only the last day of the seven is to be kept Sabbath: I answer:

First, that in respect of the point of time, I think I need not be large to prove the variation of it: For I think it will be granted upon this one instance: 10. Ios. 13. how that the Sabbath was not always observed answerable to the first institution in respect of the point of time; for that by the Suns standing still the week was lengthened beyond its due proportion.

Doctor Heylin pag. 48. allegeth, that a man travailing the World Westward may lose a whole day; now what shall that man do at his return, saith he, if to sanctify one day in seven be moral.

I answer first, Let him tell me what a Jew should have done in that case when the Sabbath was confessedly obligatory; and so should that man do now.

Secondly I answer, that though things that are moral by nature, because they bind always, and in all places alike, are ever the same: Yet things that are moral only by Discipline admit variety through exigency of time and occasion.

Thus it was lawful for Adams immediate posterity to conjugate with their consanguinity, which now (the exigency of those times being over) is utterly unlawful by disciplinary morality: (Nay nature her self being disciplined from the alteration of time and variety of choice, now abhors it as utterly undecent) so the man that having in his lawful calling of merchandizing lost a day, and had during his travel in his particular practice rent from the Church (in her computation of time) without a schism, being lawfully necessitated thereunto by the course of nature, may as lawfully at his return reduce himself again unto the conformity and practice of the Church to avoid a willful rent and disorder; like as they that were in a journey were to keep the Passover on a different time by themselves from the Church of the Jews, but at their return they were to return to the Churches observation.

Secondly, but in regard of the order which I think you labor to maintain, to wit, that the Sabbath ought to be the last, and not the first day of the week, or else not to be at all. To that I answer, that some reasons and circumstances even in the moral Law are occasional and so changeable, and yet the substance of the commandment is perpetual and immutable: As in the first commandment, where Israel's corporeal deliverance is now changed into Israel's ghostly deliverance; So in the fifth commandment, the land of Canaan is properly the land meant which had that promise belonging to it: But now it is enlarged to all that in the fear of God obey that commandment throughout the World. So this commandment had the reason of God's resting from the creation occasionally affixed unto it, because that then the creation was God's greatest and eminentest work, and being occasional and appointed for commemoration, was therefore changeable whensoever he should rest from a greater work, that better deserved commemoration then that; And yet the substance of the commandment remaineth unalterable, which substance or unalterable part of the commandment consisteth in the number, as seven is opposed to all oth • r numbers, and not in the order.

But may some say, those allegations out of the first and fifth commandments hold not parallel with this reason of the fourth commandment, because they were only given in the time of the Jews, but this was from the beginning.

I answer both the one and the other was given for the Churches sake, and therefore alterable according to God's good pleasure and the state of the Church.

But you will further object: When do you find anything altered, that was as this is from the beginning?

I answer, I find the curse which was annexed to the fall of man to be taken away and brought under by the death and resurrection of Christ: And well then may the reason of the then Sabbath be altered by it, when the curse is annulled, it being the Churches type or ceremony, and that thing changed wherein the ceremony consisted, to wit, the order from last to first according to the different state of the Church. Like as it may be supposed of the Jews when they came to be a sedentary Church, they altered their gesture from standing to sitting, but still retained the Passover; So we still retain the substance of the fourth commandment, though we have altered the ceremony, which was grounded upon God's example; And now God having given us another example of another rest upon another day, we imitate his example, and still keep his commandment, by observing the number but altering the order. For indeed as by God's ordination and disposition, the Law and Sabbath go together, so they fare alike; for the Law was to continue in the nature of a covenant till Christ came, and so the Sabbath on the last day, who b • fulfilling the righteousness of the one, did inherit the rest of the other, being annexed thereunto and entailed thereupon (whereof man failed by his fall) and thereupon changed the natures of both, subordinating the Law to the Gospel; making it, instead of a cause procuring life, to be a rule, and an effect of life and grace received; and so the last day Sabbath to the first, changing rest by works, into working by rest; A happy change (if we make not ourselves unhappy by allowing a rest to the Law but none to the Gospel) for whereas before we held by a tenure of fear, our happiness being all in the future, for we were, all our life long, to do this, and then to live, now we hold by the tenure of faith, and our happiness is in present, for saith the Apostle Hebr. 4. 3. we which have believed do enter into rest; according to John. 17. 3. This is life eternal to know thee, &c. showing that the life of grace in a man is called eternal life, because it hath its beginning from that life which shall never cease, but increase to ever-lasting perfection.

So that the Sabbath is unalterable in regard of the individual number, but not in regard of the individual day. The number being kept, the day upon occasion might be altered. And of the truth of this we have good reason to persuade us, for the issue proveth it by the divine authority of the Apostles. For this fourth commandment, being no Jewish ceremony, but a commandment in the Decalogue, and equal with the Law of nature, ought for the substance of it to be esteemed perpetual, and especially seeing that now, in one of these senses, to wit, in the number, we see it preserved inviolable by the example of the Apostles, and the practice of the Church ever since; and yet in respect of the order, by the self-same examples, altered from last to first; And▪ which alteration is very agreeable to the time of the Gospel, where many that are first shall be last, and last shall be first. Even as John the Baptist, who being the last of the Prophets, was therefore the greatest, because nearest unto Christ: yet he that is least in the Kingdom of Heaven (that is, in the time of the Gospel) is greater then he: So this seventh day, though the last in order and greatest in dignity, during the supereminency of the old creation, because of God's example; yet now, is the number retained, and the order exchanged from the last to the first of the week, in honor of the new creation of the new Heaven and new Earth, which comparatively was prophesied, and promised to ea • e out the old, in the 65. of Isa. 17. I will (saith God there) create a new Heaven and a new Earth, and the former shall not be remembered (that is the solemnity of it shall cease, and shall give place to the new, for else remember it we both do and must do, for the memory of both may consist together, and the one confirm the other, in regard that our redemption restores us to a lawful Dominion (once forfeited) over the whole work of creation. And why must there be this change? Why, because of the greater excellency of the second creation, which shall be solemnized instead of the first under the time of the Gospel, when Christ shall be come, and shall have finished the work of my Mercy, which shall be greater then was the work of my goodness in the creation.

Each creation must have its Sabbath of commemoration, for else should God magnify his lesser work of creation before his greater work of redemption. And therefore this is the day which we now celebrate, which the Lord hath made for us to rejoice in now, like as that was then.

And thus we see it in all points now fulfilled. But you will object, that this new Heaven and new Earth is meant of the differing state of the Church under the Gospel, to that it was under the Law: Ans. I grant it, whereof the solemnizing of our redemption (which principally; nay I may say only, made the change) instead of our old and first creation (unto which we lost all right, but that it was revived by, and therefore worthily changed into, the second) is a principal part; And therefore hath the holy Ghost expressed this change in those terms of old and new creation, rather then any other. And as in the 2. of Peter 3. 13. there, at the perfection of the Kingdom of Heaven, he prophecies of a real change of the old Heaven and old Earth by an absolute dissolution of them, by reason of the succession of a better condition to the people and Church of God: So here in Isaiah, at the inchoation of the Kingdom of Heaven (I mean the time of the Gospel) he prophecies of a proportionable real change (leading unto the other) of the old Heaven and old Earth, by way of mitigation, by reason of a more excellent benefit that redoundeth to the Church and children of God. For those words (according to his promise) in the aforesaid text of Peter, have reference to this of Isaiah; By the compa • ison of which texts it is evident, that there is as well a literal as a mystical sense in these words, which was to be fulfilled gradatim, in the Kingdom under the Gospel (which was the time of the adequate accomplishment of their prophecies) as well, as in the Kingdom of Heaven hereafter, which is the time of accomplishing our prophecies, or theirs, as they are transferred over to us.

So that if you grant it requisite to sanctify a seventh day, or the seventh day in respect of number, I say with you; but now to sanctify the last day in the week, were to memorize our creation above our redemption; our being, above our well-being, and to contradict promise and prophecy, example and reason; For in commemorations the lesser gives way to, and is enwrapped in the greater. Now then Christ's resting, on the first day from a greater work, then that of the creation was just cause to adjourn the great duty of commemoration, to that day which finished the greater and more beneficial action.

But on the other hand to keep no seventh day, were likewise to go against the example of the Apostles, and to blot out one of the ten commandments, and so to make a moral Law Iewishly ceremonial: For there is no reason why the Apostles should weekly celebrate the day of Christ's resurrection, if it were not in reference to the fourth commandment; seeing that if they had meant it as a bare institution of the Church, they might have done by the day of Christ's resurrection as we do by the day of his birth, that is, have kept it yearly.

And lastly, it were to cross this prophecy of Isa. 65. 17. for what reason have we to think, that God would simply have the remembrance of the creation lessened; nothing less; but only respectively; no more then he would have the Egyptian deliverance forgotten, because he would have the Babylonish deliverance remembered, but only comparatively. For he would have us, that are under the Gospel, to celebrate the work of our redemption above the work of our creation, and to acknowledge, the day of the consummation thereof, to be the day which David speaks of, Psalm 118. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , which the Lord hath made, wherein we will rejoice and be glad. In which words (as one saith) I see not how the making of the day can be intended for the common regulation of the days in the creation, but it appeareth to be some dedication to an holy use of joy and gladness (suitable to the description of a Sabbath, which is called a delight) for our unspeakable deliverance.

And not as Bishop W • ite would persuade pag. 191. that the day of Christ's passion, was every way as blessed a day in respect of man's redemption, as the day of resurrection. For the Apostle saith, that if Christ be not risen we are yet in our sins.

And so again whereas he saith; pag. 298. This great work of human redemption was not effected by the resurrection of Christ, but by his obedience and sacrifice on the cross; and it was fully wrought and finished upon the passion friday, after our Savior had said consummatum est. I ask, how we had been redeemed from, and how he had conquered, our last enemy death, if he had not risen, And again, put case it were so, so was the work of creation fully finished on the sixth day, and yet God sanctified the seventh day, and on that day. 2. Gen. 2. it is said, He ended his work which he had made, because that day gave manifest declaration of his completing the works of creation, and so did the day of Christ's resurrection manifest the completing of the work of our redemption.

And this day, thus prophetically extolled by David, was answerably honored by Christ himself, and kept by his Apostles. So that in answer to Bishop White pag. 302▪ there was at least an implicit, virtual, and interpretative command in the act of Christ's resurrection; For why should not we think, that Christ had a significant meaning in prolonging his resurrection to the third day, which was the first of the week, as well as God had, in spinning out his creation to the seventh day, which was the last of the week, seeing Christ could have raised himself out of the grave so soon as he was in it, like as God could have created all things in the twinkling of an eye.

So that then, seeing God by this his resting from the work of our redemption, hath given us a new reason (in respect of eminency) of a new day, and by the example of his Apostles preserving still the number, we in doing the like obey his good pleasure and his Law, which is not destroyed by the coming of Christ (for not one tittle of it shall pass away, till Heaven and Earth pass, which is the time of the Sabbaths period) but fulfilled and explained by him, according to the will of God, and his purpose, though not according to our carnal reasonings and opinions. For thus is all kept whole. The reason of the commandment hereby standing still good but not in chief: For God's resting from his work is now the occasion of our Sabbath, not from the work of his creation, but from the work of his redemption, wherein he was most remonstrated, and even redoubled in the manifestation of all his attributes to our view, and therefore worthy of a select day, which yet altereth nothing of the substance of the Sabbath, Alexander tertius Pontifex Rom. affirmat, tam veteris quam novi testamenti paginam, septimam diemad humanam quietem specialiter deput • sse; id est, (Interprete suarez de diebus festis cap. 1.) utrumque testamentum approbavit more • deputandi ad quietem humanam septimum quemque diem hebdomadis: qu • d est formaliter deputare septimum diem, licet materialiter non idem dies fuerit semper deputatus, & hoc modo verum est, septimum • llum diem in lege v • teri esse Sabbathum, in nova vero esse diem Dominicum.

For as our changing of the bounds of the Sabbath (which in the Jews time was from evening to evening, and now in our time is from morning to morning, in relation to the time of Christ's resurrection) is no material change, but that still the day remains entire, even so the change of the Jews seventh day, to our seventh day, altereth not any whit the substance of the Sabbath or fourth commandment.

But you will say, why was the day translated, and not rather both the days celebrated?

Because that would have crossed the good pleasure of God, who from the beginning thought it a meet • proportion to afford man six days for his necessary labor, and to exact one of seven for his more solemn worship, which also is the reason, why the Lord's day was continued in the same number, but not in the same order, so that it was not transp • sed to be observed in any other number, but only in another order in the same number; that so the will of God in that commandment might be observed, and yet his resting from the wonderful work of our redemption worthily celebrated.

And therefore whereas Bishop White saith pag. 277. that if the fourth commandment concerning the keeping of the seventh day be moral and perpetual, then it is not such in respect of the first and eight d • y, but of that one only day which it specifieth in the commandment. I answer. Neither of both is moral and perpetual, as considered in the order, but occasional and changeable, (as the event hath shown) and that each of both is moral and perpetual, as considered in their number being unchangeable to any other number, and therefore still so continueth by virtue of the morality of the Law of the Sabbath given to Adam, and re-given in the fourth commandment.

Now whereas you urge the appointed day of the Passover to be unalterable, in parallel to the day of God's rest from the creation; we clearly see the contrary: for upon occasion the precise individual day of the Passover was altered, as in the 9. of Numb. where he that was unclean, or in a journey was not to eat it till the fourteenth day of the second month, where the number is preserved entire (whereof God was ever curious) but the day is changed; even thus upon occasion is the Sabbath altered, the number of seven being kept entire in this, as in the other the number of fourteen, and yet a change made, and so both the Sabbath and Passover for substance preserved, notwithstanding the circumstantial alteration upon occasion. Yea Hezekiah's great Passover was kept in the second month, upon the exigency of the times, 2 Chro. 30. 2, 3.

And now that you have made mention of the Passover▪ besides this foresaid liv • lie illustration, which it affords to set forth my meaning in this thing, I would commend it as a notion worthy your consideration, whether God's ordaining the first and seventh day of the Passover) as also of other feasts) to be kept holy, might not prophe • y •••• Sabbath of the true▪ Paschal lamb Christ Ies •• after his being slain, as well as theirs under the typical, the one to be the first of the seven as the other was the last.

Broad.

2. When in likely hood God sanctified the seventh day.

WHen God sanctified the seventh day, I mean whether as soon as it began or about the end thereof, is doubtful; of the two the latter s • emes most probable, for God blessed and sanctified the seventh day, because therein he had rested (not would re •• ) and was refreshed.

It is the manner of men to bless that day or hour wherein some great good hath befallen them, thus God having felt, as it were, the sweetness of rest on the seventh day in comparison of his labor in the six former, and being well refreshed is hereupon moved to bless and sanctify it.

Answer.

You say its probable, God pronounced the Sabbath sanctified at the end thereof, when he had rested, which for my part I assent unto, for • o in the 2 Gen. 3. it appears to be most likely. Besides that Moses his manner of expression in that verse, compared with the like in the first chapter, do much persuade it: for you shall find there, that when he hath related God's five and six days works as finished and completed by him, then followeth the blessing upon them, so in this second chapter he • makes the blessing to follow upon his resting as before upon his working. But what you would gather hence I do not well perceive, yet two things in my opinion follow very naturally.

1. That hereby God would give to Adam as well a president as a precept to regulate and invite his subsequent duty in the particular of the Sabbath. That seeing God had chosen the seventh day to finish his creation in, and to rest there from, and had thus made it known to Adam; with a promise of a blessing thereunto for after-time upon due observance. That therefore Adam and his posterity should be moved thereby, to dedicate the seventh day from the sublunary employments of the other six to be a perpetual Sabbath unto the Lord, not by a bare rest (for what honor hath God by that) but by a sanctified rest.

2. That it was not meant that Adam should keep the seventh day Sabbath which God rested on, for though it was God's seventh day, yet it was Adams second day, which is another reason to prove your probability, for it is likely that God himself did first rest the seventh day, that so he might by his example (being revealed to that end) give mankind a pattern forever after to do the like, which is very apparent, and more confirmed by the Law concerning the Sabbath, as it was afterwards renewed upon mount Sinai to the Israelites, where we are commanded after six days labor to dedicate a seventh to holiness, & to that end to rest from our work on the seventh day, as God did from his; that so by following his example we might the better obey his commandment; not that we were to rest the self-same day that he did, but only in similitude and imitation, that is, to employ six days in our necessary labor and the seventh to rest according to his example, that so we might sanctify it according to his commandment. Which Argument do • h much disprove that over-strict tying the Sabbath to the precise seventh day after the creation, and proves the • umerall day to be only moral and perpetual, or the proportion of time which the Lord exemplifieth there, which is the seventh day for number not that seventh day for time.

But you will say, did not God's example as well oblige the order as the number, as well the last as the seventh day?

Yes, during the supereminency of the work of creation, but when a more excellent work was finished, the work of our redemption, from which it also pleased him exemplarily to rest, not on the last but on the first day of the week, and as exemplarily by his Apostles ever after to preserve th • number and proportion of time according to the commandment, the substance of the reason which constitutes the commandment still remaining entire (to wit God's resting from, or accomplishing his work) only the terminus à quo varieth the case in respect of order.

For the transcendency of the latter displaceth the former, as the presence of the King doth the Major of a Town.

I say, at this time did the order vanish, and the day of God's creation give place to the day of God's redemption as the more worthy work; And if God may be said, in any manner of speech, to be refreshed in his resting from the powerful work of creation, much more from the painful work of redemption.

Broad.

3. When God first commanded man to sanctify the seventh day.

IT is not said in Scripture that God presently commanded Adam to sanctify the seventh day, and it is one thing for God to sanctify a day and another thing to command men to sanctify it.

Indeed it is probable that this example of God, in working six days and resting the seventh, Adam and his posterity should always have followed had they continued in the state of innocence; But when Adam had now eaten of the forbidden fruit God thrust him out of Paradise, cursed the Earth for his sake, and set him to get his living in the sweat of his face.

Answer.

You say, it is not said in Scripture that God presently commanded Adam to sanctify the seventh day, and that it is one thing for God to sanctify a day, and another thing for him to command man to sanctify it: To which I answer. That God here at the institution of the Sabbath did, as Christ by his Apostles did at the institution of the Lord's-day, that is, by a declaratory example appoint it as a duty unto the Church forever after, teaching them to set aside the seventh day (which was then the last, and is now the first day in the week) from all secular commerce and employment wholly to trade with God in giving and receiving spiritual commodities. Nor is there any difference in this case, between God's sanctifying it and his commanding it to be sanctified by man. For besides that, to sanctify, ever signified to set apart to an holy use, we see it to be the very voice of of the Scripture, how that the Sabbath was made for man; that is, for his good and benefit. For man was to learn from it, that all his happiness consisted not in his own labor but also in God's blessing; so that, though he labored six days together, yet the seventh day well observed, might do him more avail then all his six days labor; And therefore, by God's blessing that day, is implied a reciprocal respect both of our blessing him, and his blessing us; and by his sanctifying is intended, his setting apart that day, for a more special communion between him and us, by his more special blessing of us, and our more solemn worshipping of him: For surely you will not say he sanctified it, and blessed it, that we should superstitiously think any inherent holiness or blessedness to be in the very day it self; And if not, what follows then? but that it must needs be meant, that we should ever after use the seventh day to a blessed and holy end, and expect a blessing from God thereon in so doing; for else to what use was it that God did thus reveal himself, and his resting, and not rather conceal it, if he had meant it only for a bare narration; But it is evident by the second giving of the Law, what, and how he meant it, at the first thus Master Breerewood in his second tract. pag. 9. The Sabbath (saith he) is called holy, not formally, for any peculiar inherent holiness it hath above other days, but finally, because it was ordained and consecrated to holy exercises in the service of God: which gives answer to Bishop White pag. 40▪ who saith, that the second Gen. 2. 3▪ expresseth not the manner how the Lord sanctified this day, whether by imparting any special virtue to it above other days, or by dedicating the same to any religious service to be performed by Adam in the state of innocence &c. You only affirm that it is one thing for God to sanctify a day, and another to command man to sanctify it, but show not the difference. But you would imply, as if the sensible refreshment of that day (in a gross sense) were the cause that made God, fall so far in love with it, where as both you and every man knows that there are no passions of wearisomeness and refreshment in God, that they should be meant by his resting; but that it is spoken ad captum vulgi for our better understanding.

1. To exemplarize unto us how that spiritual and heavenly employments should be a refreshing unto us in comparison of earthly employments; and so far we were capable of wearisomeness, even in innocence, at to have found other manner of refreshment in divine and spiritual things then in worldly affairs.

2. To signify the sensible refreshment and happy alteration, that we should have had in our heavenly rest, from the state and condition that we were in here on Earth.

But perchance you are of opinion with some, that think Adam should not have been translated, but have lived immortally upon Earth had he not fallen: But to this I answer, that by the curse which was annexed to the tree of knowledge, we may know e contrario, what manner of blessing was promised and intended by the tree of life, now the curse involued both the first and second death, here and in hell, so &c. And they indeed that are of this opinion must prove the Sabbath not to signify our rest in heaven, nor to be given in innocence.

As for your criticism in the Margin it is not worth the weighing: The substance of God's institution in those words being thus much: He blessed the seventh day, that is (saith Master Richard Byfield ) he appointed it to be a fountain of blessing to the observer • of that day, and sanctified it, that is, commanded it to be set apart by men from common businesses, and applied to holy uses.

Thus Calvin on the place, this blessing (saith he) was nothing else but a solemn consecration, whereby God claines to himself the studies and employments of men, on the seventh day.

Thus Master in his lectures upon the 51. Psalm pag. 704. saith, it is worth the observing that our Savior saith Mark 2. 27. That the Sabbath was at first made for Man, for the great been • it and behoove of Man. Man could not (no not Adam in innocence) have been without it but with great danger and loss unto him. So that the holy Ghost saith, that twice of the Sabbath Gen. 2. 3. and Exod. • 0. 11. that he never said of any other day. That the Lord blessed that day, that is, appointed it to be a mean of a greater blessing to man (if he keep it as God hath commanded him to do) then any other day, or any of the ordinary works of any other day can possibly be.

So Marius on Gen. 2. He blessed it, that is, he consecrated it to his blessing to be kept of men, and sanctified it, that is, not as if he stamped holiness upon it (as you would imply) but because he appointed it to his sanctification and praise, and to the holy conversation of men.

In short, He blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, that is, he digni •• ed it with this privilege above the six days, that it should be exempted from their profane and civil actions and negotiations, and dedicated to holy and sacred employments.

And now whereas you say that Adam should have observed God's example in innocence had he stood; I think so too▪ Wherein you mightily contradict yourself; for why should Adam imitate that, which even now you would have to be only an action in God, but of no exemplary use to man. But why should the Sabbath be useful to Adam in innocence (who was so perfect) and not much more useful to Adam in innocence (who was so perfect) and not much more useful to the Church of God after? I would fain know. But you go on and say, that Adam was thrust out Paradise, what then? God had his Church still which was principally respected by God in the giving of the Sabbath. As it is said in the 4. Hebr. 9. There remaineth a Sabbatism to the people of God, that is to his Church, for they are they which in the Scripture sense shall rest from their labors, and therefore was the Sabbath still in force though pethaps not in use; although they then, and we now ought to be so much the more careful to keep it, by how much we stand in need of the blessing of God, since the curse fallen upon our selves and the whole creation.

Broad.

Neither did he, or his posterity sanctify any Day in an holy rest a long time after for ought that we do certainly find, or may probably conjecture.

1 The Jews acknowledge that they do not read of Abraham's keeping the Sabbath, and I may add neither of any others keeping or breaking it, both before and a good while since Abraham's time, although we do read of Circumcision, Sacrifices and the breach of other Commandments together with punishments for the same.

2 Before the Israelites coming out of Egypt I find no mention of Weekes (which distinction of time the Sabbath causeth) as of Days Moneths and Yeares, whereas after their coming forth, and institution of the Sabbath mention is made as well of Weekes as of any other.

3 Tertullian's judgment is that Adam, Noah, Abraham, &c. kept not the Sabbath, and of the same opinion are many others, so Peter: on Gen. 2.

After that God had delivered the Israelites out of the Egyptian captivity (a figure of our deliverance from Satan's bondage) as he led them through the Wildernes towards the Land of Canaan (a Type of the Heavenly Paradise ) he gave them Manna to to eat, so that they did eat the same Spiritual meat with us, even the Lamb Christ Jesus, slain from the beginning of the World, who though he be not called the Tree of Life, yet terms himself the bread of Life that came down from Heaven. This Manna they gathered six Days; and on the seventh Day Moses commanded them to rest (for this Commandment was first given by the hand of Moses for ought that we do find in the Scriptures) and not long after God called it again to their remembrance: saying, Remember the Sabbath Day to sanctify it.

Answer.

The sum of this your objection is, that, nor Adam, nor his posterity, for anything we can find, santifyed the Sabbath day, till it was given the Israelites by the hand of Moses

To which I answer, that whether the Sabbath was observed, or not observed, yet notwithstanding it was of force. For 1. I ask, whether you think, those words of God's sanctifying the Sabbath in Innocency, were but a bare narration without any use or efficacy towards man? Yes say you, they were spoken to man as considered in Innocency, and had he still remained in Innocency then had he kept the Sabbath. Wherto I reply that there was nothing that was instituted to Adam before his Fall, but it was of force after his Fall, excepting such things from which he was expressly debarred by manifest voice of Scripture (by the curse and fiery sword) whereof the Sabbath is none.

Again I say if this Institution were proper only to the state of Innocency, how comes it to be renewed unto the Israelites? and that upon the primitive reason. Which indeed shows it to be a thing given unto his Church for special use, and to be coequal with the Law of Nature: for we see that so soon as God had chosen out of the world a remarkable and established Church, to which he renewed the Law of Nature; he also, as coincident there with, reneweth the Law of the Sabbath; including and determining, in this positive Commandment of the Sabbath, the Law of Nature: like as other Commandments in the Law directly forbid the actions of sins, inclusively the habits. 2. Exconcessis. Putting the case the Sabbath never was kept by the Patriarchs. I answer to it two things.

First that neither did they keep for the most part the Law of Marriage, for generally they lived in Polygamy, and yet was that Law of force even in their times, for one man to marry but one Woman. And therefore when the Pharisees alleged Moses his Law of Divorcement for the priviledging them to put away their Wives (which might better authorize their practice therein, then the Patriarchs omission can justify our neglect of the Sabbath ) but how did Christ answer them? saith he, how was it from the beginning? as who say, tell not me of Moses his Law, which you plead only to maintain your licentiousness, and which was only a concessary Law granted for the hardness of your hearts; but look beyond Moses at God, what he did in the state of Innocency, for that must be the rule of your practice. So say I, look not at the errors of the Patriarchs, to do what they did, when we have God's example to the contrary. Secondly that to draw an argument, de facto, from man's not keeping the Sabbath, against the right and institution of the Sabbath is improper: Especially if we consider man fallen, whereby the very Law of nature suffered, but doubtless the Sabbath being grounded upon the covenant of works, and having by the fall lost its virtue, being thereby made void, its Law was blotted out and quite raced, by the special hand and permission of God, and no wonder, seeing that even in innocence, nay and after his Fall too, during his abode in Paradise he remembered not to eat of the Tree of Life, where by he should have lived for ever, Gen: 3. 22. by a like secret but just work of God, (the cause we shall further see anon) being no Law of Nature, but a necessary improvement and determination of the Law of Nature in that particular, for the better accomodating Man for the public and more solemn service and worship of his Creator, (and therefore was renewed when God's Church came to be public and national:) as M. Breerwood implies from his observation upon the word Remember annexed: either (saith he) it is because it is not merely moral, and a Law of Nature as the others are, and therefore being not so effectually imprinted by Nature in the heart of man, needed a special admonition for the observance, least it should slip out of mind &c. as it seemeth it had done of a long time before, and therefore was renewed with a Memento, as who say, do thou remember to keep holy the seventh Day, which thy Fore-fathers have so long forgotten. Indeed it is evident that it was lost, and Adam despoiled of it by his Fall, because it was written in Moses his first Tables, which were broken and defaced by a Fall, to show the fruit of Adams fall; and renewed together with the rest of the Law in Moses his second Tables, to show that it suffered as well as the rest, they in the Conscience, it in the memory at the first ordaining them, and therefore is renewed together with the rest in the second, with a Memento prefixed, for this Memonto imports more then a bare Memorandum, even a different quality of this Law from the rest, else it was as requisite to have been prefixed to the second as to the fourth Commandment; considering the Israelites were as inclinable to Idolatry as they were averse from the Sabbath: see Deut. 31. 16. And as touching Circumcision and Sacrifices and the other Commandments, of the breach and punishment whereof, you say we read: I answer, that they were either the very Laws of Nature, or else Laws given since the Fall and upon that occasion (for so was Circumcision and Sacrifices) neither of which is the Sabbath. Not the Law of Nature (as I have said) for that is only to sanctify some indefinite time to the service of God, as it is likely all those did in that time of nature between Adam and Moses (where by the way take notice of the necessarines of the Sabbath to be in the nature of a Law, for the better performance of God's solemn worship, and not to be left at man's liberty) nor is it a Law instituted since the Fall, for its root groweth in Paradise; and therefore not of force with either in that time of little light; but lay dormant all that while, till it pleased God again to reveal his more solemn worship to his more solemn Church: And not without good reason too; for besides that our rest was lost by our Fall till our deliverer (tipified in Moses ) renewed it unto us the Sabbath was significative in its manner of exhibition, for during the time of the Covenant of works, we see how it was appointed in order after them, following the works foregoing, both in the primitive institution from God's own example, and also in the second exhibition of it to the Israelites, to signify and imply our Heavenly Sabbatism, then to be as well the reward of works, as cessation from works; and now the Covenant of Grace is come, it is made to precede the working Days, being celebrated now on the first Day of the Weeke, as before on the last, to signify that now Heaven is no longer, the reward of works (ex • ept in an Evangelica •• sense, and so we still rest from our Labors and our Works follow us) now who seeth not a special providence (like that of Adams not eating of the Tree of Life during his abode in Paradise implied, Gen. 3. • 2.) in the non ens of the Sabbath during the interim between the Fall and Moses, which was a time when the World (as the Apostle Paul saith) was without the Law, that is, without the Covenant of the Law openly revealed to them, as afterwards it was to Israel: so in the same sense, I may say too, it was without the Gospel, that is, without the Covenant of Grace openly revealed to them, as not it is to us; because therein it had been clouded and insignificative. Which signification Bishop White doth even now commend to us from the fourth Commandment: for (saith he) it is not now a Cypher, but the letter of the commandment figureth, representeth, and consequently teacheth, the leading of an holy and religious life, that we may at last enter the Rest of Heaven Heb. 4. 11. &c. Again I would ask you, where you find the breach of Wedlocke found fault withal for their multiplicity of Wives, or punishment executed therefore; which being no Law of nature, but a positive Law appointed in Innocency by God, as also was the Sabbath, not by instinct but by revelation, therefore in those times of darkness were they alike winked at by God, for herein they sinned not against any known commandment, (after Adams transgression) but of simple ignorance. And therefore as the Apostle speaketh, Sin was not imputed when there was no Law. Here by the way let me take in a passage of Dr. Heylins pag. 123. he saith, that the Jews thought the Sabbath to be no part of the Moral Law, because they brake it by Circumcision, as thinking Circumcision to be the older Ceremony, and therefore gave precedency to it (not because it was of Moses but of the Fathers) Nay (saith he) the Jews so far prized the one above the other, that by this breaking of the Sabbath they were persuaded verily they kept the Law.

These things he observes out of that text, John, 7. 22. Moses (saith Christ ) gave unto you Circumcision (not because it was of Moses but of the Fathers) and you on the Sabbath Day Circumcise a man, that the Law of Moses should not be broken. To this I answer. 1. That from this text it cannot be gathered that the Jews thought the Sabbath no moral Law (no more then that they can be said to think Christ's charitable a •• of healing the Sick man, to be no moral action because they persecuted him for it) or if they did, it was their willful blindness. For Christ makes it plain (that howsoever Circumcision might, and ought (as a part of God's service) be done no doubt on the Sabbath Day, when it fell out to be the eighth Day according to the Law) that it was their error, so to overvalew Circumcision out of their superstitious respect of Moses, who they made the Author of it to them above other Laws which are both in their Natures higher then that, and which also Moses gave them as well as that, as we see in the 19 verse of that Chapter: saith Christ there, Did not Moses give you a Law, and yet none of you keepeth the Law, by which is meant the Moral Law which commandeth Charity and Mercy, which is above Circumcision, and yet you quarrel with me for observing this Law of Moses or rather of God: and yet for all that are yourselves so nice in observing the performance of Circumcision for Moses his sake which is so far inferior. So in the 24 verse he exhorts them to consider it better; that if they might and ought to observe the ceremonial Law, on the Sabbath, by doing the works thereof, much more ought he to do the works of charity thereon, which are the duties of the Moral Law. 2 By the same rule he affirms the Jews not to believe the Weekely Sabbath to be a part of the Moral Law; he may affirm them not to believe the Sabbaths of Yeares to be any commandment of God at all; for a man may say of them in that case, as he saith in this, that surely had they believed them to be the Commandments of God, that could not b • affirmed of them which he saith Pag: 143. to wit, that they were long neglected, and almost forgotten if observed at all. 3. Neither did they prize Circumcision, as the ancienter Ceremony, because it was of the Fathers by anything that can be gathered from that text, for it means no such thing but the quite contrary. For Christ brings these words (not because it was of Moses but of the Fathers) in the way of Parenthesis in the 22 verse, to show them their error in setting so high a price upon Circumcision for Moses his sake, seeing Moses was not the first founder of it, but received it by derivation from the Fathers. So that the Jews blind conceit of Circumcision in comparison of the Sabbath (were it so as D ^r . Heylin allegeth) detracts no more from the morality of the Sabbath, being a mere misprision, then it did from Christ's act of Charity from being a moral action, which may serve a caution, not to make the Jews superstitious practices and blind conceits a rule and argument to regulate our doctrine and manners by, in this particular of the Sabbath; which is too much leaned upon by some, D ^r . Heylin for one, who in the beginning of his book layeth down this Maxim, that we can have no better Schoolmaster in the things of God, then the continual and most constant practice of those famous men that have gone before. Amongst which famous men he brings in the Jew▪ in their ignorant and superstitious practices, to overthrow God's clear precepts, and either shut out the light of the word, to wrest it to his own and other misguidance, as he doth the text aforesaid; which may yet be further seen in the third mistake which he makes in the interpretation of those words of Christ in the 23 verse (because I have made a man every whit whole on the Sabbath Day) which pag: 121. he makes to be spoken by Christ, in his own defense, in reference to the healing circumstances that accompanied their work of Circumcision, that if they might break the Sabbath, in healing the party hurt by Circumci • ion, so might he: whereas it is spoken by Christ in opposition to the grievous and hurtful nature of their action; for having formerly magnified his work above theirs from the cause, in that his work was an act of obedience to the Moral Law, and theirs but to the • eremoniall, here he magnifieth it also from the effect, in that his was an action of Mercy restoring to perfect health, and easing of grievous pain a man that was woefully bedrid; and theirs an action of blood procuring torment: (For where in all the Scriptue do you find the healing part of Circumcision) I mean carnally (meant or spoken of) I will conclude, in advice to such Expositors, both as touching their opinion of the Sabbath and expounding Scripture, as Christ did to the Jews concerning this matter, in the 24 verse, Judge not according to appearance but Judge righteous Judgment. Now whereas, you say that this Commandment of the Sabbath was first given to the Israelites, when they were delivered out of Egypt by the hand of Moses, intimating hereby as if it should be a Jewish Type and Ceremony, and as if it should have reference to Christ after the manner of their other abrogative Ceremonies. To this I answer. That all the rest of the Moral Law was given them upon their deliverance as well as the Sabbath. And I do think indeed, that God did purposely take that occasion, the better to signify their spiritual deliverance by the concurrence of those things, both by bringing them out of their Egyptian darkness, and at the same time making the Sun-shine of his Law (which had been so ecclypsed ever since the fall) afresh to rise upon them.

But that the Law of the Sabbath received then a new Institution is no way probable, but only a renewed one, as did the rest of the Moral Law into which it is incorporated, and with which it was a share • in the breach that Adam made, And as may also appear by the tenor of the Commandment itself, which for substance is nothing else but the first institution largely repeated, only being better explained to the understandings, and suited to the condition of those people.

Nor again is the Sabbath a Jewish Type, as appears from the difference of their significations, for the Typs of the Jews primarily and principally had relation to the State of the Church on Earth under the time of the Gospel, and secondarily or remotely to its State in Heaven; but now the Sabbath had an immediate and proper respect to Heaven, being God's rest, as appears both in the manner of God's exhibiting it in the wilderness, as you may see in due place, and in the 4. Heb.

But if it be objected that Canaan is a Jewish Type, and that Canaan and the Sabbath signify both of them one and the same rest in that 4. Heb.

I answer. They do signify the same rest but in different respects, for Canaan properly there signifieth the Rest which we here enjoyed on Earth through the Gospel, and improperly or analogically the Rest of Heaven, relating only thereto, as True to perfect, as Beatitudo viae to Beatitudo patriae; but the Sabbath properly signifieth the rest that God rested in Heaven from his worldly works, and which now by believing we shall rest with him there, and improperly signifies the Gospel-rest here on Earth, relating only to it as Perfect relates to True as Beatitudo Pat • iae relates to Beatitudo viae, by virtue of our exchanged condition; for what the Law could not give, that is, any present Rest but all in future, that Faith as a Gospel-privilege procures us. So that we which do believe do enter into Rest, even this Heavenly Rest inchoatively. The sum of the Apostles meaning there being thus much, that Israel (according to to the letter) not knowing the way of the Lord, chap. 3. ver. 10. but cleaving to the Law (which was the ministration of death, graven in stones, that is a weak and dead letter, 2. Cor. 3▪ 7. and the ministration of condemnation ver: 9.) forsaking the way of faith, and the Gospel (which is the ministration of the spirit of Power, 2. Cor. 3. 8. and of righteousness ver: 9.) they therefore lost through unbelief, both the spiritual Rest on Earth, typified by the temporal rest of Canaan, which is the rest and tranquility of the Soul entered into by faith, justifying us, and procuring us Peace with God, which should have redounded to them by the Preaching of the Gospel (see the 2 and 6 of this 4. Heb. ) and also the Rest and Sabbath in in Heaven which God himself rested, and signified on the seventh Day after his worldly works were finished, which should have ensued and followed thereupon (see the later part of the 3. and 4. verses) whereof we, that are God's spiritual Israel, that do believe, are possessed already; both virtually, in our high Priest Christ Jesus verse. 14. and personally in ourselves, by being partakers of this Gospelrest through faith on Earth, which essentially conduces or relates to the Sabbath-rest in Heaven (compare the beginning and the ending of the 3. verse.) Like as 5. Matth. 6. they are said for present to be blessed that but hunger and thirst after righteousness, and whats the reason, why, saith Christ they shall be filled: Christ means they are entered into such an estate, as doth give them right, and will bring them to full blessedness; They are therefore for present truly blessed because they shall be fully blessed: So here in this 4. Hebr. this Gospel-rest and Sabbath-rest are interwouen, being continuous and of the same nature, relating one to another as true and perfect do. So that, I say, the Apostle means, that God sware, that for their unbeleefes sake, they should not taste nor partake, neither his rest on Earth in the Land of Canaan flowing with milk and honey, and where with rejoicing hearts, they should liberally have eaten the good things of the Land; (idest ) the rest of the Gospel, making their souls flow with the milk and honey of peace of conscience and joy in the holy Ghost, and wherein are bid to come, and eat that which is good, and to drink the wine on the lees, and to fill themselves with marrow and fat things the spiritual Israel of God: Neither that rest, by which God himself rested from his works of creation verse 4. and which they also should have rested with him in Heaven, when all things were or should be finished by consummation, verse 3. as once they were by perfection.

