A Defense of the Sabbath Day

SECT. III.

An other reason he useth, taken out of Exod. 35.3. where the Jew is forbid̄ to kindle a fire on the Sabbath day: ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitationes on the Sabbath day, and herein (saith he) stood the rigorousnesse of the Jewish rest.

Herevnto I answer, that this text if understood generally, it is set upon the tainter hoockes, and stretched beyond measure: ye have a text to wit, the 4th come. saying, in it thou shalt not do any work, this text, the same divines can understand it & expound it, with a due limitation, to wit, of common ordenary and servile works: why then by like reason, can they not add the same limitation, in the same case, to this text also, Exod. 35.3? and so understand it thus, thou shalt kindle no fire, that is, to do ordenary, common, & servile works withal, like as common Bakers, and Brewares do, by making it parte of their trade: thus works of necessity and charity to be done on the Sabbath, shall be no more forbidden in this text Exod. 35.3. then they are in the 4th come. Exod: 20.10. to kindle a fire, as Bakers do, is a servile work; but otherwise it is a work of mercy, when but to warm one, and the like.

Also it might have a special reference unto the building of the Tabernacle, Exod. 35.3.4.5. whereof there was no such necessary hast, as that they should kindle fires on the Sabbath, to work about it.

For us to think, that God who allowed a beast to be led to the water on the Sabbath; and allowed the Jews to lift a beast out of the ditch on the Sabbath; & to pluck and rubb ears of corn on the Sabbath, would forbid them to kindle a fire on the Sabbath, to dress a morsel of warm meat, for their dinner, and to warm them selves in cold winters weather, when they came from Church, that so they might be the more fresh and lively to serve God again in the afternone, thers no show of reason in it: would God have mercy shown to a beast on the Sabbath, and none of a man, that is made after his Image? what likelihod is there of this?

Further our Savior saith the Sabbath was made for man Mar. 2.27. so to expound this text Exod. 35.3. therefore, as if a man might not, no not in a case of necessity, kindle a fire, in the time of froft and snow, to warm himself, and the like, is to make the Sabbath not for man, but against man: and to make man for the Sabbath, contrary to the words of our Savior.

Again our Savior Christ, was present at a ffeast, on the Sabbath day, Luk. 14.1.2.3.4.5.6.7. &c. now at a feast, there is commonly a fire, to dress meat for the guests; & there is attendance to be given by servants, and the like; now Christ by his presence at this feast, allowed of fire kindling, & of others as great works, as the kindling of a fire is: whereby it appeareth, that this text is wrested, when it is understood so rigorously, as if God had forbad his people to kindle a fire in any case: thus you see, that it is but a slander brought up upon the Jewish Rest, to say it was rigorouse; but such slanders are frequent, to loath men of God's Sabbath.

SECT. IV.

A third reason he fetcheth out of Ierem. 17, 21. and Nehem. 13.15. take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden in the Sabbath day, here saith he, the Jews might bear no burdens on the Sabbath.

Herevnto I answer briefly, that these texts, as any man may see by the context, speak only of burdens bearing, in an ordenary & common case, as a servile work: but that all bearing of burdens, was forbidden to the Jews is false; for Christ him self commanded the sick man to carry his bedd, on the Sabbath day, John. 5.8.9.10. seeing therefore, that God did not forbid a man to carry a burden on the Sabbath day, in his necessity, where is there any ground then here, for any man to say, the Ieweish Rest was strict and rigorouse? I never yet could see, but that God allowed the Jews, as much liberty on the Sabbath day, as he alloweth Christians; and as much liberty, as Ministers grant unto Christians on the Lord's day: & therefore it is but a mere slander, to say the Jewish Rest, was rigorouse: & the distinction betwixt the Jewish rest and the Christian Rest is a distinction without a difference: for all works of mercy, and works of necessity, might be done by the Jews on the Sabbath day, as well as by us Christians now. Loe, these devices wise men have, to defeat God of his Sabbaths.

SECT. V.

A fourth text I will add, which is usually alleged to the same purpose: bake that today which ye will bake, and seeth that which ye will seeth, and all that which remaineth, lay it up till the morning for you &c. Exod. 16.23. here (say they) the Jews were commanded to dress all their meat on the ffriday, the day before their Sabbath; & so by consequence they might not dress any meat on their Sabbath.

Herevnto I answer. 1. for as much as we find, that God hath added and expressed an exception to some Sabbaths, we may therefore think, that the same exception, is to be understood, in all Sabbaths; see Exod. 12.16. no work shall be done; save about that which every man must eat: that only may ye do, in which words you see, that albeit God forbad all manner of work, yet he gave an exception, allowing men to work so far forth, as may concern their present necessity, that is, to dress their meat on that day, which they must eat on that day: I confess this was a ceremonial Sabbath, but for as much as, God put no difference, betwixt the ceremonial & the Moral Sabbaths, for strictness of rest (for it was death, to any man, that did any work on either of them both, as you may see, Levite. 23.30, & Exod. 31.15.) therefore we may think, that there is the same reason of both.

2. I answer, that this text is not rightly understood & applied: for they suppose that Moses bad these Jews bake today, that was, on friday, all the Manna which they had gathered that day, to wit, the ii. omers, so as none should be to bake on the next day being Sabbath day; but it is to be noted, that Moses left it to their will, how much to bake that day, & how much to leave vnbaked; for saith the text, bake that which ye will bake, and seeth that which ye will seeth; he said not, bake all, & seeth all; but bake & seeth what ye will: again, where he saith that which remanieth, lay it up until the morning: they understand these words thus, that that which remanieth baked, should be laid up; but so much cannot be collected out of this text; but the contrary is rather the truth, namely, that that which remained vnbaked was laid up vnbaked until the morning: & this the context giveth light unto; for on other days if they reserved any until the morning it stank, v. 20. but on this day, what they reserved, it stank not, v. 24. now forasmuch as Moses recordeth it, as a wonderful thing, that it stank not, nor was full of worms, by reserving it; it giveth us to understand, that it was laid up vnbaked; for what wonder had it been, that it stank not, nor had worms in it, if it had been baked? seeing that baking, doth preserve things from stinking, and worms breeding: it is more likely therefore, that as they baked every other day, so much as they did eat on that day, so they did on the Sabbath day: So this text proveth not, that the Jews baked & boiled all their food, on friday.

One answer I here give unto all their 4. texts together; if the Rest commanded to the Jews in the 4th come. be a rigorouse Rest, & so ceremonial, then is the whole Sabbath & 4th come. utterly abolished, as rigorouse & ceremonial also: for there is but one kind of Rest in the 4th come. take away that, and take away all Rest; & if that be rigorouse & ceremonial, take away that, and then may men follow their labors, in their several housen, and in the fields.

An other answer I give unto all their 4. texts, which is this, that if it could be proved, that the Rest which the Jews kept, was rigorouse, then might we more safely hold, that the rigorousnesse of their Rest was Jewish and ceremonial, then that anything commanded in the Moral Law, is Jewish and ceremonial: for this Law of kindling a fire on the Sabbath, being not mentioned in the Moral Law, but written elsewhere, it may be questioned rather whither it was any branch of the 4th come. or exposition of it; or whither it was some special Law peculiar unto the Nation of the Jew; because in those hot countries, they might better want a fire then we in coulder rigiones can, and better feed on cold meats, dressed the day before, then we in these colder countries cane: and so the Moral Law should be maintained still in its Integrity and perfection: & why may not these particular Laws, not being written in the Moral Law, and Tables of stone, be aduentitiouse, and only added to the 4th come. as peculiar to the Jews, and those times & Regiones, as was that Reason prefixed to all the 10. come. that God brought thē out of the land of Egypt, which is also added to the 4th come. Deut. 5.15. and as was that Law, of offering ii. Lambes, on the Sabbath days Numb. 28.9.10.

Thus then you have seen their texts, for the proving of the Jews Rest, to be full of intolerable strictness & rigor; but you se how they fail in the matter; wherefore I may safely conclude, that it is but a slander, raised upon the Lord's Sabbaths, to make men afraid of them, and to loath them: for God required no more strictness of a Jew; then he doth of a Christian; nor any less of a Christian, then he did of a Jew; the 4th come. it is one & the same, to Jew & to Gentile, as are all the other 9. commandments.

SECT. V.

Having made answer unto their texts, whereby they would prove the Rest of the Sabbath, partly ceremonial, because rigorouse: we are now to come unto their texts, whereby they would prove the time, to wit, the 7th day, in the 4th come. to be a ceremony, & so abolished: but first this would be noted, that since they cannot prove the Rest in the Sabbath, rigorouse and ceremonial, now there is nothing commanded in all the 10 commandments, which they can except against, but only the question it self betwixt us, to wit, the time, & 7th day: now how they will disprove this you shall see.

Their first text which I will produce is that Mat. 12.8. for the sone of man is Lord of the Sabbath: hence some argue thus, that because Christ is called the Lord of the Sabbath day, therefore he did alter & change the Sabbath day.

Herevnto I answer, that admit, the Heir of a Manor house, because he is Lord of that house, he may destroy it, and pull it down; yet it doth not therefore follow, that he will, or hath destroyed it, & pulled it down; so, be it, that Christ's as Lord of the Sabbath might destroy it, yet it followeth not that he did destroy it: no, the contrary rather followeth, that because Christ was Lord of the Sabbath, therefore he did and forever will, maintain & uphold the Sabbath; for it is the property of Lord's, to uphold their mannour howsen; & to defend those things whereof they are Lord's, to the utmost of their power.

Christ is the Lord, both of the dead & of the quick Rom. 14.9. will it follow, because he is Lord of the quick, that therefore, he will destroy the quick? no, all that will follow out of this text, is no more but this, that Christ showeth us, how we may in a case of necessity use some labor, to pluck ears of corn & the like, to satisfy present hunger: thus the Lord of a corn field, will in a case of necessity, permit his servants, to make a pathway, thorough the midst of the corn; but yet would be exceedingly wroth with them, if they should trample all the field over, no necessity compelling them thereto; and so dealt Christ the Lord of the Sabbath, with his servants, he gave them leave to make a path thorrow it, as it were.

Lastly it cannot be, that Christ did here at this time destroy the Sabbath day; for it was not yet time for it; for Christ destroyed & abolished no ceremonies, until his death upon the Cross Col. 2.14. if therefore the Sabbath day, had been a ceremony, we cannot think that Christ would abolish it, now whilst he lived, & so long before his death: & thus much for this text.

SECT. VI.

A second text, is ii Cor. 5.17. old things are passed away, behold all things are become new.

Hereunto I answer, but briefly, because I have touched this text before: whereas the text saith, old things are passed away, therefore they think the old Sabbath is passed away too; if this be a good reason, then may we further reason thus, that because old things are abolished, therefore all the 10 commandments are abolished too, for they are old things: but the Apostles of Christ have taught us better divinity; for they in the New Testament, do send us to those old things, in the Old Testament, saying, whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning Rom. 15.4. and S. John saith, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment &c. 1 John. 2.7.

2. I answer, this text is wrested, because it is not understood; for the Apostle speaketh not here of old ordinances in the Church, as of Sabbaths and the like, but of old Adam, the old man, & of old ungodly practices; if any man be in Christ, such old things are passed away from him, & abolished &c. so here is nothing yet against the 7th day Sabbath,

SECT. VII.

A third text against the time of the 7th day Sabbath, is Josh: 10.13. where it is said, that the Sune abode in the midst of heavē, & hasted not to go down of a whole day: some Ministers make a great deal of title tatleing about this standing still of the Sune, in Joshua his time; & hereby they think that time is so confounded, as now no man knows precisely which is the 7th day: & because the 7th day cannot be known, hence is plea enough for them, to overthrow the Sabbath day, because it cannot be known: this argument is much pressed against me by M. Stinnet for one.

Herevnto I answer 1. by this reason then it seemeth, that neither the Prophets, nor the Church of God, that lived after the standing still of the Sun in Joshua his time, until Christ time, did ever keep, or were bound to keep, the Sabbath day; or to yield any obedience unto the 4th come. & by this reason the Jews, never after the standing still of the Sun, kept, or were bound to keep the passover, on the 14th day of the month; nor their other feast days; & all forsooth because the standing still of the Sun, had made such an alteration of time, that they knew not Saturday from Sunday any longer, nor the 14th day of the month from the 13th or 15th days of the month: are not these men worthily counted enemies to God's Sabbaths, and are they not very desirouse to overthrow them, when they study for such simple stuff as this is, against them? is not this to make a needless, voluntary, and unnecessary opposition to God's ordinance? for what necessity is here in this text; to move a man, to oppose God in his Sabbaths?

2. I prove their ground false, whereon they build; they suppose the 7th day cannot be known, because of the standing still of the Sun: but I prove, that long after the Sunns standing still, the 7th day, was known; for after Christ his resurrection, all the iv Evangelists do call our Sunday, the first day of the week: if then Sunday be the first day in their account, rekone onwards, & Saturday after it must be the 7th day; so thē the standing still of the Sun hindereth not from the knowledge which day is the 7th, and which day is the first &c. other answers I give also in my former book, but these are enough, & too many for such idle arguments.

An other argument of like nature they use, and this is a fit place to answer it, if it deserved answer; it is this, if all nations be bound to keep the 7th day Sabbath, as well as the Jew, then in some countries, they must keep a Sabbath day, half a year together: for in some country, there is half a year light or day together.

Herevnto I answer 1. if this argument be good against the Sabbath day, then is it good also against the Lord's day: for how shall all nations be bound to keep the Lord's day; seeing that then in some country, they shall be bound to keep a Lord's day, half a year long &c? 2. I answer, by like reason a man may thus conclude, that the 5th come. belongeth not unto all men; because some men are not bound unto it, as a King, whose father & mother is dead: but what & if the King who hath no superior living, be not bound to the 5th come. shall none of his subjects therefore, who have parents and superiors living, be bound unto the 5th come? & so, what if someone country, should not be bound to the Sabbath day, because of the exceeding length and discommodiousnesse of their days, shall not we & other nations therefore, be bound to the Sabbath day, and 4th come. who have days of convenient length, much like as the Jews had in Canaan, and no such incommodiousenesse? In the 10th come. it is said thou shall not covet thy neighbors asse: now thousands in our country have no Asses, will they therefore conclude, that such men amongst us, whose neighbors have Asses, are not forbidden, to Couet their neighbors Ass, because this branch of the 10th come. doth not reach unto every man?

Others object, that we cannot keep the Sabbath day, because our Saturday begineth not just at the some point of time, when the Jews Sabbath day began in Canaan; but by the like reason we may now say, that we cannot celebrate the Lord's Supper neither: for, we drink not just the self same kind of wine, which Christ drank at Jerusalem; nor is it likely that we eat the self same kind of bread: for we eat whitebread, but in regard of Christ's poverty, it is not vnlikly that he used brown or corse bread. 2. By the like, the Jews might have thus absurdly reasoned also; whereas the Sabbath day was commanded on Mount Sinai, Exod. 20. yea, one months journey before they came to Mount Sinai, in the wilderness of Sin Exod. 16.1.23. yea, and in another remote place, as in that parte of the world where about Paradise was, since the Sabbath was from the Creation; hence the Jews might thus perversely have argued, saying, we are now in Canaan, or in Captivity in a country that is far remote from Mount Sinai, where the Sabbath was commanded, or from the wilderness of Sin, or that parte of the world where Paradise was, and where the Patriarchs kept the Sabbath, and therefore we here cannot keep the Sabbath: for our Sabbath in this country, begineth not at that point of time, just, when the Sabbath begineth at Mount Sinai, the wilderness of Sin, or about Paradise: loe their folly! God requireth not a people to begin his 7th day Sabbath, when other remote Nations begin theirs, but only thē, when by the light of the Sun, which rules the day, God begineth to that people his Seauenth day.

This point is further prosecuted in my former book, but enough & too much hath been here said to this idle argument: men have so little reverence of God, and of his laws, and of his ancient ordinance the Sabbath, that they think anything is good enough, how idle and ridiculouse soever to throw against the same; every frothy conception of an idle brain, is matter sound enough, to buze and make a noise in people's ears, against that sacred time, which God himself hath hallowed & sanctified; & honored amongst his morales.

SECT. VIII.

A 4th text is that Isa. 66.23. From month to month or from new Moon to new Moon, & from Sabbath to Sabbath, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the Lord. Whence some collect, that the Sabbath here was made a Sign, of the everlasting Sabbath in heaven: others would have it a Sign of the Church under the New Testament, and of the Church triumphant in heaven both: & so it being a sign, it is abolished.

Herevnto I answer 1. it is doubtful what may be the proper sense of this text, it being a Prophecy, & delivered in Metaphoricall and Allegorical speeches, for instance, what shall be meant by these words, from new Moon to new Moon? it is doubtful: wherefore this text being difficult, it is not fit to have a controuercy decided by it; much less to have it used, to the abolishing of anything commanded in a moral law: it is not meet that the 4th come. being uttered in plain & proper speeches, should be contradicted, & countermanded, by a Prophecy which is uttered in difficult & improper speeches, what is this but petitio principij?

2. I answer, by the word Sabbath here may be understood, not the weekly 7th day & moral Sabbath, enjoined in the moral law, but some of the anniversary ceremonial Sabbaths, which never came into the moral law; as that Sabbath of the Seauenth year, or of the fiftith year, Levite. 25.10.4. for since the text speaketh of a continual worshiping of God, under the New Testament, therefore the Sabbath of a year is more fit to be a type of it, then the Sabbath of a day, the 7th day.

3. I answer, the Sabbath day here mentioned, is not made a Sign, but rather the other 6 days which go betwence Sabbath and Sabbath: for so the text saith, from Sabbath to Sabbath, that is, all the days between the Sabbaths, shall all flesh come to worship &c. so then, it is not the Sabbath day that was made a Sign, but those Six days which went between the Sabbaths.

SECT. IX.

A 5th text of theirs is Heb. 4.10.11. where there is mention of a Rest; and in v. 9. there remaineth therefore a Rest unto the people of God. Here (say they) the Sabbath or Rest, is made a type of the Rest in the Kingdom of heaven: now all types are abolished as ceremonies.

Herevnto I answer 1. many think indeed that here is some great matter in this text for their purpose, but it will prove upon better examination, nothing so: for, if this Rest here mentioned be a type of heaven, it is so far off from making anything against the Sabbath day, as that it rather maketh for it: for, the nature of types is, to last in the Church, until the thing typed out by them be come; thus all sacrifices lasted until Christ our pascall Lamb was comne, & sacrificed for us: wherefore by like reason, if this Rest or Sabbath here, be a type of the kingdom of heavens rest, then may this Rest and Sabbath last in the Church, until we all come to a rest in the kingdom of heaven: so then all the time we live on earth this Sabbath may be kept.

2. I answer, if the adversaries to this ordinance of God's Sabbath, could tell how to prove the Rest in the 4th come. a ceremony by this text, then hereby they must wholly overthrow the 4th come: for, take away rest from labors, as an abolished ceremony, and then may men labor in their caleings, every man in his several family, & in his several field; and how then can there be any public assemblies, of the people together in the Church, to keep a Sabbath?

3. I answer, suppose we that there was a type in the word Rest, yet since it speaketh not of a days rest, but of an everlasting rest, therefore may the year of Jubilee the 50th year, be made a type here, rather thē the 7th day: for there is greater similitude between the 50th year Levite. 25.10.11.4.1. and the everlasting rest, then between the 7th day Exod: 20.8. and the everlasting rest.

SECT. X.

A 6th text they use, which is Numb. 28.9.10. where it was commanded unto the Jews, to offer ii lambes for a Sacrifice on the Sabbath day: whence they would collect, that if the Sacrifices being a duty of the Sabbath, be abolished, then is the Sabbath it self aboiished.

Herevnto I answer 1. if the Sabbath day be abolished, together with the sacrificing of the ii lambes, then must for the same reason also be abolished, rest from labors, and the moral worship of God, in the Sabbath: for, the sacrificing of the lambes on the Sabbath day, hath as much respect unto rest from labor, & God's worship, to declare them also to be ceremonies, as unto the time, to declare it to be a ceremony & abolished.

2. I answer, that this law of offering ii lambes on the Sabbath day, it was aduentitiouse, & only added to the 4th come. & to the Sabbath for a time; and therefore no parte of the 4th come. nor essential Sabbath duty: for it was never wrote by God, in Tables of stone, but wrote by Moses, as were other ceremonies, & all after the writing of the moral law was finished, and therefore no parte of the moral law, or law of the Sabbath.

3. I answer by denial of the consequence: for since the duties in the Sabbath day were many, it followeth not, that if someone of those duties be abolished, the day must also be abolished, wherein it was done: for since the other duties of Rest and God's worship remain still, the time and day may remain still for these duties sake.

SECT. XI.

7. They argue out of ii texts together, John. 7.22.23. and Mat. 12.5. in which texts it is written, that on the Sabbath day, they did circumcise a man • and on the Sabbath day, they did 〈◊〉 the Sacrifices: now these were both ceremonies, and the Sabbath day gave way unto them, wherefore the Sabbath day, must be inferior to ceremonies, and so abolished with them.

I answer, by the like absurd reasoning, they may say, the 6th come. thou shalt not kill, is abolished also: for it gave way unto Abraham to slay his son Isaac, the like may be said of the 7th come. which gave way unto polygamy & a divorce &c. when Christ gave way to be circumcised of a Priest, & to be baptized of John, doth it hence follow, that Christ was inferior to the priest, or to John? or, that the strong are inferior to the weak; because they give way unto the weak? Rom. 15.1. or, that the Moral Law, is absolutely abolished, because in some sense, it gave way unto the gospel?

2. I answer, that not only the day & time, to wit, the 7th day, gave way unto circumcision & unto Sacrifice, but also the Rest and cessation from labor, and the worship of God in the holy exercises of the Sabbath, both these gave way as well as the time: wherefore, if this their argument be good for the proving of the time to be a ceremony and abolished, then must it be as good also, for the proving those duties of rest and holy exercises, to be ceremonies & abolished: and then what is become of the 4th come? and where is the morallity of Rest, and the performance of holy exercises, enjoined in the 4th come? thus still you see, lik men of a maleuolent spirit, they hunt all the Scriptures over, to find out something or other against God's ordinance: & what will be the issue of all their pains? why, even this; they will at last make the moral law hereby, to be a moral-ceremonial law: the 10 goolden links of God's law, shall have one link become partly goold partly lead: there shall be now, a shadow & ceremony fancied to be in the heart of a moral law: in a word, the issue will be, that now they may be partial in God's Law, & serve him by halves.

SECT. XII.

8thly, they argue from John. 4.21. The hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor at Jerusalem worship the father. In which words, Christ foreteld of the destructiō, & abolishing of the Temple, as the place of God's worship: now if the Temple which was the place of God's worship be abolished, so is also the Sabbath day, which was the time of God's worship.

Herevnto I answer, there is not the like reason; for whilst the Curch of God, was confined to the narrow limites, of the land of Canaan, all people might possibly go up to Jerusalem, to worship in the Temple there 3 times a year, Exo. 23.17. but when at Christ his death, the partition wale being brokē down, & the Church enlarged to Jew & Gentile, all the world over; thē all people could not possibly come up to the Temple at Jerusalem, to worship, 3. times a year there; for their dwellings would be too far distant from Jerusalem; & therefore it was necessary that the Temple should be no longer the peculiar place, for God's worship; but that now we might worship God, in Spirit & truth everywhere: but thers not the same reason for the Sabbath day, the time of God's worship; for the Sabbath day, and 7th day from the creation, is everywhere all a like, amongst Jews & Gentiles, all the world over: the same 7th day any nation had at the creation, the same 7th day it hath still to this day; so as the 7th day, this time of God's worship, it is not too narrow for the bounds of the Church, as the Temple was; for it is as large as the Church of God is or can be; & therefore thers no necessity that it should be altered.

SECT. XIII.

9thly, they argue from all those texts of Scripture, whereby they use to prove the Lord's day, to be a Sabbath day, instituted by Christ: & thus they argue thence, that the old Sabbath, is altered & changed, by the coming in of the new Sabbath: & this is that which is so common in many men's mouths, saying, why Christ abolished the old Sabbath, the Jewish Sabbath, by bringing in of the Lord's day.

Herevnto I answer, 1. by denial that Christ hath set up any new Sabbath, as hath been shown 2 admit that Christ had set up the Lord's day on the 8th day for a new Sabbath; yet this doth not hinder, but that the old Sabbath, on the 7th day, may stand still: for example, the Lord set up the moral weekly Sabbath, on the 7th day, Exod. 20.8.9.10. afterwards, he set up other ceremonial yearly Sabbaths also Levite. 23.32.38.39. now the coming in of these other yearly Sabbaths, did not alter change, or abolish the weekly Sabbath, no, here was an addition of Sabbaths, no alteration of Sabbaths. Just so it may be here, suppose that Christ had set up a new Sabbath on the Lord's day, then have we ii. Sabbaths to keep weekly, the old Sabbath on the 7th day, & the new Sabbath on the 8th day; so that the setting up of this Lord's day Sabbath, is but an addition of a new Sabbath unto the old Sabbath; like as when a man builds a new house by the side of an old house, this is but an additiō of house, to house; it is no alteration, or change; for the raiseing up of a new house, by the side of an old house, is not the demolishing & throwing down of the old house.

SECT. XIV.

10. they argue from all the New Testament, negatiuly; saying, of all the 10. commandments, the 4th come. is nowhere mentioned, in all the New Testament; neither is the keeping of the Sabbath day urged anywhere; wherefore the Sabbath day is not of use to us under the gospel.

To this Anabaptistical objection I answer, first see whither it tendeth: namely unto Anabaptistry & profaneness: for, if the old Sabbath be abolished we shall have no Sabbath at all; for the Lord's day can never be proved a Sabbath. 2. It tendeth to the ruin of the Integrity and perfection of God's Law, so as we shall have but a lamed and imperfect Law. 3. It tendeth to make God's moral Law, to be a Moral ceremonial Law.

Further I answer, and will you acknowledge no more of the Old Testament, then what is particularly mentioned, & repeated in the New Testament; then what do we with the Old Testament? it seemeth then, that not only the old Sabbath is abolished, but also, the whole Old Testament is abolished also, & now it standeth for a cipher, if this arguing be good, why did S. Paul send us to the Old Testament, saying, whatsoever is written a fore time, is written for our learning? Rom. 15.4.

2. If you will acknowledge no more of the moral Law, then what is particularly repeated in the new Testament, then what will become of the 10th come. where is it repeated in every branch thereof particularly, in all the New Testament? I know, it is found writ̄, Thou shalt not lust: but to come to particulars, where is it written, thou shalt not lust after, or covet thy neighbors house, thy neighbors wife, his man servant, maid ox, asse, or anything that is thy neighbors? you may as well therefore conclude against sundry things commanded in the 10th come. as agaimst the Sabbath commanded in the 4th come. for neither of them are repeated, in the New Testament particularly in an express commandment.