By their unbelief they made themselves uncapable both of the rest of Christ here, who should have led their souls into a land of uprightness, flowing with the milk and honey of righteousness, peace and joy in the holy Ghost, and of the rest of God hereafter, that everlasting rest and Sabbath, which they should have held with him in Heaven, resting from their works as he did from his. They should partake neither the one nor the other, neither Christ's rest nor God's, indeed no rest at all, neither temporal spiritual nor eternal, neither Canaan's rest, nor the Gospels rest, nor the Sabbaths rest; For verse 3. God sware in his wrath, that they should nor enter into his rest, no not although the works were finished from the foundation of the World, neither beginning nor end, less nor more, first nor last of his rest should they taste or partake of by the works of the Law, refusing the righteousness of God by faith; For he enlargeth his enraged malediction from one part to the whole rest. And thus much Mayer expresseth in short, in his exposition of the 12. and 13. verses of this 4. Hebr. saying, that those words cohere with the former thus, Let us take heed that we perish no • for want of believing the word, being deprived of inward rest and peace here, and shut out from the eternal rest hereafter, For the word of God is full of life, &c.

And here note by the way from those words (although the works were finished from the foundation of the World in the third verse) how the Sabbath keeps and is expressed in its supereminency (which it had before, in its preferment to a place among the 10. commandments, and precedency of rest in the wilderness) for what do they signify, but that they should not partake of his last and greatest rest hereafter with himself in heaven, no more then of his less and present rest of Canaan and the Gospel.

Likewise also it appea • es, • o be no Jewish type, from the different relations they had to Christ: For the Jewish types did relate to him properly as the shadow to the body being created for his sake, but the Sabbath (as the Law) accidentally to be fulfilled and accomplished by him, because they had miscarried by us. And in this doth the supereminency of the Sabbath appear, in that Christ for himself as well as for us is a sharer in this types signification; For in respect of this rest, is he said to sit now at God's right hand, by which gesture signifying rest, is intimated, as well his resting from the labors and pains he underwent here, as any other thing, for whereas he had the evil and we the good of other types, of this he tasteth the sweet as well as we. And therefore he saith to his Disciples, If ye loved me, ye would rejoice because I go to my Father. Indeed Christ only inherited the last day Sabbath, according to the first covenant, and hath left the first day Sabbath for us to inherit by the second covenant.

But you will say, surely there cannot choose but be somewhat in it, that the Sabbath was instituted by Moses upon the occasion of Manna, as it appears in the 16. of Exod. before God gave the moral Law on mount Sinai.

I acknowledge, though the Sabbath be of a transcendent nature to the other types, yet as all other things so also the Sabbath hath reference to Christ, in regard of the state of the Church since the fall: For as now the whole moral Law is fulfilled by Christ for us, and therefore was given upon their deliverance out of their Egyptian bondage: so also is the Sabbath, in its celestial signification, made good to us now by a new accomplishment, to wit, only by Christ: He it is now that doth only make us righteous in the sight of God, and he also it is that now alone maketh us partakers of the rest of God; For as they were to enjoy and feed upon Manna in Heaven with rest; so they were to have this rest by Manna (id est ) Christ.

And therefore I confess that there is very much matter in it; that thus the Sabbath doth precede the giving of the Law (like as there was in God's giving the promise to Abraham before circumcision Rom. 4. 11. ) and doth also follow so immediately the gathering of Manna (and that a double portion of Manna ) for hereby is signified, how that now our heavenly rest is not procured by our own righteousness of the Law (though once it was annexed to it) but that he only, who by faith doth gather, and lay up a large proportion of Christ, shall certainly have this Sabbatism of everlasting rest in Heaven succeed unto him, See. Rom. 5. 17. (and for the very self same cause it is, that now our Sabbath is celebrated after the day of Christ's resurrection) See also Doctor Taylor in his Christ revealed pag. 268. where he saith, that Manna fell on the evening of the Sabbath in a double quantity, signifying the double diligence that we must use to get Christ while we are in this life, which is as the even of our eternal Sabbath. And that upon condition of our diligence and care here below, we shall have supply enough of all grace without labor and gathering, when Christ shall be all in all to all Israel gathered unto him.

So that, I say, the duty of the Sabbath followed as a Law, together with the Law, for us always to observe, and that the signification of it went before, to signify that our claim to this heavenly Sabbatism is now only by Christ.

And thus you may see, how you have laid your foundation upon a false ground or principle, by mistaking the Sabbaths, signification, and in what manner it referreth to Christ.

And thus by consequence your whole building falleth to the ground, although it be granted that the Sabbath is both typical, and ( rebus sic stantibus ) hath relation to Christ also.

Broad.

What God requireth on the Sabbath.

THe duties which God required of the people of Israel, on the Sabbath were two especially.

Answer.

By the first of these duties you seem to me to insinuate a Dilemma, intimating by it that either the Sabbath is merely Jewish, or else that in all respects both of the duty and strictness of rest it belongeth to us as to them. Which strictness you prove by comparing it with the other Sabbaths, which had only servile work forbidden in them. The proof I grant, and the thing • roved. But that the Sabbath is therefore only Jewish, or that we are bound so to observe it, I deny upon these grounds.

1. I deny that therefore the Sabbath is only Jewish. 1. Because that though this strict rest was typical, yet not properly Jewish, because not of the same nature with Jewish types: For that those which were properly types in a Jewish sense, had relation to Christ's and the constitution of his Church, as considered properly and primarily upon Earth in its militant being, in the time of grace during Christ's regiment: but the signification typified in this rest was of a different nature, for propetly it signified the Church triumphant in Heaven it self; which typical difference may easily appear, only by comparing this Sabbath with the other Sabbaths as shall be seen anon; And secondly, because that this strict rest was no part of the substance of the Sabbath, but only an occasional circumstance proper for the season of their prer • grination; For so sooone as Manna failed that strict rest failed, so that you never after knew them condemned for providing their necessary food on the Sabbath-day, although you find them often complained on for other breaches.

2. And although that thus I deny this strict rest to be properly Jewish, yet I deny it not to be proper only to the Jews, but affirm it, both in respect of the duty of this rest, as also in respect of the preciseness of it. 1. For the duty of this rest, I say that, that was proper to the Jews, and not to us now; Because that types in the time of their Discipline carried with them a positive holiness, being (for its continuance) ordinances and not accidents: But now that external religion which consisted in types, is properly no part of our worship (although the thing it self (in this particular being a perpetual type) remaineth in the use and signification of it, but as I say not in its temporary holiness or occasional preciseness (for the Kingdom of Heaven now consists in righteousness, peace and joy in the holy Ghost, and not in typical sanctions.

For we must understand that the Sabbath, in it self considered without accidents was of a perpetual typical meaning, intending the absolute rest that should be to the Church of God in Heaven, as is notoriously evident in the fourth of Hebr. by comparing the 4. verse with the 9. and 10. For which cause it may well be conceived to be holy, even with an external holiness, as other types were, in the minority of those typical times, in respect of the bare rest therein commanded; which yet in that sense is no part of our sanctification (for our sanctification, in respect of this rest, properly consisteth in the signification thereof spiritualized in our hearts, and in the privative sense thereof; because our resting from worldly affairs is a necessary privative means to our sanctifying the Sabbath ) Like as (in the Antitype) our rest in Heaven it self from Worldly works will be then no part of our positive happiness, but only a privative help to our absolute glorifying God there, as it is to our better sanctifying of the Sabbath here.

And yet for all this (as I have said before) not to rest on that day, but to employ ourselves worldlily, in inward or outward works of mind or body, in thought word or deed, • ill prove our sin, For because hereby we both falsify our present duty which we owe to the commandment, which enjoineth it us as a significant privative means for sanctifying the Sabbath, and also make void the useful signification of the typical sense, which consisteth in our resting from all Worldly affairs, that we may the more fully devote ourselves to things spiritual and heavenly, such as are praising God, meditating of the life and rest to come &c. for of that nature shall be our heavenly employment, We know the Israelites separation from the heathen, did not make them the true Israel of God, for they were made such only by their faithful and true serving of God; and yet if they intermixed themselves with the heathen it was a profanation and sin unto them: So a cessation or separation of the Sabbath-day from Worldly employments is no positive part of our sanctifying the Sabbath (though it might be in the time of the Jews) for that our sanctification consisteth in Spirit and truth, not in the literal and outward performance of rest, and yet must we of necessity and duty cease that we may sanctify it. For it is with the Lord's-day as with all other things, that if it be sanctified to the end, then it is sanctified to the means: And as the Scripture saith, a man cannot serve God and Mammon especially on this Day, but we should utterly forsake the one, that we may more completely cleave to the other: By Mammon I mean, as well our carnal pleasures all profits, for on that day (according to the Anti-type) all should be heavenly; If ever we did the will of God as it is done in heaven, it should be on that day.

And as Master Hildersham observes Lect. 51. Psalm pag. 710. God hateth rioting on the Sabbath, much more then he doth working on the Sabbath: as it is plain by Isaiah 58. 13. where in one verse he names and forbids twice the following of our pleasures, as the chief profanation of the Sabbath-day. If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on mine holy-day, and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable, and shalt honor him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words &c.

But Bishop White pag. 257. objects against Sunday Sabbatizers precepts (as he calleth them) concerning the crying down of carnal recreations, and setting up spiritual duties to be actually and without intermission continued the whole space of a natural day, which saith he can be no branch of the Law of Christ, nor yet consentaneous thereunto, for this reason: Because the Law of Christ is sweet and easy, Matth. 11. 30. and his commandments are not grievous, 1. John. 5. 3.

I answer, I never knew that this was to be expounded after the flesh, but after the Spirit: By the same rule he may cry down all fasting, all abstaining from beloved lusts, and heavenly mindedness now under the Gospel, and quite blot out the Apostles advice, to use the things of this World as if we used them not.

But may some say, if rest be no part of sanctifying the Sabbath, how then are we said to sanctify it at night when we go to bed?

Not that your rest is any sanctification of it, no more then your spiritual labor is a breach of it, but because that in so doing, thou dost an act of mercy to thy body when thou sleepest, as well as when thou eatest at due times, & in a due measure: And indeed thou oughtest to do it with this or some such like consideration, and not merely sensually as an ox or an asse, for God should have special glory by everything we do that day; And whatsoever we do, without a special and spiritual relation to God on that day, that may properly be called our work, and so our sin: For though things necessary be lawful to be done, yet not as on the week day, but with much more spiritualized affections and heavenly mindedness.

2. For the preciseness of the rest which you here speak of, I also affirm that that was proper only to the Jews (as also to that time of their preregrination in the wilderness) and not to us, for because it was no part of the substance of the commandment or Sabbath, but only an adventitious or temporary circumstance (for illustration sake) begun and ended in the wilderness.

For the Jews being a people in their time under a typical discipline, God chose that time and this occasion of feeding them with Manna in the wilderness (which the Scripture calleth Angels food because it came so immediately from Heaven) the more clearly to exemplify the lively signification of the Sabbaths rest, which being always typical, should be much more so in their time; For they having other Sabbaths commanded them with strict rest, this must be imposed upon them with stricter rest; else they should not learn its proper meaning and difference: And for this cause did he command it with so much strictness at that time, even to their not gathering nor preparing Manna (when as yet their other Sabbaths were commanded them with liberty to make ready what they should eat) the better to testify the different nature, and eminent signification of that Sabbath above the other; For the rest of the Jewish Sabbaths were not so absolute, because they were only appointed to signify the rest which every believer, and the whole Church hath here by Christ on Earth▪ to wit, a rest but an interrupted rest, like to their rest in the Land of Canaan, not absolute, but interrupted and of a mixed nature, in regard of such things which are necessary to befall us in this life; whereas the weekly Sabbath signified the rest which the company of believers should have in Heaven (as it is in the fourth of Hebr. 9. There remaineth a rest therefore to the people of God) which is absolute and without any mixture, because that in Heaven we shall be at God's immediate finding, as they were th • n whilst they were in the wilderness, but never after.

And therefore did so much of that rest, as wherein it surpassed the other Sabbaths, cease for after time both to them and us, because that God ceased to rain Manna, which gave life to that circumstance of strict rest, commanded them at that time. (So that Doctor Heylins observation pag. 145. How that after their return from the Babylonish captivity, in their redress of their Sabbath sins, they had no less care of the annual Sabbaths, and Sabbaths of years, then of the weekly; and the markets were no more restrained on the weekly Sabbath then on the annual, might have been spared, as making nothing for his purpose.)

And therefore so to rest now in our days, as not to provide our necessary food, seeing God ceaseth to rain Manna were to create types to ourselves, and to cloud that light with a veil of our own making: For the extraordinary strict rest was by God then only commanded, when by him they were extraordinarily accommodated to observe it, which shall be fulfilled only in Heaven, when again we shall only be at God's immediate finding, and shall again eat Angel food as they did in the wilderness. Saith Doctor Tailor, the not gathering Manna on the Sabbath signified, that in that eternal Sabbath we shall enjoy Manna without means.

So that in the mean time we are not forbidden to be charitable to our bodies by preparing necessary food. Although I could wish with all my heart, that we were more charitable to the souls of our servants, then many of us are, and not on that day so to pamper our bodies, as to starve their souls that are under our charge, and for whom we must give account; especially if we consider that other meaning which God had, in prohibiting the gathering and preparing Manna on the Sabbath-day, so much inculcated by divines, to wit, that it is not earthly but heavenly Manna, that is, the food and welfare of our souls, which on that day our appetite ought chiefly to stand to, as we see by the example of Christ's Disciples, Matth 12. 1.

And that this strict rest was only proper to that season, and not to us, I further prove it by two contexts

The first is out of the 16. Exod. 29. compared with the 27. where when the people went to gather Manna contrary to God's commandments, Moses rebuked them saying: Behold how the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you bread for two days, tarry therefore every man in his place, let no man go out of his place (to wit, to gather Manna ) on the seventh day; where we see the reason of that extraordinary rest was because of God's extraordinary provision, so that when the one ceased the other which depended on it ceased also.

The second place is Numb. • 5. 32. where it is said, that (whilst the children of Israel were in the wilderness) they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath-day; mark the phrase (whilst they were in the wilderness) how it seems to restrain that strict kind of rest to that place and that time, for many worse breaches were made after they were out of the wilderness, and yet no such punishment inflicted.

Besides it is a rule, that every moral duty may be performed of all men, but under the North-Pole they cannot be one day without fire, and they near the equinoctiall cannot keep their meat for heat, therefore this cannot take place among them, and so not general to all, nor perpetual to be observed forever.

Whereas some interpret, that Law of the Israelites not kindling fires, to be meant in relation to the building of the Tabernacle, which though in it self it be true, that being one end happily of that inhibition; yet it is not the only meaning of that Law, for they were not to bake nor seeth their food on that day, as appears Exod. 16. 23. as also by the example of the man that was stoned for gathering sticks on the Sabbath-day, which it is propable was not for the Tabernacles use, but to bake, seeth or warm some food, neither was it lawful for them to kind •• fires after the Tabernacle was finished, during their abode in the wilderness. But there are others that interpret those words of Exod. 16. 23. ( Bake 〈◊〉 ye will bake today, and seeth that ye will 〈◊〉 ) in this manner, that is say they, bake and boil according as you use to do, what you think sufficient for the present day, and for the rest let it be laid up to be baked or boiled tomorrow. Which 〈◊〉 be the meaning for these reasons.

1. Because of the example of the man aforesaid, that was stoned for gathering sticks, it is probable, to that end.

2. 〈…〉 the difference between this Sabbath and their other Sabbaths would be confounded, whereas they were distinctly in express terms allowed to make ready what they should eat.

And thirdly, because it would have clouded the significancy of their gathering and preparing a large proportion of Christ, to assure them of the Sabbatism to come.

And fourthly, because when the Sabbath day came Moses in the 25. verse of 16. Chap. said not as before in the 23. verse • , Bake that ye will bake today, and seeth that ye will seeth, But he saith, only eat that today, to wit, which they had laid up baked or sodden since the day before.

And fifthly, Those words bake what ye will bake today, and seeth what ye will seeth; and that which remaineth, lay it up, is not meant in respect of the indifferency of proportion, as if he had said bake what proportion and seeth what proportion ye think good; and lay up the rest raw; but it respects the indifferency of their cooking it, intimating that they might either bake it and seeth it, or bake it or seeth it as their fancy liked best, so that they did it on that day before the Sabbath, for on the Sabbath they were not to alter the property, but to eat what they had le •• , as they left it. In this new-sangled fancy you shall find Doctor 〈…〉 Brahourne agreed, part. I. pag. 100. 101. where to back this exposition Doctor Heylin object • , that it were no wonder if being baked it purified not.

To which I answer, that the wonder was that 〈…〉 kept it until the morning 〈…〉 to the command) 〈…〉 either raw or baked, a great deal longer time without putrifying: Though it having the formerly 〈…〉 first (which among so many it is like was reserved of all sorts, some raw, some baked, some boiled all which yet purified alike) it was then indeed a wonder, that it did not the like the second time when they kept it lawfully; which showeth that it was of God, and not of the nature of the thing, both that it putrefied the first time, and that it putrefied not the second time that it was kept. But to put this upstart exposition utterly out of question, besides the reasons aforesaid: Let them compare the 23. verse with the 5. verse whither Moses relates, and there they shall find God commanding them to prepare that which they bring in on the 6. day; and what was that? why it followeth, twice so much as they gather daily. So that they were to prepare all they brought in, and they brought in all they gathered, and they gathered twice as much as they gathered on the other days. So that in sum▪ it is evident that on the sixth day they were to prepare, that is to cook, or make ready by seething or baking the whole double proportion which they had gathered on that day.

Nor is it without ground (as you affirm) to say, of this man's gathering sticks, that his manner of doing it did aggravate his offense, for there are these grounds to induce it.

1. Because, if it had been necessary, it had not been unlawful, no more then David's eating the Shew-bread, for Christ saith in this very case of the Sabbath, That God will have mercy and not Sacrifice.

2. It is more then probable by the context, that his Sin was out of Presumption; for in the verses immediately foregoing it is said, He that doth ought presumptuously shall be cut off from his people, and then followeth the instance of this man's fact, as it were an example of this fault and this punishment, which we never read afterwards to be inflicted upon any.

3. We find no excuse he made for his fact, so that it either was not necessary; or if necessary, yet occasioned by his willful and careless neglect of making his Manna ready the day before, according to the Commandment and so not excusable.

Now as touching your marginal consideration, how that the Sabbath was ordained in memorial of God's resting.

To this I answer, That we do not celebrate on the Sabbath the memory of God's bare resting, no more then we do Christ's bare rising; but we celebrate the consummation of the work of God's goodness in the Creation, and of his Mercy in our Redemption, for God's resting on that Day from the Creation, was no part of the Sabbaths sanctification, but a cause in him why he appointed the seventh Day to be a sanctified Sabbath unto us; no more then Christ's Resurrection on the first Day of the Weeke was a part of the sanctification of that Day, but only the cause why we sanctify it, or dedicate it to Rest and Divine employment ever since.

And therefore in vain doth B. White object p. 302. that Christ's Resurrection was no Commandment containing an institution of a new Sabbath, in that he erringly saith (as elsewhere I show) that it was not spent in resting but in action; seeing saith he, the ground of the old Sabbath was Rest. But we do not simply celebrate God's rest; but his Rest or accomplishment of our Creation, as it hath relation to us, not as that rest simply respecteth God, for so it is, meant only as a pattern, and serves as an occasion to beget this ordinance of the Sabbath, as we may see by the manner of expression that is used to set forth the Sabbaths first institution, Gen. 2. 2. 3. where God's rest is not only mentioned to be on the seventh Day, but also his completing the work of Creation verse. 2. upon both which jointly, followeth the institution of the Sabbath verse. 3. and as we may also see by the prophecy in Isai. 65. 17. where the commemoration of the benefit of one Creation shall eat out the other.

Indeed God's resting the seventh Day was of twofold use. The one of illustration, for thereby was signified the Rest of God's Church in Heaven, as appeareth in the 4 of Heb. The other was to give us an example of retiring ourselves from earthly things on that Day, that so we might devote it to his glory: for this Resting of God was only set as an example for us to imitate, the better to obey his Commandment.

But more are willing to observe his example, then to obey his precept, that is, to cease from bodily labor; then to be spiritually employed in the sanctifying of that Day, by making it a Day of holy businesses, and consequently a day of blessing. Thus using their Rest either swinishly or superstitiously as the Jews did theirs

But such ought to know that God's example in resting, was not the sum of his commandment concerning the Sabbath, nor the proper duty enjoined therein, but only the occasion of his Commandment, and a means appointed for the fulfilling of it, as appeareth in the tenor of the fourth Commandment, where it is said that because God rested the seventh Day from the work of Creation, Therefore he blessed the seventh Day and hallowed it.

What you say of the second Duty, is true, both in the letter and in your meaning, as I conceive it; except you mean that the sanctifying of the Sabbath consisteth only of the time of public Duties, which I cannot believe you do, because you speak of private, as well as public worship: and again because of your adjuration prefixed to your Treatise.

Herein you give an Answer to some of your Partizans, as B. White pag. 140. &c. and Dr. Heylin. pag. 113. 114. who saith, that two things the Lord commanded concerning the keeping holy of the Sabbath. The one in relation to the people which was to rest, and the other in reference to the Priests which was to offer sacrifice, but of any Sabbath duties which were to be performed between them jointly (saith he) we find not. And again (saith he) of any reading of the Law, or exposition of the same unto the people, or public form of prayers to be presented to the Lord in the Congregation, we find no footestep till Nehemiah's days, after their return out of the Babylonish captivity. And again though resting from work •• were a thing commanded, yet (saith he) the employment of this Rest to particular purposes, either of contemplation or devotion, that is not declared unto us in the word of God, but left at large to the liberty of the people. So also Bishop White pag: 144. saith. That there should be any public or solemn reading or expounding of the Law, every Weekely Sabbath Day, is not expressly required and commanded in the Pentateuch, And again he saith Pag: 146. After the captivity the Jews frequented their Synagogues upon the Sabbath Days, and Moses was read: but (saith he) this was not commanded in the Decalogue, or by any express sentence or Mandat of Moses Law.

Answer. These Antisabbatarians discover a strange partiality, for where as they jeer others, for their too precisely calling for a Scriptum est for the proof of every circumstance; yet now when the point comes in issue for themselves, they fly to the same way of argumentation, Non invenimus, non scriptum est.

And yet in the practice of our Church, there are some things for which not having express Scripture, we lawfully build them upon proper deductions; as for Baptizing of Children; we find in Scripture that the Apostles Baptized whole Families, amongst which say we, its most likely there were some Children.

But in this matter of the Sabbath, no consequences must be allowed by our Antisabbatarians. There must be nothing but a bare rest commanded by God to the People, no private contemplation nor public devotion; although (as M. Broad saith) God required as a special Duty on the Sabbath to have an holy Convocation (and so it is expressly called Levite. 23. 3.) for it was not enough, saith he, to worship God privately, but they must go to the Assemblies and praise him in the Congregation: Idleness being unlawful at all times. And indeed if God may be suffered to tell his own meaning, we find it plain enough what he meant (which sure must be his command, else the Jews erred not in seeking salvation and life by the right cousnes of the Law, though God meant it as a • choolemaster to bring the unto Christ) Isa • ah 58 13 where he saith, If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my Holy Day, and call the Sabbath a delight, the Holy of the Lord, hon • rabble, and shalt honor him not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words, then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, &c. which showeth us the meaning of those words of the Commandment, Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath Day, and the end of that Rest which in the following words of the Commandment is enjoined, which (as the other Commandments) implied more then is expressed. And Bishop White saith pag. 146. That some other religious actions were intended by God as the end of the precept, notwithstanding that no other, but Rest, was formally commanded. If then religious actions were the end of God's command, surely then rest must be properly enjoined as the subordinate means usefully and significantly conducing to fulfill that end. And what a perversencs this showeth in men to dispute upon Chimeraes, and to frame ac • y arguments of supposition • s in matter of fact among the Jews, when God's purpose (which ought to give meaning to his Laws, and to sway our judgments) is both known and acknowledged.

Which place of Isaiah Dr. Heylin pag: 174 will have to signify a spiritual Sabbath in abstaining from doing evil, which in the Page foregoing he saith was figured unto us in the fourth Commandment. But it is apparent that the works and pleasures there prohibited are so our own, as that we have intimated a liberty to use them at another time which is our own, though not at this time which is so especially and extraordinarily God's, so as the employment of that time ought to be God's in like manner (like as the works mentioned in the fourth Commandment, are such as may be done on the six Days though not on the seventh) but the employments and pleasures of Sin we have no liberty to own and use as ours.

And had he consulted, Bishop Hall in locum, he might have been better informed of the true meaning of this text, who thus senses it. If thou shalt refrain thy foot from walking (far or servdely) on the Sabbath, and refrain thyself from doing thine own works, or taking thine own carnal pleasures on my holy day, and shalt contrarily take delight in a conscionable sanctifying of that Day of the Lord, as that which is by thee accounted a Day of consecration to the Lord, and worthy of great reverence and honor &c. Wherein he gives Bishop White the shock Pag: 232. who saith, That honest and moderate recreations were not forbidden either in the Law, or in the Prophets in literal and express terms (for no other will be allowed) as also Pag: 237, saith he, I find no formal or express prohibition either in the text of the fourth Commandment, or in any other sentence of Moses Law simply restraining the Jews and Israelites from the use of honest recreations upon their Weekly Sabbath Day.

Besides, we find the Levites were dispersed abroad throughout all the Tribes, and so were many of the Priests among the People, whose office it was to teach the Children of Israel the difference between clean and unclean things, and all the Statutes which the Lord had spoken by the hand of Moses. Levite. 10. 11. So that it was their office to teach the People (whether with the book of the Law or without it I will not dispute) but as it was their office to teach, so it was the Peoples duty to learn, which was the fittest to be performed, on both parts, on holy times (appointed to that end by God for holy Convocations) and accordingly we find the practices of the religious Shunamite to be, who (it seems by her Husbands question) was wont to make the new Moon and Sabbath Day the ordinary times of her repairing to the Prophet, for the due celebration of them. And though it fall out for her to be named alone, yet it is like it was the practice of others also that feared God (though perchance through corruption of manners among the Jews there was no order taken for solemn meetings) to repair and meet together, for the celebration of those times, according as they could most conveniently accommodate themselves for that purpose.

And to mend the matter D. Heylin Pag: 141 bringeth the authority of Gaudentius Brixianus and Cyril against himself making them speak thus. The Jews (saith Gaudentius ) neglecting those spiritual Duties which God commanded on that Day, abused the Sabbaths rest unto ease and Luxury. For whereas (saith Cyril ) they being free from temporal cares ought to have employed that Day to spiritual uses, and to have spent the same in modesty and temperance and in repetition and commemoration of God's holy word, they on the other side did the contrary wasting the Day in Gluttony and Drunkenness and idle delicacies.

Moreover by his Rule we should think the Levites sanctified no Sabbath, neither the Priests that were scattered among the People. 1. Because we find nothing thereof recorded. 2. By this rule of separation of Priest and People, they should indeed have nothing to do towards it, for they did not officiate in the duty of sacrificing, nor were they Laicke People to whom rest was commanded. Neither should we believe that Prophecy of Simeon and Levi (I will divide them in Jacob and scatter them in Israel ) to be performed as concerning Simeon, because we find not to our understandings how he was scattered, as we do of Levi. But it is enough for sober minds to know, that now we are ignorant of many things in circumstance that were clear to them that lived in those times.

But saith D. Heylin Pag: 148. &c. They had no Synagogues therefore they had no Congregations before Nehemiah's time.

To which I answer, That Godwins opinion is, that they had Synagogues before, even so soon as the Tribes were settled in the promised Land: but that they were in David's time (saith he) appeareth Psal: 74. 8. where it is said That they burnt up all the Synagogues of God in the Land, which D ^r . Heylin answers Pag: 149. and saith. This was but a Prophecy or prediction of David touching the future State of the Church under Antiochus.

To which I rejoyne. That it is true, that this is Prophetically spoken by David, but it is likely that David (as other Prophets were wont to do) took his hint from things in present being to express future events and things by: like as one saith of Similies, Parables, and Examples, that have been alleged by the wise, to represent the truth, that they have been derived from the custom and nature of things, according to the known truth in that Time an Place. But put case they had no Congregations before the Captivity, nor did not celebrate the Sabbath spiritually in holy employments, but carnally in mere Rest, what doth this advantage D. Heylin and his party or damnify the Sabbath? seeing that D. Heylin himself Pag: 143. confesseth that the breach of the Weekly Sabbath was one cause of their Captivity, and proves it also Neh: 13. 18. who also (he confesseth) were a people so averse to the due observation of the Sabbath, as that when God had brought them again out of Captivity into the Land of Canaan, and hereupon they had bound themselves by Covenant to a due observation of the Sabbath, yet notwithstanding when Nehemiah's back was turned they brake promise with God Pag: 145. an unfit People to make a president: who also (by his own confession) were as regardless of annual Sabbaths and Sabbaths of years. Pag: 143. as of Weekely Sabbaths. And again seeing that after their return from their Captivity, the truly religious seeing these Sabbath-sins reformed them (which is the time that we are to take notice of them, for the better and not for the worse,) and then we see all these imaginary arguments confuted by their practice: for then when they saw their error and had • marted for it, they turned over a new leaf, then they made them plenty of Synagogues, and holy convocations, and the Law read and expounded, and the Statutes of the Lord taught them accordingly as it was the Priests and Levites duty; all which shows what they should have done before they were led captive, and therefore if they did it not at all, or if but a few of them were disposed after this manner to keep the Sabbath before the Captivity, the greater was their Sin, and the more they deserved to be punished of God as they were, and the less to be regarded of us, who ought to be followers of men and esteemers of men as they are followers of God.

Hereunto I will annex and abstract of Mr. Hildershams upon this point of sanctifying the Sabbath hanled in his Lectures upon 51. Psal. Lect. 135. which though long yet not tedious to a Godly reader because profitable. It is (saith he) a singular good thing to be strict in the observation of the Sabbath, and such a thing as God is highly pleased with, and hath been wont to reward wheresoever he finds it. To keep a bodily rest upon that Day from all our own works, is but one particular that is required of us in the observation of the Sabbath, nay that is (as I may say) but the outside of the Commandment, and concerneth only the outward man, the outward and bodily observation of it. Of the fourth Commandment, (as well as of the rest) that may be truly said which the Apostle speaks Rom. 7. 14 of the whole Law. We know (saith he) that the Law is spiritual. The spiritual observation of it by the inward man when we call the Sabbath a delight, the Holy of the Lord, honorable as the Prophet speaketh Isaiah 58. 13. That is when we can joy in that Day, as in the Lord's own Holy Day, and esteem it in our Hearts a far greater and more honorable Day then any other Day, keeping the rest and performing the Duties of the Day cheerfully, reverently, conscionably, spiritually. This spiritual observation of it I say by the inward man is the chief thing that God requireth of us in the fourth Commandment, the outward and bodily observation of it (which may be performed by a man that hath no truth of Grace in him at all) is nothing in God's account in comparison of this. And yet of this bodily observation of the Sabbath by the outward man, the resting from our own works is but the least part. The exercising of ourselves upon that Day in doing of the Lord's work, and spending of it in such holy duties both public and private, as may breed and increase grace and sanctification in us is a greater matter and more pleasing to God a great deal then that is. No man may think he hath kept the Sabbath well because he resteth from all his Labors of his calling upon that Day. So far forth the brute beast thy Ox and thy Horse keepeth the Sabbath as well as thou. For so is the express Commandment Deut. 5. 14. Neither thine Ox nor thine Ass nor any of thy Cattle shall do any work upon that Day. Of thee that art a man and a Christian man God requireth more then so, he will have thee not only to rest from thine own Labors, but to spend the Day (so far as thy bodily necessities will permit) in such religious duties as may make thee a more holy and a better man. The Hebrew word Sabbat (from whence the Sabbath Day receiveth his name) signifieth not such a rest as wherein one sitteth still and doth nothing (as the word Noah doth) but only a resting & ceasing from that which he did before. So God is said Gen. 2. 2. to have rested the seventh Day, not that he rested from all works, for my Father worketh hitherto and I work, saith our Savior John, 5. 17. but because he rested from all the works that he had made as Moses saith there. As if he had said he rested from Creating anything more. And so we likewise are expressly commanded to rest upon the Sabbath, not from all works, but from such works as we did and might do upon the six Days. God never allowed us any Day to spend in Idleness, and doing of nothing especially not that Day. But he hath appointed us works and duties for that Day, which he would have us as carefully to go about them, as we are upon other Days to go about the works of our calling, and when we are at them to perform them with every whit as much diligence, and care to do them well as we do any work we take in hand upon the six Days.

Let no man say, what would you have us to do if we do no business upon the Sabbath Day? would you have us spend the time in sleeping or talking, or sitting at our doors or walking abroad? How will you have us pass the time for the whole Day? To such I answer. Thou hast so much work to do, as if thou wert as thou shouldest be, thou wouldest complain that thou wantest time to do it. And yet this work, that God hath enjoined us to spend this Day in, hath such interchange and variety in it, as no good heart hath cause with these carnal professors Mat. 1. 13. to snuff at it, and to cry behold what a weariness it is, how tedious and toilsome a thing it is to keep the Sabbath as these men would have us to do. But the true Christian findeth just cause to call the Sabbath a delight (as the Prophet Isaiah speaks 58. 13.) for all this work and labor that God hath enjoined us in it. We have public duties to perform on that Day in God's House. And both the family duties, and secret duties which we are bound to perform every Day (by the equity of that Law, Numb. 18, 9. 10.) to be doubled upon the Sabbath Day, that we might the better attend upon the profit by these holy works, these duties of Piety and Religion, which are the proper works of that Day. For that is the chief end that the Sabbath was ordained for. Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy (saith the Lord in the fourth Commandment) Keep the Sabbath Day to sanctify it. I gave them my Sabbaths (saith the Lord, Ez: 20 12.) to be a sign betwixt me and them that they may know that I am the Lord that sanctify them. As if he had said. He remembereth not nor keepeth the Sabbath, he regardeth it not nor careth for it (how strict soever he be in resting from his own labors) that keepeth it not holy, that spendeth it not in such religious duties as wherein he may know and feel by experience, that it is the Lord who (by his Ordinances) doth sanctify him, who both doth begin and increase grace in the Soul &c.

And pag. 704. saith he, and if it so well please God to see men rest from their own works on that Day (which yet as I told you is but the least thing that belongeth to the right observation of it) you may be sure he is much more pleased to see men spend that Day in doing of his work in exercising themselves in those duties of Piety and Mercy which he hath appointed to be done upon that day, especially in seeing them keep his Sabbaths spiritually and conscionably. Certainly they that do so shall be sure to be blessed and rewarded of God for it. To this purpose it is worth the observing that as our Savior saith, Mark. 2. 27. That the Sabbath was at the first made for man, for the great benefit and behoove of man. Man could not (no not Adam in Innocency) have been without it, but with great danger and loss unto him. So the Holy Ghost saith there twice of the Sabbath Gen. 2. 3. and Exod. 20. 11. that he never said of any other Day. That the Lord blessed that Day, that is, appointed it to be a mean of a greater blessing to man (if he kept it as God had commanded him to do) then any other Day, or any of the ordinary works of any other Day can possibly be.

Two sorts of blessings there be which the conscionable observer of the Sabbath shall be sure to receive by it.

1. The first are spiritual, and they indeed are the chief blessings of all, because they are durable and lasting, and because they concern the Soul which is the chief and most precious part of man. And for these was the Sabbath chiefly ordained, that God might by it in the use of his Ordinances enrich our Souls with spiritual blessings in Heavenly things. So the Lord saith, Ez: 20. 12. that he gave his Sabbaths to his People to that end that they might know that he was the Lord that sanctified them. We shall find and know that the Lord will sanctify us, both begin and increase saving grace in our Hearts, if we keep the Sabbath conscionably. Yea the Lord hath promised, Isaiah 56. 6. 7. to everyone that keepeth his Sabbath from polluting, that he will make them joyful in his House of Prayer. And Isaiah 58. 13, 14. That if a man shall keep the Sabbath heartily and spiritually, then he shall delight himself in the Lord. By these two places it appeareth that God hath bound himself by promise to them that keep his Sabbath (not only to work sanctification, increase of holiness and power over their corruptions which he professeth in that former place of Ezekiel, was the very end he gave his Sabbaths for, but also) by his spirit of adoption to increase in their hearts a lively sense of his favor, assurance that he heareth and accepteth their Prayers, Peace of Conscience, Joy in the Holy Ghost which are blessings the Christian Soul prizeth above all things in the World.

Ob. Why (may you say) may not a man receive increase of grace and spiritual comfort in the use of God's ordinances on any other Day, but only on the Sabbath?

Ans. Yes verily, but these promises may give him assurance to receive them more richly and plentifully upon the Sabbath then on any other Day.

2 The second sorts of blessings that the conscionable observers of the Sabbath receive by it are temporal, for concerning them also we have a promise, Isaiah 58. 4. Gen. 18. 13: 48. 4. Psa: 1. 19. To conclude this point with the authority and judgment of a learned Bishop now living Bishop Hall: Decad: 6. Epis: 1. God's Day (saith he) calleth for another respect then do common Days. The same Sun ariseth on this Day and enlightens it, yet because the Sun of righteousness arose upon it, & gave a new life unto the World in it, and drew the strength of God's moral precept unto it. Therefore justly do we sing with the Psalmist, This is the Day which the Lord hath made. Now I forget the World and in a sort my self, and deal with my wonted thoughts as great Men use, who at some time of their privacy forbid the access of all suitors. Prayer, Meditation, Reading, Hearing, Preaching, Singing, good conferences are the businesses of this Day, which I dare not bestow on any work or pleasure but Heavenly. I hate superstition on the one side, and looseness on the other. But I find it hard to offendin too much Devotion easy in • rophane • es. The whole week is sanctified by this Day, and according to my care of this is my blessing on the rest.

Broad.

CHAP. III. I. Whereby the Sabbath was Sanctified.

T He Sabbath was sanctified by resting from work. In the fourth Commandment we have to observe.

1. The Commandment itself briefly delivered, and is thus Remember the Sabbath to Sanctify it.

2. Then followeth the explication in order, God showing what is the Sabbath, the seventh Day is the Sabbath to the Lord thy God.

And after how it is sanctified. In it thou shalt not do any work.

3. A reason is yielded why God requireth this service, For in the six Days the Lord made Heaven &c. Here thou seest that God himself being expositor, to sanctify the Sabbath Day is not to do any work on the seventh Day, read also, Ier: 17 24.

Answer.

Herein you go about to prove' that the' Sabbath was either only or chiefly sanctified by resting from Work.

First, by your own Analys of the fourth Commandment wherein you would make God to put the chiefest part of the Sabbaths sanctification in Rest.

Secondly, by your proof out of Ier: 17. 24.

Thirdly, by proving the Sabbath to be profaned by works, which again you prove by showing how he that gathered Sticks on that Day was more severely punished, then many a one that other ways seemed more to profane it.

1. For your proposition it self, which is that the Sabbath was sanctified by resting from work.

To this I answer. I wish the Geneva note upon the title of the 92 Psal: which is a Psalm or Song for the Sabbath Day, that this teacheth that the use of the Sabbath standeth in praising God and not only in ceasing from Work. Whereunto I add Mr. Calvin upon the 2. of Gen: saith he, God did not simply command man to keep the seventh Day holy as if he were delighted with rest, but to the end he being free from all other businesses might more willingly and quietly apply his mind to the Creator of the World. Furthermore saith he it is an holy rest which delivereth Men from the impediments of the World, that they may wholly bend themselves to the service of God.