3. I will show you how the 4th come. is repeated in the New Testament generally, & consequently the Sabbath is there urged also, in a general manner: see Mat. 5.18. where Christ prophecieth of the lasting of the Moral Law, and of every jot & title of it to the worlds end, now in these words is the 4th come. and the 10th come. & every commandment, yea every jot & title of every commandment contained: the like may be proved by Rom. 3.31. I am. 2.10.

It is to be observed, that of all the 10. commandments, there was the least need, nay there was no need to repeat the 4th cō. nor to urge the observation of the Sabbath day in particular: for in the days of Christ, & his Apostles, both Jews & Gentiles were very zealouse for the observation of the Sabbath day: for the Jews, they were more strict for the keeping of the Sabbath, if I may so say, then Christ him self was; for Christ would allow the plucking and rubbing ears of corn on the Sabbath day; & to carry a bedd, and the like; but the Jews could not endure it; what hot contentions did the Jews move against Christ, & his Disciples, for doing some petty works on the Sabbath day? yea, upon a time, they would have slain our Savior, for healing of a sick man, upon the Sabbath day, John. 5.16. what need then was there, that Christ or his Apostles, should repeat the 4th come. to the Jews? or urge them to keep the Sabbath day? since they were so hot for it already: it was enough that the 4th come. & the observation of the Sabbath day should be spoken of only in some general terms, as you have it, Mat. 5.18. Ia. 2.10. And for the Gentiles, there was no need to press them neither; for, they coming into the Inheritance of the Jews, & joining in communion with the believing Jews, did redely embrace the very ceremonies of the Jews, as circumcision & the like; how much more then did they embrace the Morals with the Jews, as the Sabbath day? as you may see, Act. 13.42.44. Act. 16.13. look therefore wherein the Jews were very zealouse, it is to be thought, that the believing Gentiles were zealouse also, therefore was it needless, that the Sabbath day, or 4th come. of all the commandments, should be urged, & pressed in the New Testament.

Nevertheless, something we find touching the Sabbath in particular, in the New Testament, as Mat. 24.20. Pray (saith our Savior) that your flight be not in the winter, nor on the Sabbath day: In which words, Christ alloweth a conscience to be made of the Sabbath day, for above 40. years after his death. 2. we find, that it was the constant practice of the Apostles, after Christ his ascension, to observe and keep the Sabbath day: see for this purpose, Act. 13.14.42.44. Act. 16.13. Act. 17.2. & Act. 18.4. that the Apostles, did here keep the Sabbath with the Jews, to bear with their weakness, is a weakness in any to think so; they cā never prove it I am suer: when the Apostles yielded obbediēce unto Magistrates, which was commanded in the 5th come. & worshiped God, which was cōmanded in the first Table, may any absurdly & growndlesly say, they did these things to bear with the weakness of the Jews? and why then should any say, when the Apostles performed the things commanded in the 4th come. that they did this for the weakness of the Jews? & where as some say, the Apostles kept not the Sabbath in conscience of the 4th come. they having no ground for what they say, may as well say, when they worshiped the true God, & obeyed the Magistrate, that they did not these in conscience of the first, & 5th commandments. 3 In the New Testament, and after the death of Christ, and abolition of ceremonies, we find the Sabbath day kept, & in conscience of the 4th come. & the Holy Ghost commending it, by rekoning it among, & ranking it with other commendable actiones, saying, they rested the Sabbath day, according to the commandment, Luk. 23.56.

SECT. XV.

11. They fetch an argument from Deut. 5.15. where the 4th come. is repeated, and at the end of it there is added, as a reason, these words; For, remember that thou wast a servant in the Land of Egypt, & that the Lord thy God brought the out thence by a mighty hand: Therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to observe the Sabbath day. Hence they argue to this effect, that because the Sabbath, doth depend upon the deliverance out of Egypt; therefore since the deliverance out of Egypt belongeth not unto us, no more doth the Sabbath day: this text M. Chapel urged.

Herevnto I answer, it is true indeed, that therefore God commanded the Jews in this place, to observe the Sabbath day, because he brought them out of the Land of bondage: but if hence men may gather, that we Christians are not bound unto the Sabbath day, as M. Chapel did; then 1. it followeth, that we now have no Sabbath day by the 4th come, and so the 4th come. is useless as a cipher, or abolished: for, this reason of God's deliverance of the Jews out of Egypt, it is added not to any parte of the 4th come. only, but unto all the 4th come. wholly: now in the 4th come. the adversaries of God's truth, do distinguish betwixt the time of the 7th day, and the duties of holiness and Rest: now the time is that which they would fain trample down, as for the duty of an holy Rest, this they would have still moral: but if this their argument be good, then have they hereby at once overthrown, not only the time, but also the duties of holiness & Rest, in the time; and so quite nullified the 4th come. the reason hereof is plain: for, that argument of God's deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, which they bring to abolish one parte of the come. to wit, the time, it doth also abolish the other parte of the come. to wit, the holy rest: for this reason brought by God, doth equally appertain to the whole 4th come. & to all the partes there of, to the time, and to the Rest in the time, as every eye may see, that but reads the text.

Nay the reason which M. Chapel urgeth, hath special reference unto the duty of r es • ; for the rest is plainly mentioned in these words. That thy man servant &, thy maid may Rest as well as thou. Deut. 5.14. what a case is M. Chapel in now? for in attempting to abolish God's sacred time, he hath also abolished the duty of Rest in and with the time. He hath not only made the time a ceremony, but also he hath made, the duty of Rest a ceremony: whats become of your Rest M. Chapel, which you vale moral? have not yourself made it a Ceremony?

2. If this their argument be good, then have they not alone rased the time in the 4th come. and defaced also the 4th come. it • else, but also which is more absurd, they have defaced the whole moral law, even all the 10 come. so then, now we are not bound by the first come. to have the true God to be our God; because this come & so all the rest, do depend upon that reason which the 4th come. dependeth on, to wit, that God brought the Jews out of Egypt: for this very reason, is by Moses, prefixed to the first come. & so hath influence upon all the rest; saying, I am the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of the Land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Exod. 20.2. wherefore if they abolish one • ote or title of the law by this reason, they must abolish the whole law.

3. We must distinguish betwixt the Sabbaths observation, & its institution: the reasons of the Sabbaths institution are these 1. because God himself rested on it, at the Creation. Genes. 2.3, Exod. 20.11. 2dly, that it might be for the benefit & commodety of man, both in body and in soul, Deut. 5.14. Mark. 2.27. The Sabbath day was made for man saith the text. Now the reasons of the Sabbaths observation, may be many, even all the mercies of God, these should move to obedience Deut. 28.47.48. & so this particular deliverance out of Egypt, might be a special motive to keep the Sabbath day Deut. 6.21.24? so then, albeit the Sabbaths observation, depended in parte, upon this mercy of God's deliverance of them out of Egypt; yet its institution depended not theron.

Finally, the passover was instituted, upon occasion of God's spareing the first borne of the Israelites Exod. 12 now this reason and occasion, could not concern the gentile proselytes, and yet were the Proselytes observers thereof; Exod. 12.48. and why then may not we observe the Sabbath, although this reason concerneth not us?

Behold then by these answers, and the weakness of this, & the foregoing arguments, if these Patrones of the Lord's day, & adversaries to God's Sabbaths, do not voluntarily & willfully set themselves against God's Sacred, and Sanctified Sabbaths; it appeareth manifestly, so as they cannot deny it: for what force of reason, or consequence, doth enforce them to raise an argument out of this text against the Lord's Sabbaths? If no force moveth them hereunto, then it must be merely of their own wills and corrupted minds, which desire to trample on God's ordinance.

SECT. XVI.

12. They argue from Mat. 12. where Christ defending his Disciples, for plucking the ears of corn on the Sabbath day, doth rekone up, compare, and join the Sabbath day, with ceremonies, as with the Showbreade, & Sacrifices, and the like; which comparisons and arguments (saith Walaeus on the 4th come. p. 21.) were of no force, if the Sabbath day, were not to be rekoned of as a ceremony in some sort.

Herevnto I answer. 1. why should not Christ's argument have force, albeit the Sabbath day were rekoned of as a moral? for at that time when Christ made that argument, the ceremonies were all in force, as well as morales; and all bound men to obedience, as well as morales; and the breach of a ceremonial was a sin, as well as the breach of a moral: wherefor Christ might very well fetch an argument from a ceremonial unto a moral; showing that if it were no sin to violate a ceremonial law, in a call of necessity, no more was it a sin to break the moral Sabbath, by rubbing ears of corn on the Sabbath day, in a case of necessity: the argument could not howsoever but be good unto the Jews, for they put no difference betwixt morals & ceremoniales, as we do; they tyethed minte, & annyse, & left the weighty matters of the law: and therefore Christ his argument might have, and had force enough.

2. I answer, Christ doth not only rekone the Sabbath with ceremonies, and fetch arguments unto it from ceremonies, but also from morales: for example see Mat. 12.6. I will have mercy and not Sacrifice: where you see our Savior, fetching an argument to the Sabbath day, from the work of mercy, showing that some work may be done on the Sabbath day, in case of necessity, because God will have mercy exercised towards men; now mercy is no ceremony, but a moral: the like you have Mat. 12.11, 12. where Christ fetcheth an argument to the Sabbath, from the helpeing of a beast out of a pit: now to save the life of a beast is no ceremony, but moral. Thus it appeareth, that Christ fetched arguments to the Sabbath, from ceremonials and morals both, making no difference in this respect; wherefore it cannot be concluded, that the Sabbath is either moral, or ceremonial from this argument

3. Whereas he saith the Sabbath is to be rekoned among the ceremonies (in some sort) all this may be, and yet the morallity of the Sabbath nothing infringed: for in this sort it may be like them, that as Sacrifice & ceremonies were to give place, in a case of necessity, so must the Sabbath day do: thus then the Sabbath may be like unto ceremonies, & yet far unlike to them in duration, & ceremonial typicalnesse; see still, how witty and willing men are, to invent something against God's ordinances sure I am, men should employ their Talents, rather to defend God's Title, then to defeat him of it.

SECT. XVII.

13. They fetch an argument from Rom. 14.5. This man esteemeth one day above another day, and another man counteth every day alike. And from Gal: 4.10. ye observe days, & months, & times, & years &c. In the former text the Apostle approveth of them that esteem every day alike: and here the 7th day Sabbath, is abolished: In the latter text, the Apostle sharply reproveth the Galatianes, for observing of days, & times: and here again the 7th day Sabbath is abolished: and in both texts, all difference of days, appointed in the law, is taken away.

To these texts I answer, first by showing them whither this objection tendeth: namely to Anabaptistry: for they hold from these texts, that there is no no difference of days a mong Christians: and take away the old Sabbath day, & it must be so indeed. 2. Such as manage these texts against God's Sabbaths, they are guilty of horrible partiality: for they can find distinctiones, to save the other 9 commandments, and half of the 4th come. from such as would abolish the law, saying, the law is abolished for justification but not for observation; and yet the same men, will neither find, nor receive any distinction, that so the other parte of the 4th come. may be also preserved viz: the Sabbath day. These texts, Mat. 5.34. I am. 5.12. bear as strongly against an oath before a Magistrate, as doth this text Rom. 14.5. against the 7th day Sabbath, and yet you can find ways to preserve an oath still in the Common wealth, and can you not find a way to preserve the Sabbath day still in the Church? see your partiality, and be ashamed.

3. A third absurdity they fall into, is this, that they so expound one text of holy Scripture, as it contradicteth another? yea so as it contradicteth a parte of the 10 commandments: now this is against the common received rule: for no text must be expounded, contrary unto the Analogy of faith, the Lord's prayer, and the 10 commandments: but here they expound thes ii texts Rom. 14.5. and Gal. 4.10. quite contrary unto one of the ten commandments: for the 4th come. maketh the 7th day differ from all others, but they so expound these texts, as that the 7th day must not differ from the rest of the working days: wherefore this their exposition, directed against the 7th day Sabbath, it is erroniouse, & to be rejected: for these absurdities, with others that might be added, another sense of these ii texts, is to be sought.

First therefore (that we may reconcile Scripture with Scripture, that is, the seeming contradictiō betwixt these texts in the New Testament Rom. 14.5. Galat. 4.10. & this text in the moral law of the Old Testament Exod. 20.8.10.) we may expound these texts, of such days, as were in use among these Romans, and Galatianes, whilst they were Idolaters, before their conversion to the faith: for as they had meat sacrificed unto Idols 1 Cor. 8.4. so no doubt had they days dedicated unto Idols: now as some of the believing Gentiles would eat of those meats sacrificed unto Idols, and others refused & would not eat; so some might keep those days, thinking it fit to serve God on those dedicated days, wherein they were wont to serve their Idols; but others thought it unfit &c: This the context giveth some light unto, see Gal. 4.8.9.10. where the Apostle putteth the Galatians in mind of the time when they knew not God, and did service unto them which are not God's, and then he telleth them, that now they knew God v. 9. and then he addeth his reproof saying, how turn ye again unto beggarly rudiments &c. ye observe days &c: by which orderly placing of these things, and by his minding them of the time wherein they were Idolaters, and hereupon speaketh of their turning again, this giveth us to understand, that he speaketh of their turning again unto something they used in the time of their Idolatry, when they knew not God: and so the days and times which he reproved them for observing, might be the days dedicated unto Idols: this sense M. Perkines favoreth, in his Cases of conscience, Chapt. 16. Sect. 3. pag. 108. and thus Walaeus on the 4th come. pag. 93. answereth to these texts, as spoken of the Gentiles white and black, days clean and unclean meats. The like may be said of the days spoken of in Rom. 14.5. for, it is like that the days here mentioned, were of the same kind, with the meats, spoken of in the same chapter v. 2.3.14. now it is like that these meats here spoken of were meats sacrificed unto Idols, as 1. Cor. 10.27. of which, some believers would eat, others being weak would not eat: & I do the rather think these might be meats sacrificed unto Idols, then meats unclean by the Levitical law, because the Apostle speaketh of eating of herbs Rom. 14.2. Now I remember no law, about eating or not eating of herbs: it is therefore more probable, that this eating of herbs by the weak, was an heathenish superstition, and of an indifferent nature, as they used it: and so, as the meats were meats sacrificed to Idols, so these days were days dedicated to Idols.