Secondly, I answer that it was neither only nor principally sanctified by resting, for then any labor even about the worship and service of God had been unlawful, and by this doctrine the best way for them to have sanctified it, had been to have lain all Day in their Beds, and they had sanctified it better in the Night then in the Day, and every man in his own House then in public Congregations, which but even now you yourself contradict.

Which Dr. Heylin would have us believe it is, whilst everywhere he would persuade us. That holy labors and necessary were breaches of it among the Jews, such as were Circumcision offering sacrifices, and fight or flight in time of danger &c.

Whereas he ought to know that rest from our own works is only enjoined ( Isai: 58. 13.) that so we may be employed in God's.

And therefore was not the work of Circumcision unlawful though a painful one, nor the work of offering Sacrifices though a toilsome one, much less works of mercy and Charity. For Christ saith, Math: 12. 12. That it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath Day. No work was a breach of the Sabbath, which was either in it self (as were religious actions) or upon occasion lawful to be done upon the Sabbath. And therefore in the beginning of that chapter he makes the Disciples rubbing the Ears of Corn for hunger (occasioned in his service on the Sabbath Day) to be equal with the Priests sacrificing in the service of the Temple, which was in it self no profanation of the Sabbath (though in the 5 verse Christ said, Have ye not read in the Law how that on the Sabbath Day the Priests in the Temple profane the Sabbath ) for we read no such thing in the Law, that they profaned the Sabbath.

But he means they did that on the Sabbath which the Pharisees might, through their superstitious misprison, as well call a profanation of the Sabbath, and count unlawful as that action of his Disciples. I deny not, but Rest from worldly works was a positive part of the Sabbaths sanctification in the time of the Jews, because of the holiness which did then accompany it being a Type (and that transcendent to all the rest) as I have often said.

But that it was ever meant to be either the whole or principal part of the Sabbaths sanctification I utterly deny: although they abusiv • lie made it so, even to the neglect of acts of mercy (for which they were blamed by Christ the Lord of the Sabbath as you say) by a superstitious misinterpretation of God's commandment (agreeing with self-love and sensuality) as you do by falsifying the true sense of the word Sanctify.

2. To come to your Analys whereby you would prove your position to it I answer. That in it you confound the end and the means by making the Commandment it self which consisteth in the first and last words to be expounded by the middle part, as if sanctification which always signifieth to set apart to an holy use should be properly interpreted by resting from work: as if God would put up with negative service only; or as if that which is negative could be the principal matter of a precept affirmative. But indeed the rest which you would make to be the only interpretation, is chiefly and properly of a subservient nature, serving as a significant accommodation to the main duty of holiness commanded as may appear.

First, by the Rest which was commanded them on their other Sabbaths was it not chiefly removendo prohibens, by removing an impediment the better to devote them to services which was then enjoined them, of feasting and sacrificing and humbling their Souls, and doth not the same hold good to us in our Sabbath, which is to be sanctified by all these at once in a spiritual sense. That it was so to them is evident in the 23. Levite: 27. 28. 29. 30. Where God having instituted the day of atonement, telleth them how they were to sanctify it in the 27 verse, to wit, it shall be an holy convocation to you, and ye shall afflict your Souls, and offer an offering to the Lord: and then in the 28 and 29 verses he bids them, ye shall do no work in that same Day, and what's the reasons why, it follows, for it is a Day of atonement to make an atonement for you before the Lord. For whatsoever Soul it is that shall not be afflicted in that same Day he shall be cut off from among the people. As who say, ye have other matters in hand (then worldly business) on that Day, which ye must wholly intend, and therefore surcease such things and such employments as may take you of from such matters, or hinder the fitness of your hearts in them (which is a thing too well known to them that worship God in spirit, how that a small carnal employment is found oft times an hurtful distraction to their spirit) and therefore it follows in the 30 verse whatsoever Soul it be that doth any work on that same Day &c. Which is a lively demonstration of the nature of the Sabbath Rest in i • s first and chief respect. And observe by the way, how here at large, as in the fourth Commandment in brief (though in other places of Scripture it also is manifested at large) God first layeth down the main sanctification of the Sabbath before he prescribe the means.

Secondly, in that this rest is so far approved of God as it conduceth to spiritual labor, and again spiritual labor is nowhere condemned though it be a breach of rest. For rest (take it as it was primarily intended in its first institution, without the intervening holiness which it contracted in the time of the Jews) is no ordinance or part of God's worship abstractively considered, for so it neither a • swereth the Antitype nor fulfilleth the commandment, but relatively, for it relateth to God's solemn worship on the Sabbath, as fasting doth to prayer, upon solemn occasions, which if it be used is no part of prayer, and yet omitted is an impeachement to it, because jointly considered it is an ordinance, and of necessary) and seasonable use at that time: And as in fasting we must not only fast from things nourishing (real necessity ever excepted) but much more from things pleasing; so in keeping the Sabbath, we ought not to rest only from profitable labors, but more especially from distracting bodily recreations, because the Sabbath should be both our full delights and full employment as Heaven shall be hereafter: For the commandments being Synecdochicall, as therefore in the commandments touching adultery and murder the thoughts and words conducing thereunto are forbidden: So in this commandment touching the Sabbath, as works are forbidden so worldly thoughts whence worldly works issue (as adultery from lust) and the discourse of worldly things, so likewise paritate rationis, pleasure must needs be included; For labor being forbidden as an impediment, consequently therefore whatsoever proveth an impediment is forbidden. This commandment as the rest being Synechdochicall.

And thus Musculus least (saith he) God should seem to speak of some profane idleness, he saith not remember that thou keep the Sabbath day, but that thou hallow the Sabbath-day. Now to hallow (saith he) that day is to make the rest of it devout, holy, and employed to godly exercises, whereby the mind may be instructed, exercised, and grounded in things concerning godliness. And Cyril (quoted by Doctor Heylin pag. 141.) in Amos 8. and Gaudentius Brixianus speak to the self same purpose.

The Jews (saith Gaudentius ) neglecting those spiritual duties which God commanded on that day abused the Sabbath rest unto ease and luxury. For whereas being free from temporal cares (saith Cyril ) they ought to have employed that day to spiritual uses, and to have spent the same in modesty and temperance, and in the repetition and commenmoration of God's holy Word, they on the other side did the contrary wasting the day in Gluttony and Drunkenness and idle delicacies.

And whereas you would bring the reason which God allegeth from himself in the commandment to make it good: That to rest on the Sabbath is the adequate sanctification, with this I would have you compare that speech of Christ (who by your own acknowledgement was Lord of the Sabbath ) I will have mercy and not sacrifice; where he blameth the Jews, notwithstanding the typical holiness of this rest in their times, for their not sanctifying the Sabbath with acts of mercy, through their superstitious misprison of this rest. Also consider how that God intended his spiritual service and worship in the very commandments of the second Table, much more then in those of the first. Again I oppose hereunto the reason which God giveth from his own example, in the fourth of Deut. to wit, his not appearing to them in any likeness, to cry down their making of Images to worship them, which yet is no argument to prove that their not making of Images (though he was to be obeyed and imitated therein) was his proper worship or any part thereof, but only in a negative sense, which doth exclude something but conclude nothing.

And therefore that which Zanchi saith of strangers rest is proper to the business in hand. Isti jubebantur non simpliciter quiescere, sed quiescere ut ipsi suo modo Sabbatum sanctificare possent. This ( suo modo ) is of different sense to different sorts and conditions of people, for the strangers that knew not the true worship had their suo modo, nay and the Cattle theirs, and so the Jews that knew it under types and figures had also their suo modo, and so have we now ours.

And indeed if that rest was principally respected; why was not other cattle and creatures commanded to be kept from laboring as well as the Ox and the Ass: Why were they not as well to stop up the Be-hives on the Sabbath-day to keep them from working like as they do in Winter, to preserve them from destroying; But we see that only the labors of those beasts are forbidden, which might be a distraction to man's better employments and sanctified rest; which appeareth in that for the better accommodating us to holy duties (as for the hearing of a Sermon) we may interrupt the rest of our Cattle (though other ways commanded) and use their labor on that day; as in the example of the Shunamite, 2 Kings 4 22. 23.

Lastly I would ask you wherein we shall sanctify our everlasting Sabbath in Heaven, whether by a bare resting from our works or by positive worship. Surely you will say by positive worship; And yet I deny not, but our rest will be an happy means thereunto; And so much is signified now by our Sabbaths rest: For such as is the Antitype, such is the type.

Thirdly touching your proof cut of Ier. 17. 24. I answer.

1. That the reason of God's taxing them with this was, because it was a fault most obvious (as may appear in that amongst other works, he instanceth most their bearing of burdens as the thing most frequent and abusive) so doth he complain of their profaning the Sabbath by working in it, because that being a fault most obvious they would be the soonest convinced thereby; For man can naturally better conceive of his outward gross and sensitive errors, then of his spiritual ones, which notwithstanding was implied therein. Like as at the day of judgment he will judge us by our works, and yet therein we shall answer for our infidelity, for in the one he involues the other.

God took the same order with the Jews under the Law that Christ did under the Gospel, that is, still to blame them for those faults which were either most apparent or most proper to those times and persons; knowing that if they failed in those they must needs fail in the more material; But when they were diligent to do the outward duty, and neglected the inward then God blameth them in that respect also: As we may see by that which he telleth them touching their sacrifices, how that he that sacrificed a sheep, was as if he cut of a dogs neck: whereas had they neglected to have sacrificed he would first have called on them for his outward service; because without that the inward could not be performed: So of the Sabbath-rest; he must first bring them from profaning the Sabbath, before he could bring them to a due sanctifying of it: For except they made good their bodily rest, according to the commandment, they could never meditate rightly their rest in Heaven.

Again in the second place, I say, that though God in this 17. Ier: did thus sharply reprove their profaning the Sabbath by working, yet he never meant that in resting consisted its chiefest sanctification, as may appear by the 58. of Isa. 13. Which Master Calvin in his institutions upon the fourth commandment bringeth to prove that we were to rest from our works that day, that God might work his works in us, and that the Prophets did call back the Jews from thinking themselves discharged by their carnal rest.

In the third place I answer, that this rest being a transcendent type, and of special sanctity in those times, could not be neglected, no not in the letter of it, without gross profanation of the Sabbath, besides the injury done to the useful signification of it; because that then it was a part of the Sabbaths sanctification, I mean, of its very positive sanctification: And therefore had God just cause to complain his Sabbaths were not sanctified, when they were so notoriously profaned.

Fourthly, now I come to speak to your third proof touching the profanation of the Sabbath; which is say you by working, to which I answer.

First, that a man by working (if it be seasonable) sanctifieth the Sabbath, and again by resting, if it be carnal and unfruitful, he may profane it.

Secondly, to argue from the profaning to the sanctifying is no good argument, as because works profane it, therefore rest only sanctifieth it. It may as well be argued from the second commandment, that he that doth not make Images to bow to them, is consequently a true worshipper of God. For though it be most true, that everyone, that resteth not from worldly employments on the seventh day, doth profane the Sabbath and break the commandment. Yet on the contrary, everyone that doth rest cannot be said to sanctify it, no more then every one, that doth not make Images to bow to them, may be said to worship God aright, and yet every one that doth make Images to bow to them, doth profane the true worship of God. So Master Hisdersham, to keep a bodily rest on that day from all our own works is but the outside of the commandment, and concerneth only the outward man, and the outward and bodily observation of the fourth commandment (which, as the whole Law, is spiritual) and may be performed by a man which hath no truth of Grace in him at all. Thus also Musoulus on the fourth commandment after he hath shown how those words of the commandment ( Thou shalt in it do no manner of work ) do forbid all manner of lets which may hinder the sanctifying of the Sabbath, because (saith he) that is to be done not with a patched mind, but with all our endeavor, and with a whole mind. In his conclusion, speaking against such as profane the Sabbath by licentiousness, the very cattle (saith he) do use the Sabbath-day better then we, which though they do nothing towards the sanctifying of it, yet their rest is so far forth to be preferred, that they do nothing whereby the holy rest is profaned and defiled, and the eyes of God's Majesty offended.

As concerning the proof you bring to back this last argument withal, to wit, the example of God's severe punishing work though but a small one, when yet sins and other things which might seem more to profane it were passed over, I answer:

First, that God was curious in maintaining in violate their discipline in their days, which was then both his own ordinance and the proper means of their instruction (for shadows were then substances) so that if they were remiss in observing to do the type, such as was this rest, they sinned both against God and their own souls, and under went a double guilt of punishment and loss, like as we, under the Gospel▪ do sin more in not believing in Christ, then in breaking the whole Law.

Secondly, I say, that God was the severer in menacing and punishing this, because else they would have beeue apter to thwart it, judging of it rather by matter of fact, then by matter of duty or command, which I think was a notable aggravation of his sin that gathered sticks, judging the offense by the thing; As its like Adam did (and as you do afterward) when he ate the apple, which happily God fore seeing imposed the greater judgment to over-awe him.

And this Sabbath-rest (as that of eating the apple) not being a Law written in the conscience, and therefore they not having their conscience so lively in that as in other sins, had need of the stronger bar to keep them of from breaking it.

Thirdly, this instance you give was whilst they were in the wilderness (as the Scripture phraseth it Num. 15. 32.) when the type was more lively and significative, and they better in abled to observe it, and therefore was the sin so much the more offensive and presumptuous, and consequently worthy of severer punishment. Which you never read of, to be executed after they came out of the wilderness, and yet were their profanations in regard of their works far greater.

As for the man's carrying of his bed, I answer to it two things.

First, that it was no breach of the Sabbath, but a manifestation of the miracle by a lawful action (I mean lawful though Christ had not commanded it) being necessary, because happily he had never a one else (being a poor man) to lie on at night: Or else in his absence his bed might have been wronged or stolen. And put case he had left it and in his absence it had been stolen, and he meeting the thief, the thief threw it down and run away, might not he in your opinion have then taken it up and carried it home? And why then might not he lawfully carry it home before to prevent stealing, as after it was stolen: And we have reason to believe it to be commanded by Christ to one of these ends: For it is like he was poor or had nobody to watch it, nor yet to carry it for him; for then he might have had some man to have put him into the Poole when the water was troubled, but he had none. In like case I appeal to your opinion whether you think it a breach of the Sabbath▪ for a Jew in his Sabbath-days journey finding a cloak-bag or a bag of money, to take it up and carry it away least if he leave it there till the next day, to avoid carriage on the Sabbath, another that hath as little right to it as he, find it and carry it for him.

Secondly I answer, that Christ neither could nor did command him to break the Sabbath or profane it. First, I say he could not, for that tie which the Law hath upon us, by the condition of our nature, because we are borne under it; it had upon Christ by the condition of his office and voluntary susception because he was made under it: So that it behooved him to fulfill all righteousness: And therefore he is said in that respect to have been obedient to his parents, though he were not only the Son of Mary but the Lord of Mary: Therefore when Scripture denieth all sin to have been in him, it implieth that he was exactly conformable to the Law, in doing all that it requires, and in leaving undone all that it forbids. Secondly, I say he did not, upon that reason which you allege, to wit, as being Lord of the Sabbath: For 1. Though indeed he was Lord of the Sabbath, yet in his human nature, wherein he was under the Law, he was not to show his foveraigne authority to the breach of any part of it, either moral or ceremonial, for so it behooved him to fulfill all righteousness. Secondly, that place of Scripture whence you borrow your reason is mistaken by you; For those words, the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day, do not intend that Christ is Lord of it as you mean, for him to keep or break it at pleasure; But Son of man signifieth mankind, as is evident. 1. by comparing the 27. and 28. verses of the second of Mar. The 27. verse saith, The Sabbath was made for Man, and not Man for the Sabbath, and then in the 28. verse it followeth with this word of coherence, therefore the Son of Man is Lord &c. where the one and the other do intend man in genere and for Christ if you will secondly because that in that action it was not Christ himself that Lorded it over the Sabbaths-rest, but his Disciples, for though it was done in his service yet not by his commands as you reason, but of themselves for the relief of their necessity.

But to conclude I see not then by these arguments how your first proposition can be made good. For if so be rest sanctifieth the Sabbath then doth man and beast sanctify it alike, then is there no difference between the stranger and the Israelite, nor between the Israelite and his ox.

If you had said that not resting in the profaning of the Sabbath, as bowing to Images is the profaning of God's worship we had easily agreed: But that by the sense of the fourth commandment it is properly or principally the sanctifying of the Sabbath, I can no more yield you, then that not bowing to Images is properly or principally the worship of God by the sense of the second commandment.

Ohi. But you will say, is not God's commandment kept in both these, when they do not bow to Images, and when they do not labor but rest.

Ans. I answer that the things, which the commandments properly and principally strike at are not observed thereby; For these are rather preventions of God's dis-worship then any parts of his worship; And he that knoweth these commandments aright, knoweth they intend doing as well as not doing: And therefore he that out of a good conscience forbeareth to do the one (wherein indeed he negatively keepeth the commandment) will by virtue of the same conscience set you the other. For otherwise he should give but a poor account to his Master at the last day, who when he asketh him what he hath done, answereth him with what he hath not done, and when he asketh him an account how he hath employed his Sabbaths, and what glory and worship he hath done him in them, he answereth him, I never profaned thy Sabbaths with bodily labor but always rested on that day, neither did I ever bow to an Image, surely his ways shall be as his that hid the talent in a napkin, for he hath reason to look for no better, thinking of God as he did, that he was hard in his commandments and therefore he kept them as hardly in the negative and not in the affirmative. Master Dod pag. 74. saith, one may forbear the sins of the second commandment, and yet be a damnable breaker of that commandment: for God commands not only to turn from dumb Idols, but also that we should serve the true and living God 1 Thes. 1. 9. else such are as well guilty of the breach of this Law as Idolaters, they for doing that they should not we for not doing that we should. So of the fourth commandment.

And for authority sake take notice what Thomas Aquinas saith to this purpose. In the observance of the Sabbath saith he two things are to be considered, one whereof as the end, and this is, that man be vacant to divine things, which is signifi • d in that which he saith (remember that thou sanctify the Sabbath. ) for those are said to be sanctified in the Law which are applied to divine worship; But the other is the cessation of works signified when it 〈◊〉 added, on the seventh day of the Lord thy God thou shalt not do any work • . And again saith he Spiritual works are not forbidden on the Sabbath-day, for therefore doth a man abstain from other works on that day, that he might be vacant to works pertaining to the service of God. And saith he yet further, servile works as they respect either the service of sin, or the service of man do contrary the observan • e of the Sabbath, in so much as they hinder man's application to divine things.

For a closure to persuade the spiritualizing of the Sabbath observe what one speaking of the word remember as it is prefixed to the fourth commandment, saith.

To remember the keeping of the Sabbath (saith he) is so to keep it in mind as to prevent worldly business falling on that day, to desire after it, to prepare for it; to delight and glory in it, as we do in those things we keep much in remembrance: for when he speaks▪ of remembrance he calls on us for such affections and actions as become remembrance, therefore when God bids you remember the Sabbath he commands you to desire it; Thus David still explain • himself by the word remember in the Psalms as Psalm 44. 4. and in other places. For it is a rule amongst the Hebrews in e • pounding of Scripture, that verb • se • su • cum affect •• 〈…〉 so that by remembering the Sabbath we should desire it, delight in it, and account the business and employment thereof honorable to us, glorifying God in the consecrating it to him, being joyful in it and the duties of it, both as the souls market day to provide it necessaries, like as the Husband man is glad of the market to buy and sell in, and as the souls holy-day for to procure it refreshing; as School-boies joy in a play-day, and not be weary of the day nor heavily do the duty • of it.

Broad.

CHAP. IV. Wherefore God ordained the Sabbath.

T He ends and purposes for which God ordained the Sabbath were many.

1. That the Israelites might celebrate the memorial of the Worlds creation, as Exod. 31. 〈◊〉 . It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for • ver: for in • ixe days the Lord made Heaven and Earth, and on the seventh day rested and was refreshed.

2. That they might remember their deliverance out of Egypt where 〈◊〉 doubt they might not rest any day from their burdens. And remember that though • w • st a servant in the Land of Egypt and that the Lord thy God brought the • out thence through a mighty hand and outstretch • d arm therefore the Lord thy God 〈…〉

3. • That Servants and 〈◊〉 might rest and be refreshed after their hard labor in the week before as Exod. 23. 12. six days thou shalt do thy work▪ and 〈◊〉 the seventh day thou shalt rest, that thine O • e 〈◊〉 Ass may rest and the Son of thine hand 〈◊〉 and the stranger may be refreshed.

4. That the Israelites might have more leisure to serve God, who on this day as also on festival days, commanded them to have an holy convocation. Six days shall work be done but the seventh day is a Sabbath of rest, and holy convocation.

5. That they might know, how that he was the Lord that did sanctify them, as Exod. 31. 13. Verity my Sabbaths ye shall keep, for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations, that ye may know, that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you.

6. By some men's Doctrine the legal Sabbath served to put the Israelites in mind of keeping a spiritual Sabbath; as the legal circumcision served to put them in mind of the spiritual circumcision of the heart, hereof now in their understanding the Prophet Isaiah speaketh Chap. 58. 13. truly this spiritual Sabbath is the only Sabbath in the judgment of Augustine, Tertullian, Chrysotome &c. which Christians ought to keep.

7. The legal Sabbath was a type of the heavenly Sabbath, it was a shadow of the blessed rest to come, of which matter in the next Chap.

Answer.

To the first of these I answer:

That the Israelites were a people contenting themselves with the outward part, not savouring the inward and spiritual strength of things (which is naturally the fault of all men till they be better taught of God) and for this reason God ever and anon made the Sabbath to follow as a Counter-check to their carnal zeal.

And therefore when the making of the Tabernacle was commanded, the Sabbath was even then exempted from its very work, to show them, that it was other worship that he expected, and that they were not to repose their happiness and confidence in outward things, but in God: And as therefore in the time of Manna he commanded his Sabbath, to show them, how that it was he, and not that, which nourished them: So likewise when the Tabernacle was commanded the Sabbath was urged upon them in this 31. Exod. to show them, how that it was God and not it that sanctified them: And therefore did the one give place to the other.

So that the end of the Sabbath as it is expressed in this portion of Scripture between the 12. and 18. verses seemeth rather to consist in these words of the 13. verse, for it is a sign between me and the children of Israel, forever that ye may know, that I the Lord do sanctify you (Those words which in the 17 verse make mention of the Worlds creation and God's rest, being rather added as a reason in this place to enforce this end) For here it is not the meaning of the holy Ghost to discourse of the Sabbath simply, but only occasionally, as appeareth by the coherence of the 11. 12. and 13. verses, where the Sabbath is urged with a verily or a notwithstanding as it is in the Geneva, that though he had commanded the making of the Tabernacle; yet he would not have them repose their Religion or content in this outward Tabernacle or Temple (for God dwelleth not in things made with hands) but that they should look to the spiritual part the Temple of their hearts, that they should be more careful to build up and keep that in repair, which did more properly distinguish them to be the sanctified Israel of God. Whosoever therefore is an Israelite indeed let him look to make good this sign of his sanctification, the sanctifying of the Sabbath by spiritual worship and service, which doth excellently approve it to his conscience that God hath sanctified him, that is chosen him to be his, and thus it is made holy to him (as it is phrased in the 14. verse) that is, a day of blessing and sanctification, for therein God bestoweth the best of his blessings, because on that day we are or ought to be wholly employed in the best of his ordinances, such as belong to our souls and not to our bodies. Therefore ought not this day to be defiled with bodily employments (by such as are the Israel of God) but to be dedicated, from earthly labor to an heavenly rest, after the example of God: For when the hands cease from one employment, the heart is fittest for another. And as one well observeth. The Sabbath-day signified that they themselves were the Lord's, and therefore they abstained from their own works to do the Lord's.

To the second end gathered out of the 5. of Deut. That they might remember their deliverance out of Egypt.

I answer, that this is an Argument to incite them to the better observance of this duty of sanctifying the Sabbath, and their more willing allowance of it in their servants; For the 15. verse is thus much, That whereas when thou wast a servant in the Land of Egypt, thou couldst not have sanctified a Sabbath unto me, having no rest for thyself, because of thine intolerable pressures, which I who am the Lord thy God have set thee free from, and therefore command no more then I have enabled thee to fulfill, therefore do I now expect that according to my commandment, and for my mercies sake shown to thee in working thy deliverance, thou shouldest observe the Sabbath to sanctify it.

For God's mercy thus preached unto them must needs conduce much to the gaining back from them both mercy and obedience. And for this cause it is that this their deliverance is made the Preface to the whole Law, suitable to that in the Gospel, that we being delivered from the hands of our enemies might serve him without fear.

And both this (which was a signification of our redemption) and that other example of God's resting from the creation, are propounded as fit Theames for them to improve and exercise their minds upon, to the glorifying of him, and bettering themselves on that day; both which were much to one purpose to show forth the wonderful loving kindness of God to his people and Church, in that he made all things for them, even for them whom he had delivered out of Egyptian thralldom: which admirable mercies of his, he would have them take special notice of, and turn to praisefull Haleluiahs on that day, (which he hath sanctified to himself) without wearisomeness, cheerfully and with delight, as the Angels and Saints in Heaven keep their Sabbath.

If this typical and corporal deliverance of the Jews be such a persuasive reason of their sanctifying the Sabbath; shall not our deliverance much more stir us up to do the like?

The substance of your marginal consideration hath been handled before, only I add this, that a commandment is not made special by every motive, but that it may be in force to me, though every motive brought to enforce it, properly concern not my particular. Else a man may oppress a stranger that hath not been himself stranger in the Land of Egypt: Though this motive be only proper to them in the letter, yet common to us in the spiritual and better sense, and therefore enforceth the commandment upon us, as well as on them.

Touching your third end deduced from Exod. 23. 12. where God commanded the Jews to rest from their six days work on the seventh day, that so their Cattle, Servants, and Strangers might be refreshed.

To this I answer, that this commandment doth neither imply that a bare rest doth sanctify the Sabbath, nor that they were to use the Sabbath as a Parenthesis between two weeks the better to pass from labor to labor, but the intent of it was.

1. The better to set forth the heavenly rest which the Sabbath signified, for it being thus absolutely and universally commanded both to them and every thing that was properly theirs, it showeth the absolute and universal rest which everyone that belongeth to God shall be possessed of in Heaven, as well as God himself. For as God rested from his works so shall they from theirs, to enjoy an absolute and perpetual refreshment with him in Heaven.

2. That to the practices of piety (which they were to perform towards God on this day) they should adjoin the practices of charity humanity to man and beast, (not that mercy was the proper end of the Sabbatical-rest, for so you confound the two Tables, the first whereof immediately respects God, the second Man.) And in this respect was God curious of the due observance of his Sabbaths, because the right keeping of them did involue the whole Law of God.

Your fourth end drawn from the 23. Levite. doth refute your position of the Sabbaths being sanctified by rest. For if so be this rest of the Sabbath served properly as a means to further the holy duties of that day, how can the holiness of that day be properly or principally said to be included in the rest it self? which if it be not an holy rest, that is, used to an holy end and purpose, it neither fulfilleth the duty of the commandment (which commandeth us as well to sanctify the Sabbath as to forbear work) nor the signification of the Sabbath it self; For in Heaven when there shall be the convocation of the universal Church of God, the perpetual Sabbath shall thenbee sanctified not in that we shall rest, but in that we shall holyly rest.

Your fifth end fell out to be discoursed of in your first, which shall suffice concerning it, only thus much further, that I suppose, it cannot be proved, that all signs of covenants were abolished by Christ's coming. For the Rainbow was given for a sign of God's covenant with Noah. The Sabbath for a sign of God's covenant with Israel, from which I infer that this cannot therefore be judged abolished because a sign, because the other sign as we see is yet remaining. Catonus pag. 45. De iride autem si concedemus (quod doctissimi nonnulli negant) illam, ante diluvium fuisse, induisse à postea ra • ionem signi, sequetur tamen inde (quod nos contendimus) essentiam iridis non à signo dependisse, imo si promissio Dei ad certum tempus restricta fuisset, expleto tamen illo, iridis natura non minus integra remansisset. Similiter & de Sabbatho dicendum est.

And to give further light to that same place of Scripture, Exod. 31. 3. I will here insert the discourse of a divine of prime note upon the word ( remember ) showing the reasons wherefore it is prefixed to the fo • rth commandment, wherein he handles the aforesaid text.

This word remember (saith he) is prefixed to the fourth commandment rather then to the rest for 2. reasons.

[ 1] 1. Because we are apter to forget it then any of the rest, for mark it in Scripture and where any duty is charged by God with Remember, it argues a proneness to forget it, as that, Remember thy Creator in the days of thy youth, when many lusts are ready to draw us of. And the reasons why we are so apt to forget this Commandment, and why there is need of a Memento are four.

1. Because the rest of the Commandments are written in our Hearts by light of Nature, but this only was given by outward ordinance of divine instruction, & we are apter to forget instructions then inclinations.

2. Because this more restraineth the natural liberty then all the rest, they restraining only sinful things, this lawful things, yea our very words and thoughts about them.

3. Because of the multitude of our six days businesses which had need be remembered to be seasonably finished, else they will breed distractions.

4. Because the Devil prompts us to forget it, so to quench the Memory of the Creation and the Creator, and so to bring in the Eternity of the World, as he did amongst the Heathen and there with Athisme: to prevent which we are bid to remember to keep this Commandment as a means to preserve the memory of God and to keep a foot his worship.

[ 2] 2. Because it is of most weight to be remembered and that for three reasons.

1. Is taken from the dependancy of the observation of all the rest of the Commandments on this, for in keeping of the Sabbath the Lord is wont to sanctify his People to the keeping of all the rest of the Commandments, so that keeping this we keep all, and neglecting this we neglect all, hence God saith Exod: 31. 3. Verily my Sabbaths you shall keep for it is a sign between me and you throughout all your Generations that you may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you; moreover saith God Exod: 20. 12. I gave them my Sabbaths to be a sign between me and them that they might know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify them, Look all the conversion of sinners and you shall see where one hath been converted on the Weeke Daies 7 have been on the Sabbath, 7 to one nay 10 to one if not a 100 to one. God doth delight most to dispence his grace on that Day, so that keep that Day and you keep an opportunity where God doth bestow his graces on the Sons of men, but neglect it and you neglect an opportunity of getting grace of God. Heathen Princes are wont on their coronation Day to show themselves to their People in all their rioalty and cast about Silver and Gold, so doth God sometimes in these his solemn Daies show himself to be present with us in holy duties, he scatters abroad his holy graces and delights so to do, we are not to appoint God the time when to come down and speak to his People, but they must wait the time he hath appointed, now God doth delight to sanctify Men on this Day of all the rest, therefore the text saith, He blessed it and hallowed it, that is, he did bless it to be a means to sanctify it to his People; for else the Sun shines no hotter on this Day then any other but that God hath blessed it, as he blessed the bread, to make us blessed, to observe it therefore is a means to bring ablessing on our Family, Town, Kingdom where we live, take many Men that are dejected for Sin and 〈◊〉 tell you one of the first and chief in their neglect of the Sabbath though it be not written in their Hearts by nature. On this Day God draws nigh to his People, and they to him, by whom he will be found sooner on this Day then any of the rest, and if we get grace any Day its a thousand to one it is on this Day, or else something added to it. Esa: 36. 4. The way to lay hold of the Covenant is to keep the Sabbath, there is some hope of a Mans salvation when he makes con • cience of keeping the Sabbath. If thou turn away thy feet &c. and consecrate it as glorious &c. thou shalt delight thyself in the Lord saith Isaiah, implying that a man that hath no delight in keeping of the Sabbath, hath no delight nor pleasure in God, but the way to get pleasure in God is to keep the Sabbath.

2. Reason why this cómandement is of most weight to be remembered, is taken from the efficacy of it, in it we are made most spiritual and heavenly minded, it frames our spirits to be fit for every good business, by keeping the Sabbath we are kept from idle thoughts, and by this means are molded up into a Heavenly frame, we are not even of this World, there is nothing of it doth hang about us. There remains a Rest to the People, Heb: 4 9. implying that the Saints in Heaven keep a Sabbath rest, meditating divine things, learning from Christ, Singing praises and are in a spiritual manner wrapped up in all spiritual business and minding Heavenly things. And we by keeping it are wrapped up from all incumbrances otherways lawful, but now not fitting our spirits.

3. Reason is taken from the memory of those things are kept in memory by it, for by keeping in mind the Sabbath we keep in mind God's chiefest benefits to us, as our Creation and our Redemption by its translation from the seventh to the eight Day, and Ezech: 20. 12. that it is a sign that God doth sanctify us implying thus much, that whereas there are three Persons who show themselves in three Works tending to our Salvation. This Sabbath is sanctified to us to put us in remembrance of them, and their works, as of the Father that Created us, of Christ that Redeemed us, of the Holy Ghost that Sanctifies us.

Thus are our chiefest blessings remembered by our keeping of this fourth Commandment and therefore it is of most weight to be remembered.

The legal Sabbath as you call it, and which you speak of in your sixth end, was more then to put them in mind of the spiritual Sabbath, for it was the properst means of bringing it about to cause them actually to keep a spiritual Sabbath, for when as they were not to do any of their own works nor to think any of their own thoughts, what could they construe hence but that they were to do God's, and think God's ? And therefore doth not that 58. Isaiah 13. intend only the negative part (for so God should allow of Idleness, and take away the nature of the mind, which is ever to be in motion) but also the spiritual part, which also is expressed there: but if it had not, it being delivered in the Negative, they both ought and might thence have deduced the Affirmative and better part: (like as was done to them in their Typicall ordinances, wherein the shell was to be cracked before they could find the kernel. ) like a skillful Logitian, that only mentioneth the Major and the Minor of a Syllogism, and leaveth the Conclusion to be gathered, as a thing so easy because so necessary, as none but Fools and Dunces can be ignorant of, and thus doth Christ deal with us also under the Gospel, he giveth general Rules for us thence to deduce particular Conclusions.

To your last End I answer. That it is most true that the Sabbath was a Type of the Heavenly Sabbath, and a shadow of that blessed Rest to come; and therefore transcendent to those Types which were properly lewish and of a Temporary nature; whereas this Sabbath had its beginning with time, and shall receive its ending with time, when the works are finished from the foundation of the World. When as the Church of God is possessed of the Antitype, then shall this universal Type vanish by the second coming of Christ, as the Jewish Types have already vanished by his first coming.

Broad.

CHAP. V. 1. The Sabbath was a shadow.

S Aint Paul in his second Chapter of the Epistle to the Coloss. hath these words, Let no man judge you in Meat, or Drink, or in respect of an holy Day, or of the new Moon, or of the Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. Here by Sabbath the Weekely Sabbaths are meant as I gather.

1. Because St. Paul useth another word which doth most properly signify the festival Days, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 .

2. Vnles by Sabbaths in this place the weekly Sabbaths be meant, we have not the least warrant in God's word for working on the Jews Sabbath. The Sabbatarians heretofore might with more color have put of any Text then this.

3. Taking it for granted that we 〈◊〉 not keep the Jews Sabbath, how it is credible that S. Paul being Christ's only Doctor about Days, and handling this matter purposely in three Epistles, should not give us to understand as much in one of them, and if in any in this.

4. Thus it is taken by very many great Divines S. Aug: termeth the Sabbath Sacramentum ambratile spir: & lit: cap: 14. Calvin speaking of the fourth Commandment saith umbratile veteres nuncupare solent, so that it seemeth the Fathers generally for Sabbaths here understood the Weekely Sabbaths, and therefore termed the fourth Commandment umbratile shadowish.

5. I know no more but two or three in Print who take it otherwise, and all that they can say, is that it is Sabbaths in the plural number, but Sabbaths importeth the Weekely Sabbath in many places. Again that with Sabbaths are adjoined Meats and Drinks, and therefore that S. Paul speaketh of such Sabbaths as are in rank with them, which manner of arguing is termed Petitio principis: This is all that ever I knew alleged by any, which is so little, that it only argueth a will to say something, it is not so much as a shadow of sound proof.

Besides this Text Coloss: 2. There are other pregnant enough to prove, that the Sabbath was a shadow, Type or Ceremony, as that Exod: 31. 13. and and the like may be gathered by Heb: 4. but of these Texts more shall be said hereafter.

Answer.

1. However there may be another word used to signify Festival Days, yet you cannot deny, but it is frequent to name their festivals, Sabbaths: Because of the Rest and analogy which they had common with the Weekly Sabbath. And such is the sense of this Text, as may probably appear by these following reasons which you so slightly evade.

1. Because it is Sabbaths in the plural number, for the Greek word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 where it signifieth the Weekely Sabbath, and not the Weeke it self, is for most part either expressed in the singular number, or if in the plural, then it is joined with a word singular, as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , and after this manner it is also everywhere translated both in English and Latin, but in this 2. Coloss: 16. there are none of all these.

2. Because Sabbaths are adjoined with such things (in this place of the Coloss: ) which are indisputably abrogative and merely Jewish, and therefore are these the likelier to be such. For as Dr. Andrew's saith of the Sabbath, how that it had been folly to have put a ceremonial Law amongst the Moral; so say I in this case, that it were strange if God, who is the God of order and not of confusion, should by his Apostle in this place mixe one of the ten Moral Commandments with the hand writing of Ordinances, things merely ceremonial and abrogated.

To which two Reasons I add these which follow.

1. The Apostle himself did condescend to keep the Weekely Sabbath with the Jews (not only for a time, as he did some of the Jewish Holy-days as also their other rites, but at all times and in all places as occasion offered) as being a thing of a different nature from their Sabbaths which he taught.

2. These three Holy-days, New-moons and Sabbaths are but (as I may so say) Synonimies in sense signifying as it were one and the same thing, in the intention of the Apostle by divers expressions: for were not New moons Holy-days, and Holy-days Sabbaths, so that if you disp •• e from a seeming Tautology you may as well argue against New-moons as Sabbaths. And I would know why Holy-days and Sabbaths may not be as well one and the same in this place of the Coloss: as in the 58. Isa: 13. both of them in the one place signifying the Weekely Sabbath, and in the other place the Jewish Sabbaths. Which Synominy doth the rather appear from that 4. Gal: 16 (which is the same in effect with this of the Coloss: ) where the Apostle by Days, Moneths, Times and Yeares, meaneth things of the same nature and Ordination, to wit, the Jewish abrogated Types and Ceremonies such as begun with Mans Fall (or rather with Moses ) and ended with Christ's Resurrection (unto which the converted Gentiles did too much adhere) not such as began in Paradise, and shall end in Heaven.

But whereas it may be objected: that doubtless had not the Apostle intended all Sabbaths in the word plural, he would have made some particular exception of the Weekely Sabbath, considering how considerable it was so to do, if he would have had the Weekely Sabbath to be understood to be still of force.

To this I answer. That the first Day of the Weeke or Lord's Day having taken footing among the convert Gentiles to whom the Apostle wrote, he might with less scruple use the word Sabbaths absolutely without exception; considering that all Sabbaths (eo nomine ) were outlawed. Though now as the case stands we in these times are forced to re-assume the name Sabbath (not thereby to shoulder out the more worthy name of Lord's Day, but) to vindicate the authority of the fourth Commandment, and to testify our judgments touching the new Sabbath; like as the primitive times are reported to take up the wearing of the Cross to testify their profession and Confession of a Crucified Christ against their opposers.

2. To your second Reason I answer. That our warrant to work on the Jews seventh Day is the fourth Commandment, which proportioneth us out six Days for our worldly affairs, and the seventh for an holy rest, which is the total and moral sense and sum of that Commandment, and which we still observe, the order being occasional and temporary, but the number moral and perpetual, as I have proved before. And therefore the Apostles did imply a nullity of the one by the bringing in of the other, according to the nature of the Commandment and the Prophecy of Isaiah 65. 16.

So that if you think it meet to retain the Lord's Day in our Church (as you do in your premonition) then must you grant the order to be changed. For it was never the Apostles meaning nor in their power, when God by a perpetual Law from the beginning had given us six Days for labor and destined the seventh to an holy Rest, to have turned it into five Days labor and two Days Rest. For amongst the Jews, when Holy-days were so frequent, there was never any weekly Holy day ordained, to go cheek by jole with the Sabbath, but either Monethly or Yearely. So that as Moses his Serpent eat up the Sorcerers, so hath our seventh Day eaten up theirs. Generatio unius est corruptio alterius. Our new Heaven and new Earth have given us a new Sabbath and new Rest. For old things are passed away, and all things are become new.

3. To your third reason I answer. That Paul in like case speaketh in divers places of Ministers maintenance, and yet saith never a word to clear the controversy of Tythes, whether they be or be not Iure divino, but he preacheth the substance, to wit, a meet maintenance to be necessary. So in Paul's discourse of times and Days (as also of other things) although he satisfy not our Fancies, who cannot see af • rre of, yet doth he answer the will of the Holy Ghost, who for reasons whereof we are uncapable spareth to do what we expect. And indeed the reason of Paul's not Preaching the Sabbaths alteration might be because it was neither safe nor convenient. For it must needs have given great offense to the Jews, (seeing it had a place amongst the moral Commandments) who were so precise in the punctisioes of times, as that they would have been of your opinion, that either their seventh Day or none was moral: and so would have taken advantage to vilify his doctrine, as if he had gone about to overthrow as well the Moral as Ceremonial Law; the sun shine of the Gospel being too bright for their weak Eyes to behold all at once. And therefore the Aposile, condescending to their infirmities, chose rather to insinuate the Lord's Day t • citly by his practice, then by his doctrine. For so i • behooved him in those times, wherein he became all to all that he might win some. And therefore did he take occ ••• on on the I •• ish Sabbaths to Prea • h the Gospel in their Synagogues, when yet we see how that privately he sanctified the Lord's Day with Ch • istians.

Therefore I conclude that this Scripture is nothing concerning the Weekely Sabbath (whereof he writeth nothing at all directly for the reasons aforesaid) but of the Jewish Ceremonial Sabbaths which he must needs cry down, if he set up Christ. The shadow must vanish, when the substance comes in place. And of this the converted Jews were mostly as well persuaded without offense as the converted Gentiles. But of this sort was not the Weekely Sabbath, as I have proved elsewhere, and as further is evident from the 92. Psal: which is dedicated to the Sabbath Day, but none of the rest of the Psalms to any of the legal Ceremonies, from which I may thus reason.

That seeing the Book of the Psalms, was ordained for the consolation of the militant Church unto the Worlds end, (as may appear by the Apostles exhortation) it seemeth not consonant to reason, that a part of God's perpetual worship should be dedicated to a temporary Ceremony.

To your fourth and fifth I answer, that how the Sabbath is said to be shadowish, we have shown before, and shall have more occasion hereafter to enlarge it.

Amongst those two or three which justify the morality of the Sabbath. I would have you take in D ^r . Andrew's in his exposition of the fourth Commandment, and M ^r . Hooker in his Eccles: Pol: and Bishop Hell whom I have already alleged.

Broad.

2. The Sabbath was a shadow from the beginning.

FOr God's very Resting was Typicall as appeareth Heb: 4. 4. observe that the Apostle there speaketh os the seventh Day as rested upon by God, and not as sanctified by him or enjoined to be sanctified by Man, so that the seventh Day then became a Type when God rested therein, the seventh Day in order if not in time before it was sanctified was God's rest, and Consequently a shadow of the Rest remaining to the People of God. Consider further that it doth not appear by the Scripture when the Sabbath became a shadow; and which was the first Sabbath that was such if the first of all were not.

Again that all other shadows and Types were such from their first institution.

If any think there was no shadow or Ceremony of Christ before Sin.

Ans: Suppose that before there had been no shadow or Type at all, yet might the Sabbath be a shadow or Type from the beginning thereof, for it is very profitable that Adam fell the Day before. Again though there were no Ceremony of Christ before Sin, yet might there be a shadow of things to come, that now shall be exhibited by Christ, which had not Adam sinned God would have exhibited by himself.

There were it seems three Types or shadows in the beginning, Paradise, the Tree of Life, and the seventh Day God's Rest, of the comfort of all which Adam for his Sin was deprived. But afterwards God being merciful to the posterity of Abraham they had the same Sabbath, Manna for the Tree of Life, and the Land of Canaan for Paradise, which was as it were another Paradise, and a figure also of the Kingdom of Heaven.

Answer.

In the 4. of Hebrews it is beyond the Apostles scope to treat upon the sanctification of the Sabbath, for that there he only disputeth upon the typical use of it. So that thence I easily grant you the significary or typicalnes of the Sabbaths rest even from the beginning: so you take it not in a Jewish sense as abrogative by Christ his first coming: for though Christ then came to destroy the ceremonial Law, yet came he to fulfill the Moral Law, in which the Sabbath hath his seat, and whose typicalnes doth not so properly relate to Christ, or to our present Rest in him, as to our Rest in Heaven, which in Innocency we were capable of without him, although that now our capacity and interest in that Rest being lost, and only recovered in and through Christ, it may by accident refer to Christ (as the Tree of Life is made to do.) because he is become our Intermedium to that Rest which yet at first it signified without him, and thus is Marriage made a Type of Christ, and his Church, which in Innocency was properly a Type of the Union and Unity between God and his Church immediately till sin made a divorce, and therefore are they not as other Types occasionally taken up and occasionally laid down, but begun (as I may say) before Christ, and shall end after him, that is, when he shall give up his Kingdom into the hands of his Father, to whom the Creation being appropriated, this Type of the Sabbath being grounded thereupon, must needs begin and end in him. Yet so, as that by reason of Christ's intervention, and the new Creation which he hath made, it is (by accident) of use also towards him; because that in and by him only, we now enjoy this Rest, and are given in Marriage unto God. So that, if we can here prove our Rest and Marriage unto him by Faith, then are we inchoatively possessed of our everlasting Rest and Marriage, which shall be consummated with God in Heaven, * whereof these two Institutions in Innocency were figures.

Touching the time of Adams Fall for my part I cannot think it was before God's seventh Day, and my reason is from Moses his method for he putteth it after, and yet I do believe he never kept Sabbath in Innocency, but fell before his own seventh Day.

Touching Adams deprivation I answer. That although it be evident by Scripture and the fiery Sword, that Adam was deprived of Paradise, and the Tree of Life, as being properly annexed to the Commandment concerning the Tree of Good and Evil: yet doth not the same appear concerning the Sabbath, for that it did partake as well of duty as of commodity, and was a coadjutor to the Law of nature: besides we see it renewed in its proper kind, and upon its primitive reason: which the other are not, but exempt by a fery Sword; also we see the Scripture saith, the Sabbath was made for Man, which indefinitely signifieth all Mankind, though properly the People of God. For God having still a People he hath for them a Rest in Heaven, towards which the Sabbath is as helpful as the Sacrament of the Lord's supper is to our Faith in Christ. For as one saith. Even now in this marvelous light of the Gospel, we have our divine Ceremonies and Sacraments, God reserving the greatest for the Kingdom of glory.

Broad.

3. The Sabbath was a shadow of our blessed Rest in Heaven.

SAint Paul saying Coloss: 2. that Meat, Drink, Holy-days and Sabbaths are a shadow of things to come, doth not there tell us of what things to come they are a shadow.

And the only place (in my knowledge) whereby we may gather of what the Sabbath was a shadow, is Heb: 4. by which Chapter it appeareth that the Sabbath was a shadow or Type of the Rest in Heaven. The Rests or Sabbaths mentioned in that chapter are three, one, the first seventh Day verse 4. another the Land of Canaan verse 8. a third the Kingdom of Heaven verse 9. of the latter Rest the two former were shadows. Some tell us of a legal spiritual and Heavenly Sabbath, and the legal with them was a Type of both the other, which I dislike not.

Answer.

You may well imagine of what things to come Paul meaneth in that 2. Coloss: if you consider the context, for after he had handled Circumcision both in its Type and Antitype, then he concludeth of other things of that nature in these words, let no man therefore condemn you in Meat or Drink &c. As if he had said; like as Circumcision, so all things of that nature and institution, are extinguished through Christ, the substance of these shadows, and the end of these Ceremonies. Amongst whichby an Argument ex non concessis, you would draw in the Weekly Sabbath to be one, (as if the Jews had not other Sabbaths which more properly are to be reckoned in that number) and yet confess it to signify our Rest in Heaven, and to have none other signification but that: which signification is still in force also, as we see in the 4. of H • b. which properly is true of none of the abrogated Shadows. Which signification I say is still in force and consequently the Sabbath: for how should it be other, seeing that they are Christ's own words, Math: 5. 18. That till Heaven and Earth pass one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law till all be fulfilled. Now how can the Sabbath be abrogated, seeing by your own confession it signifieth our Rest in Heaven, which is not yet fulfilled nor will not be till the second coming of Christ. whereas the Jewish Types therefore vanished at the first coming of Christ, because they received the fulfilling in him properly and adequately.

But perchance it will be objected. That the abolishment of all the signs of the Old Testament was by this, that Christ hath actually acquired all the benefits figured by them, though the Elect inherit them not yet totally and perfectly; and thus he hath also acquired the benefit of the Sabbaths signification for us, though not yet accomplished it to us.

I answer. 1. It is true that the benefits of both are acquired by Christ, but in a different kind. For the Jewish Types were since the Fall created de novo for his sake, to shadow him forth, and so he properly accomplisheth and soe abolisheth them, Coloss: 2. 17. But this of the Sabbath was created in the beginning, and was since then (things so falling out by the Fall) only renewed for his sake: like as was the Law also (for God makes them go hand in hand and so should we) to the end that both of them may appear, by the accident of our Fall, to be now only fulfilled and accomplished on our behalfes through and by Christ.

I say 2 ^lie . It may as well be said that the whole Law is utterly abolished by Christ, as the Sabbath • for that he hath fulfilled the righteousness thereof for us; and yet we know that to us under the Gospel the Law is still binding in a Gospel sense, requiring a willing and an upright, though not an absolute and perfect obedience unto it: And so are we to celebrate a Gospel Sabbath, though not the last of seven as expecting Rest by works, yet the first day of seven as having and expecting Rest by Christ for still the Law and the Sabbath fate alike. So that (as one saith) Christ hath both accomplished and abolished the Ceremonial Law, the 〈◊〉 Law he hath accomplished but not abolished; for Christ is the End of the Daw. But as Augustine well distinguisheth, the perfecting not the destroying End.

But by the way I must in this place the better to clear the truth take in two objections that are made against our acceptation of this 4. Heb:

First, they object that God's Rest (there spoken of) on the seventh Day is not meant as typifying our Rest in Heaven, but only is mentioned in way of similitude.

[ 1] Ans: 1. If the Sabbath be at all a Type it must be so from the beginning: for as M. Broad observeth it appears not else, by Scripture, when the Sabbath became a shadow, and which was the first Sabbath, that was such, if the first of all was not. And again, that all other shadows and Types were such from their first institution.

[ 2] If the Sabbath be no Type, why is it disputed to be no Moral Commandment, but abrogated?

[ 3] That it is the Churches Type appears two ways.

1 From the olteration and change which it hath undergone since Christ.

2 By the inference which is made, in way of consequence from God's resting unto his Peoples resting, in the connection of the 9 and 10 verses of this 4 chap. Heb:

[ 4] The Sabbath its said was made for Man, that is, for his benefit and here to signify his happiness hereafter: so Mayer in locum saith, that in God's being said to rest, there must needs be an alluding to a most joyful Rest to be had by Man, seeing he was never weary neither had he need of Rest: so Anselm. to prove the rest of the seventh Day, and that it prefigured a further rest to come, he aleadgeth the words (saith he) of the history in Genesis▪ (The seventh Day God rested from all his Works ) for in that immediately after the making of Man these words were added, it is plain, that the resting of man who was last made was meant hereby. For as Augustine saith, God was not weary so that he had need to rest in regard of his great labor, but in those words he hath promised Rest to the laboring, or because he made all things very good and then it is said, he rested, thou mayest understand also that after thy good works thou shalt rest, and rest without end.

Secondly, they object, that by Rest there is not meant our Rest in Heaven, but our Rest from Sin here upon Earth, or our Gospel rest.

To this I answer, It cannot properly bear that sense; for,

1. It must be such a Rest as God rested, which was not from Sin, but an everlasting Rest in Heaven from the Works of Creation.

2. It must be such a Rest as is spoken of in the fourth Commandment, which is not properly a Rest from Sin, but a Rest from works.

3. As Mayer observeth it is there called Sabbatismus which signifieth a time of everlasting joy and festivity which cannot be expressed, which is only proper to Heaven.

4. To put all out of doubt in the 14 verse of this 4 chap. Heb: it is expressly called Heaven, and Christ himself is implied to rest it when he ascended into Heaven. Nor doth the Apostles speaking in the present tense in the third verse of this chap: saying, ( We which have believed do enter into Rest ) afford any Argument against it, for that is only a speech of faith, implying the certainty thereof, as also intimating the inchoation or entrance which the People of God make into this Heavenly Rest or everlasting Life even in this Life. For the Apostles dispute there showeth that God hath a Rest of everlasting Happines for his People, as for himself, and which now we are become capable of only by the promise of the Gospel through Faith, by reason of Christ our high Priest, who is gone thither before us, but for farther satisfaction see mi • e Anal •• pag▪ 38.

Broad.

4. The Sabbath was a shadow in as much as it was a Sabbath, that is, a day of rest and refreshing.

THe Sabbath (as hath been said) was a shadow of the blessed rest to come, and hereof now it was a shadow in respect it was a Sabbath or day of rest, even as the Land of Canaan was a type of Heaven in as much as it was a place of rest. Some will not have a Sabbath it self to be a shadow, but would Saint Paul have said the holy days new Moons and Sabbaths are shadows, if not these but circumstances only about them had been a shadow, where is the word Sabbath taken in such a sense? The word Sabbath is to be taken in such a sense Col. 2. as it is to be taken in other places, The Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath. The Sabbath was made for Man, was the strict rest, precise seventh day or the like made for Man? was the Son of Man Lord of the Sabbath only in such respects? but let us examine their Doctrine better.

The Sabbath they say was shadowish or ceremonial in some respects: as first, in respect it was the seventh day, and here they say, that the number of seven is mystical, that it is the number of perfection, and tell of seven days, and of seven times seven years &c. Ans.

1. Why may not I say also that the number of three is mystical, I am sure that three Persons in one God is the greatest mistery of all others, and I can tell them of three Persons in one God, of three Angels appearing to Abram.

2. Supposing that the number of seven be mystical, it followeth that we are freed from it, and not from the seventh day only, for what have we to do with the Jewish dark mysteries, in this clear Sun-shine of the Gospel. The week by this Doctrine should rather be a mystery or shadow then the Sabbath, for the Sabbath was but one day of the seven, as the first was or any other. Indeed the Sabbath was the last of the seven but what of that? Saint Paul terming the Sabbath a shadow joineth it with the Holy-days and new Moons, if now they will have the Sabbath be a shadow in regard it was the last of the week, the New-moon (maysome say) was a shadow in regard it was the first of the Month, and the holy-days in regard they fell at other times.

3. If the number of seven or last of seven be mystical, must it not be so from the beginning. And thus must the Sabbath be a mystery or shadow from the first institution, as all other shadows were. Secondly, in respect of their strict rest, but I know nothing of any moment, which they bring for proof hereof, and why of the strict rest and not of the whole? Certainly we shall rest wholly in Heaven. And if the Sabbath was ceremonial in respect of the strict rest, then it seemeth he that labored all day or a good part thereof brake the moral part and so sinned. Moreover the holy-days (joined with the Sabbath Col. 2.) may seem to want the ceremony, seeing no such strict rest was in joined in them as was shown before Chap. 2. 3. in respect of the sacrifices offered therein. Ans.

First, If sacrifices offered on such a day made the day a shadow, then every day of the week was a shadow as well as the Sabbath, for sacrifices were by the Law to be offered every day.

Secondly, Then shall we have three Sacraments for the administration of the Lord's supper is as well a part of sanctifying the Lord's day, as the offering of sacrifices was a part of sanctifying the Sabbath. If then the sacrifices made the Sabbath a ceremony like to themselves, the Lord's supper maketh the Lord's day a Sacrament like to it self also.

Thirdly, If a ceremonial duty enjoined on the Sabbath made it partly ceremonial, a moral duty enjoined on the holy-days made them partly moral. And thus should the feast of Passover be partly moral as well as the Sabbath.

Answer.

I grant you, that the Sabbath was a shadow or signification of the blessed rest to come, and that not as it was a seventh day, but as the seventh day was a Sabbath. But hence you would deduce a wrong conclusion, that therefore it is as was the Jewish shadows, abrogative in the coming of Christ, and that we are not bound to dark mysteries (say you) in this clear sun-shine. Ans.

We are not bound indeed to any mystery, but to the duty contained in the number of seven. Yet to the signification of the Sabbath we are bound, which is not dark but clear for so the Scripture hath made it to be in the fourth Hebr. And although this Sabbath was shadowish, yet was it neither of like nature with their other Sabbaths, nor yet with other things whose signification reached to Heaven as well as it.

First I say, it differed from other Sabbaths because it properly signified our rest in Heaven (as we see in the fourth Hebr. where it alone is mentioned) and they properly our rest on earth by Christ; and therefore were they so many (and it but one and the same from the beginning) to signify that our rest here was to be with manifold intermissions and in great variety.

Secondly I say, it also differed from other things whose signification reached to Heaven as well as it: For mostly they had a double signification, the one proper and proximate, as Jewish types, signifying the rest and flourishing prosperity, that the Church should have in the time of the Gospel; the other Analogical and remote, intimating that in the end, Heaven should be the accomplishment of our Gospel graces and benefits, like as in the mid way they were the accomplishment of their types and shadows. But the Sabbath had precedency of these having for its signification properly and adequately one rest in Heaven, and the other abrogative Sabbaths subservient to it for the abrogative part (as appears by the significant difference of rest that was imposed upon them in the wilderness, as I have else where observed more at large) it being Catholicall and (the) Churches inheritance beginning with it and ending with it; and they being (that) Churches inheritance in like manner receiving their beginning and ending with it.

If it be objected, that the Sabbath is as much fulfilled on earth as many other Jewish types, for many of them have not their perfect signification accomplished here but in Heaven, (as the Jewish circumcision shall not be perfected till we be in the Kingdom of Heaven) and our everlasting rest hath its inchoation here in the souls of God's elect, what difference then?

Ans. The difference consisteth in the immediate object which the types primarily and principally eyed. For the Jewish types primarily eyed the happy estate of the Church on Earth under the time of the Gospel, thereby to invite and bring their souls into a Gospel state by believing (so that though they are perfectly fulfilled in Heaven, yet they are properly fulfilled on earth) and secondarily or remotely its perfection in Heaven; For the time of the Gospel was (as I may say) properly their Heaven as it may appear in that it is said, the Prophets and righteous men have desired to see (to wit looking through their types and shadows) the things that you see &c. Matth. 13. 17 these being their primary and proper object, and as may appear in the second place by the faultines of their covenant Hebr. 8. 7. and the faultlesnes of the Gospel covenant. But this type of the Sabbath contrariwise primarily and principally eyed the happy estate of the Church in Heaven Hebr. 4. whereby their minds were to be elevated above the Manna, that they should partake of on earth, which they must enjoy with pains taking, even to the Manna which they should feed on in Heaven with rest from all labor, and so is not yet fulfilled neither properly nor perfectly. For we must note that the Sabbath signified properly God's rest, or our rest with God, not first Christ's rest and then God's, though by reason of the admixtion of the Gospel in that time of the Law, it signified God's rest to be by Christ (as in its succession to Manna hath been shown) I say that properly it signified not Christ's rest; neither literally, in respect of the time of the new covenant under the Gospel, wherein we are set free from the burden which neither we nor our Fathers were able to bear, nor spiritually, in the souls of the regenerate freed from the Law (for this their other Sabbaths did in regard this weekly Sabbath could not properly do it, at that time) though now under the Gospel, the Sabbath-day that attended the Law being done away, this weekly Sabbath now supplieth the place of all their Sabbaths, and now it self alone signifies our already entrance into our eternal rest inchoatively, by being possessed of our souls spiritual rest in Christ, a thing which whilst the Law was afoot it could not properly imply; Because the Law gave no present rest but all future, though in the time of the Law (as aforesaid) it was signified to be made good to us by Christ. Yet it never properly signified the rest of Christ in the soul, for then it had signified a present rest which was contrary to the Law, and is now our privilege under the Gospel; The Sabbath-day being changed for that end from last to first. For 4. Heb. 3. We which have believed do enter into rest, where this rest of God is spoken of in a double respect, to wit, as denied to carnal Israel that sought to possess themselves of it by works, but granted to God's spiritual Israel that seek it of Grace through faith, who shall not only have it here after, but even for present are possessed of it in their souls, which happiness the Law or first covenant never could afford.

So that although the Sabbath be shadowish, yet is it not the Jews proper freehold but common with them and us, being theirs only, as they were the elect Church and people of God to whom it universally belongeth, and therefore was instituted even to Adam in innocence. For the Church of God in the clearest state of it never was nor never shall be upon earth, without shadowish Sacraments and Sabbaths, being her proper inheritance, which were even in innocence, where our eyes were clearer then they are now.

And seeing that the Sabbath is not properly Jewish it cannot be said to be abrogated, because the substance is yet not come, which is Heaven it self; or our absolute rest and inablement to serve God there; As was signified by that strict rest commanded to the Jews on this Sabbath in the time of Manna, above other rests and other Sabbaths; but only changed, to prove to us that the Gospel estates us in that rest (and that presently) which the Law should, but could not.

And now in our days the stricter that we rest from worldly distractions, and the more sanctifiedly that we keep the Sabbath, the nearer we imitate God's example, and fulfill his intention in the institution of the Sabbath, and the better we perform our duty in glorifying God (as the Jews did in doubling their sacrifices on that day) and the more comfort we reap to ourselves, in lively moralizing thence our heavenly rest which we shall have hereafter, free from all corruptions, interruptions, temptations. For in proportion all that belong unto the Jews concerning their resting and sanctifying the Sabbath, belong likewise to us consideratis considerandis.

Broad.

CHAP. VI.

A Rguments proving that the precept of the Sabbath is not moral nor perpetual

Answer.

A pitiful shift that these Antisabbatarians and the Papists are driven to for the maintenance of their opinions, even to the down right adventuring to blot out that which God himself hath written with his own hand; (a greater boldness then King Belshazzar durst attempt touching the writing on the wall) witness Master Broad here, and Vasquez the Jesuit else-where, who being driven to acknowledge (by comparing the words of the second commandment with the fourth of Deut. ) that the Scripture doth forbid the adoration of the true God himself in an Image, and confessing with all that he and his fellow Catholics do other ways, what saith he then to the commandment? why, because it will not be obeyed it must be repealed, and not admitted to have any place amongst the moral precepts of God, it was (saith he) a positive and ceremonial Law, and therefore ought to cease in the time of the Gospel, thus making the commandemen of God of none effect to keep their own traditions Gab. Vasquez. lib. 2. dispute. 4. cap. 4. sect. 84. But the Jesuits come short of the subtleties of our age, for they bluntly explode the second commandment, whereas they might have let it stand still with a distinction: Like as some of our Antisabbatarians (For they cannot all agree upon the point) do, let the fourth commandment stand though not for its own sake, or as a Law (though we must pray, Lord incline our hearts to keep this Law, as we do to the rest) but only for some other causes and consideration dictated by our Antisabbatarians, someone, some another; to keep the ten commandments from a blank. I wonder what one man of a thousand hath wont to pray that prayer after the reading of the fourth commandment in their sense; which if they will have pass for Doctrine, they must either alter the frame of the commandment or else explode it as Master Broad doth.

But Doctor Heylin part. 2. pag. 241. objects, that if this ejaculation be to be understood in a literal sense, according as the words are laid down in terminis, it then must be the meaning of it, that we should pray unto the Lord to keep the Sabbath of the Jews, even the seventh day precisely from the Worlds creation and keep it in the self same manner that the Jews once did.

To which I answer, that our praying that prayer in a literal sense now in our times doth force no such conclusions. Not to keep the Sabbath of the Jews: For though the commandment express a seventh day for number yet it doth not in terminis express the order saying, Thou shalt keep the last day in the week, or of seven, and not the first, &c. (though I acknowledge from other reasons proper to these times the commandment had then that meaning only) so that now the letter of the commandment is intended in our prayer only with a circumstantial variation according to the practice of the Church (derived from the Apostles) which explains it to the meanest: Again, not the seventh day precisely from the Worlds creation, for that hath suffered many variations, nor did Adam keep it, but he means the seventh day from the first gathering of Manna.

Nor yet in the self same manner, that the Jews once did, If by (once) he mean in the strict time of the wilderness for reasons aforesaid. So that by the letter of the commandment we now may pray the Lord to incline our hearts to keep holy a Sabbath, and not the Jews, a seventh day and not the last of seven (For the Law in the letter respecteth properly and principally the number implying only the order occasionally, for the season sake, because the creation was then the greatest good; which number it still retains in the same letter, and upon a new season implies a new order, the reason whereon the order was built being circumstantial, as I have proved before) nor the day that God rested on after the creation, nor the extraordinary rest in the wilderness. I say, we may ejaculate this prayer in a literal sense to the fourth commandment as well as to the fifth, where weepray, Lord incline our hearts to honor our parents, that according to thy promise, the days may be long in the Land which thou givest us: Now we all knew that by Land there and then is implicitly meant the promised Land, or Land of Canaan. Yet the manner of expression which God useth in the penning of that Law (as of that of the Sabbath ) admits a latitude ( Ephes. 6. 2. 3.) not appropriating the promise to the Land of Canaan only (by saying, that thy days may be long in that Land of Canaan which the Lord thy God giveth thee ) so that the Tribe and the half which planted on this side Jordan might have prayed this prayer at the reading of the fifth commandment, as well as they with in the Land of Canaan, by virtue of the letter of that Law; and so in like manner may we now: So excellent is the wisdom of the Lawgiver. That though in some temporary implicit circumstantial sense, his Laws might more properly belong to those people to whom they were immediately given then to us and our times; yet he hath so ordered it that the Law is still useful and binding for the substance of it, even in the letter. And therefore they that pray this ejaculation with understanding hearts, do not pray, Lord incline our hearts to keep a Sabbath which 〈◊〉 no Sabbath, but Lord incline our hearts to keep a Christian Sabbath, a Christian seventh day, and a Christian rest.

But in the conclusion Doctor Heylin saith, we may thus expound this prayer. viz. to pray unto the Lord to incline our hearts to keep that Law as far as it containeth the Law of Nature, &c. (which yet Master Broad his partizan will not allow) a pitiful shift to keep all whole: And such is Bishop Whites pag. 159. 160. The generality of whose conclusion there upon this ejaculation (saving his private exposition) may well serve to set forth the use of it now; For (saith he) our prayer to God, prescribed in the Liturgy, is not to beseeth him to incline our hearts to keep the Law according to the special form and circumstance of time commanded in the old Law, (which say I is the last day of seven in memory of our creation) but in such a manner as is agreeable to the state of the Gospel and time of Grace, which say I is the first day of seven in memory of our redemption, and not as he interprets it, to wit, according to the equity and mistery of the fourth commandment, and according to the rule of Christian liberty, which hath freed God's people under the Gospel from the observation of days, months, times and years (saith he) upon legal and ceremonial principles; true, if he mean judaicall ones, and then he cannot mean the Sabbath; For to be freed from it is no part of Christian liberty, because not yet fulfilled by Christ, Hebr. 4. 9. 10.

But to return to Master Broad, by your Marginall note it seems you could allow the Sabbath (not in respect of the Jews weakness, but of its own worth and greatness) to be of longer continuance then the holy-days but not perpetual; wherein you exceedingly wrong your cause: for if of longer continuance why not perpetual? and if not perpetual, why of longer continuance? the Holy-days and Jewish Sabbaths, say you, expired in Christ, and if this common Sabbath be no other then a Jewish Holy-day, why doth not it expire with the rest? and if you can allow it beyond Christ, I pray you, what should hinder it for being perpetual? neither is it incredible to think that the common Sabbath, and Jewish Holy-days be of different natures; when as they had different institutions, different significations, different locations and different extensions.

Broad.

ARG. I. No moral Commandment may be broken in case of necessity: but the fourth Commandment may; Ergo, it is not moral.

THe Major is evident, for a man may not Ly, Steal or the like to save his Life; The Minor is no less evident, for to save the Life of his Cattle a man may labor all the Sabbath, in seeking them covered with Snow, in lifting them out of Pits &c.

Works of necessity are not forbidden in the intention of the Lawgiver, and therefore such do not break the fourth Commandment.

Suppose the King by a general Law shall forbid the eating of Flesh in Lent, a sick Man eating Flesh breaketh the Law, though no doubt it be in the Kings intention, that in such case Flesh may be eaten: as it is in the Lawgivers intention that Work in case of necessity may be done, so is it in the Lawgivers intention that the fourth Commandment in case of necessity may be broken, as other Ceremonial precepts might in the time of the Law.

The whole Rest (not the strict Rest only) is Ceremonial, so that if a Man labor all the Sabbath in lifting his Cattle out of Pits, in saving his goods from Burning, in Fighting against the Enemy &c. Yet he breaketh only the Ceremonial part of the fourth Commandment.

Unless such break the moral part, none ever did, nor can do, and consequently there is no moral part: consider that to break the fourth Commandment, and to profane the Sabbath are the same, and now that the Sabbath is profaned only by work was shown before those Laws only are to be termed Moral whereby the observation of Moral duties, such as are Prayer, Alms &c. are prescribed as for Time and Place, they are necessary circumstances about the performance of Moral duties, and their Laws are to be termed Circumstantiall.

M ^r . Jacob in his reply to some notes of mine above twenty years since acknowledged that the fourth Commandment was circumstantial and not moral. And I suppose that many other when they have a little considered the matter will easily acknowledge as much, but yet as he, so they, will have it perpetual nevertheless: wherefore I come to prove that the fourth Commandment is abrogated.

Answer.

In answer to your Argument, I say, that the fourth Commandment can be no more broken then the first second or third. For as in the first other things may be loved, but not unlawfully loved, and as in the second Images may be made, but not unlawfully made, and in the third the Name of God may be used and taken, but not abused and taken in vain: so in this fourth Commandment we may do work, and • et break this no more then the other, if so be not unlawful work, but such as agreeth with the sense of the Lawgiver, and may be gathered by comparing places of Scripture, which we find to be such as may promote Piety, Mercy and Charity. And therefore is that following Objection of moment. For in all Laws the meaning of the Lawgiver, and sense of the Law it self is principally to be respected, not the Letter: for that thing may be contradictory to the Letter of the Law, which yet is no breach of the meaning of the Law, if so be it be agreeable to the rules of Right, Reason and Piety. As where we are comanded not to Swear at all, you might well imagine what would follow thence, if this doctrine of yours might take place, that therefore to Swear at all is to break this Commandment, and so in this fourth Commandment where we are bid to do no manner of Work, if you will cleave to the Letter, you may soon find your error to your cost. But God giveth his Laws and Commandments to reasonable Creatures, who should therefore be able to judge of them according to the Rules of Truth and Reason. A London Merchant chargeth his Apprentice upon a Shrovetuesday that all that Day he stir not out of his House, if so be the Apprentice upon occasion go into the back Court, you will not say hereupon he breaketh his Masters commandment. That therefore which one affirms of men's writings is true touching Laws, to wit, that we must seek for the meaning by the matter, as well as by the Letter; and lend our Ears to listen and observe what they desire to speak, and not make them speak only what w're desire to he • e, unless we will be like 〈◊〉 Children, who having some fancy running in their Heads, imagine the Bells to ring and sing as they think and speak.

See that where Christ saith Math: 12. 5. That the Priests profaned the Sabbath in the Temple, and • ere blameless, it is spoken according to the Capacity and misprision of the superstitious Pharisees, the better to convince their error, 〈◊〉 that if they counted the actions which his D •• ples did in his service to be a breach of the Sabbath, they must by the same Reason account the actions which the Priests did in the service of the Temple to be a breach of the Sabbath (for he had more authority to use their service, then the Temple had to use the service of the Priests) but that they did not, therefore nor ought they to think this a breach of the Sabbath, for indeed such works as tend to Mercy and Piety are so far from breaking the Sabbath (which commandeth an holy Rest) as that they are the proper fulfillings of it, even as to do the will of our Father in Heaven will be no impeachment to our Rest there▪ And indeed the just intermission of Rest on the Sabbath, is most improperly called a dispensation of the keeping of the Sabbath, for in nothing ought Rest to be intermitted on the Sabbath, but in such things as tend more to the sanctifying of the Sabbath (such were Christ's Sabbath Day cures which he might else have suspended till the next Day) for Rest being principally ordained to remove the impediments of the Sabbaths sanctifying ought of right to give way to its furtherances: whereas the dispensing with a duty is to prejudice that for the advantage of some other.

But by the way take notice that, from the Pharisees reproving Christ's Disciples, in the beginning of this 〈◊〉 . Math: for rubbing the Ears of Corn on the Sabbath Day, it is objected by some, that that Law given in the W •• dernes in the time of Manna, touching their not preparing their Food on the Sabbath Day, was then of force and a foot in the opinion and practice of the Pharisees, else they would not have reproved the Disciples for so doing, to which I answer.

That they did not reprove this action of Christ's Disciples in reference to that Law, or with any such opinion that it was of force, or in respect of any such practice of their own: but as a work and so a breach of Rest (as M ^r . Broad rightly observes in his third chapter) nay as a needless and cursory work or action, as may appear.

1. In that they themselves were not so ill instructed in the lawfulness of works of mercy and necessity (seeing they led their Oxen to watering on the Sabbath Day) that they would have found fault with it had they conceived it to have been a work of necessity.

2. In Christ's excuse or justification of them, from the necessity of what they did, implying, first that it was not needles and superfluous, as they by their Pharisaical carping and misprision conceived, but necessary, and secondly that it was not unlawful, because not needless.

2 ^lie . I answer, it was not their practice as you may see Luke 14. by comparing •• verse with 12. 13 except of some superstitious ones, such as Ignatius ad Mag: mentioneth.

3 ^lie . I answer, it was not their opinion, for then the Pharisees would have replied upon Christ's argument, that necessity made it not lawful to them, in regard that that necessity was begot by their improvidence, in not preparing and making ready their viands beforehand on the Day before, according as that Law enjoined: for so it is likely through the improvidence of the man that gathered Sticks on the Sabbath Day (probably for to seeth or bake some Manna unprovided the Day before) his action became necessary and yet he was stoned for it.

But here it will be said that if this action of Christ's Disciples was a breach of Rest, and so judged to be unlawful, then in like manner it is unlawful for us going through a Corn Field on the Sabbath Day to do the like.

It is as well unlawful to us as to them needlessly and cursorily performed, but with a distinction of unlawfulness for it was literally unlawful to them, but it is spiritually unlawful to us: For it was of a positive holiness to them in their times, but to us it is only of a relative holiness: so that such an action is unlawful to us, not properly as a breach of Rest, but as it is a distraction, or a fruit and effect of empty carnal and earthly minds on that Heavenly Day: for else in case of necessity (for mercy sake) it is lawful, or as an help and furtherance of the spiritualizing or sanctifying of that Day it is also lawful: as if a man for the help of his mind in meditation, or to deduce some point of instruction do pluck an Eare of Corn, and anatomize it by rubbing it in his hand, the better to see the wisdom and power of the Creator in it. For thus even in the time of Israel, the Temple sanctified works to it own service, even on the Day of Rest: as Christ showeth after in this 12. Math: intimating that the principal end of the instituting the Sabbaths rest from carnal works, was for the service and help of the Temple of our minds and Hearts in the works and ways of God Isaiah 58. 13. Levite. 23. 27. 28 &c. And therefore did the godly-wise among the Jews make no scruple of working on the Sabbath Day to this end, as the Priests in the Temple, nor to travel further then a Sabbath Days journey for this purpose, as we see by the godly Shunamite her going to the Prophet a Kings 4. 22. 23. For spiritual and holy ends make spiritual and holy actions, so that the action be not unlawful but indifferent. To this purpose its worth our observation to consider how that the building of the Tabernacle (and Temple) gave place to the rest of the Sabbath, Exod. 31. intimating that distracting bodily labors, or the carnal part or employment of or about even holy things, their opus operatum must give place to the spiritual rest of heavenly mindedness, and spiritual worship or worshipping of God in Spirit: And again on the contrary the Sabbath-rest gave place to the serviceable works of the Temple (and Tabernacle) implying that our carnal rest must give place to his spiritual worship and service. And hereupon let me in an holy Iealousy annex an exhortation to some of the Ministers of this Land (for blessed be God it needs not to all) that they would carefully provide, and look that they do not build the Tabernacle on that day, I mean that they rest not in the opus operatum of their holy employments, and busying themselves about the carnal part of holy things, in putting off the studying of their Sermons, or getting them by heart (except it be to work them upon the heart, and not barely to commit them to memory) till that day, and so though they take care to build the Tabernacle of God's Church, yet they in the mean time neglect the Temple of their own hearts, in serving God in the Spirit and not in the letter or outward performance only. But it were well if they would gather and prepare their Manna, seeth it and bake it the day before, that when the Sabbath came, they might have nothing to do, but to chew and conc • ct it into their own Spirits, and so spiritually in the experience of their own hearts (not heads) dish it out to their hearers; which would be an happy means to make them see better fruits of their labors: For commonly that which is notionally delivered is notionally received, and that which is spiritually and powerfully delivered in the evidence of the Spirit, is spiritually and savingly received (though I know to the pure all things are pure; a good stomach can digest good meat, though the cook perhaps never lick his own fingers, how ever it be cooked or dished: it may be as the yolke of an egg to the hearer, when it is as the white to the speaker without taste or life) for Spirit begets Spirit, as fire begets fire; And as a worthy Writer of this Church saith to this purpose, that it can hardly sink into an hearers heart, that never went further then the speakers head. This fault in part is to be suspected in some Ministers by their absenting themselves from the public prayers of the congregation, not coming in till the Psalm be almost at an end (of ill president, the congregation losing the Doctrine of their example and the assistance of their Spirit) not but that some men at sometimes may be justly and really straitened and necessitated to study or get by heart their Sermons on the Sabbath-day, others also may be of weak memories and must bring it fresh: To such I speak not, but only to make them their afflictions, and to watch and pray against them; but to them to whom God gives Manna for gathering and preparing, that they do not put up with the worse, and neglect the better part of the duty, satisfying themselves with this that they are in their Divine calling, conversant about holy things, and so gather Manna when they should eat it. It is an easy thing to take great pains in the outward part or performance of holy things, which oft proves a snare, causing the neglect of the Spirit of the inner man: For many are great laborers in the work of the Lord, that are starvelings in the Spirit of the Lord, satisfying themselves with a Popish peace of conscience in the deed doing, instead of joy in the holy Ghost, bringing indeed meat to their nests, but through hast or laziness eating none themselves; or like Tailors make clothes for other men to wear, so they never assaying their own points how they fit or may fit their own Spirits, but think it is their duties to teach, and other men's duties to do. And let me also admonish the People that they take not scandal or offense by carping or misprision at the Ministers absence in time of public prayer, as the Pharisees did here at Christ's Disciples, but rather judge them necessitated to it.