Secondly, if this sense pleaseth not, but it will be rather, judged that these meats & days, were such as were enjoined by the Law to God's people the Jews; why then, I distinguish of days: there were days Moral, & days ceremonial: or days which God ranked among his Morales, or days that were excluded the hedge & pale of the Morals, & never came into the Tables of stone: the Moral days, were the weekly Sabbaths on the 7th day; the ceremonial days, were the yearly Sabbaths, their new Moons, & other festival days: now the Apostle in both these texts, may be understood to speak against these ceremonial yearly Sabbath days, new moons, and festival days: thus the Apostle may be understood, & yet no wrong or violence at all offered unto these texts; & by this means these texts are so expounded, as they do not contradict nor overthrow any other text of Scripture, or portion of the 10. commandments, nor do we rune into those absurdities, which they of the contrary opinion do rush upon.

Behold how easy a matter it is, to reconsile scripture with scripture, the 4th come. with other texts seeming to contradict it, to such as have eyes in their heads, and affections in their hearts to do it: but when they, these adversaries to God's truth, come to touch these & the like texts, with their polluted hands, & impure minds, by way of exposition & argumentation, they are so far off from reconciling of the holy scriptures, as they will make no work of it, but to set Scripture by the ears, as they say; text against text, making one text as fire, the other as water; the one iusleing & shouldering out of place the other; the one text commandeth the 7th day, the other they make to forbid the 7th day: & yet all this hurly burley, & opposition of text against text, is made needlessly, & causelessly; nothing moving thereunto, but the corrupt minds of such as are enemies to this ancient ordinance of God's Sabbath: for suer I am, thers nothing in the texts themselves, to move them & compel them hereunto: it seemeth therefore, that these men had rather be against God, then for God; & rather throw down his ordinance, then uphold and maintain it, thus you see, none of these texts hitherto alleged, will prove, that the time, & 7th day commanded in the 4th come. is abolished.

SECT. XVIII.

14. They fetch an argument against the 7th day, out of Ex. 31.13. Keep ye my Sabbaths; for it is a sign between me & you in your generationes, that ye may know that I the Lord do sāctifie you. This text M. Chapel urgeth, & so doth every man: now because they put no small confidence in this text, for the abolishing of the Lord's Sabbaths, I must therefore take the more pains in answering it: for they have no more but this text & another, & if they fail in these two texts, as they have done in all the former, then have they no culler or cloke left them, for maintaining the abolishing of this ancient ordinance of God's Sabbaths; & then this fearful sin of a weekly transgression of the 4th come. & violation of the Lord's Sabbaths, will lay heavy upon the consciences of the patrons of the Lord's day: for these are they, who do teach stiffly that the 7th day Sabbath is abolished, and do warrant the people, that they may with a safe conscience, violate the Saturday Sabbath: and behold, these are their grownds for it which we have already answered, and are in answering: But before I come to lay down their arguments out of this text, and my answers; I will in the first place show how they are condemned by their own Authores, who do apply this text, to the Sabbath in the 4th come. and would make it a sign & so abolished: & then I will show also, how absurd they are to make attempt, to prove anything out of this text, against the Lord's Sabbaths.

It is well known, I might here allege the Testimonies of many, both godly & learned, who writing on the doctrine of the Sabbath day in the 4th come. have defended it, against this text of Exod. 31.13. showing that it is not so a sign, as it can be therefore a ceremony, & abolished: of which number is M. Greenham on the Sabbath, & M. Richard Byfield, pag. 88.99. of late come forth: Doctor Bownd, & Doctor Ames, & others cited in the first Section of this Chapter: with diverse others, whose words & names I spare, as well known unto such as are seen into this controuercy: for nothing seemed more absurd unto them, then to think God should put a ceremonial sign and shadow, into the body of the 4th come, and heart of the Moral Law: all which writers do condemn those who would make the Sabbath day, a sign, & so abolished by this text Exod. 31.13.

For matter of absurdity. 1. it appeareth in this, that by bringing this text Exod. 31. against the moral and weekly Sabbath, commanded in the moral Law, hereby they pick quarrels with God, & his ordinances: for, this text doth not say, that because the Sabbath is a sign, thereby you shall know it for certain, that it shall be abolished: no, but because the Sabbath is here called a sign, therefore hence they will needs collect, that it must be abolished: & for furtherance of this wicked collection, all their wites & invention are set on work, partly so to expound this text, as it may not be understood of the yearly Sabbaths by no means, least so the moral & weekly Sabbath should be preserved from ruin and destruction; & therefore they will expound it of this moral and weekly Sabbath, that so it may be abolished, & its light extinguished: partly how to prove all signs to be abolished, & the like: and this is done to this evil end also, that so they may bring the Sabbath of the Lord, within the compass of an abolished sign, and so quite rase it out of the moral Law, and root it out of the Church: thus you see, how they seek out for, and study to find matter against God's ordinance; and all this needlessly and causelessly, save that they bear a grudge against the Lord's Sabbaths, and would have them profaned: for what other reason can they render of this their fact? suer I am, this text Exod. 31. doth not compel them to say anything against the 7th day Sabbaths: for they are faint to use their best wits, to invent something in it, that may make against God's Sabbath, and is not this then to pick a quarrel with God's ordinance?

S. Paul saith, Love thinketh no evil 1. Cor. 13.5. & suer I am, these men think no good: for did they love God's Sabbaths, and God's commandments for themselves, unless, some spirit of slumber for the present hath possessed them, they could not but show their love to God's 4th come. as well as to the rest of the commandments, & manifest their love also in time of trial, by thinking good, and that which might make for the preservation of God's Sabbaths, & 4th come. intirly, rather then by thinking evil of them, to do some act against them: how can men think worse of anything, then to labor its abolition, ruin, and destruction? yea, & that too, when they need not so do, having no cause moving them thereunto, save a corrupted mind: this is a malitiouse & wicked spirit, that will study the overthrow of an ancient ordinance of God, yea an ordinance as ancient as any in the Church of God whatsoever, and labor to undermine it causelessly: I wish M. Chapel, & his other 9. confederate Ministers would think of this point: at the latter end, after I had handled the 4th come. I gave sundry effectual reasons to move us to the love of God's Law; & is this the love that men bear to it, to seek out how & which way they may overthrow forever some parte of it?

And what will be the issue of all this? why even this: hereby God's Moral Law, shall become a moral-ceremonial Law: God's Law shall be maimed, & denied its integrity & perfection: yea a godly prayer of our Church, shall become a babbling before God: & those most ancient Churches, which lived next the Apostles, & are therefore accounted the most pure Churches, shall be condemned, in that they religiously observed this Sabbath day.

A second absurdity, that these men who are partial in God's Law, do fall into, by sharpening their wites, to fetch an argument out of this text, Exod. 31.13. against the 7th day Sabbath, is this; that hereby they do contradict them selves most foully; for, they teach & maintain, that the Rest in the 4th come. is moral & perpetual: & yet for all that, they will bring an argument, out of this text, which doth plainly ouethrow this Rest, as well as anything else: for, the Hebrew word Sabbath, signifieth Rest: now then, if the Sabbath here mentioned, Exod. 31.13. be a sign, and so abolished, so must also the Rest signified by the word Sabbath, be a sign also, & abolished too: and yet for all this, will they have this Rest moral & perpetual? will they have this Sabbath or Rest, both moral and ceremonial? what a gross contradiction is this?

Yet further, it is to be noted, that whereas the cōtrouercy betwixt us, is about the time & day only; for they would abolish the 7th day, this text which they bring doth not so much as mention the word day in Exod. 31.13.14. for it mentioneth only the word Sabbaths: whenc I gather, that though the word day be implied, yet because it is not mentioned, therefore if any thing be made a sign of Christ, it is rather the Sabbaths, then the day: wherefore, if the Sabbaths be a sign of Christ, which signify Restes, then are the Restes, ceremonies, and abolished signs of Christ: & so the Rest in the 4th come. which they hold to be moral, by this text they make to be ceremonial: so we have a moral ceremonial Rest, a contraicted Rest.

A third absurdity that these mē fall into, who will have God served by halves and by peecemeale, is this; that whilst they make a glorious show to the people, that they stand for the 4th come. as well as for the rest of the commandments, they do notwithstanding so gelde it, & pick out the life & soul of it, as they leave it but like a dead corpse; for, by their consequences, (such as they are) they would out of this text, Exod. 31.13. make the Sabbath day, a sign, & so a ceremony, and so then abolished: well then, be it so; hence then I argue, If that Sabbath day, commanded in the 4th come. be an abolished sign & ceremony, thē is the 4th come. nullified, & like a dead corpse; for, it standeth for a cipher, and commandeth just nothing: for the clearing of this point, let us see the 4th come. thus it is written, Remember the (Sabbath day) to sanctifi it, Exod. 20.8. let any man now take out of these words, in this commandment, these ii. words (Sabbath day) & then let him tell me, what it is which the 4th come. commandeth: you may as well take away these ii. words (Sabbath day) which they say are a sign, and ceremony, and abolished; & instead of them, put so many ciphers in the commandment, as there be letters in these ii. words, that is ten, & then we may write this command. thus, Remember the (0000000000) to sanctify it, Exod. 20.8.

I remember our Savior Christ hath a similitude, wherein he likeneth such hearers as hear, but do not, unto a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand, Mat. 7.26. but I now tell you of builders, & builders in God's house too, who are more foolish then this foolish man, for he built, though not upon a rock, yet he built upon the Sande, so as his house might stand until the floodes came & the winds blue; but these mē, would build God's 4th come. upon worse then sand, for they build it upon nothing (0000000000) and make it to command nothing 0000000000. all this must needs be true against them unless they can show us, that there were two Sabbath days spoken of in the 4th come. one upon the 7th day, & another upon the 8th day; and this they cannot do, seeing the Lord spake in the singular number, in his 4th come. saying, Remember the Sabbath day, and not in the plural number, Remember the Sabbaths, or Remember the Sabbath days: now forasmuch as they have robbed the 4th come. of one Sabbath day, there must now be no Sabbath day in the 4th come. unless they cane by help of their magnified reason & consequences prove unto us, that God commanded ii: Sabbaths in his 4th come.

A fourth absurdity that these men fall into (who are adversaries to the Integrity & perfection of God's Law, by rejecting his Sabbaths) is this; that they set Scriptures together by the ears, text against text, and God against himself: for whereas it is a rule, that no exposition, & by like reason, no consequence or collectiō, is to be given of and from any text, which is contrary unto other plain texts of Scripture, as for example, the 10. commandments, & the analogy of faith, &c. yet these adversaries of God's truth, have given such expositions of, & consequences from this one text, Exod. 31.13. as whereby they do utterly nullify something, plainly & expressly commanded in the 10 commandments, as for example the 7th day Sabbaths.

First then their absurdity appeareth, in swerving from the common received & approved rule: & secondly in making one portion of holy write, to contradict another; yea to contradict an ordinance, commanded in the Moral Law: &, which is yet worst of all, they make their own idle brained consequences, fetched out of this text, which never were in it, to contradict an express commandment of the great God's: so that now, man's saucy reason, & frivolous collections shall confront a plain commandment of his God's: yea, it shall sit in equal throne with God: I, & which is worse, it shall take the right hand of God also: for their consequences do more avail with men, then God's express commandment; & their collections, shall be a Counter mand, to God's commandment: yea, they shall take the upper hand of it, & shoulder it qui e out of place, as we see to our hearts astonis • meant it doth, when we look upon the ruined 7th day Sabbath: on times! oh manners! oh wicked manners of these sinefull times! some men do so pride themselves in their wit, & bear themselves so strongly upon their learning, as by these they dare make an assault upon God, and Syllogistically crush to nothing, what God once established in his Church, with terrible thunder and lightening: were this done by some profane person, it were not so much to be thought on; but the Authores & stife Agents in this most horrible fact, are such as draw nere unto God, and called puritane Ministers: oh that they shown more purity then this comes to: it grieveth me, thus to blow up the Skirtes of my bethren, but I have none other way left unto me now but only this one, to discover them unto the world, that they may be ashamed of their folly; & to prevent men in following them; else they will lead the world after them, so mad they are in their dotages, & so vnmouable: the Prophet David hath a passage which will bear me out in this, fill their faces with shame, that they may seek thy name, o Lord. Psal. 83.16.

I might for these reasons & absurdities of theirs, reject their arguments, as unworthy any answer at all; for they deserve none: yet as Solomon saith, Least they be wise in their own conceit Pro. 26.5 and think there is worth and excellency in their arguments, I will misespend some time, and waste some paper and ink, to show them their vanity: & so I come to their arguments. I conceive they may argue out of this text Exod. 31.13. these ways; the first whereof is this, All Signs are abolished: But the 7th day Sabbath, is a Sign, Exod. 31.13. Therefore the 7th day Sabbath is abolished.

To this argument I answer, as for the minor, it shall be answered, in the after passages: but as for their Major, I deny it: for, they cannot prove it: & I give instances to the contrary, showing that all Signs are not abolished: for example, the Rain bow, God made it a Sign that he would never more destroy the world by a floode of waters Genes. 9.12.13. nevertheless the Rain bow is not abolished; for we see it still in the clouds, in rainey weather. For other signs still remaining see the proof of the next Major, & see these Scriptures Ro. 3.25. Phil. 1.28. 2. Thes. 1.5. and thus much for answer to this argument.

An other way whereby they may argue out of this textis this, All Signs of Christ are abolished. But the 7th day Sabbath, is a Sign of Christ: Therefore the 7th day Sabbath is abolished. But I deny this wholl argument, both Major and Minor.

For the Major, I deny that all signs of Christ are abolished: For, they cannot prove it: and because there are sundry signs of Christ remaining still: for example, the Bridgroome, was made a type or sign of Christ John. 3.29. Revel. 29.9. and as we read everywhere in the book of the Canticles: so the Shepherd John. 10.11. was made a sign of Christ; and yet these relationes remain still: we have Bridgroomes still, and Shepherds still. 2. certain meats legally unclean, as the Hare, the Conie, and the Swine Levite. 11.5.6.7. they were made a sign of Christ Act. 10.14.15. Col. 2.16. and, yet for all that, all Hares, Conies, and Swine, are not abolished, no nor as touching abstenence from them, as in a fast. 3. The Rock in the wilderness, was made a sign of Christ, 1 Cor. 10.4. and yet the Rock is not vanished out of its place, because it was once a sign of Christ, nor is it become useless, but that men may wash and cattle drink at it to this day. 4. I might add, that circumcision, being a Sacrament, it was a sign of Christ Rom. 4.11. & yet those infants, circumcised a little before Christ his death, their circumcision was not gathered as the Apostle speaketh, or nullified and abolished, immediately after Christ's death, nor in all the time of their lives after, see 1. Cor. 7.18. by all which instances, it is manifest that all signs of Christ, are not abolished.

I come now to the Minor; and here I deny, that the 7th day Sabbath, was at any time a Sign of Christ considered as incarnate: their text Exod. 31.13. saith indeed; that the Sabbath was a sign; but it doth not say, that the Sabbath was a Sign of Christ: indeed the text speaketh of Jehovah, God the father under this word Lord, but it is altogether silent of God the Son, Christ Jesus, considered as mediator & incarnate: wherefore this text maketh nothing for their purpose; and thus is this second argument answered.

Nevertheless, some reply and urge this text further for the proving of this Minor, saying, that God sanctifieth us, by Christ considered as incarnate, as is plain Eph. 1.3. Herevnto I answer behold! what shufling is here, is this the way to prove by necessary consequence, when they are forced from one text, to fly unto another text? were there that necessary consequence (where of they talk) in their argument out of this text, they should not need to fly unto another; is not this to pick aquarrell against God's ordinance; & voluntarily without any necessity, to seek out for matter against God? but all this will nothing avail them: For, 1. I have some exceptiones against the text in my former book p. 138. 2dly, admit that God doth sanctify by Christ, yet it followeth not; that what souer is made a sign of God the Father, and of God the Son considered as God, it must also be a sign, of God the Son considered as redeemer and incarnate: so great is the difference betwixt Christ considered as God coequal with the father, and considered as Godman incarnate, as that which being a sign of God the father, though it must also be a sign of God the Son considered as God coequal to the father, yet it is not necessary that it should be a sign also of God the Son considered as God-man and incarnate.

Further more, I will give three answers more unto this argument: the first is by distinguishing of Signs; if the Sabbath here be a sign of Christ, then there are some signs of Christ, which are ever present with the thing signified, as in this text Exod. 31.13. where the text speaketh in the present tense, do, it is a Sign, that I the Lord do sanctify you: where you see, this is a Sign of something as present: & there be some Signs of Christ, which are far distant from the thing signified, where the sign was present, but the thing signified was future; of this kind was circumcision, sacrifices, meats and drinks, new Moons, and yearly Sabbaths: now the former sense is it which they must embrace, by this text Exod. 31.13. and in this sense, I deny, that such signs of Christ are abolished: for albeit it were so, that of the latter kind of signs, where the sign and the thing signified were far asunder in time, that at the presence of the thing signified the sign vanished; yet is there not like reason in the former kind of signs; for then the Sabbath day, which was made a sign of Christ (as they say) then presently sanctifying the Israelites, should have vanished and have been abolished, even in those days wherein Moses wrote this text Exod. 31.13. for then at that time, was the Sign and the thing Signified present together. It is a sign that I the Lord do sanctify you, saith the text.

My second answer is this, whereas they build so strongly upon it, that the Sabbath day, was here made a sign of God's, and so also of Christ's sanctification, as if sanctification were a main thing signified, and typed out, by the Sabbath, this I deny: the Sabbath was not made a sign of Sanctification: but only a sign of God the Lord. For the word Sanctify in this text, is used as a description of God, not as the antitype or thing signified: the antitype or thing signified is only the Lord: as if the text were thus read, My Sabbath is a sign, that ye may know, that I am the Lord: or, that I am the Lord, who do sanctify you: For confirmation of this see Ezek. 20.20.12. where the same matter is repeated thus, Sanctify my Sabbaths, & they shall be a sign between me and you, that ye may know that I am the Lord your God.

Hereby you may see, that the thing signified by the Sabbath, was the Lord our God; for God would give his people a sign, whereby they might know him, that sanctifieth them, from all false God's: now if the word sanctify had been the thing signified and typed, then that word would not have been omitted here, as being the chief thing intended: Thus you see, the Sabbath was no sign of Sanctification; and yet upon this supposition, they build all this their argument.

My third answer, is by distinguishing of the word sanctify: it may be taken 1. For that inherent grace of holiness which is wrought in the hearts of the Elect, by the holy Ghost; or 2. For an external privilege, whereby a Nation or people are severed from other Nations and people, to participate of the outward ordinances of God, as the word and Sacraments &c. Rom. 3.1.2. Rom. 9.4. Deut. 4.8.34. Exod. 19.10. now admit the Sabbath was made a sign of Sanctification, then may the word Sanctify in the text, be understood of this latter kind of Sanctification only: now this Sanctification cannot have reference unto Christ, considered as incarnate; for if it hath, then the text must rune thus: keep ye my Sabbaths; for they are a Sign, that I the Lord (Christ) do sanctify you: Now the Lord Christ considered as incarnate, could not be said to sanctify those Israelites in Moses his time: that is, to take the people of the Jews then from other Nationes, and bestow upon them those holy Privileges of his Oracles, circumcision, and the rest: for, he was not incarnate of 2000 years after that.

A third way whereby I suppose they may argue out of this text Exod. 31.13. is this: All signs, whose things signified or antitypes be come wear forthwith abolished: But the 7th day Sabbath, was a sign, whose antitype is long since come: Therefore, the 7th day Sabbath, was forthwith (at the death of Christ) abolished. For the truth of the Major, this they think to prove, partly by that text Col. 2.16.17. and partly from that common received axiom, that when the body is come, the shadow or sign vanisheth.

Herevnto I answer, 1. for the text Col. 2.16.17. that this text will not help them; for our question now is about signs: But this text saith nothing of Signs, for it speaketh only of Shaddowes: now there may be great difference made betwixt a sign and a Shaddow; For, every Shaddow may be a sign, but every Sign is not a Shaddow: we have the word Shaddow used but thrice in the New Testament, as in Col. 2.17. and in Heb. 8.5. and in Heb. 10.1. and it is ever used to signify a thing to come futurlie, as the Apostle speaketh plainly, Which are a shadow, of things, to come Col. 2.17. And again, The law having a shadow of good things to come. Heb. 10.1. But now, Signs are used to signify things past Exod. 31.17. Rom. 4.11. and sometimes things to come, Genes. 17.8.11. and sometime to signify a thing present as Exod. 31.13. wherefore seeing there is so great a difference, betwixt a sign and a Shaddow, we must not confound them; the Apostle would abolish no more but such signs only, as did signify things to come: and the Sabbath in Exod. 31.13. is made only a sign of a thing present.

Have these men an indifferent respect with David unto all God's commandments Psal. 119.6. (think you) when they belabour it so studiously, to overthrow a parte of them? and may not these men be said to love God's law from the heart, and to be true friends unto it, when they use all their wit and learning, to overthrow an ordinance of God's, commanded expressly in that law? and what will be the issue of this their thankless work? why this, the bright shining law of God, which is a light unto our feet Psal. 119.105. it shall by this their great study have a dark shadow, or ceremony, placed in the very heart of it: yea, it shall be made a very monstre among God's laws: For of all God's laws from Genesis to Malachi there is not one like it: such a hotch potch they have made it: it shall be partly fish parly flesh, partly white partly blake, partly moral partly ceremonial, partly abolished partly entaining: may they not be in love with this their work, to behold the ugliness of it?

2. I answer to their axiom, and so also to their Major, by denial that all signs must forthwith vanish, when the antitype and thing signified is come; and I give these instances to the contrary. 1. The Passover Lamb, it was a Sign that God would spare the Israelites at midnight, when he came to destroy the firstborn of the Egyptians; now this Passover, it was eaten in the Euening before this midnight, so that it was a sign of a deliverance to come, as namely in the night after: now midnight being come, and the Angel bauing Passed-over, & spared the firstborn of the Israelites, here then the antitype or thing signified by the Passover, was come: and yet for all that, this Sign of the Passover, it was not forthwith abolished; for it lasted many hundredth of years after, even till the last Supper of Christ: see Exod. 12.6.13.29.25. Luk. 22.15. yea, it remained still as a sign of their deliverance which was past, come and gone long before, as you may see Exod. 12.26.27. loe here, the sign remained, long after the thing signified was come and gone: for, the fathers were to instruct their Children, when they were in Canaan, that this Passover was kept in remembrance of God's deliverance from the destroying Angel, whilst they were in Egypt, which deliverance was long before this Passover, and this Passover long after the deliverance signified by it: And why may not the Sabbath last also in the Church (if it were a sign) long after Christ's coming in the flesh, even till his last coming unto judgment? I can see nothing to the contrary, but that it pleaseth not our Ministers to have it so: indeed they talk much that the Sabbath it was a sign, the Sabbath it was a sign, and now the body Christ being come, the sign must of necessity be gone, but here they see the contrary, the sign of the Passover it lasted in the Church, many hundredth of years after the thing signified by it was come.

2. Circumcision, it was a sign, that God would give the Land of Canaan, to the Israelites Genes. 17.4.8.10. well then, Canaan was the thing signified by the sign of circumcision: now when the Israelites were come into the Land of Canaan, then they had received the thing signified; but did not this sign of circumcision, last in the Church, many hundredth years after that? yis, even to the coming of Christ; for he was circumcised: and why may, not the Sabbath (if a sign) remain still in the Church after Christ's death? if they say, that circumcision was a sign of something else besides the Land of Canaan; so say I was the Sabbath; for it was a sign also of the creation, or of God's rest then Exod. 31.17.

A 3d instance: The Lord gave Moses a sign or token, that he had sent him to deliver the Israelites; now the sign was this, that after he had brought the Israelites out of Egypt, both he & they should serve God upon the Mount Horeb, Exod. 3.1.12. where you see, that the sign, was a good while after that the thing signified was come: for the thing signified was this, that Moses should go unto Pharaoh and also bring the children of Israel out of Egypt, Exod. 3.11. now after he had been with Pharaoh, & after he had carried the Israelites out of Egypt, then was the sign not abolished, but to be used: An other instance of like kind, we find in Isa. 7.14. you may see it at your leisure: by all which instances this one thing appeareth, that a sign may remain, long after the thing signified by it be come, & thus is their 3d argument answered.

Oh, how do these men love the Law of God? who thus dispute against it? and what would be the issue, if they could obtain their desires? why this, God's Law should become A Monstre: & we Protestants should become Anabaptists, & profane persons, kepeing no Sabbaths at all, for besides this Sabbath, they shall never be able to show us any other.

Having answered to all that they can say out of this text, & to every argument severally, now I come to give iii. answers more, which may serve to every of their 3. arguments: but first I desire my adversaries, either to embrace these my answers, and distinctiones, whereby I would preserve God's Sabbaths, or else to study such others, as may please them better; or else they bewray abhominable partiality to God's Law & truth: for they cane preserve nine commandments, & half of the 4th, & why not the other half, & so all the ten entirely?