But it will be said, that it is beyond flesh and blood, thus to spend a whole day in heavenly mindedness.

It is indeed hard to flesh and blood, but where the Spirit is there is liberty: A Gentleman that handles a flale for novelty sake thinks it an hard thing to thresh an hour together, but the Country Husbandman, that is called to it, and by frequent use hath made it another nature, to him thinks it no hard thing to thresh a whole day together. So flesh and blood wanting the skill to handle spiritual tools, and feeding on spiritual things with a forced and not a natural palate, digesting divine truths but as other truths of other arts, only into a notional meditation to improve his understanding or outward practice a little, to such a man it must needs be hard: But he that is begotten of God, and hath a new nature put into him, he is skilled in the way of the Lord, and findeth such sweetness in digesting divine truths into his Spirit, and in renewing and maintaining his spiritual acquaintance with God in giving and receiving, and in the variety of God's spiritual ordinances as that it is not hard to him; for when flesh and blood knows it shall have no liberty it will look for none and then the Spirit easily beareth rule. I wish by the way that such men as talk of keeping every day Sabbath, to cry down the weekly Sabbath • thereby, do know their own meaning whilst withal they say, to spend a whole day in heavenly mindedness and spiritual employments is an heavy yoke; and implyingly make it part of our Christian liberty to be redeemed unto earthly mindedness and not unto heavenly, whereas it is both the best and chiefest part of our Christian liberty, to be redeemed and enabled unto heavenly mindedness, and to a willing, powerful, spiritual performance of holy things, in this time of the ministration of the Spirit, being delivered from the ministration of the dead letter, which embondaged them to the outward and carnal part, and unwilling weak performance of them through the weakness of the flesh: For the Spirit is therefore a free Spirit, not because he freeth us from the Law, but because he sets us free to the performance of it: Thus David looked to be a free man and set at liberty, not from obeying but to obeying and doing the commandments Psalm 119. 32. I will run the ways of thy commandments when thou hast enlarged my heart▪ I wish we were less guilty of this Judaism in our days viz. making our holiness consist rather in rest, then in resting to be holy. Sure I am those that walk the most exactly and strictly in this way of heavenly mindedness on that day, find the benefit and sweet thereof to their souls, and good reason: For that promise Isaiah 58. 14. Then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord is not only made to, but also to be fulfilled by the performances of the duties enjoined us in the foregoing verse, of not doing our own ways, not finding our own pleasure, not speaking our own words, the Spirit of God working this unspeakable delight and comfort in the souls of them that so walk.

Now I come to speak to your answer to the second objection, and therein to show you when we are said to break the moral part of the Sabbath, which is, when we either do our own works, or God's work to our own ends. For had rest been properly or only the moral part of the Sabbath, then had the superstitious Jews kept it, none better. But a man may rest and not keep the Sabbath, and a man may work and not break the Sabbath: And indeed that man that both resteth and worketh to wit, from his own works to do the works of God, is the only true Sabbath keeper: And therefore as we are advised in another case, that whether we eat or drink &c. So in this case, say I, whether we rest or work let it be done to the glory of God, else our rest is but the rest of brute beasts, and our works the works of profane Men and Hypocrites. So that on the Sabbath our rest must give place to all God's good works, and on the contrary all our works must give place to God's rest: For whether we rest or work, it must be unto God, and not unto ourselves, for so only we fulfill the Sabbaths signification.

Lastly, for answer to that which you say in proof hereof, how that those Laws are only to be termed moral &c. I ask you what prayer or Alms &c. is there commanded in the third commandment, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, and yet this you cannot deny to be a moral Law. If you say there are, then I answer, no more then in the fourth commandment where we are to keep holy the Sabbath, or to sanctify it with an holy rest: by which is not meant a bare rest, no more then by an holy convocation is meant a bare meeting together, but it is meant in regard of the holy duties that were to be done thereon of praying, praising God, reading Moses Law, sacrificing &c. And why is not, remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath-day as well moral also, as, thou shalt not make to thyself any graven Image, in the sense in hand. And whereas you say, that time and place are circumstantial (implying them thereby to be indifferent things) I answer, that in themselves they are so, but if God please to alter their natures, he may; Thus he disposed of the Temple for a time, and the Sabbath forever to be his proper ordinances. Consider how inconsistent you make it, for resting to be the sanctifying of the Sabbath, and yet the Law of the Sabbath to be but circumstantial to other duties.

Broad.

ARG. II.

BY Sabbaths Col. 2. 16. the weekly Sabbaths are to be under stood, by ordinances then in the 14. verse the Law of these Sabbaths must needs be meant as well as the Laws of new Moons and Holy-days, and now these ordinances, that is, precepts of the Sabbath, new Moon and Holy-days are here said most manifestly to be blotted out.

Though Saint Paul here saith that the precept of the Sabbath is blotted out, yet his meaning is not that it is wholly blotted out, but only in part.

So any one may say of the precepts of the new Moon and Holy-days, and would it not trouble them to show by the Scriptures how much is blotted out, and what is left uncancelled?

The received division of Moses Law hath been • into moral, ceremonial, and judicial.

That any commandment should be partly ceremonial, and partly moral, partly an ordinance and partly not, partly nailed to the Cresse and partly remaining in the Ark, partly blotted out and partly left to be read and observed; I could never yet find in any part of God's word. And this no doubt some of late perceive well enough, and therefore teach that the precept of the Sabbath is wholly moral, or (as their words are) no more ceremonial then all the rest.

They see plainly that he which will have it partly blotted out and partly not, had need be greater then an Angel, as teaching in part another Gospel then Saint Paul did. Consider that Saint Paul here saith as much of the Sabbath and the precept thereof, as he doth say of the New-moon and the precept of the same, and again that he saith as much here of the New-moon and its precept, as is said of them in any other place.

Though the precept of the Sabbath be wholly blotted out, as the precepts of the New-moon and Holy days joined with it, yet not the fourth commandment in the Decalogue. We grant the fourth commandment is ceremonial and blotted out so far forth as it enjoineth the Sabbath (not only the seventh day and strict rest) but this commandment is of a larger extent then this cometh to.

The fourth commandment and the commandment of the Sabbath are the same after the Scriptures, so that Saint Paul here saying the commandment of the Sabbath is blotted out, it is all one as if he had said, the fourth commandment in the Decalogue is blotted out, you have no color of proof to the contrary. As touching the fourth commandment, being blotted out so far forth as it enjoineth the Sabbath, consider that the fourth commandment must needs enjoin the Sabbath, so far forth as it is contained in these words, Remember the Sabbath-day to sanctify it, &c. If God had made this Law bath for Jews and Christians, is it credible but that he would have set it down in words fitting both sorts, so that Christ at his coming should not have blotted out any part thereof? Certainly Christ would not have written that again which he had once blotted out, suppose that he also had left Tables.

In a word the Sabbath is the only thing spoken of in the fourth commandment, and no Law of God or Man ever stood in force longer then it bound to do the thing mentioned in it as many as dislike the name Sabbath for the Lord's-day, have cause to dislike this commandment for the Law thereof, for the one is as well Jewish as the other.

Answer.

By Sabbaths in that 2. Col. 16. is to be understood the Jewish ordinances, which properly belonged to them and their time, such as were their solemn fealts, which although they were Jewish Holy-days, yet did they also carry the name of Sabbaths, and holy convocations, because of the Analogy they had with the weekly and moral Sabbath, as we may see Levite. 23. In the beginning of which Chapter you shall find the weekly Sabbath most gloriously entitled (THE SABBATH OF THE LORD) and remarkeably paled out from among those Jewish Holy-days, Feasts, and Sabbaths. For God, in that Chapter instituting his solemn Feasts, or Jewish Holy-days, in the first place noteth out his weekly Sabbath (in the third verse) to be none of them, by a glorious and sublime title, and pregnant difference, which s • emeth to be distinctly penned by the holy Ghost, to prevent confusion and unequal mixture. And, having first done this, then he in the rest of the Chapter proceedeth to show what Feasts he meaneth, which he also calleth Sabbaths, but in a far different sense. And think you, that the Apostle would so carelessly and slightly have jumbled together (in this place of the Col. ) what God, even in the time of the Jews, was so careful to distinguish▪ as in this 23. Levite. appeareth, as also in the exhibiting of his Laws, which were of several natures, ceremonial and moral, amongst which this was one, and which with the rest was put into the Ark.

And as in your answer to the first objection you say, that you cannot find in any place of God's word why any commandment should be partly ceremonial, partly moral, partly nailed to the Cross, and partly remaining in the Ark, partly blotted out, and partly left to be read and observed; I affirm the same of the Decalogue or ten commandments as Moses numbers them Deut. 4. 13. Not but that in the delivery and exhibition of this Decalogue (this rejoyneth upon your following answer to the second objection) there were things (as I have said before) which were more proper in regard of circumstance to the Jews then to us, and yet God made the Decalogue as a Law both for Jews and Christians, and hath set it down, though not altogether in words and letters, yet in sense and substance fitting both sorts: So that the Law may still be truly said to remain, although Christ's coming and the state of the Church differing, may vary some circumstances; as by changing the Egyptian deliverance into the antitype thereof, to wit, our spiritual; and the Land of Canaan meant in the fifth commandment, into England where we dwell; and so likewise the memory of our creation into the memory of our redemption; and their gates into our jurisdictions; and thus though there is an alteration made, yet doth the Law remain the same in sense.

Broad.

ARG. III.

IN the 31. of Exod. we read thus, Verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep, for it is a sign between me and you, throughout your generations, that ye may know, that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you. Here by sanctifying is meant separating from other Nations to be a peculiar people to himself. In this sense Aaron and his Sons are said to be sanctified. Exod. 29. 44. Aaron and his Sons were sanctified and severed from the other Levites to be the Lord's Priests, and the Israelites were sanctified and severed from other Nations to be the Lord's people, of which sanctifying the Sabbath was a sign, in as much as it was a day sanctified and separated from other days of the week for the Lord's service.

Now if God gave the Sabbath for a sign to the Israelites, the Sabbath could not be common to other Nations, and consequently was a mere ceremony as was circumcision. Abraham received the sign of circumcision, and the Israelites received the sign of the Sabbath. Hence I thus argue, such as is the Sabbath such is the precept thereof, The Sabbath is a sign, therefore the precept thereof is significative or ceremonial and is abrogated. Here consider, that if Noah had taught his household, and Lot his Sons, Abraham his Sons by Hagar and Keturah, Isaac his son Esau, and Melchizedek his people to keep the Sabbath, the Sabbath could have been no sign to the Israelites, for the World would have been replenished with Sabbath-keepers at that time, and a long time after, so that no doubt we should often read of this matter in Heathen writers.

Answer.

You say the Sabbath was given to the Israelites as a sign of their peculiar sanctifying or separating to be the people of God from all others, and hence you fallaciously conclude, that therefore it cannot be common to others.

For though it be true, that as a sign it was proper to them only in their times, and so also was the whole Law, as it was renewed and given of God for a covenant between him and them (and therefore doth he say Psalm 147. 19, 20. He hath shown his word to Jacob, and to Israel his judgments, and statutes, and that he hath not dealt so with every Nation, (that is with any Nation) neither have they known▪ his judgments) so that the Sabbath and the whole Law are alike significative, and indeed have somewhat of signification in them in this second exhibition: For as the Church it self was then typical, signifying the Church of God's elect; So was the Law, as given to them, as may appear in that it was twice written; to show the double writing of it, by nature and grace in the hearts of the elect.

So that both the Sabbath, and the rest of the Decalogue, as they are moral Laws, are forever common to the universal Church of God; being not only bare signs, but of a double nature. For the same thing may be both proper and common in diverse respects: As the Land of Canaan was proper to the Jews, as it was the Land of promise, and yet it was common to many Nations in the use thereof, to wit, as it was a place of commerce and habitation, and so is to this day. And so the whole Decalogue we know was common, as it was the Law of nature, to all Nations and People, even in those times of the Jews, but yet is it in the fourth Chap. of Deut. 13. verse, appropriated to the Jews; because it was given, in a special manner, as a Covenant between God and them, and in that respect it is opposed to things that are common to all People, in the 19. verse of that Chapter, as the thing, wherefore and whereby God will be especially worshipped, even for that very cause, because (as he himself layeth down the reason there) they are distributed unto all People under the whole Heaven: And yet is this Law no man will deny in the moral sense of it common to us now 〈◊〉 (whereof the Sabbath is a part) nay, and was also common to them that were not Jews even in the time of the Jews, though not in nature of a special Covenant, yet so as it was a Law of nature (which the precise Sabbath, I confess is none, but only made equivalent by revelation) and therefore did they then observe (though set times of worshipping God, yet happily) not the whole day, or at least not every seventh, for that most properly is the Churches right and rite. Moreover the very Sabbath it self was of force, by virtue of the fourth commandment, to all that came with in the cognizance of it as well stranger as Jew: And therefore could it not be meant a sign of separation in your sense, so as to appropriate it solely to them, and thereupon to create it a mere ceremony. Many things there were indeed, among the Jews, that bare this sense expressly, as the Paschal-Lamb, whereof by express words no stranger was to eat, until he was made as one that was borne in the Land by circumcision, Exod. 12. 48. But it was other ways in the commandment of the Sabbath, for the stranger ( quatenus stranger) was • o observe it, if they were within their gates ( Iubebantur feriari eo die, q • emadmodum & Iudaei, indigenae, saith Zanchi ) And not as the Antisabbatarians of our age would persuade, that it belonged to the proselite stranger only.

Again I argue against you out of your own place. 31. Exod. That if God menat it as a bare sign peculiar to the Jews, why then doth he fly back to the primitive institution of it; in the seaventeenth verse, re enforcing the commandment there, upon that reason which is common to all mankind. The words are these: It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever; For in six days the Lord made Heaven and Earth, and in the seventh day he rested.

Now we know, it was never the property of the Jewish types to look backward to the state of innocence, but forward.

But you will say, that the first institution of the Sabbath was but a prophecy or fore-runner of the second.

To this I answer, That it is very ill likely, that anything that was proper to the Jews as a ceremony, and not common to the whole Church of God (for whose sake the World was made) was prophesied or fore-ordained in innocence; For all the things that are made use of in Scripture from the state of innocence, are spoken of as appertaining to the whole Church of God, and not proper to any one People or time: And so is the Sabbath made use of in the fourth Hebr. to signify an everlasting rest, to whom? but to the People of God.

But you will ask me, how I know that this Law of the Sabbath was given in innocence, and not after the fall?

I answer, that this one reason may serve for all; Because that whatsoever Moses maketh mention of before the fall, we have good reason to think it to be done in innocence, and to allow as well his Method as his matter in that particular. But he placeth the Law of the Sabbath before the fall: Ergo &c. Besides your own Hypothesis stoppeth this objection.

For if Adam should have kept the Sabbath had he continued in innocence (as you suppose he should) its like it was revealed to him in that state.

And the rather was the Sabbath given in innocence, that it might be understood to be equal with the Law of nature, and to appertain to the whole Church of God, which afterwards was to be of a double condition, and so the Sabbath serves for a double end answerable to these conditions, to wit, in memorial of the creation as it is in the 20. Exod. 11. and also in memorial of our redemption as in the 5. Deut. 15. and as is the Sabbath such is the Law, of a double obligation to us in respect both of our creation and redemption.

It is very observable in those two places how an order is kept (which giveth authority to our second Sabbath and to the reason thereof) for in the first giving the Law Exod. 20. the Sabbath is enforced by the creation, and in the repetition or second giving of it in the 5. Deut. it is altogether enforced upon the redemption, the creation not being once named or mentioned there in the Law of the Sabbath or fourth commandment, lively intimating the subsistence of the fourth commandment under the Gospel, and the binding authority of it in our days, by the incorporation and addition of the reason of our new creation or spiritual deliverance by Christ, into the commandment, in stead of the old reason which is utterly omitted as if it were forgotten, or at least overtopped and triumphed over by us that are the second generation of Israel.

I wish our Antisabbat • rians to consider well, that such a repetition of the fourth commandment (not seorsim or by it self, but together with the whole Decalogue in its proper place) with such a material omission and addition or alteration, cannot but be significantly and doctrinally meant by the holy Ghost there.

But some argue, from this connection of the Sabbath to their deliverance out of Egypt, that the Sabbath was therefore given to them for a memorial of a particular benefit to them, and so belonged to the Ecclesiastical Government of the Jews, and therefore though it were not typical, yet for that cause it ought to be done away.

To whom I answer, that upon the same reason they may as well abolish the whole Law (and turn Antinomians ) if they ponder it connected with its preface.

I will borrow Master Richard Byfield to conclude this point pag. 88. who saith, that the Sabbath in those places of Exod. 31. 13. and Exod. 20. 12. 20 is called a sign in two respects.

First, in that it is an Argument and Document between God and Israel, and so between God and his People forever, whereby they may know, that God hath sanctified them.

Secondly, it is a sign not of any future thing▪ but of a thing present, as every adjunct that is a visible concomitancy is a sign of the subject present.

For in the observation of the Sabbath there is a public profession of that communion which intercedeth between God and us. As then every solemn profession is a sign of that thing of which profession is made, so also is the Sabbath called in this respect a sign.

Broad.

ARG. IV.

GOd resting on the seventh day, it became his Sabbath or Day of rest, as we term that a man's birth-day wherein he was borne, and as the other days of the Weeke were God's working days▪ This his resting (as I have shown before Chap. 5.) was typical, and it was the reason, why God did sanctify the day, and commanded men to sanctify it as appeareth by Gen. 2. 3. and Exod. • 0. 11.

Hence I thus reason, such as the foundation is, such is the building; The foundation (God's resting on the seventh day) was typical, and therefore his sanctifying it presently, and man's sanctifying it afterwards was no less.

Finally consiner whether more then this may be not spoken of Zion, and the Temple, then is spoken of the Sabbath. This is my rest forever. Psalm 132. 14. My house shall be called an house of prayer for all People, Isa. 56. 7.

I do not know where the Sabbath is termed God's rest forever, and for all People.

Answer.

My former Arguments have been sufficient to give this its answer, for I have always granted the Sabbath to be typical from the fourth Hebr.

Your comparison of the Sabbath, with those phrases belonging to the Temple and Zion in holy writ, is a mere flourish, and readily answered out of the fourth of Hebr. where the typical rest of the Sabbath is extended far beyond the typical rest of Canaan wherein Zion was, for the holy Ghost saith there, that the Sabbaths-rest still remaineth to the People of God, implying the contrary of the other rest.

Broad.

CHAP. VII.

T HE chiefest Arguments of the adverse part answered. I come now to answer the chiefest Arguments of the adverse part, I say the chiefest, for with a cloud (not of witnesses seeing they prove nothing, but of Arguments) such as they are, whereby some go about to obscure the light, I will not at this time have anything to do, hoping that as a mist it shall of itself vanish away, from before the eyes of all those that read this Treatise with understanding.

Answer.

To your answer I rejoyne, That this example of God, thus declared by himself, was in the nature of a Command, as appeareth plainly by the parallel case. We see God's creating Man male and female was a law justly inferred thence, obligatory enough to bind one man to marry but one woman at once, and to love her and live with her as appeareth, Gen. 2. 23, 24. compared with Mark 10. 6, 7. where there is concluded, from this exemplary action of God, a perpetual binding duty to all mankind, without any express Commandment to that purpose.

But God's blessing and hallowing the seventh day must needs enforce a Command, if we consider, that (as Christ saith) the Sabbath was made for man, that is saith M ^r . Hilder sham for the great benefit and behoove of man; so that man could not (no not in Innocency) have been without it.

And if this of the Sabbath were of no obligatory • orce, I pray you then, why do you (as before) say that Adam, if he had continued in Innocency, should have kept it? Me thinks he should rather then have kept every day Sabbath then we now; and yet you say, It is likely he should have wrought six days and sanctified the seventh. Therefore as Christ saith in the case of separation, it was not so from the beginning; So say I in this case of the Sabbath, that it was so from the beginning, on God's part actually, and on man's part it both should and would have been so, had he continued upright.

And therefor • as well in this of the Sabbath, as in that of Marriage, ought it to be so now. Nor did man's fall abrogate the Sabbath (anymore then it did the rest of the moral Law as you would seem to persuade in your first Chapter. For God used the self same authority to reinforce it when he gave the Law the second time, to wit, his own example and the Creation, both which he used in his first institution.

And therefore however we may think of the Sabbath in our corrupt reasonings, or by other men's examples, as the Jews might do of Marriage from the example of the Patriarchs polygamy, or the toleration of Moses, y • t it was other ways from the beginning, and let God be true though men be liars.

As touching your marginal note, God (as I may so speak) had no reason to go so far of for an enforcement, as to Adam, (especially it having been so long intermitted) when he might have it fresh and nearer hand; which he the rather chose to use, for that this iteration of the Law was more peculiar, and a greater Demonstration of his special love to them in way of Covenant, and so more pressing and remarkable.

And yet doth he not utterly omit to make use of the first institution, for he useth the same Arguments to them, as to Adam, for the observing it, to wit, his own example, and the memory of the Creation: which showeth that it was to be understood as a Commandment laid then upon Adam, as well as now upon the Israelites. And by this rule you may say, The promise and Covenant of Grace was not given to Adam, because Gal. 3. 17. The Apostle draweth his Argument of refutation from that Covenant which God confirmed with Abraham 430 years before the Law was given, and not from the Covenant made with Adam at the first. Touching the latter part of your marginal note I have answered it a little before, from Psal. 147. 19, 20.

It may well be said, (as a Rejoinder to your second answer) that unless the sanctifying of the Sabbath was instituted as an Ordinance for Adam to observe, wherefore did God sanctify it? for Christ saith, The Sabbath was made (that is appointed or created in the beginning) for man; And if God had a reserved and secret intent in this, why was it revealed (especially when the thing was done and past) seeing things revealed belong to us and to our children? And from your own reason, That the Sabbath was a Type of the Rest that remains to the people of God, a man may justly argue the use of it to the Church, and consequently the necessity and universality of it. For by the people of God is not meant any visible particular, but the whole Catholic Church.

And why God, who (instrict sense) rested no more on that day then on others, did yet so declare himself to have done, ad captum vulgi, and did also spin out the creation into six days, which else he could have done in a trice, if it were not for example sake, I leave to any indifferent judgment.

And as touching your second reason, why God should thus antedate the Sabbath, and have such a special eye to Israel, in the time of Innocency, when there was no partition wall built up, I see no reason, nor could the ancient Jews ever dream of such an interpretation, neither can you produce the like example in anything else, from all the Scripture, to give some color of probability to your conceit.

But some there are, who screw their wits further then you to foil this Doctrine of the Sabbath, and for want of other objections stick not to say that those words, Gen. 2. ver. 3. were not at all delivered by God in Innocency, but are only by Moses, speaking there of God's rest, aptly introduced in way of Anticipation, declaring what God did then the better to give authority to the Sabbath, that was instituted in his time.

To which I answer three things as followeth:

1. That they may as well (and better) affirm the the four and twentieth verse of that Chapter to be a deduction drawn and inserted ( orbiter ) by Moses. Had these objectors lived in the time of the Jews, before this Gospel of Math. 19. 5. was written, they would doubtless readily have sided for the maintenance of Moses his bill of divorce, and have invented tricks against the law of marriage mentioned, Gen. 2. verse. 24. as now they do against the law of the Sabbath, mentioned verse. 3. In both which Moses doth alike couple the example and duty, whereas had it not been then preceptive, why should Moses pussle our faith, and transgress the rules of method, not contenting himself with the relation of the history alone as it is penned, verse. 2. especially seeing he needed not have begged any credit to the duty of the Sabbath, by inserting it into that place: For God had sufficiently warranted it under his own hand in the Tables of stone from mount Sinai. I say they have far less reason to make this a Prolepsis of Moses his inserting, then that of 24. verse. of this second of Genesis, which rather seems to be an inference of Moses his own collecting from Adams former words in the verse foregoing, then this a Prol • psis of his inserting from God's resting on the seventh day; And the reason likewise is the same, for whereas it was done (saith D. Heylin, pag. 10.) by Moses, because of the Jews adversenesse to observe that day, and therefore they are minded of it by an intimation of the equity and reason of it, even in the entrance of God's book, derived from God's first resting on that day after all his works: So in like manner, they may allege this to be a minding of them of their duty in this, from the equity and reason of God's making them male and female at first, because of the averseness of the Jews to this conjugal law; seeing that Moses was fain to grant them a bill of divorce for the hardness of their hearts, besides the Polygamy that even the Patriarchs gave example of. But I know no man affirm this later, and if any do let them compare this 24. verse with Math. 19. 4, 5. and their mouths will soon be stopped; and as little reason have they to affirm the former, but to grant this its being from the beginning, as well as that.

2. I answer, That if these words, Gen. 2. 3. were only inserted of Moses, and were not institutive, but that God's giving the law of the Sabbath to the Jews, was the first institution of it, then these words of the fourth Commandment mentioned, Exod. 20. 11. would have run in the present tense, thus; therefore the Lord blesseth, or doth now bless the seventh day, and halloweth it, and not in the preter tense, thus; therefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, for this hath a reference with it, implying it to have been done aforetime of God, as indeed it was (like of those last words of the third verse of the second of Gen. (which God had created and made) imply a precedent Creation, in Innocency, not referring to its institution upon the fall of Manna, as some object, for then there was no mention made of blessing and hallowing.

3. I answer, That this appears plainly to be the meaning of the Church of England (though opposed by our late Doctors) which in the Bible allowed by Canon (Canon 80.) in the contents prefixed to the second chapter of Gen. calleth it peremptorily, the first Sabbath.

But Bish. White brings in this objection, p. 42. That the Law of the fourth Commandment was not agreeable to the state of Innocency. 1. For that in that happy estate, there was no toilsome labor, &c. Sweat of face entered into the world after the fall, and before the fall man's labor was matter of delight and pleasure. To which I answer:

1. That this is a good argument with those that grant him, rest to be either the only or principal sanctification of the Sabbath.

2. That there was labor enjoined Adam, which though it was not toilsome, yet (as we have elsewhere observed) it must necessarily take him off from immediate contemplation and more solemn service and worship, and that he was so far capable of wearisomeness, even in Innocency, as to have found other manner refreshment in divine and spiritual things, then in worldly affairs.

3. No more was God's labor in the work of creation toilsome, but delightful, and yet he saith of himself that he rested the seventh day.

Secondly he objects, That Adam being a free man, might have intermitted labor at any time, when himself pleased. To which I answer:

1. So no doubt might God in his work of Creation.

2. And so Adam by voluntary worship in keeping every day Sabbath and not this, should have lost an excellent and significant ordinance (as I have proved the Sabbath to be.) Just as they would now have an every day Sabbath under the Gospel, to blow up the weekly. Sabbath; As if because that under the Gospel God hath promised that he will teach us, Ier. 31. 31, 34. therefore we might cast away the use of means, whereby we are to get knowledge. But as the best way to be taught of God is to use the means whereby he works knowledge: So the best way to keep this every day Sabbath, is to sanctify the Sabbath of the Lord, that so the Lord of the Sabbath may sanctify us as he hath promised: And those that most truly and conscionably desire to keep an every day Sabbath to the Lord, find most need of a Sabbath, being built up sensibly thereby the better to perform that duty.

Thirdly, he objecteth, There was no necessity of having one set day in every week for performing religious offices, for man lived in Paradise in a fruition of God. To which I answer:

1. By the same rule seconded by their position. The Church need appoint no Holy-days now under the Gospel for say they, we are to keep every day Sabbath or Holy-day to the Lord, which surely we cannot do without spiritual fruition of God.

2. That though God's children enjoy now a constant fruition of God as a friend, yet is this fruition much maintained, increased, and enlarged by their sanctifying the Sabbath: And so doubtless should Adams, it representing to him and us the perfection of our happiness and his.

Fourthly, he objecteth, All God's creatures were as living books to preach to man the majesty and bounty of the Creator.

To which I answer. We account it not a needless action in God when he had made his creatures which we knew and saw well enough, so solemnly notwithstanding to overlook them, as is recorded, Gen. 1. 31. Neither is there any cause why Adam should not have a solemn day of contemplation and service appointed him, because of the time and means he had of serving God on other days: seeing the Sabbath intimated most doctrinally, what we ought to God, to wit, our whole selves, and what service we should do him in heaven, to wit, absolute without any interruption, the better to enamourus of our change.

To conclude, it is evident that the Sabbath was a Law in Commandment in time of Innocency, else it could not have suffered loss and detriment by Adams fall, which it did, as is evident in that. First, It was one of the Laws written in Moses his first Tables, which were broken and spoiled to signify as much. Secondly, Because there were renewed in the second Tables the very self same laws which were at first, whereof the Sabbath was one. For the Sabbath waits as an handmaid on the moral Law, in which respect chiefly it was made for man (that is, given to mankind) to be helpful to his obedience: So that seeing, as a Law, the Sabbath is concomitant with the Law in the second exhibition of it, consequently it was so at first, especially seeing it is reported, that God writ the same things in the second Tables as he did in the first; which signifieth God's twice giving the Law once in Adam which was defaced, and so the Sabbath as well as the rest, which he repaired as before.

And again work was commanded in Innocence and consequently the Sabbath.

It is true, that an Holy land and an Holy day suite well together, but an Holy Church and an Holy Sabbath suite better, and you shall find this Holy Church keeping the Sabbath in the wilderness, before they came into the Holy land, and more strictly too.

When God (lastly) asketh me that reason why I thought the Sabbath to be a Commandment. I think it good to answer him, 〈◊〉 his own example, especially seeing he grounded an express Commandment thereupon afterwards. And if God like not this answer, he will then do by it as he did by Adams breeches, give me a better. In the mean time I will choose rather to err by obeying then • y disobeying, and I am sure I shall give a better account of the one, then you shall of the other.

Broad.

2. In the state of Innocence.

Answ. It hath been I suppose the general opinion until of late years, that Adam fell the day before, and otherwise his first child had not been conceived in sin, again the Devil doubtless would be • empting as soon as might be, his malice was so great that every hour seemed a twelve month before he could become a murderer, and the sooner he set upon our first parents after they were created, the likelier he was to prevail the more easily, should he have ta •• yed a day or two, the woman might have learned by experience that the Creatures could not speak of themselves, which had Eve known, she would rather have been affrighted then deceived. Further who (and without curiosity) would not be desirous to hear, how Adam and Ev • carried themselves in that first Sabbath. Had not this been a notable pattern to all his posterity? In man's reason Adam should be ill dealt withal, to have his evil deeds and not his good deeds committed to History.

Answer.

Let us herein be wise with Sobriety, and be content to receive it as God by Moses delivereth it, to wit, what was done before the fall, as done in Innocency, whereof the Sabbath was a part, which silenceth your conjectural reasons. And therefore I will forbear to refute conjectures with conjectures, and satisfy myself with divine authority.

Though I could tell you that it is very unlikely, that, seeing in God's days works in the first Chap. of Genesis, (who did yet but command and it was done) so few things are recorded to be done on every day, That Adam besides the business of his temptation, fall and punishment (together with the circumstances belonging to them which you may read in the third of Genesis: took up no small time) could receive his blessing, Gen. 1. 28. and his regiment and liberty, 29, 30. and his putting into Paradise, Chap. 2. 8. and his law of Commandment, 16, 17. and could give names to all Cattle, fowls of the heaven and beasts of the field 19, and all on the day of his own Creation, especially if we consider how much time God spent of it (proportionably to the work that Moses allotteth to other days) in creating the living things of the earth according to their kind, as Cattle, creeping things, and beasts, and Adam himself, and casting him into a sleep and creating Eve out of him, and the view he took after of all that he had made.

Nor is it so considerable concerning. Adam and 〈◊〉 keeping the first Sabbath, seeing they kept none, for God (as yourself observed) made known his example at the evening of his seventh day, and Adam fell before the the seventh day cam • about.

If you ask 〈…〉 he fell, if 〈…〉 〈…〉

〈…〉 but the third, which was the first day of the week follow • ng, and 〈◊〉 which leads me thus to think 〈…〉 Adam in opposition to the first I rose on that day 〈◊〉 I think Adam fell, And that he fell not on the first of his Creation, which was God's sixth and last day, appeareth not only by the Sabbaths institution in time of innocence as aforesaid, but also by the last verse of the first Chapter of 〈◊〉 Where after God had finished the works of that Day, he viewed everything that he had made, and seeing all was Good; presently there followeth upon that, as upon the other days of Creation (when they were finished) this Conclusion, And the Evening and the Morning were the sixth day. Besides that it is likely God could not be said to be refreshed on the seventh day, and Adam new fallen, for whom all things were made and by whom all things were accursed, which would have been a displeasure to God, and would have taken of his refreshment.

Broad.

3. And therefore it is Moral.

Answ. Suppose that it had been commanded, and in the state of Innocency, yet would it not follow that this Commandment was Moral, for Adam received a Commandment concerning the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, and yet was not that a Moral Commandment.

Answer.

To this I answer; That all the Commandments which were given in Inno • encie were Moral, they were both common to all mankind and perpetual to all ages, and so was that of the forbidden Tree (Though M ^r . D • w, pag. 15. saith he, supposeth no man will affirm it, And therefore did Eve sin a particular sin in eating of it, and so should conceive whosoever of Adams post • itie had eaten thereof, though none but Adam could sin the public and Epidemical sin, because the Covenant was made with him, in the day that he should eat thereof, &c.) but with this difference, that some of them in God's intention were proper to that state, and were not to be renewed by Christ after the fall, of which sort this of the forbidden Tree was one, and therefore was Adam thrust out upon his fall by God, from having to do with anything that is peculiar to that state.

But other Commandments there were, which were intended to remain as common to man falling or standing, by means of Christ, and of this sort was the created Law of nature in the mind of man, the ordinance of marriage, and then why not this of the Sabbath? For this is most true, that whatsoever God giveth as a law afterwards, we have no reason to think that to be utterly abolished by the fall, for from all such things we are kept by the fiery sword, never to have commerce with them again: For thus we are utterly deprived of something, which in Innocency signified Heaven, to show us our desert and God's justice; And something again is renewed unto us, which likewise did and doth signify Heaven, to manifest our hope and his mercy through Christ. So that then if the Sabbath be not abolished by the fall, neither is it abrogated as a Type, because not yet fulfilled: For the Rest which it did signify doth yet remain to the people of God.

To your marginal note, I answer, That there was no need of a Moral Commandment to be given, so far as nature was capable; but if God's will extended further as it did in this particular of the Sabbath, as I have formerly shown, then it was necessary it should be revealed as positively Moral, and part of natures discipline.

Broad.

4. To sanctify one day in a week.

Answ. Nay rather to sanctify the seventh day. God commanded Adam to sanctify the seventh day, ergo it is moral to sanctify the seventh day, is a nearer inference then thus, ergo it is Moral, to sanctify one day of the seven or week. And now if any deny the nearer inference, the further of may better be denied. Why (I marvel) shall the sanctifying of one day of the week be rather Moral then of the seventh day? What reason can they allege of the least moment? As for Text of Scripture they can produce none.

Answer.

For your full answer to this, I refer you back to your first chapter, only with this summary addition.

That the Sabbath being the Churches perpetual Type, it is to vary according to the constitution of the Church, even as the shadow of a man doth according to the disposition of his body, or the Suns shining, The substance of the Commandment, and the signification of the Sabbath being still kept inviolate, though circumstances alter in this as in other Commandments, as hath already been observed in the first Chapter. And so it is with us Christians, in whose time, since the consummation of our redemption by Christ's resurrection, the last day hath been changed into the first of the week, only to take in better loading, and to fignifie how that by Christ we are ass • redly possessed of that heavenly Rest, even now in this life before our works be ended: For whereas formerly by the Covenant of the Law we were to do this and live, now we must first live, and then do.

Broad.

ARGUMENT. 2.

THe Commandment of the Sabbath is placed among the Moral precepts in the Deoalogue, therefore it is Moral like unto them. Ans. Then must it be wholly Moral, and then must the Jews Sabbath be kept of us Christians. Again, the Commandment of the Sabbath is placed among the Ceremonial pr • cepts, Levite. 23. therefore (be like) it is ceremonial like unto them also.

Answer.

You do wrongfully conclude us necessarily to keep the Jews individual seventh day, from the morality of the Sabbath▪ For though they were bound to observe that order, because they were under the Covenant of works, like as Adam was when it was given him in Innocency, (in which time the work of Creation was the thing most worthy commemoration) yet notwithstanding we being freed f • om the one, are likewise freed from the other▪ for as the • ast day of seven was significative to them, so is the first to us. So that our new Creation being finished the first day of the week, it hath privileged us to sanctify a new seventh day, though an old Sabbath: For in this case alteration is no dissolution, no more then to adjourn the Parliament to another time is to dissolve it, especially considering the Sabbath is not naturally but positively moral. And whereas you say, That the Sabbath is found in Scripture among the ceremonial precepts, and specially in that Levite. 23. (where yet it is spoken of, Paramount, although because of Analogy it is reckoned amongst them.) I answer, That I deny not but there may be found in Scripture a mixture of moral and ceremonial Laws, without danger of confounding their natures after they had been once formally instituted. But that the ten Commandments which God himself both spake and gave, after such an extraordinary manner, with such majesty and terror, and in regard of the place for all the world to take notice of it, and which he calleth his Covenant, and himself in a special manner recordeth them to be ten in number, Deut. 4. and with his own finger wrote them twice in Tables of stone (signifying as well their lasting nature as any other thing) and commanded them to be put into the Holy of Holies in the Ark under the Mercyseate, and which were all of them institute in Innocency, either by created Nature or immediate Revelation, whereas all other Ordinances were delivered by the mediation of Moses a mortal man, but that immediately by the immortal God, as witnesseth Josephus in his Jewish antiquities: Moses (saith he) received the ten Commandments from the high and unexcessible mountain Sinai, with thunderings, but other Laws he received in the Jewish Tabernacle, ascending no more the mountain. Now that one of these should be temporary, and the other nine perpetual, is doubtless in any reasonable man's opinion very ill likely. I am sure Bishop Andrew's in his Chatechisticall doctrine saith, That it were not wise to set a Ceremony (he means a Jewish abrogative Ceremony) in the midst of moral precepts. And one saith, Certainly God did intend something extraordinary by this great odds of conveyance, and what more proper then that these were mortal and dependant upon those, those immortal and independent, especially if we weigh the manner how Moses concludeth his repetition of the ten Commandments with these words. God added no more but wrote them in Tables of stone, to show that these words be valued of a greater rate, then those which should be added by the hands of Moses, which were either to be explanations of these, or shadows of Christ: And as God did not add, so man may not diminish from these words, and so consequently there is no reason without sacrilege to suspect the morality of the fourth Commandment.

Broad.

One heretofore required me to show a satisfactory reason, why if the fourth Commandment be of no higher rank then the other temporary constitutions of Moses, God should grace it as much as the nine moral. Ans. I dare not take upon me to yield a reason of God's doings: And I would gladly know what reason themselves can yield, wherefore God should use so many words touching abstinence from work on the Sabbath, and not one word of coming together to pray, and to hear the word preached. Yet this I say, In man's judgment it is great reason, that one Ceremonial Commandment at the least should be placed amongst many moral precepts, in the Tables of the Covenant; seeing God made a Covenant with the Israelites, after the tenor of both sorts indifferently, as is to be seen, Exod. 24. There we read how that Moses having written in a book sundry Laws, as well Ceremonial as other, the book is called the book of the Covenant, verse. 7, 8. Behold the blood of the Covenant, which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words. See also Chapter 34. from the 10. verse to the end of the 27.