First, whereas they take it for granted, that the Sabbath here mentioned, Exo. 31.13. which they say is made a sign of sanctification, that it is the 7th day Sabbath, mentioned in the 4th come. this I deny: there are ii. sortes of Sabbaths, the weekly 7th day Sabbath; & the yearly Sabbaths: now this their text, may be understood of the Annual and yearly Sabbaths, which never came into the Moral Law: if therefore I shall make it appear, that this text of theirs, may be understood of the Annual and ceremonial Sabbaths, and not of the moral, weekly Sabbath; then is all their labor lost, and all their 3 arguments frivolous; for all their arguments have argued only against the yearly ceremonial Sabbaths, the which no man will defend; for this purpose therefore, note these things:

1. It is very improbable, that all those verses v. 13.14.15.16.17. which are 5 in number, should treat but of one kind of Sabbath, to wit, the 7th day Sabbath, as may appear by the very reading of them over, unless you would say here were a Tautologie, over and over again with the same thing. Wherefore it is more probable, that in this long and large discourse of Sabbaths, Moses speaketh of ii sortes of Sabbaths, of the yearly Sabbaths in Exod. 31.13.14. and of the weekly Sabbath in Exod. 31.15.16.17. some light is added hereunto, if we do but observe Moses; for he useth often in speaking of the Sabbath, to mention both kinds before he hath done, that is, both the anniversary Sabbaths, and the weekly Sabbath, as you may see in Exod. 23.12.14.15.16. and in Exod. 34.21.22.23. and in Levite. 23.3.4.24.32.38.39.

A 2d reason may be this; the Lord had given Moses in charge to build the Tabernacle, Exod. 25.8.9. the making whereof, would cost great & longe labor; now least the people should think, that because the work about this Tabernacle, was an holy work, pertaining unto God, for his service and worship, that therefore they might put no difference of days, whilst they were in this work, but that they might work upon the Sabbaths also, whither weekly Sabbaths, or yearly Sabbaths, as well as on the 6 working days; to prevent this, Notwithstanding (saith the Lord) my Sabbaths ye shall keep &c. Exod. 31.13. &c. as if the Lord had said, albeit I will that you make me A Tabernacle &c. Yet I will not, that you work about it on my Sabbath days; now because the people, were as prone, upon this occasion of building the Tabernacle, to work upon the yearly Sabbaths when their turn came, as upon the weekly Sabbath, on the 7th day, therefore it is meet for us to think, that God would as well make provision here, for his yearly Sabbaths, as for the weekly Sabbath: and that therefore in this text Exod. 31. Moses spake of the yearly Sabbaths, as in v. 13.14. and of the weekly Sabbath, as in v. 15.16.17. that so the people appointed to work about the Tabcrnacle, as Bezaleel and Aboliab and the rest, they might not work, either upon the yearly or weekly Sabbath: but were all these 5 verses spent only about one kind of Sabbath, as the weekly Sabbath only, then had not God made provision here for his yearly Sabbaths, which cannot be likely.

A third reason may be this, that in these few verses v. 13.14.15.16.17. there is threatened the punishment of death, to those that do any work on the Sabbath, two several times, & in two several verses, as in v. 14. whosoever worketh therein, the same person shall be cut of from his people: and in v. 15. whosoever doth any work in the Sabbath day, shall die the death. Now it is not likely, that one and the same punishment should be repeated, and twice together threatened, for the breach of one kind of Sabbath day: and therefore to avoid a Tautologie and needless repetition, it is most likely that here Moses spake of two kinds of Sabbaths, of the yearly Sabbath in v. 13. and so threatened death to the transgressoures of them in v. 14. and of the weekly Sabbath in v. 15. and so threatened death also to the transgressors of it, in the latter end of the same v. 15.

A 4th reason may be this, that the Sabbaths in v. 13.14. are made a sign of Sanctification or Redemption by Christ, as they say; but the Sabbath in v. 15.16.17. is kept in memory of the Creation, and is a sign of Creation, to remember, that in 6 days the Lord made beauen and earth, and rested on the 7th day, as you have it in v. 17. now these diverse signs do intimate, that here may be diverse Sabbaths spoken of in these verses: for, Sanctification and Redemption may be applied to the one kind, and Creation to the other kind of Sabbaths: for, it is nothing probable, that Redemption and Creation, should be both applied unto one kind only.

Thus you see what liklihod there is, that the Sabbaths mentioned in v. 13. upon which they ground all their arguments, are not the 7th day Sabbath, which is our question; but that they are the yearly Sabbaths, which never came into the moral law, and about which we make no question at all: wherefore, unless they cane take away these answers, and prove unto v. that by the word Sabbaths in v. 13. is meant the weekly 7. day Sabbath, they are besides the question; all their labor hath been in vain, and all being granted them which this text cane afford them, it will make only for the abolishing of the yearly Sabbaths, but nothing for the abolishing of the 7th day Sabbath: for, suppose it granted, that the yearly Sabbaths, in v. 13.14. were signs of Sanctification, and Redemption by Christ, and therefore abolished; yet it will not follow, that the weekly Sabbath in v. 15.16.17. which was kept in memory of the Creation, and was a sign, that God created the world v. 17. must also be abolished, and so much for the foremost of my general answers.

My other general answer to this text, Exod. 31.13 and te all their arguments hence deduced is this; suppose we that be the word Sabbaths in v. 13. is meant the 7th day Sabbath, yet it followeth not that because it is made a sign, or a sign of Christ, that therefore the Sabbath day must be abolished: for, we must know, that the sign of the Sabbath may vanish, & yet the Sabbath may remain still: for the clearing of this, consider with me, that the Sabbath may be considered abosolutly or relatiuly: absolutely without any sign, or relatiuly with its sign: like as an Iuey bush or the like sign hung up at a Vineteners house; you may consider its absolute nature, as it is no sign, but as it is an Iuey bush only; & you may consider it relatiuely, as it it is a sign that wyne is to be sold at that house; & these two may be parted; for take down the Iuey bush, & then it is no longer a sign, it hath lost its relative nature, but yet it is a bush still, so it retaineth its absolute nature: & thus the Sabbath, it hath an absolute nature, & it hath a relative & signifificatiue nature, now these two may be parted; for it may leese its relative nature as a sign, & yet retain its absolute nature as a Sabbath, just as in the similitude of the Iuey bush.

But here happily some may ask of me, what it is which I call the absolute nature of the Sabbath, & what the relative nature: To whom I answer, I count that to be the absolute nature of the Sabbath, which is not considered typically relatiuly, & significatiuly, even all, that is to be considered in the Sabbath, over & besides its typical & significative nature, that is its absolute inature: more particularly, the absolute nature of the Sabbath, tis an holy rest, upon the 7th day, because God rested upon the 7th day, and all this, as commanded by God: in which absolute nature, are comprised these particulars, 1. a rest from labors, 2. a performance of sacred and holy actiones. 3. that both these be done on the 7th day: 4. that these three be done in imitation of God, because God rested on the same day, & blessed it, and sanctified it, Exod. 20.11. fifthly, that all these be so done, because God commanded them, Exod. 20.8.10. these 5. things are the absolute nature of the Sabbath: now for the relative nature of the Sabbath, it is whatsoever is added unto these 5. things significatiuly, to sign & signify anything; thus the Sabbath was made a sign of the Creation & of God's Rest on the 7th day, at the worlds creation, Exod. 31.17. & thus was the Sabbath made a sign also of the Redemption, or of Christ's sanctification of us, as they would have it out, of Exod. 31.13. which being supposed, the Sabbath had a double relative nature, the one to signify the Creation as past; the other to signify the sanctification of Christ as to come: (which double sign being considered, my insueing instances, might be a little more distinctly carried, but as they are, it may suffice to give you a taste) and thus you have the absolute nature of the Sabbath declared, and also its relative or typical nature.

I come now to show, that the Sabbath may leese its typical nature, & yet it may retain its absolute nature: & first I shall give you instances, where things had a double type or sign, & the one of them vanisheing, nevertheless the thing was observed still, with a respect unto the other sign that remained.

The first instance for this purpose, shall be that Sacrament of Circumcision, considered as used, after the children of Israel were come into the land of Canaan: & here we are to note, that circumcision typed out two things; the one was, that God would give unto the Israelites the land of Canaan, Genes. 17.8. the other was, that God would make Abraham a father of many nations, Gen. 17.7.4. & that God would be God unto Abraham & to his seed after him, Genes. 17.7. now after that the Isralits the posterity of Abrahā were come into the land of Canaan, & did inherit it, then was one of these things typed out by circumcision fulfilled, & then was circumcision to loose its relative & significative nature, as typing out Canaan to come, for it was come, & they were in it; & yet this sign of circumcision remained still in the Church, for many hundredth years, & that as having reference unto the other thing typed out by it, to wit, that God would be God unto the seed of Abraham, & that he should be a father of many nations: thus you see, the action of circumcision remained in the Church still, when one of the antitypes was come: & why then may not the duty of the Sabbath day, remain still in the Church, after one of its antitypes be come; so long as another of its antitypes is still in force? admit, the Sabbath was a sign of Christ to come, and so therefore it be no more kept as a type of Christ to come; yet may it still be kept in the Church, and so forever, as a type or sign of the Creation: for our ages, and so all posterity unto the worlds end, may as well keep the Sabbath as a sign of the Creation, as the Jews and people of God did at any time: Why may not the Sabbath be retained, for one of its antitypes sake, as well as circumcision was retained for one of its antitypes sake?

A second instance for this purpose, shall be that other Sacrament, the Passover, considered as it was used after the Angel had smitten dead the first borne of the Egyptians, and passed by the housen of the Israelites: and here we are to note as before, that the Passover was a type or sign of two things, the one was, that God would pass over the housen of the children of Israel's, & spare them, when at midnight he would destroy others. Exod, 12.11.12.13. The other was, that it was a sign of Christ our Passover. 1. Cor. 5.7. Now after that the Angel had destroyed the first borne of the Egyptians, & spared the Israelites, then one of the types of the Passover was fulfilled; nevertheless, the Passover was retained in the Church for many hundredth years after; and this was because of the other type which was not then fulfilled:

2 The Passover cold not be a sign, unto those Proselytes who joined to the Jewish religion, when they were in Canaan, of their deliverance from the destroying Angel, who smote all the first borne of Egypt; and yet it remained as a sign to them, of Christ their Passover to come: these Proselyte Gentiles left the Jews, in that which was proper and peculiar unto the Jew, that is, to use the Passover as it was a sign of deliverance obtained by the Jews only in Egypt, and joined with them in the use of the Passover as it was a sign of Christ the common Passover for Jew & Gentile both; see Exod. 12.25.26.27. Now suppose the Sabbath was a sign of Christ, and therefore abolished in that respect, when Christ came; yet why may it not remain still, in that other respect, as it is a sign of the Creation? if it was so with the Passover, it may be so with the Sabbath day: and, if those Proselytes who were Gentiles, did observe the Passover, neglecting such things therein as were peculiar unto the Jews, embracing such things only as were common to the Jews and Gentiles both, why may not we Gentiles, lay aside the typical quality of the Sabbath, wherein it was peculiar unto the Jews, & embrace the Sabbath in other respects; and as a sign of the Creation, wherein it was common both to Jew and to Gentile?

I come now to give you instances of signs, where all the typical & relative nature is abolished, and the absolute nature remaining still. 1. The Rock in the wilderness, its absolute nature was to be of a stony substance &c. And its use, for men to wash and beasts to drink at: Now this Rock was made a sign of Christ: For, they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them, and the Rock was Christ. 1. Cor. 10.4. so this Rock was a Sacramental sign: now when Christ was come (if not longe before) this Rock ceased to be a sign of Christ any longer, and so it lost its relative and significative nature; but yet it ceased not to be a Rock still, and of a stony substance &c. And to be useful for men to wash and beasts to drink at, it kept its absolute nature: and so, if the Sabbath be no longer a sign, yet it may be a Sabbath still, and all those 5 duties which are the absolute nature, forementioned, they may remain still: suppose therefore that they could prove, that all signs are abolished, or that all signs of Christ are abolished, yet it would never follow, that the Sabbath is abolished, any further forth then as it was a sign; it could leese but its relative and typical quality, like as the Iuey bush doth, when it is pulled down; then it is no longer a sign, but a bush it is still; and so a Sabbath it is still; for its absolute nature may remain still, to wit, 1. Its rest 2. its holy performāces, 3. On the 7th day. 4. Because God did these things, on the same day. 5. Because God commanded them.

A 2d instance may be this, the Bridgroome was made a type of Christ, as we read everywhere in the book of the Canticles, & John. 3.29. Revel. 19.7. so the Shepherd was made a sign of Christ John. 10.11. and yet the death of Christ, hath not abolished these relationes; for we have Bridgroomes and Shepherds still.

A 3d instance may be that of forbidden meats: we read of certain meats forbidden to be eaten by the law, as unclean Levite. 11.5.6.7. as the Cony, the Hare, and the Swine: now these were made signs and Shaddowes of Christ, Col. 2.16.17. But Christ being come, these beasts ceased to be unclean, and to be signs of Christ any longer Act. 10.14.15.12.13. Col. 2.16.17. so, then they lost their significative nature, but yet the same beasts lost not their absolute nature so soon as Christ was come; for these beasts were the same in nature and kind the which they were before, the Hare was an Hare still, the Cony a Cony still &c. And why may it not be so with the Sabbath day also? it may be a Sabbath, though not a typical Sabbath: or, the flesh of the Hare, Cony, and Swine, may still be refrained, in a political respect, as in Lent time; or in a Religiouse respect, as in a fasting day: and why then may not the Sabbath day be abolished as a sign? and yet remain still, as a sacred time for God's worship? for the forbearance of these meats, was as much a type, as ever was the Sabbath day, & yet we may and do forbear them still: why then I say may we not still retain the Sabbath, albeit it was a type? may we not as well observe the Sabbath now, which was a type, as forbear those meats now, which forbearance was a type?