Answer.

You say you da • e not give a reason of all God's doings, I could with you were as modest in not reasoning against God, as you are in reasoning for him.

As concerning your question, why God speaketh so much of rest, and so little of holy duties. Answ. You are sufficiently answered out of the Commandment itself. For those words (Remember that thou keep holy the Sabbath day) are a most plenary expression of the sanctifying of that day, with the duties of holiness, which being thus premised, then followeth after in the Commandment the urging of Rest or abstinence from work, both as a means to further the Sabbaths sanctification (like as in the Sabbath of Atonement, Levite. 23. 27, 28.) and as a significant part thereof, conjunctively considered and spiritually improved. For as fasting joined with prayer is a necessary medium of God's extraordinary worship by removing impediments, and also a significant medium concerning our extraordinary humiliation: So is the Sabbaths Rest both a medium and a significant medium to God's extraordinary worship and our extraordinary happiness: And it is not rare to find fasting urged in Scripture without express mention of Prayer, as in Ester 4. 16. Where when Ester gave Mordecai in charge to assemble the Jews, and to fast for her three days and nights, there is no mention of prayer; And yet no man can deny but it is most necessarily understood and implied, though it be not expressed. So it is.

As for your Arguments drawn from the Covenant, which because it consisted both of Moral and Ceremonial Laws, therefore (say you) it is reason that one Ceremonial Commandment at least should be placed among many Moral precepts in the Tables of the Covenant. Answ. Nay rather it is good reason that both the Laws should be written together in the Book of the Covenant, as indeed they were, in regard that the two Tables were to be laid up in the Holy of Holies, and so not to be come by, but the copies of that Book were of continual use. And again seeing the Covenant of the Jews consisted of both, it is the more reason that they should be carefully distinguished (as likewise they were) then confounded, seeing you cannot deny but that which was Moral was to appertain to after ages, and if they had then been undistinctly mixed, how could after ages tell which was which; But this was prevented through God's good providence, by their disjunction and distinct exhibition at the first.

Broad.

If this will not satisfy him or any other (then as Christ answered some Questioners, Matt. 21.) let them first tell me wherefore God should appoint a greater punishment for the breach of a Ceremonial Law, then he did of some Moral▪ And I will afterwards tell them wherefore he should grace a Ceremonial Commandment as much as a Moral.

Answer.

There may be very good reason for it, for though sometimes God doth inflict the most grievous temporal punishment upon the greater sins, to aggravate the danger of committing them; So other sometimes he ordaineth a great punishment for a lesser sin, least according to our corrupt judgments we should think it small, and if it were not for the punishment threatened, be the carelesser to observe it. And secondly to show that it is not so much the Nature of the thing commanded, as the Will of the Commander that gives weight to the Commandment. And thirdly, A man may commit some moral offense with less guilt, then the Jews might a Ceremonial: As if a man should steal a loaf of bread for pure need, he was not so great a sinner, as he that through contempt or willful neglect omitted, or carelessly performed the Sacrifices of the Law or other Ceremonies.

Broad.

Again, He would needs know a reason why God should grace the Commandment of the Sabbath above the other temporary Constitutions. Answ. The reason happily was because the Sabbath served more then any of the other (I think I may say then all the other) Ceremonies, to the furtherance of the Moral Law. True, that on the first and last days of the Passover the Israelites were to have holy Convocations as well as on the Sabbath, but this Feast as other came but once in the year, whereas the Sabbath was once in the week.

Answer.

If the Commandment of the Sabbath had had its beginning with the rest of the Ceremonies, you might have had some color for what you say; But seeing it was first set on foot in Innocency, and afterwards revived as an equal among, and contemporary with the Moral Laws, why now it should only be preferred to be the Master of the Jewish abrogative Ceremonies, and so Moses his tale of ten Commandments, brought by us into the number of nine. I can see small reason to persuade. And I know no use the Sabbath was of then for advantage to the Moral Law , but it is of the same use to us now, (especially if it should have been useful (as it should) in Innocency.) So that if the Sabbath fail, which is the sinews of Religion, then farewell the power of Godliness. For doubtless it was the very reason why it was given of God as a perpetual and absolute necessary Concomitant and Appendix to the Moral Law, superadded by him in the time of • nnocency to the Law of Nature, as I have said before, that it might be a perpetual help thereto; and therefore as it begun with it, so it shall end with it.

Broad.

Not to stand longer hereupon. Consider that the Sabbath was instituted for divers weighty purposes as no other Ceremony the like, whereof before Chapter 4. Secondly, that it concerned all the Israelites generally, both Priests and People, and also very often as few Ceremonies the like. Thirdly, that as soon as it was instituted, it was profaned, the like whereof I do not find did befall any other Ceremony. And if this last consideration did minister sufficient occasion unto God to grace the Sabbath above other Ceremonies (seeing the people had already disgraced it more then the other, and thereby bewrayed what they were likely to do in time to come) how much more the two former considerations concurring herewithal? This much to give him and others satisfaction if it may be.

Answer.

You say very true of the Sabbaths super-excellency above all other Ceremonies, and let me add one which is, That as it was before them in dignity & time, so shall it be after them to the end of the world. But for your third reason of the profanation of the Sabbath, as soon as it was instituted, which you say you find not to befall any other. I answer, that you need not go far to seek one, for their gathering Manna was profaned with covetous gathering and disobedient keeping of it, before the Sabbath: And you may as well say, that therefore it was commanded to be put into a golden pot, and laid up before the Testimony, as that because the Sabbath was profaned, therefore it was put among the ten Commandments: Besides, offering of incense was profaned in the very first exercise of Aaron's Priesthood by strange fire, Levite. 10. 1.

Broad.

Now out of that hath been here said, an answer may be taken also unto these words of the Prophet Isaiah, 58. 13. 14. No more can be gathered from that Text then from the placing of the fourth Commandment among the moral Commandments in the Decalogue, which is that God much respected the keeping of the Sabbath. And this I acknowledge, but this he did likewise, the paying of tithes and offerings, Mal. 3. and doth the partaking of the Lord's Supper, 1 Cor. 11.

Broad.

ARGUMENT 3.

SOme of late would fetch an argument from Christ's words, Matth. 5. 18. where by the Law they understand the Decalogue only.

Answ. Then shall the word Law be taken in one sense, verse. 17. and in another, verse. 18. for by the Law in the 17. verse. is meant the whole Law of Moses, as likewise, Matth. 11. 13.

It is altogether improbable, that where there is a distribution of Scripture into parts, by the Law should be signified the Decalogue only. Again, when Christ cometh to instance afterward in many particulars of the law, some of the instances are taken out of other places as verse. 33. 38. 43. If it be said, these particulars may be referred to some Commandments in the Decalogue. Answ. So it would be said if Christ had instanced in any Ceremonial precept throughout the whole Law. The instances (as also that which is said verse. 16. and 20.) do show that Christ spake of the Law Moral, or that which is to be kept of Christians, but seeing the instances are taken out of divers places, it cannot be gathered by them (nor by ought else here) what is moral in Moses law, and to be kept of Christians, and what not, were it that by the law the Decalogue is only meant, yet seeing no more is said of the law, verse. 18. then is said of the Law and Prophets, verse. 17. the meaning cannot be that every thing that is enjoined in the Decalogue is perpetual, for then it should follow that everything enjoined likewise in the Prophets is perpetual and to be observed of Christians, Now that no more is said of the law, verse. 18. then is said of the Prophets, verse. 17. is manifest, for there Christ saith that he came to fulfill the Prophets, which is as much as one tittle of the Prophets shall not pass till all be fulfilled. That Christ spake thus as it were, verse. 17. The Law and the Prophets shall be fulfilled in part, and thus verse. 18. The Law shall be fulfilled wholly is not to be imagined. It would ask a long discourse to show Christ's meaning. Let it then suffice to have shewn that this Text maketh nothing for the perpetuity of the fourth Commandment.

Answer.

It is true that these 17. and 18. verses of the 5 ^th . Matt. do intend as well the Ceremonial as the Moral Laws, for Christ going about to bring himself into liking with the Jews by removing the impediment of their Law, showing that he made for and not against it. First concerning the Ceremonial, whereas they thought Christ had meant to have made those Laws to be no laws, but to have brought in a new way of Righteousness and Salvation into the world, he telleth them, his coming was not to disparage or annihilate those laws, but rather to ratify them by fulfilling them, not so much to take away their being as to give them a better being.

Secondly, concerning the moral Law, whereas they trusted to it to their own destruction, and misinterpreted it in favor to their carnal and corrupt minds, he came to show them the true sense and meaning of God in it, to wit, that they were not to be saved by their own but by his fulfilling it, and that God will as well be served in spirit as in letter: So that he was so far from abolishing this Moral law, as that he did more enforce it, and gave life to that which they had made to be but a dead letter. And thus this text maketh for the perpetuity of the fourth Commandment, for that Christ fulfilled both the Laws, the one by adding the substance to the shadow, the other by delivering men from the curse of it through grace, and confirming it (by a new exposition and a manifestation of the spiritual part of it) as a rule of manners for all ages; which is evinced out of the 19. verse, where notwithstanding he had formerly said how that he had fulfilled the Law, yet doth he there press them to obedience, which must needs be of the Moral Law.

Moreover as Christ meant not to destroy the law, so neither did he mean to confound the natures of laws perpetual and temporary (which was a way to destroy them) and consequently not to annihilate the use and being of anything, save only such as did help to build the partition wall, and were ordained for the state and time of the Jewish Church before Christ's coming: Much less the Sabbath, which sprung out of Paradise, before any promise of Christ was made, and which now in our State or Church is every whit as useful and proper as ever, serving to cherish the Moral law, and to help us to heavenly mindedness by its signification.

Nor do we say as you would force upon us in your Margine, that every tittle in the Decalogue is perpetual, to wit stri • tly (for that the Law like other Scripture being occasionally written, in the strictness of the Letter, did partake of those times, and of the state of the Church to which it was then given) but Evangelically, and in a suitable sense to our times it is perpetual.

Broad.

ARGUMENT 4.

A Fourth Argument is taken from Christ's words, Mat. 24. 20. but this Text being rightly understood, maketh nothing for them neither.

An exposition of Christ's words, Pray that

Your, not of the Apostles only, who were all well nigh dead, or departed out of Jury before that time, not of the Disciples alone, who before the siege departed to Pella, but of the Citizens of Jerusalem, and generally of all the Jews.

Flight, that is calamity from which I council you to fly, there being no hope by any means to avoid the same. He termeth it flight, to note the certainty of their overthrow.

Be not in the Winter, neither

On a Sabbath, that is, a feast, or festival Sabbath, and I am induced thus to expound this Text.

1. Because Christ seemeth not to mean any one particular day, for he speaketh of days, as before verse. 19. and again after ve. 22. except those days should be shortened.

2. Because he counselleth them to fly as soon as they see Jerusalem besieged, Luk. 21. 20.

And indeed it had been a great folly (knowing that the City should be destroyed) not to shift for themselves whilst they might, but to tarry until the last brunt.

3. Because the calamity befalling at the Passover, became came far more grievous then other ways it would have been, for a great number repairing to Jerusalem at that feast were shut in by the Romans, and thus Tot • gente velut in carcerem conclusa (as Josephus speaketh) it came to pass. 1. That the air was infected and many died of the pestilence. 2. That they sooner wanted food, and many miscarried through famine. 3. That there was greater dissention among them (for quot homines tot sententi • e ) and many perished by this means.

〈…〉

Some of late restraining Christ's words to the Disciples, only hold the reason of his counsel to be, that so they might not be hindered from the sanctifying of one Sabbath, which say they would be grievous to the soul, as to 〈◊〉 in winter would be grievous to the body.

Answ. As though they might not be as well hindered from sanctifying the Sabbath, in defending themselves against the Romans▪ as in flying from them, and again in hiding themselves after their flight, being scattered here and there as the manner is of such.

If the Disciples following Christ's counsel, Luke 21. would depart out of Jerusalem as soon as it began to be besieged, it is likely that they might then depart in what day almost best pleased themselves, or rather indeed in what night they would, which is the time wherein men usually seek to depart out of Cities besieged. If they would tar • y until the city were ready to be taken (which in them had been extreme folly) there is no likelihood that they could fly and escape at all. But not to stand longer hereupon, the verses both before and after do sufficiently convince, that Christ gave this counsel for the better avoiding of bodily calamities, and the event hath manifested the same.

Answer.

I will not much dispute what Sabbath was meant by Christ in these words of his, Math. 24. 20. For admitting the conclusion, how that Christ gave this counsel for the better avoiding of bodily harms and calamities, and the increase of those troubles, which (at the least) was such as was not from the beginning of the world to this time, nor ever should be. For that they were to typify the calamities that should befall the wicked and unbelievers at the last day; I confess this exposition of yours to be in my conceit very genuine, and yet it may for that very reason intend the weekly Sabbaths as well as any of their festivals: For as by the one the Jews should be multiplied at Jerusalem at that time, and so should their misery be increased: So again by the other might their consciences be so straitened in regard of their superstitious resting, which they used upon the Sabbath, as that they would rather endure to die then fly, especially considering the Religion they put in that tradition of a Sabbath days journey, which was but two miles as they accounted it; So that had they fled • ut two miles further then their stint, they would have thought themselves more to have violated the Sabbath, then if they had spent the whole day in contentions and seditions within the City: For of such force is zeal, when it is not according to knowledge of Scripture, as that, through our corrupt nature, it bindeth the conscience more straight then any command of God rightly understood; As we may see by those soldiers, who when they were besieged, rather then they would drink of the well into which a dog was thrown, they would starve or render the City . And so doubtless would many of the Jews choose to die before they would fly further then their superstitious tradition gave them leave.

But as I have given truth its due in commending your exposition, so give me leave to discover the fallacy of your marginal sophism, by comparing 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 with 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 already spoken of in the 2 Col. 16. There because it maketh for your advantage, you will have it to be meant the weekly Sabbath, and yet the Article is not prefixed, and in this place you will have it to be meant the lewish Sabbath, because the Article 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is not prefixed. This is scarce good dealing. But I pray you let one and the same defect beget one and the same sense in both places, and so let them both pass alike, for the Jewish extraordinary festivals, and so your Argument shall not only prevail with us, but evince the truth.

Broad.

CHAP. VIII.

WHat would follow were the fourth Commandment moral or perpetual.

Were the fourth Commandment moral or perpetual, it would follow that we Christians ought to keep the Jews Sabbath, for the meaning of this Commandment must needs be the same as heretofore it was: A Law cannot say one thing today and another tomorrow, though a Law-giver may: And now the meaning of the fourth Commandment heretofore was that the seventh day wherein God rested should be sanctified, other meaning this Commandment could have none, as the words thereof do manifestly declare, they import this and nothing else.

Such I know among us, as urge the perpetuity of the fourth Commandment, will have it bind now to sanctify the Lord's-day, but they cannot agree among themselves show this strange matter • hold come to pass, I say this strange matter, for there being an old statute for fasting on the Friday, if it should be said that hence forward we should be bound thereby to fast upon Saturday, would it not seem wonderful strange? A strange matter it is that the fourth Commandment should bind to sanctify the Lord's-day, and how it may come to pass many strange opinions there are, which I think needful here briefly to examine

Answer.

Instead of answer to this in this place, I refer you to a review of your first Chapter and mine, where the self same point is largely discoursed, Only a word or two more.

1. Touching your consequence of the unchangeableness of the Jews day into ours, if the fourth Commandment be admitted moral. See for this Eat • nus de Sabbato, pag. 40. de Moralitate Sabbathi. Neque enim (saith he) mut • bile cum ceremoni • li been est coniunctum, aut cum eo convertendum, Quamvis enim omne ceremoniale sit mutabile, non e contra tamen, Multa enim sunt positiva ••• tabilia quae non sunt Ceremoni • , huius generis sunt leges Iudiciales, Exod. 21. &c. Sic etiam totu • Decalogu • , aliquo modo mutabilis fuit, ut diserte Apostolus expri • it, in 3 ad Gal. 13. Christus redemit nos ab execratione legis, & cap. 4. 30. Ejice ancillam & filium eius, qu • ancilla (ut verse. 25. apparet) mo •• Sicai erat, qui est in Arabia. Hoc est lex; quae ibi pronunciata fuit. Hisce liquet, quod lex & male •• ctio eius, in Christo sunt abrogata, quatenus aliquo modo erant murabilia, totam autem legem ceremonialem esse, nemo est qui dixerit.

2. And touching your instance or similitude of fasting Friday by Statute. I answer, That indeed it were strange to turn Friday into Saturday by virtue of the letter of the same law, Rebus sic stantibus, but put case we had some extraordinary Deliverance fell out on Friday (as the Gun-powder Treason) and were to keep it weekly as we are the Sabbath, then if either the Parliament sedente curia, should alter the law, or the King by a non obstante should for this cause publish an alteration, or by his and the Courts example should change the day from Friday to Saturday, in memory of that Deliverance, Friday being made thereby rather a Day of Feasting then Fasting, I think no wise man will say that the law was repealed or suffered any detriment by this: So &c.

Christ came not to give new laws but to renew the old upon a new condition, and in this sense was it a new Commandment, to love one another. And thus is the Lord's Day a renewed Sabbath, not given as a new law, but altered by example. For ours is a new Sabbath, as the Covenant is said to be a new Covenant, which is only in exhibition, not in substance: For there was nothing but by the coming of Christ it was ground under one of these two wheels, either it suffered abrogation or qualification: But the Sabbath suffered not abrogation: Therefore Qualification: And which was proper to Christ, who though he came not to give new laws, yet he was to qualify and renew the old upon Evangelical terms.

Broad. 2. Opinion.

By this first opinion, though the fourth Commandment bindeth to keep the Sabbath yet not the seventh Day, but others teach that it bindeth to keep the seventh day as heretofore it did. Those have then to prove that the Lord's-day is the seventh or last of the week. Now how can they prove this? Nay I know not any that hath so much as gone about it hitherto, and to save their pains hereafter, I would have them know that the Scriptures, Fathers, and Reason are against them in this matter.

1. The Scriptures are against them, for they term the Lord's-day the first of the week in two places: Act. 20. 2 Cor. 16. It is imagined that Christ before his Ascension or the Apostles, presently after commanded to keep the Lord's-day for Sabbath, which if Christ or his Apostles had done, and it had been needful that the Lord's-day should be the seventh day, doubtless order should have been taken for this also, and then Saint Paul would not have termed it the first of the week well-near twenty years after this time writing especially unto the Gentiles.

2. The Fathers are against them, for they termed Wednesday the fourth of the week. Si dies observare non licet, & menses, & tempora, & annos, nos quo{que} simile crim • n incurrimus, quartum Sabbati observantes & parascenem, & diem Dominicum, &c. Hieron. in Gal. 4.

3. Reason is against them, for if the Jews Sabbath until the change were the seventh day, how should the next day be the seventh also? Either there must be once; two seventh days together, or there must be one monstrous week consisting of eight days, or else one day must be in no week.

Answer.

It is not needful to prove the Lord's-day to be the last day of the week; It is enough to hold correspondency with the Commandment, if we prove it to be the seventh day, not in order, but in number: For though the Commandment bindeth perpetually to the number, it was and is the present condition of the Church, in regard of our benefit from God and God's Covenant to us, which bindeth us to the order first or last. In which adjournment we, as is requisite, retain and observe the scope and equity of the Commandment, since God hath afforded us six days for the dispatch of our own businesses, that we should willingly dedicate the seventh to his worship: For the altering of the circumstance of time doth not abolish the substance of the Commandment. This difference is evident and usual in other matters, as for instance: It was one thing to have the Tridentine Council translated to Bolonia, and the ending of it was another thing: So there is a difference between the adjourning of the last to the first, and the dissolution of the Sabbath day. And although the Sabbath be now the first day of the week in one respect, to wit, according to order, yet it remains still the last in another respect, to wit, as they are seven in number: And that it was thus, even in the Christians account, the last as well as the first, appeareth in the 1 Cor. 16. where Paul biddeth them, that every first day of the week everyone should contribute as God had prospered him, to wit, in the six fore-going work-days.

And as touching your reason I answer, that every thing must have a time of institution and beginning. Had God made Adam the first day, then had he kept God's seventh day Sabbath, but God making him the sixth day, and he being first to spend six days in one kind of employment, and the seventh in another, thereupon it is more then likely he was to keep the thirteenth day from the first day of the Creation as his first Sabbath, and not the fourteenth day as his second .

Again, if to be God did rain Manna, on the first day according to the computation of the Creation, then they kept that seventh day Sabbath; But if he did not begin to rain Manna on that day, but on some other in the week, then was that computation broken, and yet the Sabbath rightly kept.

So, had Christ risen on the last day of the week, (but then had not Isaiah his prophecy been fulfilled 65. 17.) then had we observed that day; but the Son of man (as you say) being Lord of the Sabbath, its fit the Sabbath should wait on him, and not he on the Sabbath, and therefore as he chose the first day to rise on, as likewise the morning and not the evening to rise in; so have we done well, after Saint Paul's rule, in imitating him as he imitated Christ, in keeping the Lord's-day Sabbath ever since: which, as I have noted before, was not darkly prefigured in the keeping the first and seventh day in the time of the Passover: As like wise to being the Sabbath in the morning and not in the evening (which yet cannot be done without some loss of time, being that the Jews Sabbath ended at the evening) for if we change the day because of Christ's resurrection, and by Paul's example; why not then the terminations of the day, according to the time of Christ's resurrection, and example of Paul in his practice at Tro • s. I speak this as an argument against some, that are of opinion the Sabbath still beginneth at evening, as in the time of the Jews, and first Creation, when indeed evening and morning made the day, and darkness was to go before light.

As for the disorder which you say this innovation must needs produce, let it lie upon the Apostles who can answer it well enough; and so may we building on the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles: In the mean time Paul's example, which is not in vain set down in the 20. Acts 6, 7. (where no day of the seven, but only the last, which was the first day of the week, is thus disposed of) is a sufficient warrant for us hence forwards to observe it, from the 4 ^th . Phil. 9. The things which you have seen in me, do, and the God of peace shall be with you.

And as for that in your margin, where you say that the number seven hath reference to other going before; I answer you in this figure 7000007: where you see, the first as well as the last in some respect may be the seventh, to wit in number, though not in place and order.

Broad.

But let it be imagined (although I can scarce see how it can be imagined only) that our day is become the seventh and last of the week, what would follow hereupon? That God might well be said to have rested on our day, and to have enjoined one day on Mount Sinai; But then it might not be said, that Christ rose upon one day. He that saith both God rested and Christ rose upon one day, may as well say▪ that God both rested and began to make the world upon one day, which I will not believe any man will say, until I know it.

Answer.

I know none that goeth about to make God's Rest and Christ's Resurrection to be upon one and the selfsame day: Nor need it, for it is enough that the one was, and the other is observed holy, as the seventh day in opposition to the six work-days: The change not only being granted by us, but argued as necessary and significantly material.

Broad. 3. Opinion.

Others there are which by the seventh day in the beginning of the Commandment, understand one of the seven days; but the seventh day is the Sabbath, that is (say they) but one of the seven days is the Sabbath, and the first day is one of the seven days as well as the seventh.

Answ. 1. Then shall the words seventh day have one sense in the 2. Gen. and another here. Will any man say that God ended his work upon one of the seven days, and not upon the seventh day only?

2. Then shall the words seventh day have one sense in the beginning of the Commandment, and another after, for after it is said that God rested on the seventh day.

3. Then had the Israelites sanctified our day or any other, and not the seventh, they had not broke the fourth Commandment.

Answer.

This opinion, of the seventh day to intend one of seven, is doubtless most true, and is therefore spoken in the Commandment exclusively, implying thus much, That thou art not to keep the sixth day, or one of six, or the eight day or one of eight, but the seventh day or one of seven.

For the substance of the Commandment hath respect unto the number, for it opposeth seven to six; as if it had said, six days shall be for labor, and the seventh for Rest: although I deny not, but the example of God in respect of order, was then significātly binding during the inforcemēt of the reasonof the creation: I would not be mistaken; and be thought (when I say one of seven) to mean any one, but as Ames. in that place being rightly understood, and set down, dies septimus vel unus e septem, that is, the seventh day, or one of seven, not of six or eight. For I know the Jews were to celebrate the seventh day, the last in order both for example and signification sake, during the Covenant of works: For the order both was and is exceeding useful in respect of its signification, and helpeth much to the fulfilling the duty of sanctifying the Sabbath. And therefore hath God been ever careful, not only to give the general Commandment to his Church, for the observation of the seventh day; But he hath likewise prescribed them a terminus a quo, a day or an occasion whence and whereby they were to number their seven days (which yet was not always one & the same seventh day) As unto Adam he gave the first day of his being created to number from, and therefore was he careful to give him this Commandment in due time, to wit, the second day of his Creation, so soon as he had given an example, that so he might remember it against the seventh day came: So likewise to the Jews he appointed by Moses the first day of Manna for them to reckon upon: And so to us by his own and the Apostles examples he hath given the day of the Resurrection to be the ground of our Computation.

Broad. 4. Opinion.

Some of late tell us of the substance and circumstances of the fourth Commandment, by the substance they mean the sanctifying of one day in the week, by circumstances the keeping of the seventh day, and strict resting. Answ. 1. That the sanctifying of one day in the week is the substance of the fourth Commandment you have not learned from the words thereof, for they speak only of sanctifying the seventh day. 2. No Prophet nor Apostle (nor Father I believe) hath thus interpreted the Commandment either in clear or dark terms. 3. No other Commandment of God is to be interpreted after such a manner. 4. Then had not a Jew broken the Commandment though he had labored on the seventh day, so that before he had sanctified one of the six days.

If God had said, Remember to sanctify one day of the week six days thou shalt labor, and the seventh thou shalt sanctify, ye had some color for your doctrine, although this had been nothing in very deed. For God said, thou shalt keep a Feast to me, thrice in the year thou shalt keep the Feast, &c. Exod. 23. 14, 15, 16. and yet the keeping of the Feast thrice in the year was not the substance of that Law whoever so imagined? But only God there first telleth the Israelites in general what he would have done, and afterwards acquainteth them with his mind particularly and fully. You yourselves I am sure will acknowledge that the keeping of a feast thrice a year is as well the substance of the foresaid Law, as the keeping of the Sabbath once in a week is the substance of the fourth Commandment; and the worshipping of God was one end of the feast, as well as of the Sabbath. Yet Christ hath blotted out that whole Law. The like may be said of that Law, Exod. 23. 10, 11.

By this opinion not the substance, but only the circumstances of the fourth Commandment are mentioned in the Decalogue, which circumstances also are not to be observed.

Answer.

That in the fourth Commandment is both substance and circumstance is evident: By substance, I understand the sanctifying the seventh day, not as it is last in order, but as it is opposed to all other numbers, by circumstance I understand the order and the reason : Which two (that I may use your phrase in the conclusion of your seventh Chapter) have been manifested to have been circumstantial by the event.

I say the very reason of the Commandment as it did bind the order was circumstantial and changable. We see how it received an addition, in that their remembrance of their deliverance out of Egypt (which was a Type of our spiritual deliverance) was made a reason of this fourth Commandment as well as the Creation; And so is now our redemption it self by Christ, and yet nothing of the substance abolished or altered, but the main duty of sanctifying the seventh day is still observed. And the reason (as I conceive) why this Commandment was more circumstantial then others, was because it was preter-ordained to the Law of Nature for the continual use of the Church in all states and conditions: And therefore was it to be brought to the state, and made suitable to the condition of the Church ; and not the condition of the Church to be brought to it, as were also the Sacraments, and yet so as that God hath himself ever ordered these changable circumstances in it, either by the doctrine or example of his Prophets or Apostles, notvery darkly.

Indeed as touching the seventh day to be any other then the last in the time of the Prophets, is not to be imagined, because then that order was in force, but now in the Apostles time, the event doth clearly manifest the contrary in the practice of the Apostles, which giveth sufficient authority for ours . And whereas you say that no other Commandment is to be interpreted with circumstances and substance. I answer, That be • ides that circumstance of the Israelites deliverance prefixed to the whole Law, me thinks you should acknowledge this to be true in the fifth Commandment, where there is a promise made of a reward in Canaan to them that keep it, which yet is a changable circumstance in respect of the precise meaning: For though in that respect it be void, yet it is still of force and use according to the present state and residence of the Church, as appeareth in the 6. Eph. 2. And notwithstanding the cessation of the Egyptian Deliverance, and the precise meaning of this promise in the fifth Commandment, and their alterations into a more spiritual & proper meaning for the present Church, yet do the Commandments themselves for their substance remain to this day the same: For the change of significant circumstances may be upon good grounds without impeachment to the being of the law: as the Israelites supposed changing the gesture from standing to sitting, when they were a Sedentary Church did no whit abolish the Passover. And thus did David change the order that God had appointed among the Levites (how that till thirty years old they were not to officiate) when the reason of it failed, and the Ark had rest, then without prejudice to the Ordinance, he ordained that they should officate at twenty, as is 1 Chron. 23. As a man may alter his temperament and yet continue a man still, so long as for substance he remaineth the same in soul and body. So if so be the Sabbath had been changed, from being kept every seventh day, to every sixth, then the whole frame of the fourth Commandment had suffered shipwreck: But in the change of one seventh day to another upon such a ground and reason the substance suffereth not.

For as Bishop White observes, pag. 136. (against T. B. who affirms that in all Divine laws whensoever any part is taken away the whole is abolished) That if by part he understand such a part as is substantial and constituent his position is granted, but if he understand a circumstantial or accidental part the position is false; For (saith he) the Law of Prayer or Divine worship is still in force, as it was in David's and in Daniel's time, in respect of substantial actions, but many circumstances of time, place and gesture, are abolished in the time of the Gospel: as Daniel's praying with windows open toward Jerusalem, &c. And therefore, a little to vary the words and sense of his conclusion against T. B. the substance of the fourth Commandment may be continued and yet the Circumstance altered.

As touching your following instance of the three feasts a year, I see not that it holds good Analogy with the Sabbath: But your marginal instance of the • arths seventh year Sabbath is proper. In which Commandment (I say) there is both circumstance and substance. The substance is the Law it self of resting the seventh year in opposition to the other six: But the precise order is added by the God of order, for the better execution of this Law without confusion, which must needs follow if it were left arbitrary. Like as in the Law of Tythes, God chose to himself one in ten, which for orders sake, and that they might have a rule to walk by, he appointed to be every tenth as it passed under the rod. And so of the Sabbath, wherein for order sake God did not only appoint the seventh day to be the last, but also gave a computation from Manna, that so they might also know which should be that last, and so avoid confusion: Which yet doth nothing hinder, but that the same God may upon occasion, appoint another order by his Apostles, as he did that by Moses, and not harm the Law it self, or the substance of the Commandment in so doing. Nay I think, if the case were put to you of a man in a far country, who by some or other accident losing that computation of Manna) should notwithstanding have dedicated every seventh day (which yet happily might be the first, second, or third of the week as well as the last) to an holy rest, in obedience to though Commandment: (I think I say) you would grant this man to observe the fourth Commandment in substance.

Broad. 5. Opinion.

Others speak of the Morality and Ceremonies of the fourth Commandment, by the Ceremonies they mean the seventh day and strict rest, by the morality the sanctifying of sometimes, or the having of set & appointed days.

Ans. There is no Morality of the fourth Commandment as is said before: Indeed I acknowledge the Law of Nature; here Nature taught the Gentiles, and doth teach Christians to set apart sometimes (as places) for the public worship of God: But there is a difference between the general Law of Nature written in man's heart at the Creation, and the peculiar precept of the Sabbath written since in Tables of stone.

Should God now say to the Jews, you shall sanctify the seventh day, wherein I rested, and to us Christians you shall sanctify the first day wherein my Son rose. The Jews sanctifying their Sabbath, and we the Lord's-day, should do that is enjoined by the Law of Nature in a general manner, but as they should not do that were enjoined by our particular Law, so then neither should we do that were enjoined by their particular Law.

Answer.

That there were some intervening Ceremonies befell the Sabbath in the Jewish Church, you (I think) will not (I am sure cannot justly) deny, which now like an old suit of clothes are dropt off (for Christ hath pruned the Law of her Mosaical branches) and the Sabbath remaineth naked and pure. For as the Sabbath it self was a super-addition or handmaid to the Law of Nature, that is of necessary use and service to preserve our obedience to the will of God revealed in it (and especially to the first Table (as I have observed in the beginning of this Tract: So had it self also many additions, which were proper to the state of the Jewish Church (in which time it was reinforced) as likewise had everything else: Which additions were some of them Ceremonies, some mere occasional circumstances (and thus was the strict rest in the wilderness, and the stranger within thy gates mentioned in the fourth commandment) some whereof were abrogative, some changable, according to the several natures, as appears by their several events in this new created Church of ours. In the Commandment it self, as it is laid down in the Decalogue, I know nothing properly Ceremonial in a Jewish sense, and to be abrogated properly by Christ; For whatsoever was abrogated by Christ, was ordained by reason of Christ since the fall, which the Sabbath was not. Yet is it no other then a Ceremony (and for this cause it is so changable in diverse particulars upon occasion) but of that nature and so annexed to the Church, as the shadow to the body, inseparable, though alterable, according to the condition of the party and degree of the Sun.

Touching your first marginal note, with which I will couple your conclusion of the fourth Opinion, You say, That by these two opinions, Not substance, but either circumstance or ceremony, are only mentioned in the fourth Commandment, and hath as it were a piece of Moses his veil when it is read in the Church.

Answ. In the order there is included the substance ; For the seventh day cannot be commanded, but one of seven must necessarily and principally be intended, as when God commanded the Tenth, surely any man will think he hath more respect to the number then to the order.

Neither can the fourth Commandment be said any more, nay not so much (for the one was common and the other proper, to have a piece of Moses his veil over it, for the seventh day being a Ceremony, then all the Law hath by its preface of the Egyptian deliverance. I wish you had considered what a veil you cast upon the fourth Commandment, when it is read with the Prayer.

As concerning your second marginal note, I have formerly shown in what relation the Sabbath and the Law of Nature stand. And as touching the difference of the commanding of one day in a week, and the seventh day I answer, That in substance they are the same, and the difference is only in manner of exhibition. For Ham hath only the substance it self mentioned and commanded him, and the order left arbitrary, which if he of his own accord should design to be every seventh or last day, then I pray you what difference for substance: But Japheth hath both the substance and order assigned him of God, so that the difference lieth only in manner of exhibition. Like as the Covenant of Grace was both one to the Jews and us in substance, only as it was given to them, it was clothed with many circumstances and ceremonies (though they were Laws they were no better) but to us naked: All which circumstances (I grant) did bind during their significancy, and though now the Ceremonies be annulled, and the Sacraments changed, which were Appendices to the Covenant, yet is the substance of the Covenant the same, and distinct from its circumstances: So though the Sabbath admit an annulling of some additaments, and a change of some circumstances or ceremonies, yet may and doth the fourth Commandment in substance remain the same distinct and unconfounded. Nay this very change doth discover to us the substance from the circumstances and ceremonies, as well of the Sabbath, as of the Covenant if we had not understood them before.

And though the Morality and Ceremonies of the fourth Commandment relish not with you, yet your Partizans of later Edition pass it in Verbo Magistrî. That it is abrogated in the speciality of it, because it was ceremonious, and so serve their turns to pull down the Sabbath, and yet affirm it stands good in the morality or equity of it, to keep unraced the ejaculation annexed to it in our Liturgy. And M ^r . Dow, pag. 9. saith in absolute terms. They more fully express the nature of this Commandment who say, It is partly Moral, and partly Ceremonial.

Broad. 6. Opinion.

M ^r . Cleaver will have this strange matter come to pass by a Trope, whereby one part is put for the rest. He saith, That in the precepts and prohibitions more is meant then in words is expressed. Moral. of the Law. Chap. 4.

Answ. I acknowledge that in the other nine Commandments more is meant then is expressed in words, but here in the fourth Commandment that which is expressed in words is not meant. It is a kind of Trope to put one part for the rest, but when no part is put for the rest, what manner of Trope may that be? For this thou shalt sanctify the seventh day wherein I rested, is no part of God's Law in these days, and yet this in effect is all that God spake from Sinai.

Answer.

Although the fourth Commandment be a Law still in force, yet (as I said) it bindeth us not to keep Sabbath the last day of the week, though the seventh. For the order was foretold to be altered in the 65. Isaiah 17. where it is prophesied, that God's creating new heavens and a new earth shall make the old to be forgotten, that is, there shall be a wonderful alteration, and that which now men make most account of, to wit, the Creation, then they shall account it the least, sanctifying the memory of my resting from their Redemption instead of my resting from their Creation. And thus you willfully slander us when you say, that, Thou shalt sanctify the seventh day wherein I rested, is no part of God's Law in these days, for we grant it but with an Orthodox distinction of Rest. For the Commandment itself looketh with a double face both ways, both to the Jewish Church and ours, both to the old and new Creation; And beareth his Title in the very front in that word Remember. And as one well observeth, There is no Commandment ushered with such a Memento as that of the Sabbath, wherein (saith he) I think we may discern God's providence, forearming weak Christians against the strong assaults of their own affections, struggling against the restraint of a whole days libe • tie, and of man's inventions oppugning God's institutions, for it is a Commandment of Remembrance; so that as once we were to remember our Creation by it, as appeareth b • the first promulgation of it in Exodus, for there the Creation is only mentioned: so like wise are we now to remember our Redemption by it, as appears by the second pro • nulgation of it in Deu • eronomie, where the old Creation is quite forgotten not a word mentioned of it, and the new set forth in its Type of their • gyptian deliverance. Which observation (taken from the various reasons annexed at several times, and in such an order, for the enforcing of this Commandment) compared with this Text of Isa • ah 65. 17. and the present event suitable, doth both very much illustrate the perpetuity of the Sabbath, and yet prophecy the change both in one, which also (if we consider the nature of those times) doth well prove the thing: For though Christ speaketh plainly to us now, yet to them he spake and prophesied (as I may so say) in parables, which rightly understood are no less proofs then ours, And thus is the substance of the fourth Commandment preserved, that is, the dedicating of the seventh day to duties of Piety and Mercy, and six days to our other affairs, as also prophecy fulfilled, and the Apostles imitated.

But may some say, Our Redemption was not finished on that day, for that it still remaineth in acting by Christ's intercession, which is Bishop Whites objection, page 299.

Christ's intercession after his dying and rising, is as God's providence was, and is, after his six days Creation; And as (notwithstanding his continual providence) his Creation was finished on the last day of the week: So Now (notwithstanding Christ's intercession at God's right hand) our Redemption was finished on the first day of the week by his Resurrection. And whereas Bishop White further objecteth, pag. 299. That the day of Christ's resurrection cannot properly be called a Sabbath or day of Rest, because our Savior was in action on that day about the necessary works of perfecting man's Redemption, by applying, teaching, inspiring, authorizing his Disciples. I answer. They were all Sabbath-day works, and so was the seventh day a working day to God in many such like respects suitable to the first Creation, and yet it was his Sabbath for this reason, because he rested and ceased from that which he did before, (as M ^r . Hildersham noteth upon the Hebrew word Sabbat in his 135. Lect. on the 51. Psalm ) which holds in respect of Christ. Furthermore page 300. Bishop White saith, That the Primitive Church devoted the first day of the week to the honor and service of Christ, not because of Christ's cessation from redemptive actions, but because it was primus dies laetitiae, The first day of joy and gladness for the resurrection of the Lord: True; But the cause of this joy was the perfection of our Redemption and Deliverance, which we celebrate with a congratulatory commemoration on the first day, like as we were to do the perfection of our Creation on the last day of the week. And pag. 303. h • saith, That Christ rested upon his resurrection day, no more then he did upon every day after until his ascension, and since his ascension until the worlds end. Answ. So he may say that God rested no more from his work of Creation on the seventh day, then he hath done ever since, where by the way take notice, That it is the consummation of the Creation and Redemption, which is meant by their Resting, and which we celebrate, for else if Rest should respect barely their cessation, then all the after time should be of equal estimation with the last day in respect of the Creation, and with the first day in respect of the Redemption.

And now indeed I wonder why the Egyptian deliverance being in Deut. annexed by the dictate of the spirit, as a reason to enforce the duty of the fourth Commandment or Sabbath in its second promulgation, should not be thought a sufficient reason to enforce the same duty & law upon us, as well as the obedience of the whole Law is urged upon us by the same reason contained in the Preface seeing that in both places it signifieth alike our spiritual Redemption and deliverance. Especially seeing the holy Ghost, in the fifteenth verse of the fifth of Deut. after he hath there affixed to the fourth Commandment, our deliverance out of spiritual Egypt in its Type, as the reason of it, concludeth upon it mandatorily a duty (not a liberty) imposed upon us therefore, in these words, Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day. A place of Scripture if soberly consulted (especially considering withal the preterition of the Creation in that place, whereby this becomes not only a motive but the sole reason) not easily answered by our Antisabbatarians. For as one saith well, In the 5. Deut. The reason of the Redemption from Egypt is put as a cause of sanctifying the Sabbath, so that there beginneth a translation, though not of the day itself, yet of the use and sanctification of the day, as to be kept in an holy and thankful memory of the Redemption from Egypt, which was but a Type and figure of our spiritual Redemption by Christ: which their Redemption from Egypt, if taken only literally, was not to be compared to the work of Creation, that it should challenge to it self a right in the Sabbath before the Creation, but only as it typified and prefigured that glorious work of Redemption. Now if the Redemption from Egypt, which was but a Type, were so glorious a work, as that the Sabbath day should be kept rather in memory of that, then of the Creation, then what shall we say of the work of Redemption it self, which doth so far exceed in glory that from Egypt, as the Sun doth the shadow? If therefore God's ancient people were to keep the Sabbath day in memory of their Rest from Egypt, how much more (when a greater Rest from a greater work of Redemption even the true and eternal Rest is come in, and we in Christ do enter into it as Heb. 4. 3.) ought that day of the week be kept holy, wherein the Lord rested from his most glorious and gracious work. And this may serve to answer your unanswerable conclusion following, if you will weigh it without prejudice.

Broad.

To conclude, By no ways or means yet found out can it be, That the precept of the Sabbath should bind to sanctify the Lord's-day, And I could wish my brethren not to busy their brains to find out more ways, as having busied them too much hereabouts already. Were the fourth Commandment a law in force still, it should bind to sanctify the Jews Sabbath and none other.

Broad.

But suppose that the fourth Commandment did bind to sanctify the Lord's-day, what would follow thereupon? That we might do no more work on our days then the Jews might do on theirs; for there is not the least color of dispensation in God's word for doing of more, and indeed after some men's doctrine we may do no more, not pick up a few sticks, nor buy a little ointment, nor step over the door sill to gather up Manna, &c. See M ^r . Dod, and M ^r . Cleaver on the fourth Commandment.

Answer.

It matters not what would follow now, no more then what did follow when the Commandment was confessedly of force. For certainly if we be to keep a Sabbath to the Lord, if we could herein do the will of God on earth as it is done in heaven, by keeping it here in the Type, as they keep it in heaven in the Antitype, it were so much the better, wholly heavenly, free from all carnal and earthly distractions, so far as necessity will give leave, and to do even these necessary things with such heavenly mindedness, as that the rules both of Piety to God and charity to ourselves are fulfilled therein. If at any time, much more on that day, • it ought to be our meat and drink to do the will of our heavenly father in earth, as it is done in heaven. And it is apparent, in Christian experience, that he which that day keepeth himself and his heart diligently from terrene thoughts, words, and actions, employing them contrarily, groweth most in grace, hath the sweetest Communion with God, the greatest measure of Divine comfort, (for a Christian never feeleth such sound comfort as when he spiritually observeth it) and is the ablest to long after his dissolution , which show it to be God's ordinance, for he is wont to give a blessing to his own ordinance: Whereas those that fight so much against it, it is like never felt the sweetness of it (as for yourself, I will pass no censure of you, for I know you not) but some I am able to produce, that are of this licentious opinion concerning the Sabbath, and are as little strict in other things which are uncontroversably naught, to the scandal of the Ministry, and to the palpable arguing, that because they entertain not the truth in the love of it, God hath either given them over to believe a lie, or else that they take up this opinion more to countenance their corruptions, then to maintain Truth. For non-residency, a formal and lazy ministry, and such like follow as naturally upon this, as falling away doth upon free-will. Your manner of instancing is naught thus to go about to lessen the Commandment itself, and our obedience to it, by a sleightie expression of the things commanded. Had Adam thus excused himself to God, when he accused him of rebellion, and told him, why, it was but a mouth-full of an apple, &c. the aggravation had been worse then the fault, a few sticks, a little oil, &c. is it the fewness of the sticks, the littleness of the oil; that give ens and non-ens to the Sin? He that hath his eyes anointed, though but with a little of God's eyesalve, knoweth that the thing commanded is to be judged by the commandment, and not the commandment by the thing commanded.

Me thinks that Memento or watchword set at the beginning of the Commandment (and so usefully expounded by M. Dod and M. Cleaver ) to quicken our circumspection in providing for the sanctifying of the Sabbath, by prevention and foresight, should have answered this Argument in the hatching, especially in these petty things you speak of, considering that the less the temptation the greater the sin.

But to your instances themselves I answer. That in all things whatsoever a lawful necessity granteth a lawful liberty on the Sabbath, as for gathering of Manna I have formerly shown you, why it did bind and for what time. And therefore, instead of further answer, I will insert for a conclusion, the positive truth of such works as may be done on the Sabbath day, as you shall find it in M ^r . Richard Byfeild, pag. 95, 96. There are (saith he) four sorts of works lawful on the Sabbath. 1. Works of holiness. 2. Works of mercy. 3. Works that are in their nature servile, yet do directly respect the present worship of God, as our travel to the places of God's worship, for these works become now holy works, and are not ours but God's works. 4. Works of common honesty, that is, works that make to the comely decent and orderly performance of God's worship, and our carriage and behavior therein. Such are the tolling of a bell for the calling of the assembly, the comely and modest dress of the body provided that it be not vain, curious, nor ask much time, but be thrust into the narrowest room that may be: The spreading of our table, so that state be not taken up, and all things be prepared before, as much as may, with the like. By works of mercy, I mean not only necessary labors in the help of the sick, and of women in travel, and of beasts out of a pit with the like: But also all those which are called works of necessity, which I rather call works of mercy, because they are therefore necessary, as they tend to the preservation of things, not from feared or suspected, but from eminent and imminent and present danger, and the work it self must be done in mercy, not in covetousness or other respects. Now of this sort are these works, labor in provision of convenient food, tendance of cattle, fight for defense of our country being assailed, riding of posts on the affairs of the state in causes of present and imminent danger. In all these the Master hath power to command, and so hath the superior ove • him that is under his charge, and the servant is bound to obey. The Master may command him the works of mercy, and the works servile, which directly look to the worship of God, or to go with him to the Sermon, though many miles off (if it cannot be had nearer hand) and as his Master may take his horse and ride thither, his servant going on foot, so may he command his servant for this purpose to saddle his horse, as in 2 King. 4. 22, 23. the question of the Shunamites husband showeth, who to his wife desiring one of the Asses to be made ready, and a servant to be sent her that she might go to the man of God, saith on this wise, wherefore wilt thou go to him today? It is neither new Moon nor Sabbath. It was then their custom so to do on the Sabbath and new Moon.

In like manner the Master may enjoin the servant such works as tend to necessary provision of food, and tending of children in the family, &c.

Yet here again some things seem to fight with the sanctification of the day. First, if the Master shall strictly stand upon his state and distance, for if the family-necessities in respect of young children should necessarily require the presence of some constantly at home, the Master may not hereby keep his servant constantly from public worship, but rather sometimes change turns with him. Much less may he desire such unnecessary superfluities, as may cause absence from the Assemblies, for this is to feed the carcass on the life-blood of the souls of thy servants. Deale in all plainness of heart, and know that thou hast to deal with God. The servant must be sure the work is unlawful before he offer to withdraw his obedience, but thou mayest sin in that in which thy servant sinneth not, because thou art bound to search more into the nature of thy necessities. Secondly, if the Master set not his business in so wise and discreet an order, that without all unnecessary hindrances, he and all his household may sanctify the day and keep it holy. Thirdly, if the Master remember not that he is a God, and that both by communication of name and power, to provide for, and see to the servants and his households rest, and therein respect the mercy which God would have shown to his servants, yea to cattle on that day.

Broad.

CHAP. IX. The Doctrine of the Primitive Church.

AFter the Doctrine of the Primitive Church the fourth Commandment is ceremonial and abrogated, and for proof hereof • say,

Answer.

M ^r . Cleaver in his book called the Morality of the Law, hath there given you your answer to this particular objection of the Fathers opinions in this point, where the Reader may see the true meaning of the ancients in this particular, and how Saint Augustine is wronged and perverted by you. I say for plenary satisfaction to the Reader, I refer him in this particular of the Fathers opinion in this point, to peruse these pages of M ^r . Cleavers book aforesaid, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136.

Broad. (3.)

That M ^r . Calvin speaking of the fourth Commandment, hath these words ( • nstit. lib. 2. cap. 8. Sect. 28.) Vmbratile veteres nuncupare solent. The ancients (not only some of the Ancients) accounted it shadowish, not only partly shadowish. Of what judgment M ^r . Calvin was, may partly appear by that he writeth afterward sect. 34. It a evanescunt nugae Pseudo prophetarum, &c. D ^r . Field excepteth the fourth Commandment out of the number of the Moral Commandments. Book 5. of the Church. Chap. 22. pag. 101.

Answer.

In the beginning of this work, you gave occasion to manifest M ^r . Calvin's opinion, and so I did.

As for D ^r . Field he doth not except the fourth Commandment from the number of the Moral, but from the number of those that are connatural with man, and therefore is more subject to change then the rest: His words are these; These Laws (saith he) are imposed upon men by the very condition of their nature and creation, as the very condition and nature of a man created by God requireth, that he should honor, love, fear, and reverence him that made him, and therefore touching the precepts of the first Table (that concerning the Sabbath excepted) it is clear and evident that they cannot be altered.

Broad.

M ^r . Rogers in his Cathe. Doctrine of the Church of England blameth D. B. for teaching (as contrary to the seventh Article) that the Sabbath was none of the Ceremonies which were justly abrogated at the coming of Christ; again that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day (as in the Mosaical Decalogue, is natural, moral, and perpetual.

Answer.

It is true that M ^r . Rog • rs blameth D. B. for teaching that the Sabbath was none of the Ceremonies which were justly abrogated at the coming of Christ, for which he is much to blame himself, till he can evince it to be one of them which he doth not.

Broad.

Who so readeth what M ^r . Rogers hath written in the Preface to his book, shall understand, that I am not the first or only man that have stirred much in this matter, God grant I be the last that hath need to stir much herein, and that the day of Rest to the Jews be not the cause of contention among Christians any longer.

Answer.

Here you fulfill the Proverb, you wish all were well so you were not the cause of it, if you may be suffered to speak the last word, you care not, though all keep silent. I did wish (though it be now unseasonable) when I first framed this answer, that it might come to the notice and knowledge of authority, the disturbance of the peace which M ^r . Rogers and you have brought into the Church by endeavoring to discover a shameful nakedness of contradiction in your Mother, by laboring to set the Articles and the Liturgy at odds one with another: For how cometh it to pass that we are commanded by the church to pray, Lord incline our hearts to keep an abrogated Ceremony of the Jews, even in her opinion as he and you would have it.

But the contrary is apparent not only by the Liturgy, but also by the Homily (established and received for the Doctrine of our Church) as you may see it quoted to this very purpose by M ^r . Richard 〈…〉 in answer to M ^r . Breerowood. He 〈◊〉 thus, You come in with the Edicts of Princes as one that would have the Lord's-day depend upon the constitutions of the Church, and Edicts of Princes only, and so not to differ from another Holyday: Most wicked pope's •• and worse then popish, and against all famous lights ancient and moderne. Or do you mention Princes Edicts and Churches-Constitutions to gloss with ours? Ours de • est your Tenet, and you seek herein to wound Church and Prince. For how they hold of the Lord's day that it is directly grounded on the fourth Commandment, appeareth in the 〈◊〉 , in the book of Homilies, and in the Statutes and godly provisions for redress of profanations. This is the doctrine of the Church By this Commandment (speaking of the fourth) we ought to have a time, as one day in the week wherein we ought to rest, yea from all lawful and needful works: For like as it appeareth by this Commandment, that no man in the six days ought to be slothful or idle, but diligently to labor in that estate wherein God hath set him, even so God hath given express charge to all men that upon the Sabbath-day, which is now our Sunday, they should cease from all weekly and work-day labor, to the intent that like as God himself wrought six days and rested the seventh, and blessed and sanctified it, and consecrated it to quietness and rest from labor: Even so God's obedient children should use the Sunday holily▪ and rest from their common and daily businesses, and also give themselves wholly to heavenly exercises of God's true Religion and service. So that God doth not only command the observation of this Holy-day, but also by his own example doth stir and provoke us to the diligent keeping of the same Good natural children will not only become obedient to the Commandments of their parents, but also have a diligent eye to their doings, and gladly follow the same. So if we will be the children of our heavenily Father, we must be careful to keep the Christian Sabbath-day, which is the Sunday, not only for that it is God's express Commandment, but also to declare ourselves to be loving children in following the example of our gracious Lord and Father. Thus far the words of the Homily, which (saith, M ^r . • yfeild to M ^r . 〈◊〉 ) Crosseth all that you hold in this your Treatise, and fully speaketh what we hold Consider it.

1. Our Christian Sabbath is God's express Commandment in the fourth precept of the Law enjoined.

2. That it is given of God in express charge to all men.

3. That all men are charged to cease from all weekly and work-day labor, and rest from common and daily businesses▪ and give themselves wholly to heavenly exercises of God's true Religion and service.

4. That all this standeth in force upon all men for the Lord's-day, from the example of God himself, who wrought six days, and rested the seventh, and blessed and sanctified it, and consecrated it to quietness and rest from labor, which example bindeth us to imitation

And that this was the proper meaning of our Church, besides the former words, take these that follow in the Homily also, they are these.

This Example and Commandment of God, the godly Christian people began so follow, immediately after the ascension of our Lord Christ, and began to choose them a standing day of the week to come together in, yet not the seventh day, which the Jews kept, but the Lord's-day, the day of the Lord's Resurrection, the day after the seventh day, which is the first day of the week. Ten times is the sanctifying of the Lord's-day in that part of the Homily called the Commandment of God in all meaning no other then the fourth Commandment. Now why should some be bold to say, and be suffered to put forth this wicked doctrine to the casting an aspersion on our famous Church, That to establish the Lord's-day upon the fourth Commandment is to incline too much to Judaism. This also layeth the like aspersion on the Scottish Church, which teacheth that the sanctification of the Lord's-day is of divine institution, as well by reason of the divine precept commanding the seventh day in general to be observed, as of the practice of Christ, which hath the force of a divine precept.

Broad.

A Treatife of the Lord's-Day. CHAP. I.

T He Church of Christ hitherto consisted of Jews and Gentiles. And as touching the believing Jews at Jerusalem, it is out of question that for many years they observed the same day as before, for they were zealous of the Law; one part whereof was the observation of the seventh day. If Baptism would not serve them instead of Circumcision, who can believe that the Lord's-day would serve them instead of the Sabbath. Yea James and the Elders did not so much as teach them, that the law of Commandments contained in ordinances was abolished, as it is manifest in that they desire Saint Paul to make it appear by his practice, that the report of him was nothing, and that he himself also walked orderly and kept the Law. But were they zealous of the Sabbath or not, when the unbelieving Jews were so much offended w ^th Christ afore time for the carriage of a bed on the Sabbath, and at this time with Saint Paul for profaning the Temple as they supposed, it cannot be that they would suffer their Sabbath, and other Holy-days to be profaned by Christians, as long as their Common-wealth stood. It is then out of question that the Church at Jerusalem a long time observed the Sabbath: and now, that besides the Sabbath and other Holy-days▪ enjoined in the Law, they sanctified the Lord's-day, and so rested from work two days in every week I cannot believe without some proof, and 〈◊〉 I have seen none at all.

Answer.

Here in you fight with your own shadow, for it is easily yielded all you say; but what you would conclude hence, I see not, or what you can well conclude, from the weakness of the believing Jews, to disprove the Lord's-day to be the Sabbath; no more then you can prove Baptism to be no Sacrament, because many of them held themselves still to Circumcision, in all which Paul was • aine to comply with them, that by becoming all to all he might win some. Yet still keeping the Doctrine of Christian liberty whole among the Gentiles where there was no stumbling block, though in his practice he warped towards the weak Jews amongst them at Jerusalem. And therefore did those, that advised him to comply with the Jews, declare their faith in the point, and show him that it was merely done to win upon their weakness, as appeareth in the 25. verse (which I would have you take notice of, as well as of the 20. and 24. verses ) where they tell him▪ as touching the Gentiles that believe we have written and determined that they observe no such thing.

So that from the practice of the Apostles among the believing Gentiles we are to gather conclusions for our directions, and not from the practice either of the Jews, or of the Apostles among the Jews: For you yourself will say, that the Jews 〈…〉 observing the Sabbath, because (you say) it was then abrogated.

And (I say) they erred in observing that day Sabbath▪ for as James and the elders said to 〈◊〉 in the 25: verse of that 21. Chap. of the Acts, 〈…〉 say I concerning the Sabbath. That they had taug • t the Gentiles to observe no such thing as to keep the 〈◊〉 seventh day, nor yet did they • each to keep no day Sabbath, but instituted the Lord's-day there, where they know they might do it usefully.

Broad.

As touching the Church of the Gentiles, I see no likelihood, that for some years the believing Gentiles came together rather on one day then on another, but esteeming every day alike, and assembled as often as they could with conveniency. And thus it continued (as may be thought) until near twenty years after Christ's resurrection, for the text of Scripture, were first we find mention of any such matter is • . Car. 16. which Epistle was written above twenty years after Christ arose. as is said by some learned; again for a time after the Gospel was preached to the Gentiles, there was no need of an appointed day, some few only in a City embracing the faith of Christ.

Answer.

Happily this is true which you say, concerning the Church of the Gentiles also, That for a long time they used no such Sabbath, but assembled as they could conveniently; But what doth this argue, against the Lord's-day being the Sabbath? no more then that of the Jews aforesaid. For we are not to judge of the Church of the Gentiles in their worst, but in their better estate. This new Creation had at first its Chaos, as well as the old, without form, till things were perfected by degrees, now a little and then a little: It was no little while before they were persuaded that fornication was a deadly sin.

The Lord's-day received its Institution at the consummation of this new Creation, as the Sabbath did at the consummation of the old; though perhaps this, by reason of the Churches non age had its intermission, like as that had, being also set a foot in its season, as that was.

But let us not pitch either upon the rudeness of the Jews, or the rawnesse of the Gentiles to take example by, but see the disposing providence, and directing hand of God in the Apostles them selves in those times, who were ordered by the special instinct of the spirit, and we shall see that in the 20 ^th . of John, where in the 19 ^th . verse it is said, that the same day at night which was the first day of the week, and when the doors was shut, where the Disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus &c. and so again in the 26 ^th . verse: it is said, That eight days after, again the Disciples were within and Thomas with them, Then came Jesus &c. Which showeth God's special hand in assembling them on the day of Christ resurrection, and the Spirits care to record it for our learning, together with Christ's approbation and blessing thereof by his presence.

Neither is there the least mention made of the Jewish Sabbath, but it is reckoned in the Text as the rest, ( eight days after ) and so Paul he passeth over the Jewish Sabbath as an ordinary day in the 20. Acts 6. and honoreth only the first day of the week when he saith, That he abode at Troas seven days, and the first day of the week the Disciples being come together, &c.

D ^r . Heylin, Part. 2. pag. 22. to make the matter good, biddeth us take notice that Paul had tarried at 〈◊〉 seven days before this meeting; But we may do better to take notice that he wrongs the Text, which implies no such thing, but that his stay was but seven days in all: for the 6. verse having briefly told us Paul's journall from Philippi to Tro • s, it also showeth us the number of days that he spent there, which were but seven in all (where we abode seven days saith he) and then the 7. verse historizeth to us, the remarkable example of Paul and the Disciples touching the first day of the week only, being silent of the rest. And upon the first day of the week, when the Disciples, &c. And as touching that 1 Cor. 16. which you mention. The words of Paul there seem to take for granted the foreknowledge and acquaintance that the Christian Cori • ths already had of that day to be the Lord's. And if so be the Lord's-day be not the Sabbath, why was it kept of them, and is it now kept of us, in parallel to the Sabbath, weekly, and not anniversarily or yearly, as Easter-day and other remembrances of Christ are? and as all the times of Commemorations which the Church of her own accord dedicated have ever and only been; as we see by the feasts of Puri • , and of dedication, among the Jews, and so now amongst us Christ ••• and Easter, &c.

Broad.

We read that the Disciples were called first Christians at Antioch, though by whose me ••• it be not said in the Acts, but as touching the meeting on the first day of the week, we neither find where it began nor by whom. This (in my judgment) is very probable if not certain, that this manner of assembling on the first day of the week, was approved by the Apostles, as was the name of Christians: Yea and Christ himself may seem to approve it likewise, in as much as on this day, he revealed those mysteries to the beloved Disciple. About forty years after this order began, the name Lord's-day was given to the first of the week, which name had it been given when Saint Paul wrote his first Epistle to the Corinthians, and Saint Luke the Acts, it is probable that one of them would have used it, and yet it is not improbable that this name Lord's-day was given as soon as the day began to be in any great account.

Answer.

It is true that in Antioch the Disciples were first called Christians, and be the means what it will, it was not without the special hand of God, nor without a special prophecy and promise as appeareth in the 65 of Isaiah 15. Where the name of the Jews is cried down, and the name of the Christians set up . Ye shall leave your name as a curse unto my chosen, for the Lord God shall slay you, and call his serva ••• by another name. And as thus God prophesied the alteration of the old name into a new, in the 15 ^th . verse, so in the 17. verse, he prophesied the alteration of the Creation from old to new, together with the forgetfulness of the old by reason of the joyful remembrance of the new: which was yet further prophesied by the Psalmist in the 118. Psal. 22. 24. The stone which the builders refused, that is, crucified and cast off, is the head of the corner, that is, is raised again of God and made our salvation, for this is the sense thereof, as you may see in the 4 ^th . Acts 10, 11, 12. And what followeth in the Prophe • of David? That this work of raising up Christ again by his mighty power is a thing marvelous in our ey • s. And that therefore this is the Day which the Lord hath made, for us to rejoice and be glad in it, as it follow • th in the 23 and 24 verses of that 118 Ps • lme.

Object. But it will be objected, that hereby is no particular day denoted, but indefinitely the time of the publication of the Gospel.

Answ. To which I answer, That the promise of the accomplishment of our 〈…〉 3. 15. on the very particular day of Christ's 〈◊〉 is eminently meant hereby, as is evident by comp • ring this place with 13 Acts 32. 33. These words. 32. And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers. 33. God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised us. Jesus again, as it is also written in the second Psalm: Thou art my • on this day ha • e I begotten thee. As touching the meeting on the first day of the week, which you say we neither find where, nor by whom it began. I have even now shown you the original of it, both for time and persons; to wit, on the day of Christ's resurrection by the Apostles, and the day fennight after. Had they only met the day of his re • urrection, we might have thought it had been only accidental, and not of special providence; or if it had been recorded, that they had met any other day besides, it might somewhat have weakened the force of this argument: But meeting twice, and it being recorded to be on the same day (together with the effects thereof) it doth wonderfully prove the thing to be of purposed providence, both on God's part in assembling them then, and on Christ's part in appearing to them, thereby to give original to this Ordinance, which accordingly hath been so observed ever since. And therefore it is not likely that the Apostles took it up by approbation from inferior Christians (nor yet that Christ honored it only by way of approbation but also of institution, for we see what honor he gave to it a principio, by his often appearings thereon, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, John 20. 22. on this day, which you so Sophister like pass over, and only instance in that which seemeth to serve your turn) but that it was taken up from them.

Though this confessed approbation of Christ's, granteth it to be of the same authority with Baptism, which was brought in by John the Baptist and ratified by Christ. And if the people of the Jews held the Baptism of John to be from heaven and not of men, though they had no express command for it but only his practice (and though the chief Priests and Elders believed him not) only for this reason, because they held John as a Prophet, Matth. 21. 25, 26. and this their belief of John and his Baptism, producing suitable fruits of grace and holiness in them, was approved of Christ, verse. 32. I wonder how any dare deny the Lord's-day to be of divine institution, and affirm it human, that know and acknowledge Paul to be an Apostle (the least whereof was greater then John the Baptist ) and the thing of such great consequence and benefit to the Church, and other ways so backed: But let us labor to imitate these contemned Publican's and harlots in believing this point of the Lord's-day to be from heaven by divine institution, and not of men by human ordination, suffering Paul's practice as an Apostle to overrule 〈…〉 as John the Baptist as a Prophet did them, and framing our practice to ou • faith like them: And so, obeying him and his Ministers, let us not doubt in like case the approcation of Christ in our behalfes, above the over-wi • e unbelievers be they 〈…〉 .

And you shall 〈…〉 second Treatise, pag. 22. 〈…〉 that, o • taken 〈…〉 the Lord's-day is in some sort de iure divino, in some sort, namely not by personal but by delegate authority, that is, not prescribed personally and immediately by God himself, but only by virtue of that authority which by God was committed to the Apostles, for the ordering and governing of his Church, but being taken for divine Ordinance or Commandment it is not de iure divine. And further he saith, To entitle a Commandment divine is required. 1. That the authority be divine whereby it is ordained. 2. That the Author himself that ordaineth be so also, that is, that both the power whereby, and the person that doth immediately establish it, be divine. Which divine authority is confessed to be in the Apostolical constitutions, but the immediate Authors are denied to be divine.

Now as all other events and actions receive their denomination from their immediate not remote causes: so the constitutions of the Apostles, although they proceed originally from the instinct and aspiration of the Holy Ghost, God's spirit yet proceeding immediately from the institutions of the Apostles themselves, which delivered them unto the Church in form of Commandments, they are to be termed human constitutions, and not properly divine. Thus you have M ^r . Breerewoods opinion of the divine authority of the Lord's-day, much more Orthodox then yours, only in answer to this later part, where he saith that Apostolical actions are to be termed human, from that principle, That all actions are to receive their denominations from their immediate not remote causes. He might have considered how that all the New Testament is called the word of God from the remote Cause the Spirit of God, which inspired it, though the Apostles and Evangelists writ it (which were men) and that by no express Commandment that we find.

Bishop White averreth against T. B. pag. 91. That our weekly observation of the Lord's-day in the time of the Gospel is an holy and godly practice, for it is warranted by the example of the Apostles, and those Primitive Churches which were planted by the Apostles, and which received their Ecclesiastical precepts and constitutions by tradition from the Apostles, so that the Apostles first founded it, as he further affirms, pag. 97. saith he, It is an ignorant speech to term it a popish tradition, for popish traditions had not their beginnings from the Apostles. So also pag. 189. We believe saith he, that the holy Apostles ordained the Sunday to be a weekly Holy-day, because the Primitive Fathers, who lived some of them in the Apostles days, and others of them immediately after, and who succeedeth them in Apostolical Churches did universally maintain the religious observation of this day. So again, pag. 192. It is probable that in the Churches at Corinth and Galatia, the Lord's-day was made a weekly Holy-day by the Apostles (for they principally governed those Churches at this time) 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2. (And yet Doctor Heylin laboreth to prove this ordination of Paul to the Galatians to be upon a Sabbath day, and not upon the Lord's-day. ) And again, pag. 192. It could not possibly have come to pass that all and every Apostolical Church throughout the universal world should so early, and in the beginning of their plantation, have consented together to make the Sunday a weekly Service-day, unless they had been thus directed by their first founders the holy Apostles themselves, &c.

Lastly, it is a true that a long time after Christ's Resurrection was the name of Lord's-day given to the first day of the week , to wit, when the first day of the week began to be most currently received for the Christian Sabbath: As the name of Christians was then given, when Christianity was generally professed and received, and yet was there a Sabbath before professed by many, as well as there were Christians and Christianity before they were so called: So that what you say of the one, you may as well say of the other.

Broad.

Now I have before acquainted thee with the agreement between divines touching this day, namely that ordinarily (some necessary businesses excepted) it is to be spent wholly in religious exercises. The difference be • ween them standeth in this point. Some will have the Lord's-day to be the Commandment of Christ, or his Apostles, as the Sabbath was of God heretofore. Others will have it to be only an Ecclesiastical tradition or constitution, yet such an one as is of greater authority then many other Zanehius hath this saying, Traditionum enim Ecclesiasticarum, quaedam sunt Apostolicae, qu • dam mere Ecclesiasticae. Certe quas constat ab Apostolis fuisse profectas hae plus habeant authoritatis quam relique. Red. de trad. Eccles.

Answer.

It were to be wished that how-ever Divines differ in opinion concerning the Morality, that yet they agreed in the divinity or holy practice of the Sabbath. But there are of your opinion that stick not to say, how that the Sabbath is but an ordinary Holy-day; and that the vacant hours which are besides the public employments ordained by the Church are of the same nature with working days, and their practice is accordingly: So that if we may judge the tree by the fruit, then may we judge their opinions by their practice which savoreth of the flesh, and not of the spirit, whose furthest progress in the practicke part is (like some of the choicest heathens) to regulate their actions by the light of Nature. And happily they have the lantern of notional divinity shining in their heads (a cold clymate for Religion to dwell in) which they (embracing this present world) use (as workmen do their tools) to get money and preferment under the color of an outward calling, for the inward they look not after; But for the knowledge of that wherein the life and soul of Religion consisteth, to wit, Christ and him crucified, in a saving sense, they are as ignorant in it as Nicodemus was in the doctrine of Regeneration, which though he had read it before in the new Covenant ( Ezek. 11. 19.) yet seeing he saw not, no more do these, and therefore no wonder if they cry down the authority of the Lord's-day, that have no acquaintance with the Lord of the day, but instead of serving him as their Lord and Master, they serve themselves of him, making his Gospel (wherein they should labor in season and out of season) to be their stalking horse, to convey them the more plausibly to their prey of preferment here on earth, and leave that of Heaven for such fools as they call Puritans. I mean not non-conformists, except they be such as they mean, that is, Men that make not Religion to consist in knowledge, but in living according to their knowledge in inward and outward holiness, not being vainly puffed up by a fleshly mind with a voluntary obedience of will-worship, or mere formal holiness, or moral excellencies, or civil and natural righteousness; but holding the Head, laboring to increase with the increase of God, and to grow in the excellent and humbling knowledge of the simplicity of Christ, to the praise of the glory of his grace; in a word, such as the Scripture calleth Saints, and profane men, Precisians.

No men greater enemies to preaching. A conscionable Minister, that is painful in the discharge of his calling, laboring to save the souls of his flock, preaching twice a day, and the name of a Lecturer (so called for distinction sake) stinks in there nostrils, as they do in God's. I wonder how such men come to be called Divines or Preachers, that thus defile their own nest, accounting soul-saving preaching, foolishness, and in a spiteful pride calumniating those that with conscience and diligence labor in the work of the Lord.

How necessary is it, think we, then to maintain the Prerogative of the Sabbath, when men of this Coat (like swine) tread holy things under their feet.

But let such ponder that place of the Evangelist, and apply it, Matt. 5. 19. Whosoever shall break one of these least Commandments, and teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven.

But to come to the difference it self, I answer, That I know no Divines that do affirm Christ to have left it in express mandatory terms that that day should be kept Sabbath nor yet Holy-day; for indeed there is no such Commandment extant in the New Testament: But they say, That it is likely Christ did teach it to his Apostles before his death , which though it be more then I know, yet sure I am their meeting thus emphatically recorded in Scripture to be on that very day, and the day sennight, of Christ's Resurrection, and answerably practiced after by Paul, is doubtless of binding authority, and to an exemplary use and end: And how-ever it be, that Christ did or did not, teach them by word of mouth before his death, questionless in that thing, at that time, they were especially taught of God, the instinct and secret guidance of the Spirit being instead of a Commandment to them (though perhaps for present they were ignorant of their own practice, as Mary was, when she poured the box of ointment upon Christ's head, that she did it for his burying) and doing the same thing that day sennight; We have just cause to think that Christ had an hand in it, though it be not expressed in the word, he having appeared to them the day before, and the same effect ensuing upon the same occasion, to wit, his appearing to them being met again.

And therefore what though the Puritans (as Bishop White stiles them, from T. B. pag. 185.) cannot show the Lord's-day to be made a Sabbath by any written Law (he means no doubt in the New Testament) may not the unerring spirit of the Apostles suffice us, seeing that himself saith, pag. 119. The inspiration of • od is of as great efficacy and authority as his writing, wherewith the Apostles doubtless were directed in the instituting of an exemplary perpetual observation to the Church.

And whereas (I say) the instinct of the Spirit was as a Law or Commandment to the Apostles, in this particular of instituting the Lord's-day upon Christ's Resurrection. I would to this purpose commend the consideration of Moses his instituting the Sabbath, upon the fall and gathering of a double portion of Manna in 16. Exod. which yet we do not find in terms to be taught him of God then, when that Law of Manna was commanded, ver. 5. Fulke upon the 1▪ Revel. is peremptory and saith, That for the prescription of the Lord's-day before any other of the seven, they had without doubt either the express Commandment of Christ before his ascension when he gave them precepts concerning the kingdom of God, and the ordering and government of his Church, Acts 1. 2. or else the certain direction of his Spirit, that it was his will and pleasure it should be so, and that also according to the Scriptures, seeing that there is the same reason of sanctifying that day in which our Savior Christ accomplished out Redemption, and the restitution of the world by his Resurrection from death, that was of • anctifying the day, in which the Lord rested from the Creation of the world. Nor can it be denied (I think) but that the Apostles had many things taught them privately by Christ, which afterwards upon occasion they published, some by precept, and some by example . And we may be the rather induced that Paul had received it from Christ, if so be we consider how ingenuous he is to acknowledge what he had not received in the 1 Cor. 7. 25. As concerning virgins (saith he) I have no Commandment of the Lord, but I give you mine advice. And Zanchi observes that he taught them not so much by words, as by the efficacy of the Spirit, which being their unerrable guide in all things concerning the Church, we may well allow to be ours in this matter of the Lord's-day by virtue of their exemplary Ordinance. Their practice and example, I doubt not you will say, had been enough without precept (and I remember none they have in any express terms from Christ) for the ordaining Pastors and Ministers, nor do I think you will deny them to be iure divino. But granting this is not commanded by Christ, yet are you no gainer by it. For I do the rather think that because no express mention is made of it in the New Testament by way of Commandment, it should seem the rather to be the Sabbath. Thus Eatonus de Sabbato, pag. 69. de institution & iure diei dominicae ait. Non opus erat mandato novo, cum vetus illud mandatum de observando Sabbato in vigore esset, & adhuc est, iam autem novum praceptum ferre de re illa, quae veteri pracepto stabilita fuerat, esset vetus praceptum abolore. Christus autem non venit abolere legem sed implere. And indeed God is most precise as we see, both in Innocency and under the Jews, to prescribe the days of his solemn worship by special Commandment, and so certainly would he have done this if it had been a new thing; but being not commanded in the New Testament, it ought the rather to be taken for granted in the matter of it, from the fourth Commandment , and in the manner to be regulated by the Apostles example (which should be of force to us, as well as David's eat • ng the Shewbread was to the Jews) else God would never have let such a day, which hath ever in the Church been received as a weekly Sabbath, to have been without an express Commandment; especially considering how precise he was in that point, even son the days that were appointed for the solemning of the Type in the Time of the Jews. And yet as 〈◊〉 saith, pag. 70. Nulla est conseque • ti • , Non 〈…〉 dixit & fecit Dominus noster de quibus 〈◊〉 • pud Ev • ngelistas facta est mentio, satis au •• 〈…〉

It is no new thing, both to belee • e a thing to be 〈◊〉 divi • , for which yet there is none other commandment (expressed then practice, as also to believe that it was commanded of God, though there be no specification of any such Commandment in holy writ, as for instance in the sacrificing that was before the Law, where find you any Commandment to sacrifice, before you find Abel sacrificing? And yet (I believe) you doubt not but there was a command or something equivalent. Neither can you other-ways think, but when Noah at his going into the Ark, took with him beasts both clean and unclean, he was instructed from heaven, which was which, though no such instruction appear.

Again did not Christ, in the instituting of the new Sabbath, imitate his father in his manner of instituting the old in the old Creation: For what Commandment did God give at first? Was it any other then a declaration of his own practice to Adam, whom he had then extraordinarily made, that he by his practice should teach it to his posterity? So doth not Christ the like? For because he rested by rising on the first day of the week from the work of our Redemption and re-creation, therefore did he bless and hallow it, by his example to his Apostles, whom he had extraordinarily called (that they by their example should do the like to others) with those many manifestations of himself, and admirable blessings, which he then bestowed on them. Which practice of Christ doth wonderfully make good both the Morality of the Sabbath, and justifieth the alteration of it also to the first day of the week. For whereas God at the first blessed it, that is, appointed it to be a day wherein he would especially confer spiritual blessings. We see Christ accordingly doth still on this day bless and enlighten his Apostles, by appearing to them being together glorifying God.

Now if you will say that Adams posterity (whom in your first Chapter you say, it is probable, had they continued in Innocency, should always have followed God's example in working six days and resting the seventh) should have sanctified the last of seven by Tradition from God and Ad • ms examples, I will easily yield you that by the like tradition from Christ and his Apostles example, we do now keep the first day of the week.

Broad.

CHAP. II. The latter Opinion maintained.

THe Primitive Christians for the most part held the latter opinion, as I gather by this that followeth. Justin Martyr in his second Apology writeth after this manner. We hold these assemblies on the Sunday because on that day God began to make the world, and also our Savior Jesus Christ arose from the dead. Hereby it is manifest that Justin knew not of a Commandment from Christ or his Apostles, for should a Rabbin yield a reason of their meeting on the Sabbath, would it not be because God had so commanded it, who on that day rested after the Creation and sanctified it? And so would Justin no doubt had he took their meeting to be enjoined by Christ or his Apostles, we hold these Assemblies on the Sunday because Christ hath so commanded, who on that day rose again from the dead. Thus I am sure some would be ready to write in these days.

Answer.

The opinion of the Ancients (how-ever you may force them to speak) was that one day in a week, or the seventh day, was still of force by virtue of the fourth Commandment, (and that the individual first day of the week was from Christ or his Apostles or both) as appeareth in that they call the sanctifying of the Lordsday a keeping of the Sabbath. So Ignatius (who ad Magnes. chargeth those Christians to work on the Jews seventh day) doth yet say. Let every of us keep Sabbath spiritually : (speaking in opposition to the Jews manner of superstitious Sabbatizing ) so that he crieth down both their day and manner of hallowing it , and yet maintaineth the Sabbath to be yet still on foot, and exhorteth them to the right keeping it. S ^t . Augustine also saith. So we also sanctify the Sabbath the Lord saying, Ye shall not do any work therein. And as M ^t . Richard Byfeild saith, The Apostle to the Heb. 4. 9. Doubted not to apply the name of Sabbath to the Christian people and our Re •• , saying, That the people of God have their Sabbatism left unto them. For human authorities in this point, I further refer you to the 21 and 26. Chap. of M ^r . Richard Byfeild.