Here I must crave leave of my reader, to make a short digression, by way of defense of this last instance; you see I call the Swine a shadow of Christ: this phrase is exceedingly distasted of some: by name M. Chapel, undertaking to confute some things in my former book publicly, took hold of this for one, and in reproachful manner said, this Author makes the Swine a sign of Christ, a Swineish argument, quoth he: which check was received by his auditory with great applause, insomuch as it hath been runge in mine ears, & cast in my teeth sundry times, by diverse men, what a swineish argument, I used: now for the clearing of myself, see my former book on the Sabbath, at pag. 146. where I did affirm the swine to be a Shaddow of Christ, & I proved it there by Levite. 11.5.6.7. Col. 2.16.17. now that it is so, this text of S. Paul's will bear me out; for he saith that meat was a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ: where S. Paul maketh meats to be shadows of Christ, as well as holy days, new moons, & Sabbaths, as you may see in the text: now what meats, were shadows, but the prohibited meats, forbidden to be eaten under the Law? & what meats find you in the Law forbidden to be eaten, but these the Hare, the Cony, & the Swine, as you may read Levite. 11.5.6.7. so then, these forbidden meats, the Hare, the Cony, & the Swine, were these which Paul counteth to be shadows of Christ: why then M. Chapel, may not I have leave to say, the Swine was a shadow of Christ, as well as S. Paul? & why should you make me a scorn, and a bye word, unto your auditory, & disdained in the minds of honest and well minded people? for ought I can see you might as well have said the same words reproachfully of S. Paul, as of me, taxing him to have used a Swinish argument: This your error M. Chapel is by so much the greater, in that when you uttered these words, you preached out of this very text, the which I used in my book, to prove that the Swine amongst the rest, was a Shaddow of Christ, to wit, Col. 2.16.17. now had you but well & rightly understood your own text out of which you then preached, you would never have accused me for using of a Swinish argument. for it is your very text, that beareth me out in calling the Hare, Cony, & Swine shadows of Christ: and so I return whence I came.

A 4th instance shall be that which my adversaries will assent unto: for they say the Rest in the Sabbath day, is a type of the reft in the Kingdom of Heaven, Heb. 4. & a sign of Christ, Exod. 31.13. Col. 2.16. & yet they hold the same Rest to be moral & still in force: & why then may not the 7th day, be abolished as a type, and yet remain as a sacred time for God's worship, & as a time to exercise mercy in towards poor servants, by releasing them from their labors wherein they have been spent the 6. days before? why I say may not the time remain still, as it is an help and a furtherance unto those moral duties of rest, & the worship of God? it is to be wondered at, to see men go about to reject & abolish such things as were, are in themselves, and may be helps & furtherances of Moral duties.

A 5th instance shall be the feast of Pentecost or Whit-Sunday, which was a Jewish feast day or Sabbath day, as you may read in Levite. 23.15.16.21. & it was also a sign, or Shadow of Christ to come, as you may see, Col. 2.16.17. & so it was abolished: nevertheless, we Christians do keep this feast day, & sanctify it as a Sabbath day once every year; for as Peter did preach upon the day of Pentecost, Act. 2.1.14. so doeth our Church upon Whit-sunday; only we have cast of that shaddowish respect which it had amongst the Jews, of being a sign of Christ to come: wherefore, by the constant practice of our Church, it appeareth, that a Jewish ceremonial day, may be retained in our Church, so be the ceremonies of it be rejected: if then pentecost, a ceremonial feast or Sabbath day, may be retained in a Christiā Church, why may not the 7th day Sabbath also be retained amongst us? yea if it could be proved a sign of Christ to come: thus by this instance you see, that a Sabbath day may remain, after its significative nature or quality be vanished.

Thus I have finished my two general answers, the former, showing that the 7th day Sabbath, is not spoken of in their text, Exod. 31.13. but only the yearly Sabbaths: the latter, showing that if the 7th day Sabbath were spokē of in their text, Ex. 31.13 yet no more is abolished of this Sabbath, but its significative & typical quality; but the absolute nature of the Sabbath, consisting of those 5 things foremētioned, may still remain, to wit, 1. rest, 2. holy duties, 3. on the 7th day, 4. because God rested on this 7th day, & sanctified it. 5. because God commanded these things.

My third general answer (that I may defend the moral Law, with everything therein commanded unto a jot and title; and shune those foul and many absurdities, which my adversaries rune into) is this: the Sabbath may be considered naturally & orginally, & so I deny it was any sign: for the sign was not put into the 4th come. much less to its first institution, Gen. 2.3. or it may be considered accidentally & aduentitiously, and so it became a sign after its institution, as in Exod. 31.13. so as the sign, was but accidental and extrinsical to the Sabbath; it being added to it many hundredth years after its prime institution; and I know not how long after its promulgation on Mount Sinai: in this latter sense I yield it abolished, but in the former, I deny it: for as the Rock after it lost its typicalnesse, it still remained a Rock; so may the Sabbath; after Christ had abolished its typicalnesse, which was affixed to it, it may still remain a Sabbath, as it was originally at its prime institution; it may remain still, as a Sacred time for God's worship, & as a fit time to refresh mā & beast in, spent with former 6 days labor.

Thus much for answer unto this their text, Exod. 31.13. wherein we have been the larger, because they stand so much upon it, as one of their strongest fortes and suerest houldes, but how weak you see: there remaineth now but one text more of theirs to answer, and it is a main and chief one also, it followeth in this next section.

SECT. XIX.

15thly, they fetch another & a main argument against God's 7th day Sabbath, out of this text, Col. 2.16.17. Let no man therefore condemn you in meat & drink, or in respect of an Holy day, or of the new Moon, or of the Sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come: but the body is of Christ. But before I come to show you their arguments out of this text, against the Sabbath, let me first show you how absurdly they behave thenselves, who would fetch arguments out of this text, against God's Sabbath.

The first absurdity is this, that they do voluntarily & willfully, without any constraint, set themselves in opposition, to an ancient ordinance of God's in his Church: for this purpose, it is to be observed, not only that the Saturday, or 7th day Sabbath, was an ordinance of God's, and in high honor in his Church; but also that it was one of the most ancient ordinances, that ever God established in his Church: for this Sabbath day, it did not only obtain like privileges, and honor equally, with the residue of the Morales, delivered upon Mount Sinai; but also, it pleased God to Sanctify this day at the very Creation of the world, as we read Genes. 2.3. So God blessed the 7th day & sanctified it: God did sanctify this day, & rested in it, making him self our president, beginning this holy Sabbath in his own person: now for any man to oppose any of God's ordinances, willfully & not compelled thereunto is an evil, but to oppose so ancient an ordinance as is this Sabbath, is a far greater evil: Baptism, and the Lord's supper, are ancient ordinances in the Church, yet are they nothing so ancient, as be the Lord's Sabbaths: whereby you see, that these patrons of novelty are enemies to antiquity; I mean, those who defend the Lord's day for a Sabbath, which is a nouill thing, they are enemies to the Sabbath day, which is a most ancient thing: were it some novelty, or new upstart point in religion, which I speak for, it were tolerable that they should oppose it; but being so ancient an ordinance in God's Church, as that it is backed with the greatest antiquity; here to oppose, & that causelessly, is most absurd.

Were they compelled hereunto or constrained, by the vrgeing necessity of some portion of Scripture in the New Testament; or more specially, were they compelled hereunto by this one text of Scripture Col. 2.16.17. or by anything therein contained, they might be excused: but seeing this text, as well as all others, may be so expounded, as it shall not any whit oppose this ancient Sabbath and ordinance of God; and seeing there is no collection or consequence, that is thence deduced against this ordinance of God's, which necessarily must follow from this text, therefore they are altogether inexcusable that oppose it, & make it so odiouse before the people of God.

Wherefore their absurdity appeareth, partly in this, that they will oppose an ordinance of God's; yea one of his most ancient ordinances established in his Church: and partly in this, that they will set themselves against the same, voluntarily and willfully, for no cause at all, but because they will do so.

The 2d absurdity that these do fall into, by forceing this text Col. 2.16.17. & (so any other text also) against the Sabbath day, commanded in the moral law, is this, that hereby they are manifest enemies to the Law of God, I say, to the moral law of God Exod. 20. written by the finger of God Exod. 31. • 8. they bewray their enmity in this, that they are enemies to the Integrity and perfection thereof: they fear they should rune into Judaism if they should yield obedience to all • the ten commandments: for whereas the text saith, God spak all thes • w •• ds, Exo. 20.1. yet these men will reject some of these words, namely, all those words which concern the 7th day Sabbath: thus they will not have as the Prophet David speaketh Psalm. 119.6. a respect unto all God's commandments. But they will serve God by halves, and by pieces; they will take and leave where and what they list in God's law: for they will not embrace and maintain the whole law of God, as God delivered it; but some pieces of it, they acknowledge, other pieces they renownce; and thus they deliver to the people but a parte of God's will, and but a broken, partial, and imperfect law: if one parte of God's law be good for us Christians, is not another parte of it good also? if the greatest parte of God's law be good for us, is not the whole law, and are not all the partes of it good for us also? deprive us not of the Integrity and perfection of God's law.

A 3d absurdity, committed by these is this; that they foully contradict themselves, by bringing this text Col. 2.16.17. against the Lord's Sabbath day: for, whereas the question betwixt them and me, is solely about the time and day, to wit, the 7th day, this their text which they bring against this day, it doth not so much as mention they word day at all; for the word days in the text Col. 2.16.17. it is not in the original, as you may perceive by this, that our translatoures have written it in smaler letters; the original hath nothing but the word Sabbaths: whereby I gather, that rather the Sabbaths, then the word day, and the time, are made a shadow of Christ: now the Hebrew word Sabbath, signifying a Rest from labors, as they will have it: if anything therefore be a shadow of Christ, it is this Rest from labors: now they all teach and maintain, that the Rest in the 4th come. is moral and perpetual, and yet behold here, by this their text Col. 2.16.17. and by their argument out of it, they dispute against this Sabbath or Rest; for they make it a shadow of Christ, and so abolished; and so this Rest, it shall be moral & ceremonial; perpetual, and yet long since abolished: it shall be moral, by their Doctrine in the pulpit, and ceremonial by their arguments in Disputation: is not this a gross contradiction? for this text Col. 2.16. if it maketh anything against the 7th day Sabbath, it maketh as much (if not more) against the word Sabbath and Rest, as it doth against the day and time, which is the thing in question.

And this I make plain by this reason also; they say, that by the word Sabbaths in Col. 2.16.17. is meant all Sabbaths, both the weekly and the yearly Sabbaths; which if it be so, then look how largely the word Sabbaths, is expounded touching the yearly Sabbaths, so largely this word Sabbaths must be expounded touching the weekly Sabbath. for this one word (Sabbaths) cannot be taken in ii diverse senses: now this word, in reference unto the yearly Sabbaths, doth includ both the time & day, and also the Rest & duties to be performed in that time and day, and so all are abolished as Shaddowes, both the Rest, and the day: just so it must be touching the weekly Sabbath, if it be meant in the word Sabbaths, then both the day and the Rest of the day also, must be included, and so day, and Rest, must be abolished, as shadows both?

A 4th absurdity committed by these enemies to the perfection and integrity of God's law, is this, that by bringing this text Col. 2.16.17. (or any other text or texts) against the Sabbath day, commanded in the 4th come. hereby they do nullify & utterly bring to naught the 4th come. for, whereas the 4th come. commandeth the Sanctification of the Sabbath day; these men will by this text, prove this Sabbath day, to be a Shaddow of Christ, and so therefore to be abolished: whence it must follow, that by their doeings the Sabbath day, commanded in the 4th come, is abolished as a shadow, which being abolished the 4th come. is nullified, and made as a cipher, it commanding just nothing at all: for, if these words (Sabbath day) be a shadow and abolished, then these 10 letters which are in these 2 words, may in sense be put away as abolished, and in the room of them put 10 ciphers: then whereas the 4th come. runeth thus; Remember the (Sabbath day) to sanctify it: why now according to these patrons of the Lord's day, it may rune thus, Remember the 0000000000, to sanctify it: and thus they have nullified this commandment; for you see it now commandeth just nothing; unless they can tell how to prove unto us, by the virtue of their consequences, that God commanded two Sabbath days in his 4th come. the one upon the 7th day, the other upon the 8th day: suer I am, the Jews never knew but one, and Christ never kept but one, and God spake not in his 4th come. of Sabbaths, in the plural number, but of a Sabbath, or the Sabbath, in the singular number, as but of one singularly, and this one Sabbath, they have made a Shaddow, and so abolished.

Finally, whereas all Divines affirm, that some time or day in general for God's worship, is moral and in force by the 4th come. if this text Col. 2.16. be urged against the time and day, to wit, the Sabbath day, in the 4th come. then this absurdity also followeth, that there is not some time or day for God's worship, moral by the 4th come. the reason is, because look what was commanded in the 4th come. under these words (Sabbath day) the selfsame is a bolished by Col. 2.16. under the same words (Sabbath days) if this text be set against that: for these words must have as large a sense in Col. 2.16. as they have in Exod. 20.8. and so we shall have no time moral in the 4th come. for God's worship, which is contrary to all Divines.