But to show your leger-de-main I proceed to that of Justin Martyr. In which (I say) he doth as Paul sometimes doth concerning his Apostleship, Demonstrating it by such arguments as do properly constitute an Apostle. So Justin in his Apology for Christians doth first show the reason of the Christian Sabbath, i. e. Our new Creation by Christ, who by his resurrection brought light out of darkness in the first day of the Creation.

But had you looked further (as no doubt you did) you might have seen his opinion to be more then you make it, even witnessing Christ to have taught it to his Apostles, as you shall find it quoted by M ^r . Richard Byfeild . So that you deal with Justin Martyr as men deal with Mag-pyes, cut their tongues shorter to teach them to speak what they would have them. And yet a R • bbin might have laid down the Reason and concealed the Commandment without solloecisme or error, unless you will say it was a fault in Rabbi Moses, for so he proscribeth the Israelites to answer their children, when they should ask them concerning the Passover, as you may see in the 12. Chap. of Exod. 26. 27. so also in the 13 Exod. 13, 14, 15, 16. You shall see the reason of a duty delivered from the parent to the children, by precept from Moses, without any specification of the Commandment itself.

Broad.

Si dies observare non licet, & menses, & tempora & annos, nos quo{que} simile crimen incurrimus, quartum Sabbati observantes & parascenem & diem dominicum & ieiunium Quadragesima. See the place and note that he doth not yield a peculiar reason for the observation of the Lord's-day.

Constantine imperator concessit rusticis, ut diebus dominicis agrorum culturae, pro ut ipsi viderint fore necessarium inservirent. Idoneum vero precationi tempus salutarem diem dominicum constituebat, quippe qui tum vere praecipu • s est, tum ha • d dubie primus.

Note the reason Eusebius rendereth of this constitution of Constantine, and consider withal that Constan • ine would not have so constituted, if in his judgment our Savior Christ had before appointed the Lord's-day to this end; Did ever a Christian Prince simply decree that the Lord's Supper should be administered? As many Christian Princes and Councils as have simply decreed the observation of the Sunday, were doubtless of this opinion.

Answer.

For answer to this, I refer you to M ^r . Richard Byfoild, Chap. 29. where the Reader may herein receive satisfaction.

Broad.

As touching moderne writers Calvin saith, Veteres subrogarunt diem dominicum in locum Sabbati.

Zanchius saith, that the Lord's-day, Nullum habet Domini mandatum.

D ^r . Feild saith, that the Lord's-day is an Apostolical tradition not precept.

The Book of Homilies (not to stand upon other) saith, That Christian people chose the first day which is as much in effect as that it is not Christ's Commandment. Will any man say that the people of Israel chose the seventh day? Now of this opinion I am, and these are my reasons.

Answer.

I have in the introduction of this Treatise shown you M ^r . Calvin's opinion of the fourth Commandment, to be universal and perpetual, and how? but by the succession of the first day of the week to the last.

Zanchi saith, Morale est mandatum quatenus praecepit ut e septem diebus unum consecremus, &c. quatenus tale nunquam fuit abrogatum nec abrogari potest. And yet if the fourth Commandment be not observed in the Lord's-day it is abrogated.

The Book of Homilies maketh this good likewise of the divinum ius of the Lord's-day, as it is the seventh day, from the fourth Commandment as hath been shown before; and so hath your objection been answered in respect of the people's choosing the Lord's-day, by a reference to M ^r . Cleaver his Moralitie of the Law, pag. 137.

And now of this opinion am I.

I have ever granted you that the Christian Sabbath is not by any express precept from Christ or his Apostles enjoined, nor is it needful, for if upon this ground you will conclude it to be an arbitrary practice and not de iure divino , you may as well cry down the writings of the Apostles, and turn Anabaptist in point of baptizing of Infants. For as for the Scriptures, what express precept of Christ's, have we to his Apostles for writing of them? and 〈◊〉 the Epistles were most of them occasionally written by the Apostles, and yet who of us for these reasons denieth them to be the work of God, universal and 〈◊〉 divi • o? For as Feild saith in answer to the Papists, 〈◊〉 the imperfection of the Scriptures because they were written by the Apostles and Apostolical men of their own motions, and not by Commandment from Christ (which is a parallel argument to this of the Christian Sabbath and the answer equal to both) who knoweth not (saith he) that the Scriptures are not of any private motion, but that the holy 〈◊〉 of God were moved, impelled and carried by the Spirit of truth th • the performance of this work, doing nothing without the instinct of the Spirit which was 〈◊〉 the • a Commandment. And why may not all these reasons and grounds warrant, and give equal force to their practice in the point of our Christian Sabbath or Lord's-day as well as to their writing of Scripture. So speaketh D ^r . Ames. med. pag. 359. Si dies bac dominica conced •• ur fuisse Aposto ••• 〈◊〉 author it as 〈…〉 est divina, quia divino Spirit • agebantur Apostoli, non minus in Sacris institutionibus, quam in ipsa doctrina Ev • ngelii, vel verbo vel script is proponenda. Especially seeing that the same things that accompanied the Gospel, did accompany the Sabbath, the better to approve it to be of God, to wit, The gift of the holy Ghost.

And now we know there is nothing more ordinary in Scripture, then for God to grace the first institutions of his Ordinances, with extraordinary tokens of his savor, which are of an argumentative nature, and of an establishing and instituting force. As at the first setting up of the San • drin among the Jews, Numb. 11. 25. Everyone of the seventy Elders prophesied for a while, to testify that their calling was from heaven. And though divers others besides these have had the Spirit of Prophecy bestowed on them, that yet nothing detracts from God's sealing the ordination of this Council or Sanhedrin by the Seventies prophesying. So though Christ appeared to his Disciples on other days, besides the first day of the week, yet it detracteth not from his instituting and authorizing that day by his remarkable apparitions and operations thereon, as D ^r . Heylin would insinuate, part. 2. pag. 13.

Again at the instituting of the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices, there came a fire from the Lord, and consumed the burnt offering: also at Christ's baptizing we see how extraordinarily the Spirit came down in likeness of a Dove; and so at Peters first preaching to the Gentiles, what an extraordinary work was there wrought, Acts 10. 44. And may not we well conclude the divinity of the Lord's-day from these manifold rare occurrences which fell out in the practice or usage of it , and such as are most remarkably and eminently recorded in Scripture, mentioning the Time as well as the things themselves, As, That Christ appeared to them on the first day of the week, and the first day of the week they had the gifts of the Holy Ghost given them, and on the Lord's day Saint John was ravished in the Spirit (not any other day in the week having the honor to be denominated the day of his appearance in all the New Testament, though no doubt he did appear to them on other days of the week, besides the first, in those other times of his appearances) And why is all this? But to give the better authority and estimate to that day: Which we may the rather judge, because that since then God hath shown extraordinary judgments upon the breakers and profaners of it, which being frequently and remarkably instanced, I will refer you for them to the Martyr-book, Practice of Piety, and M ^r . Richard Byfeild, pag. 99. 100. 101. As also if we consider the benefits, which nationally we have enjoyed thereby, above all other Protestant Churches, of Peace, Plenty, and also powerful Preaching and Professing for a long season, and which do experimentally and personally redound to the due observers of it, how extraordinarily and feelingly they delight themselves in the Lord, according to that promise Isai. 58. ult. So that then believe it for the works sake, as Christ saith in another case. And indeed Argumentum ab effectis, is an argument of no small evidence and power with those that profess Christianity in the power of it: The want of which medium in the experiences of men (either not at all wrought in them, or else not taken notice of by them) is the cause of so many false conclusions in these days, as well as it was amongst the Galatians, till Paul (a man of spirit) put them in mind, Gal. 3. 2. And observe it as a main argument in this way of experience, That at the first beginning of men's conversions, when God enlighteneth and convinceth the Conscience, commonly the first thing the Conscience fastens on, is the misspending the Sabbath, and the first duty that he conscionably putteth in practice upon his conversion, is commonly the better sanctifying and keeping the Sabbath.

Now as touching the baptizing of Infants, there is neither an express precept for it, nor yet an example of express practice delivered in Scripture; and yet the grounds, causes and reasons of the necessity of that practice, and the benefit or good that followeth on it, are evidently contained in the Scripture, and for this respect it is named a tradition: But yet the grounds of it being in Scripture (as Feild in the fore-quoted place observes) it is not therefore a bare tradition, but is therefore of Divine authority, and unalterable in the Church of God. The same in all respects holdeth good concerning the Sabbath, and with some advantage, for that there is the express practice of the Apostle Paul in this point mentioned in the Scripture, which is not so in the baptizing of Children. And this is apparent, that those things which had their grounds and reasons in Scripture, the Apostles were not curious or exact in commanding them expressly, nor entreating of them largely, except they were then controverted and scrupled at, which (it seemeth) the Lord's-day was not, but was currently received and practiced among the Gentile converts (the Infant Jews being born withal) for on that day they ordinarily were wont to celebrate both the death and resurrection of Christ, the one by the Sacrament, and the other by the Sabbath, as appeareth, Acts 20. 7. And therefore Saint Paul when he speaketh of it, still mentioneth it as a thing granted and not doubted of, although the Ceremonial or Jewish temporary Sabbaths, as like wise the Ceremonial meats were, which maketh the Apostle so often and so largely handle that point.

Thus Eatonus, pag. 69. Nullum praeceptum de ritu aliquo. Iudaico abrogando à Domino nostro Apostolis & Discipulis suis relictum legitur. Nusquam dicitur Pascham, non comedetis, non circumcidemini, & similia, Solum enim controversia in Ecclesiiis de illis orta est ex occasion ista. Apostoliritus illos prohibuerunt, iam autem cum in confess • est diem nostrum dominicum à nullo Christiano impugnatum fuisse, non mirandum est, si nullum de illo observando vel abrogando Sabbato Iudaico mandatum expressum reperimus. Est tamen generale mand • tum de illo observando comprehensum in illo Apostoli, Estote imitatores mei, sieut & ego sum Christi.

And thus much may serve for answer both to your opinion and reasons, as also for the remainder of your Treatise (excepting some short observations) for what followeth hath been mostly spoken of before both by you and me.

Broad.

CHAP. III. The former Opinion confuted.

1. CHrist did not command us to sanctify the Lord's-day. Such as would have us believe that our Savior Christ himself enjoined the Lord's-day, go about to prove it by his practice.

1. Because he appeared to his Disciples on the first day as they were assembled together, John 20.

Answ. This assembling was for fear of the Jews, and it was a very strange kind of teaching them by his practice to observe the day, not to come unto them till late in the Evening, about half an hour before the end thereof, for the night following belonged unto the second day, other wise either that first day had two nights belonging to it, or else I cannot see how Christ lay three days in his grave.

Answer.

Had this record of the Apostles being assembled and Christ appearing at this time been alone recorded, there might have been some probable conjecture that it might be but accidentan (although the Text is very exact and expressive concerning the time: for having in the first verse of the 20. John, spoken of the first day of the week, the 19. verse reduplicateth that with a significant explanation (as if the Evangelist would be loath to be mistaken in that point of Time) saying, The same day then at night which was the first day of the week, &c.) But being seconded with the like afterwards, it argueth it to be ordered by God of a purposed providence, especially if we take along the event and succeeding practice of the Apostles and Church ever after, which to all sober minds putteth it past doubt. And as touching that you say their meeting was for fear of the Jews, happily the privacy of it was so, but why they should fear the Jews more on that day, then on any other I see no reason, and therefore can it be no reason of their then assembling.

And now concerning Christ's appearing to them at the Evening of the same day, it is so far from lessening the authority of this institution, as that, being compared with God's institution of the first Sabbath, which according to your own confession was about the end thereof, it giveth much force thereto.

And although I mean to be brief in what followeth, yet I must needs by the way show you M. Breerewoods refutation in this point by M ^r . Richard Byfeild, pag. 211. Saith he there. Concerning the authority that translated the Sabbath, you say it is certain that the translation thereof was actually and immediately prescribed by the Church, deal ingenuously and show me where, if in Scripture then I answer, that it was not immediately prescribed by the Church, for the Apostles were not Authors of the institution, but ministers of Christ and pen-men of the holy- • host: If in Ecclesiastical writers, I answer, they all refer us to the Apostles and the Scriptures. This opinion therefore is so far from certain, that it is certainly false. You say again, That certainly Christ never gave his Apostles particular charge of instituting a new Sabbath, either while he conversed with them on earth; or afterwards by Revelation. How know you this? The Apostles delivered many things that the Evangelists did not set down, not themselves expressly say, that they received them from the Lord's mouth, That they concealed Christ's command from the Church, that is, this particular expression in so many words, that Christ, commanded it, this maketh to prove that it was given them in charge by Christ, for else when the Apostles enjoined it, they would have said of that their injunction as of other things, 1 Cor. 7. 6, 12, 25. We speak this by permission, and not by Commandment: We have no Commandment of the Lord, but we speak our judgment, Herein speak we, not the Lord. This institution then (to use your own language; of a new day of solemnity instead of an old Sabbath ) was of the 〈◊〉 and necessity of the Apostles Commission not of the libe • ty. The Apestles did nothing in ordering the Church but from and by Christ, either by precept or example or divine inspiration: And it is more then probable they had special warrant from Christ in express change, when we compare together their precept and practice, with these two Texts, Matt. 28. 20, Acts 1. The first enjoining the Apostles to teach what he commanded, and to teach and baptize, in which Ordinances teaching such things he would be with them to the worlds end. • The later declaring that Christ spake the things pertaining to the kingdom of God to his Disciples in these forty days before his ascension For all that you say therefore, it is certain the Sabbath was translated by the same authority that first commanded it.

Broad.

2. Because after eight days he came to them again, John 20. 26. Ans. This were more strange, for how can they prove that a week is meant thereby? A week after is but seven days, and should thy friend departing from thine house on Sunday at night, promise to come again after eight days, wouldst thou expect his coming upon that day seven-night? either it was not a week, or Saint John dreamt not of such a collection, for otherwise he would have said so plainly. Matthew and Mark have the like phrase, and seeing by after six days they mean on the seventh, it is some likelihood that John by after eight days, may mean on the ninth, this is more probable.

Answer.

These words of John after eight days, or as it is in the Geneva eight days after, what do they intend more then if I should say, Eight days hence I will do such a thing. Surely according to this propriety of speech, the eighth day is the fittest to be understood. So here after eight days is as much as if he had said, after eight days were come, or after the eighth day was come (signifying thereby that it was the first day of the week and not the last, which as I observed before, from comparing the 1. and 19 verses of this Chapter, he is c •• ious (and sure not without cause) to notify unto us) again his Disciples were within, &c.

Thus E • t • nus • pag. 71. saith: Parum obstat obi • ctioilla 〈…〉 non ipso •• ctav • esset sed non s •• bsequente; Obiectio (inqu •• ) haeo par •• • alet, quia vel Synechdochice exponenda 〈◊〉 verba illa, • t alibi saepiu • in scriptura, sic • t Luk. 2. 21. 〈…〉

Broad.

3. 〈…〉 .

〈…〉 Supper in memory of his Passion, and 3. of the Evangelists together with Saint Paul make mention thereof, what the least show of Scripture or reason can be alleged, where fore if Christ would have a day kept in memory of his resurrection, he should not command so by word of mouth, or commanding so the Evangelists should not commit it so to writing but leave us to pick out his meaning in such a sort?

Answer.

So in the instance that you gave even now, from the expression of the Evang. Matt. 17. 1. (After six days) had it not been as easy for him and the rest to have said the seventh day (if they had meant the seventh day) as after six days? But it seemeth had you been in those days a follower of Christ, you would now and then have stopped before him, and have given him occasion to have plucked you back, with a Come behind me; Or his councellor, Then always when the Jews had asked a Miracle, he should have shown them one, and not have suffered them to have gone so far about, as to find their desire in the miracle of Ion •• , nor have bid the man carry his bed on the Sabbath, but he should also have given satisfaction to the Jews in the point, nor have turned the water into wine after they had well drunken, but withal he should have preached sobriety to them. Do you preach it to yourself.

Indeed if there had been no footsteps nor grounds for this in the Old Testament, or that the Apostles had not had the assistance of the holy Ghost, then it had been somewhat which you allege. But as there is nothing so clearly expressed, but wrangling and perverse spirits will find some matter of controversy thence, so some things are left purposely to try men's spirits, whether they delight more in sobriety or disturbance.

It seemeth you cannot satisfy yourself with crying down the fourth Commandment or old Sabbath, but you would also persuade that the sanctifying of the Lord's-day (the day which, as the Psalmist saith, the Lord hath made for us to rejoice and be glad in) is against Christ's will, or at least not with his will, when you say, If Christ would have a day kept in memory of his resurrection. &c.

Broad.

2. The Apostles did not command us to sanctify the Lord's-day.

That the Apostles commanded us to sanctify the Lord's-day, some go about to prove.

1. Because Saint Paul ordained that upon the first day of the week collections should be made in the Churches of the Corinthians and the Galatians.

Answ. If they met usually upon the Lord's-day, it may seem strange, that Saint Paul had not rather ordained that a collection should have been made in the Congregation, then that everyone should lay by him in store (at home) as God had prospered him, thus we would think that their benevolences would have been in greater readiness. But be it that they met every first day, yet by whom this manner began is uncertain. They themselves will have it begun long before Saint Paul took this order about the Collection.

Further, let Saint Paul be the author thereof, yet every ordinance of an Apostle doth not bind us in these times, yea this very ordinance doth not. Were there the like collection to be made, who would take himself to be bound every first day to lay up by him in store, as God had prospered him?

Answer.

Certainly this Ordinance of Saint Paul, doth wonderfully commend this day, and argue the point in hand. For first they were hereby prompted, to give to the poor members of Christ, as they had received from him a work becoming an holy day, and conducing to the pious hallowing thereof, like as did those charitable cures which Christ wrought on the Sabbath-day.

If they met usually upon the Lord's-day (say you) it may seem strange, &c. Bishop White telleth you, page 211, 212. That although this Text of Sa • nt Paul maketh no express mention of Church assemblies on this day, yet because it was the custom of Christians, and likewise it is a thing convenient to give alms upon the Church days. It cannot well be gain-said but that in 〈◊〉 and Galat • the first day of every week was appointed to be the day for alms and charitable contributions, The same was also the Christians weekly Holy-day for their religious assemblies. Secondly, it argueth their rest on 〈◊〉 day, from the labors of the 〈◊〉 days, with a reco •• ection, and tha • kefull calling to mind the blessing of God upon their foregoing week-day labors, and what can there be more Sabbath-like.

D ^r . Heylin, parr. 2. pag. 26. 〈…〉 prove this laying up to be appointed by 〈◊〉 on some Sabbath day or other (and to a little before doth he labor to make then meeting at Tro •• to be on the Sabbath- 〈◊〉 too, and not on the first day of the week) and yet pag. 27. he 〈…〉 .

Acts. That as concerning the Gentiles which believe we have written and determined that they observe no such thing as the Law of Moses, whereof the Sabbath was a part saith he. Now these things are very inconsistent. That Paul should countenance the Sabbath even among the believing Gentiles at Troas, and command this laying up thereon also to the Corinthians, and Galatians, and yet be an opposer of the Sabbath, and therefore it must needs be upon the first day of the week or Lord's-day.

Again, in the same place he quarrels 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the 1 Cor. 16. 1. to intend the first day of the week, under some authorities quoted to countenance his acceptation. But Bishop White being in print before him might have given him better satisfaction (saving that it seemeth he loves to vary) who pag. 196. saith, In the holy Gospel, this day is styled 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 the first day of the week following, Matth. 28. 1. Mark. 16. 2. John 20. 1. likewise, Acts 20. 7. 1 Cor. 16. 2. Besides his quotation of sundry authors to confirm this translation, which phrase is an Hebraism thus to express the first day by one day, and so used in the 1. Gen. and the word Sabbath for week, Levite. 25. 8. Luke 18. 12. as M ^r . Sprint affirmeth, pag. 101. And sure I am, the same phrase is used by the Evangelists, to signify the day of Christ's resurrection to be on the first day of the week.

Moreover, pag. 211. Bishop White, in positive terms upon the argument in hand, saith, That the Apostles themselves at sometimes observed the Lord's-day, and brings (with a for it is written) these very places to prove it, Acts 20. 7. The first day of the week, &c. and 1 Cor. 16. 1, 2. Concerning the gathering for this Saints; even as I have ordained in the Churches of Galatia, so do ye: Every first day of the week, &c. In that you say. Every Apostolical Ordinance doth not bind; I grant it, if the Ordinance be circumstantial, proper either to times or persons, it cannot be properly said to be cominon, but if it have for substance a Moral Law, for order a Prophecy, for confirmation an Apostolic ordinance and example, me thinks, this might be very well allowed to be binding. And all this is (as hath been proved) true of the Christian Sabbath,

Some ordinances (I confess) there are of the Apostles that are not of perpetual obligation, for that they were done only occasionally, and to an exemplary end, for to authorize their successors (the Governors of the Church) to order things of an indifferent nature to the benefit of the Church, all which things the Church had and hath authority, as well occasionally to abolish, as occasionally to institute; but this Ordinance of the Sabbath is beyond the authority of the Church to abolish or alter, as much as it is to add or detract from the New Testament.

And therefore is it not of those sorts of Apostolic Ordinances which bind not in perpetuum. For the foundation of it is so laid in Scripture (as aforesaid) as neither time nor authority can expire nor alter it.

Broad.

2. Because the Disciples at Troas being come together to break bread on the first day of the week, Saint Paul preached to them.

Answ. Granting that the Disciples assembled every first day, and also by Paul's own ordinance (neither of which can be proved) yet doth it not follow that they kept it Holy-day, and abstained altogether from works of their Callings.

Saint Augustine saith, that in some places they communicated every day, and in others on the Sabbath and Lord's-day.

Socrates saith, that in all Churches of Christians (two excepted) they communicated every Sabbath-day.

Sozomenus saith, that at Constantinople and almost in all other places, they came together on the Sabbath and the day following, that is, the Lord's-day: yet no man (I trust) will hence infer, that these who met and received the Communion, both on the Sabbath-day and the Lord's-day, kept them both Holy-days and forbare work altogether. Ad • e that in likelihood they came together at Troas, late in the Evening, about that time of the day, wherein Christ did institute the Sacrament, otherwise Saint Paul's preaching till midnight should have been very long, and this they might well do though they kept it not Holy-day. The Disciples at Troas assembled on the first day to break bread, ergo, Saint Paul ordained that all Christians should assemble on that day to break bread is a likelier inference then this, ergo, Saint Paul ordained that all Christians should keep that day Holy-day. If anything may be enforced from their meeting at Troas, this may as well (or rather better) that the Lord's Supper must be celebrated every first day.

Answer.

That on that day the Disciples abstained from the works of their callings exercised on the other six, I have even now more then probably proved by a just and proper deduction, or collection, from 1 Cor. 2. 16. I have also quoted the authority of Ignat ad Mag. and Aug. serm. de temp. 251. And is it probable that the Jews were to abstain from works on their remissest Holy-days, and that we must make a work-day or a mixed day of our Ca • itallest?

And as for the time of the day when they met • (though it might be in the Morning for ought the Scripture saith to the contrary) it is not so material to us to know, considering the Natures of those Times.

It sufficeth that that was the only day (being also parallel with consonant places of Scripture of the same nature) that they employed solemnly in their sacred affairs.

And if there were diverse observed, as you say, it was because for a time Christians were diverse, consisting of Jews and Gentiles.

As touching your conclusions whereby you argue hence rather the practice of the Sacrament then the Sabbath, I answer, That if it was an ordinance, yet it was but temporary; for from those words of Christ ( So often as ye shall • at it ) the times of celebrating the Sacrament are at the disposition of the Church (and it was in the Churches then, occasionally celebrated, for the Christian Sabbaths sake, as a means of its sanctifying, and not the Sabbath for its sake) whereas the time of the Sabbath and Lord's-day is by Precept and practice determined.

Broad.

3. Because Saint John telleth us that he was in the spirit on the Lord's-day.

Answ. I acknowledge that whereas Christians in many places used to assemble on the first day of the week. Christ hereby may seem to approve of their meetings on this day, and this is the most that can be gathered from Saint John's being in the spirit: Now whereas from the name Lord's-day, some would infer that therefore the Lord himself enjoined it. Let them consider that this name might well be given, because that upon occasion of Christ's Resurrection the Churches held their meetings therein. The Synagogues in Canaan are called the Synagogues of God, and yet we find not that God commanded to build them: Some call the Church God's house, whose meaning is not, that it is God's express Commandment to build Churches now, as it was to build the Temple heretofore.

The most that can be gathered from these Texts is, that after a time Christians used to assemble on the first day of the week, and that Christ and his Apostles approved this manner, which I acknowledge, but that Christ or his Apostles would have the observation of the Lord's-day be a matter of Religion in the time of the Gospel, as the keeping of the Sabbath was in the time of the Law, is not to be believed. God is a spirit, and the time is come wherein he will be worshipped in spirit and truth. The kingdom of God consisteth of a matter of another nature, Rom. 14. 17.

Answer.

From these Texts may wellbe gathered the laudable and Evangelical practice of the Apostles, and the excellent confirmation, countenance and authority that God gave thereto, in this point of sanctifying the Lord's-day, so that God bare witness thereto by signs and wonders, and gifts of the holy Ghost, according to his own will; besides the benefits and fruits of it at this day to every man's experience that observeth it conscionably, of peace of Conscience, Joy in the holy Ghost, and sensible increase of knowledge & grace do also make it good, according to that where it is said, That it is a sign that the Lord doth sanctify you, as also according to that promise, Isai. 58. 13, 14.

It was by these two Arguments of Christ's special appearing to him, and the fruits thereof, that Paul proved his Apostleship, and so may we prove the Sabbath.

For the name Lord's day, and force of that argument to prove Christ the instituter thereof, see Eatonus, pag. 73. saith he, Arguinus ex appellatione eius, Apocal. 1. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c. sic autem dici non potuit, nisi eam Dominus instituisse • ut in C • na 〈◊〉 & oratione • actum est. Hic respondetur, do • inic •• diem dici potuisse, quia in commemoratione domini, licet non • domino fuerit instituta. Sed assertionis 〈◊〉 racion •• non vide •• s; Cum e • im Ecclesia 〈◊〉 & ascensionis eius memoriam retinuerit, dies tamen illos 〈◊〉 non vo •• it.

Lastly the Jewish superstition we disclaim, but the true spiritual worship of God we retain, as it is requisite in the present state of the Church, and why a solemn day should be prejudicial to solemn service, and why we stand less need of rest and opportunity to serve God, then the Jews, or Adam in Innocency, I see not.

Broad.

CHAP. IIII.

ENough hath been said to make it appear that we are not bound to sanctify the Lord's-day, by virtue of that Commandment in the Decalogue, neither by any express Commandment from Christ or his Apostles, and now if any think, though this doctrine be true, yet happily it were better that it were not taught publicly.

Answ. Be the truth alone preached, the greatest good doubtless will follow thereupon: Do not we know, that though Paul plant, and Apollos water, yet it is God alone which giveth the increase? Indeed if any man were able to give increase, it were another matter, but shall I fetch water from the devils well, and look that God should give increase after such watering? neither is the Church now in the infancy, that we should fear to make known the abrogating of Moses Law.

Broad.

The truth being taught, this good will follow. 1. Thou shalt not Judaize, as they will be found to do who observe the Lord's-day in obedience to the precept of the Sabbath. 2. That thou shalt not do anything doubtingly on the Sunday, which doubtless many in England do; and if he which eateth doubtingly be damned, shall not he which worketh doubtingly be damned likewise? 3. That we shall not have such building on the foundation, hay and stubble hence forwards, as hath been heretofore especially of late years.

Answer.

You will not say he Iudaizeth, that upon his obedience to father and mother shall now in the time of the Gospel, expect the fulfilling of that promise in the first Commandment of the second Table, because that now we live not in the land of Canaan. And why, pray you, may not this Commandment concerning the Sabbath stand good now, as well as that promise, and challenge obedience, as well as that doth faith. If we observe the one, or believe the other as the Jews did, then I confess we Judaize, but if according to the present state of the Church, we obey the one and put trust in the other, this must needs be free from Judaism, and yet be good Christianity.

For the second Good: Call you that Good to work on the Sabbath-day (which yet anon you make to be the property of such, as belong not to God, but are the children of the devil) so a man's conscience accuse him not, or so he do it not doubtingly? • ndeed you salve the soar well, but take heed of daubing with untempered mortar. M ^r . Byfeild giveth a good rule, If we must needs doubt, it is better to doubt and obey, then to doubt and disobey. And for your third Good, That we shall not have such building on the fo • ndation hay and stubble. Be you aware betime, lest you bring an old house over your head. For you know what is threatened to him that breaketh one of these least • ommandements, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven.

Broad.

As touching the hurt which in some men's imaginations may come of the publishing of this truth, It is not to be doubted, but that when Luther preached Justification by faith, such as were not good trees brought forth less good fruit in show, and be the truth taught concerning the Lord's-day, it is (I confess) likely enough, that such as belong not to the Lord, will serve the Lord the less in outward show too: But shall I conceal any good thing from the children of God, because the children of the devil will show themselves more in their colors? He that is unjust, let him be (more) unjust still. If a man had not the fear of God before his eyes, and any should preach as formerly they have done, he would not forbear as formerly he hath not, to follow his worldly business, to haunt the Alehouse and the like on the Lord's-day. If a man truly feareth God (as I hope gentle Reader thou doest) enough may soon be said to make him spend the Lord's-day in the holy exercises of Religion, as, 1. Though in this time of the Gospel God would not have any part of his worship consist in the observation of times or places, neither did Christ or his Apostles command us Christians to any day whatsoever, yet this general Commandment we have. Let all things be done to edifying decently and in order, yea and Nature teacheth that there should be Times and Places set apart for public meetings, as we see the Gentiles had by the very light of nature. 2. This order to assemble on the Lord's-day, had his beginning in the time of the Apostles, and was approved by them, neither is there the least doubt to be made, but that were Saint Paul now alive, he would approve of it in like manner, only he would be much more earnest then I have been, a • , or can be to have all superstition clear weeded out of men's minds. After the Apostles time the succeeding churches observed the same order as partly appeareth by these sayings of Justin Martyr, and others before alleged, and thus it hath continued ever since, and no doubt shall so continue to the second coming of Christ. Some of late have made it a question whether the Church may change the Lord's-day into any other day of the week, but in my judgment they might well have spared their pains therein, for what can be imagined wherefore any Church should attempt such a matter, unless it be to withdraw some from a superstitious conceit they have of the day? Let this error be reformed, and there is no fear of a change.

Answer.

To this changing of the Lord's-day into another, I answer, That as the order of the last day in the week was significant in the time of the Jews: So is the first day now (as I have observed before) and as therefore that was commanded, so was this prophesied by Isaiah in the Old Testament, and accordingly practiced in the new, and therefore can no more be altered now without contradiction of divine authority, then the other could in the time of the Jews; Except you can imagine God hereafter to bestow a benefit on us as much greater then our Redemption, as our Redemption was then our Creation. Besides the Church hath no liberty to alter any day, the which hath a clear ground and warrant in the word, which the Christian Sabbath or Lord's-day hath. And moreover you say Christ is Lord of the Sabbath, if so, then sure the privilege and authority of altering belongeth only to him.

Broad.

The Apostle, Hebrews 13. giveth this charge, Obey 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 〈1 page duplicate〉 them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves, and again, Rom. 13. Wherefore ye must needs be subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. Some peradventure hearing that God hath not immediately commanded us Christians to sanctify the Lord's-day, as he did the Israelites to sanctify the Sabbath, will be ready to demand, what need we then forbear any worldly business on the Sunday? for answer unto whom though unworthy of any, let me also demand, what need you repair to the Church, the place of prayer? That you may so do must we teach that God in express terms hath commanded to build Churches, and in such places in every Parish? Had these men lived in the time of the Law, though they had forborne work on the Sabbath, yet certainly they would not have repaired to the Synagogues when they had been called they would have answered with Dathan and Abiram, we will not come, for God hath not bidden us come to such a place, nor at such a time of the day. Should thy so •• e being sent of thee into the field, think with himself, I need not go, for it is not written in the Scriptures that I should go plow to day, As God in general terms hath charged thy son to obey his father, so God in general terms hath charged thee an inferior to obey thy Governors, both spiritual and temporal, by whose joint Commandment thou art bound to sanctify the Lord's-day, and if thou willfully breakest this double bond, know that it is by the coming of another spirit upon thee then came upon Sampson heretofore, even such a spirit as the man had that brake the iron chains and setters in pieces, Mark. 5.

Answer.

Pray you turn the point of this Argument into your own breast, and consider if the same authority, which commandeth you to sanctify the Lord's-day, do not likewise in the Liturgy command you to pray for inablement to keep the fourth Commandment, but it s • emeth whosoever is in authority you will be supreme, binding that authority that should rather bind you. But if the authority be thus (as you would make it) in the hand of the Magistrate only, to appoint the time of God's solemn worship, and that the fourth Commandment is now of no force, nor yet the prophecy or Apostolic practice to bind us; then you may say with Ames. in his Medulla, pag. 355. ut si ipsis videatur diem 〈◊〉 ex viginti, aut triginta huic usui assignare, non posint hoc nomine argui alicuius 〈…〉 (aut scripturae. ) Nay rather we may hence argue it as a fault in the Apostles and primitive times, that they would take upon them of their authority to create so near a semblance to the Sabbath, and not rather an annual remembrance of the Resu •• ection▪ and by an human institution to shoulder out a divine one, an • yet the substance thereof (to wit the benefit of the Creation) still remaineth to be remembered. But it is strange that the Church should either assume this liberty, or that we should give it to the Church. 1. Seeing the fourth Commandment doth dictate to us, both the proportion of time which we are to celebrate to God▪ and the reason of that celebration, the Time is the seventh day, the reason is God's resting from or consummating his greatest and beneficiallest work, which Christ, the author and actor of the new Creation, God and Man, hath now fulfilled by his Resurrection, and so pointed and appointed us the 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or the particular seventh day, nothing dissenting from the Commandment nor destroying it, but fulfilling and establishing it upon better terms. 2. Seeing God commandeth to labor six days and to rest a seventh; And Christ hath not exempted us from laboring in our calling to the end of our lives, therefore a seventh day is to be kept for Sabbath weekly to the end of the world. And it is not left in the power either of the Church or any human authority, doctrinally to shorten or enlarge this proportion of days for our labor and holy Rest, or any way to abrogate or alter this Commandment.

Broad.

Answer.

Weigh well the truth of that which the same man speaketh concerning this unlawful liberty, which you strive so much to maintain by good Scripture misused, Saith he there, Experientia docet licentiam & rerum sacrarum non curantiam, magis magisq •• invalesc • re ubi die • dominicae i • st • ratio non habetur.

Take heed of walking in the Broad way.

Broad.

A question whereabout I will not contend, only I think good to show mine opinion therein.

The Sabbath as it is said before chapter the third, was sanctified by abstaining from all works, which in the time of the Law was an holy duty, as was the abstaining from leavened bread, the offering of sacrifices, &c. and some that only rested from work sanctified the Sabbath, as did little children their cradles. A child of twenty days old did profane the Sabbath (no man will say so) and of necessity everyone profaned it or sanctified it, there is no mean.

Quest. Was the Sabbath sanctified by offering sacrifices, praying, hearing the Word, and the like holy Duties, or not?

Answ. It was not, for proof hereof I propose this briefly to be considered.

1. God commanding to sanctify the Sabbath, and coming afterwards to show his meaning, requireth only to rest from work: Remember to sanctify the Sabbath, that is, God himself being expositor, Remember to do no work on the seventh day, Exod. 20. 8, 10. See before, Chap. 3.

2. God sanctified the seventh day, because therein he had rested and was refreshed, Gen. 2. Exod. 31. not because he had instructed Adam and Eve therein, or that they had called on his holy name.

3. As God commanded to sanctify the seventh day, so the year, which year was not yet sanctified by the sacrifices, prayers, &c. in the same see Levite. 25.

4. God requireth in the first place to worship him, then for the better performance of this duty in the second place he requireth Israel to sanctify the seventh day, that is, to do no work therein, whereby the day became fit for this purpose. The sanctifying of the Sabbath then, as the sanctifying of the Tabernacle in order went before the worshipping of God therein, I mean before praying, hearing the word and such like duties, for the sanctifying of the Sabbath was it self a part of the Ceremonial Law.

5. Were the Sabbath sanctified by praying, hearing the word, &c. it would follow that God more respected the sanctifying the Sabbath, then he did praying, preaching, &c.

6. The Sabbath was profaned only by working, as is shown before, Chap. 3. Wherefore it was sanctified only by abstaining from work.

7. Suppose that Adam had continued in the state of Innocency, Nature then would have taught him to set a part sometimes and places for holy Convocations, I demand now, how Adam sanctified his appointed times, by preaching, hearing of the word, &c. or not.

If not, why then did the Israelites? If yea, then why had he not as well sanctified his appointed places, by the same holy Duties? I dare affirm that when any goeth on the Sunday to the Church, to pray and hear a Sermon, if thereby he sanctify the Sunday, that thereby he sanctifieth the Church also. This I will maintain, though (as I said) I will not contend about the question, for we have nothing to do with the Jews Sabbath nor with their sanctifying it.

Answer.

How & in what sense Rest is said to sanctify the Sabbath we have at large spoken of it before. Yet here I will briefly answer one question with another. I ask how the vessels of the Temple were properly said to be sanctified, whether by being not employed about profane uses, or rather in a relative sense, by being employed about holy? Sure you will say, by being employed in God's service about holy uses. So the Sabbath was not properly sanctified by resting from profane, but by being employed in holy businesses. For God hath appointed it to be a day of blessing, now sure it is not our Resting, but our employment in holy services, and use of the means that makes it so. And so had God appointed it to be to Adam in Innocency, for no doubt but Adam being enjoined labor, which necessarily took him off from immediate contemplation, his spiritual life should have been upheld by due use of means as well as his temporal, but what those had been besides prayer, and meditation, and praise, and such like means, whereby he might enjoy spiritual commu • ion with God, I will not take upon me to determine.

Now as for that, which you urge so strongly, of sanctifying the Places as well as the Time, I answer, That what Places God hath ever specially and solemnly appointed for his special and solemn worship, they have been as well sanctified by that worship as the Time so appointed, and so was the Temple in Jerusalem. For as it is the use, unto which Christ hath appointed the bread and wine, in the Lord's Supper, that sanctifieth the bread and wine, so was it the use unto which God appointed the Temple that sanctified it. God appointeth one time universally for all people, not so of Place: Because an appointed Time may be Catholic (as is the Church) which an appointed place cannot. For first it would be of infinite inconvenience for the Catholic Church to repair to one particular Place, as all Israel did to Jerusalem; and secondly it would contradict the nature of the Church, and make that particular which is Catholic. But I will conclude with D ^r . Ames. opinion in this matter of Rest, Medul. pag. 367. Quies ista quamvis in se absolute considerata non sit, neque unquam fuer it pars aliqua cultus, prout tamen à Deo imperatur, tanquam necessarium quid ad ipsius cultum, & ad illum etiam refertur, eatenus est pars observantiae illius quae pertinet ad religionem & cultum Dei, Sanctificatio huius quietis ac diei est applicatio nostrum ipsorum singularis ad Deum eo die colendum, quod innuitur illis ipsis phrasibus. Sanctificavit illum diem & Sabbatum est Iehove Deo tuo.