A 5th absurdity, which these enemies of the perfection and integrity of God's law, do fall into, by producing this text Col. 2.16.17, (or any other text) against the 7th day Sabbath, commanded in the moral law, is this, that they do set Scripture together by the ears, as they say; they make by their collectiones and by their consequences, one text of Scripture, to be at mortal wars with another; & one text quite to overthrow and overturn another; for example, the 4th come. it commandeth the Sanctification of the 7th day Sabbath, in most plain and express words, and yet for all that, they dare attempt to gather collectiones and consequences, out of another text of Scripture, to wit, Col. 2.16.17. whereby they will abolish and nullify utterly that very thing, which was commanded in the 4th come. in express terms: is not this, to set Scripture at variance with Scripture, and one text against another?

It is the parte of all Ministers to love God's law, and to their best to defend it, as the Title and Charter of their Sovereign Lord God: and for this end, they should labor and study, to reconcile such texts in the New Testament, as seem to oppose anything commanded in the moral law: but these are far from reconciling, who study to set the Law & Gospel at odds: I appeal unto their consciences, if ever they faithful attempted, to reconcile these two texts Exod. 20.8.10. & Col. 2.16.

Nay which is yet worse, not this Scripture Col. 2.16.17. is set in opposition, against this Scripture Exod. 20.8. but their collectiones and consequences, fetched out of this Scripture Col. 2.16.17. by manes shallow reason, is set in highest opposition against this other Scripture Exod. 20.8. But for a bare collection and consequence, framed by man's poreblind and feeble reason, that this should put to perpetual silence, an express commandment, a portion of God's written word and will; yea overturn an ordinance of God's, commanded in his moral law; then this, there can be no greater absurdity, no greater impiety: for this is to set man's reason, and consequence, in equal Throne with the most Highest: for man's reason shall be a Countermand, to God's express commandment: yea, it shall take the upper hand of God; for it shall be more forcible, to overturn God's commandment, then is God's commandment forcible, to gainsay man's reason and consequence: if this be not blasphemy against the most Highest, let all men judge: and whither the Pope himself, hath more highly advanced his Authority, above the Scriptures, then do these men their consequences, let all men judge.

A 6th absurdity is, that these men can find distinctions to preserve the Moral Law from being abolished, but none to defend God's Sabbath commanded in that law. 2. Let Anabaptists bring these texts Exod. 31.13. Rom. 14.5. Gal. 4.10. & Col. 2.16. profanly, against Sabbaths in the Moral Law, and these my adversaries, will find answers and distinctions, to maintain some day in general, as moral in the 4th come: yea, to preserve the Lord's day, in the 4th come. which God never put there; and yet will find, nor admit of any distinctions, framed, to preserve the Lord's 7th day Sabbath, put there by God himself: they have an heart to defend their own inventiones, which they have thrust into the 4th come. but none at all, to defend what they find in the same come. placed there by God himself: they had rather overthrow it, then defend it.

A 7th absurdity which these do fall into, by bringing this text Col. 2.16.17. (or any other) is this, that they dispute against Principles & Maxims, now who so will dispute against Principles, he deserveth to be answered with clubes, rather then with reason: as all Arts have their Principles, so hath Divinity hir Principles also; now the 10 commandments, are as 10 foundation stones, whereupon a great parte of the glorious building of Christian Religion doth stand; for all Religion standeth upon Law & Gospel; faith & works; and these 10 commandments, concern that parte of Christian Religion, which standeth in works, to wit, in works of Piety & Charity. Now to dispute against any ordinance commanded in these 10 commandments, is to make a bold and unchristian attempt, to remove and pull away, one of these foundation stones; or at least if not a whole stone, yet half, or some piece and parte of a stone: and is it not a rash, bold, and aduenturouse parte of any man, to go about to alter, remove, take away, or diminish a foundation stone? yea, such a stone as God himselue the master builder hath laid, and not man? will they not endure it in Schools, to hear a man dispute against the Principles of Art, and shall it be borne, that men shall dispute against the Principles in Divinity? No man may there, contradict the Axioms of Aristotle, and shall men here, be suffered to contradict the commandment of God? Aristotle, & his axioms, are more honored in Schools, then God, and his Laws, are among Divines: where fore the Schools shall rise up in judgment and condemn Pulpites: for they honor Aristotle's precepts, more then these do God's praeceptes; after I had handled the 4th come. I added sundry effectual reasons to move us unto the love of God's law; and is this all the love men will show to it, to seek out all manner of ways, how & which way they may forever overthrow some parte of it? where is love to God? where is any love to his laws for themselves sake?

Furthermore, all other Scriptures, especially if they be such as need exposition, they are to be brought unto the 10 commandments, as to the common standard; & Rule of trial, so as no exposition may be admitted of, which any way crosseth the 10 commandments; this is a common received Rule in the exposition of Scripture: but if these new Sabbatharians may have their will, the 10 commandments shall be no longer a standing Rule, for the expounding of other darksom Scriptures; this star, which guideth us in our nauigation to heaven ward, shall be plucked out of the firmament: for the Rule it self shall be questioned, whither all the partes of it be a Canō, Rule & touchston of trial, or not: for they will question the 4th precept in this Rule: & thus we shall have no certainty, in the Scriptures, no Judge in scriptures darksom; we must I think err long, to the Pope again, to be a judge in Scriptures doubtful: nay these mē do not only doubt of some parte of this Rule, but they dare dispute against some parte of it, in right down terms, & they will bring Scripture also against it, as Col. 2.16.17. but as the Devil brought Scripture against Christ, Mat. 4.6.

But since they will question some parte of this rule, why may we not by as good leave, question the whole rule, even all the 10. commandments? I can with Libertines & Anabaptists, bring Scripture too against all the 10. come. as well as they can against the 4th come. see Ephes. 2.15 where it is said, that Christ hath abrogated, the Law of commandments: whence a man might argue, if he would be so absurd & profane, against not only something in the 10 commandments, but also against everything in the 10 come. again, Hebr. 7.12. If the priesthood be changed, then of necessity must there be a change of the Law: whence a man might also say something against the whole Law, & bring Scripture to back him too: but forasmuch as the Law, that is, the Law Moral, is an excellent Rule of our lives, & a notable Rule, for the expounding of other hard & darksome places of Scripture, therefore we will not be so absurd as to question it, least so we fall to question everything, & leave no certainty in the Scriptures, nor anything that migt be a Rule & a light unto other Scriptures, & in conclusion, be driven to the Pope again, to determine of the sense of Scripture for us. So much for this their absurdity, that they deny Maxims in Religion, and Principles in Divinity, who deny the 7th day Sabbath, & dispute against it,

One absurdity more is, that they who allege this text, Col. 2.16. or any other, against the Sabbath day mentioned in the Moral Law, they herein shake hands, & join with lawless Libertines & Anabaptists, who do by these texts, oppose God's Sabbaths, & so live profanly without any Sabbath, & conscience of this divine ordinance: & shall we Protestants, shake hands with Anabaptists, in ouerturning God's Sabbaths? God forbid.

Thus having shown, the diverse & sundry gross absurdities, which they rune into, who bring this text, Col. 2.16.17. (or any other) against the Sabbath day written in the Moral Law; now in the next place, let us see their arguments out of this text, that so we may answer them; their arguments are two: the one of them is this, that by the word Sabbaths, or Sabbath days, in this text, Col. 2.16. is meant all Sabbath days, universally & generally; & so if all Sabbath days be abolished, then the 7th day Sabbath also is abolished.

Herevnto I answer, there is a Law Moral, & a Law ceremonial, now when we read, that Christ hath abolished the Law of commandments, Ephe. 2.15. & again, that Of necessity there must be a change of the Law, Heb. 7.12. if any man should press these texts to the abolishing of all laws, we would answer them by distinguishing of Laws, into Moral & ceremonial; saying, that these texts do abolish only the Law ceremonial, but not the Law Moral: So may I answer them, in this point: for the Sabbath day is a branch of the Moral Law: for it is written in the Moral Law, & commanded in the Moral Law; wherefore, I answer them by distinguishing thus, there be weekly Sabbath days, commanded in the Moral Law; & there are yearly Sabbath days, which were never written in the Moral Law; Levite. 23.24.39. now this their text may be understood only of these yearly & ceremonial Sabbaths, & not of the Moral & weekly Sabbath: & thus are these two scriptures, Exod. 20.8. & Col. 2.16. reconciled.

And whereas they say, that all Sabbaths are meant in this text: I answer, that this all, may be meant of the ceremonial Sabbaths, that all those Sabbaths are abolished: for, there is, an all of them for they are many: so then, we may understand this text, to abolish all Sabbaths generally, that is, the generality of all yearly Sabbaths; since there is a generality of them: or, by all, we may understand all these Sabbaths excluded the Moral-Law, or Tables of stone, that is, all the Sabbaths written in the ceremonial Laws: & so the 7th day Sabbath is not touched in this text: thus you see, there is no necessity at all, why they should hale in the 7th day Sabbath into this text; for a fit distinction may salve all: wherefore if they will violently wring the 7th day Sabbath into this text, it is willfully done of them, to satisfy some corrupt humor or other: you see this text may safely & soundly be expounded of the annual Sabbaths only, without any the least violence offered unto this text.

Furthermore I answer, it is to be observed, that the Apostle speaking here of Sabbaths which are a Shaddow, he doth not say all Sabbaths. using the general particle all, but he speaketh indefinitely, saying, Sabbaths, or Sabbath days, without this word all: & therefore may be understood but of some Sabbath days particularly: It is true indeed, that the Apostle speaketh of Sabbath days, in the plural number, but yet it doth not thereof follow, that therefore he spake of all Sabbath days generally: thers a difference betwixt a plurality & a generality; between Sabbahts plurally, & Sabbaths generally: for the Apostle may make Sabbaths plurally, that is, many Sabbaths, to be Shaddowes: & yet not make Sabbaths generally, that is, all Sabbaths, to be Shaddowes: for example, a man may say, the Trees do shadow me; and yet all Trees in the world, do not shadow me. Again Ministers teach that the bread in the Sacrament is the very body of Christ: & yet it followeth not that all Ministers do teach so; for protestant Divines teach the contrary: so might Paul say, that Sabbaths were a shadow, & yet neither say, nor think, that all Sabbaths were a shadow: and thus is their former argument answered.

By the weakness of which argument, we may see the weakness of their love to God, & his ordinance, & to his Laws: for strong love, would never permit them to rase down to the ground, so honorable an ordinance as God's Sabbath, & to oppose God's Law, the 4th come. with so weak an argument: and what would be the issue, if they might obtain their desires? why this, God's Law shall be mangled & defaced: it shall be denied its integrity & perfection: it shall be made a Monstre, partly moral partly ceremonial: & way made for Anabaptistry, & the flood of profaneness to flowe in upon us, by the want of God's Sabbath.

An other argument they draw out of this text, against the Lord's 7th day Sabbath (for they are wonderouse eagre upon it, & desire exceedingly to find, or make if they cannot find something to defeat God & his Church of the Sabbath day) & for this purpose, they will fain a necessity upon it, that by Sabbaths in this text, we must of necessity understand the 7th day Sabbath for one: because (say they) under the words Holy day, is meant all the ceremonial yearly Sabbaths, & so then under the words Sabbath days, must be meant the weekly Sabbaths.

Herevnto I answer, that it cannot be proved, that under these words Holy day, all yearly Sabbaths are comprised: for it may be that none of the yearly Sabbaths are therein cōprised: to make this appear, let it be observed, that the word translated Holy day, doeth signify also a feast, & the words translated in respect, may be translated in parte; & so for these words in respect of an holy day, you may have in room of them, these words, in parte of a feast 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 , & then the text should rune thus; Let no man condemn you in meat, & drink, or (in parte of a feast) or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days &c. Now the question is to know, what days are signified by these words, in parte of a feast: & for this purpose, look into Levite. 23.34.39. where you have two feasts mentioned, & either of them were to last 7 days a piece: now the first day of the 7 should be a Sabbath day, & likewise the 8th day should be a Sabbath day, as the text speaketh, v. 35.36.39. now forasmuch as the first 7 days were the whole feast, when the first day of those 7 was taken out for a Sabbath day, then the 6 days remaining, which went between the two Sabbaths, these were the parte of a feast: and these 6 days, being the parte of that ceremonial feast, these were those which S. Paul might say were a Shaddow of Christ; & so abolished: so now you see, what days they were, which S. Paul speaketh of, under these words translated Holy day; & which may be translated, in parte of a feast: hereby is nothing else signified, but those 6 festival days, which went between the two Sabbaths, & were a parte of the whole feast, which lasted by the Law 7 days. so then, whereas they would have all the ceremonial Sabbaths, comprised under the words Holy day, inconclusion you see, thers none of them at all comprised in them: for the Apostle may be understood to speak only of those 6 days which went between the 2 Sabbaths, but were no Sabbaths themselves: & so it will not follow, that by the word Sabbaths, in Colos. 2.16.17. must be understood the 7th day Sabbath.

In conclusion, let me show you what may be understood by these words holy day, or, in parte of a feast: and these words Sabbath days: by those words holy day, or, in parte of a feast, may be meant those 6 festival days, which went between the ii Sabbaths, but were no Sabbaths themselves; & then by those other words in the text Col. 2.6. Sabbath days, may be meant these ii Sabbath days, which were the bounds of the 6 festival days, to wit, the first day, and the 8th day v. 35.36.39. together with all other annual Sabbath days.

But if this pleaseth not, then thus, by the words holy day, or rather feast, you may understand the Apostle to speak of those ii feasts of 7 days a piece, in v. 34.39. joining the first day Sabbath, with the following 6 days, and both these to make up one feast consisting of 7 days: only then these words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 must be translated rather in respect, then in parte: for the words may be rendered both ways: now if you put the first day Sabbath, unto the 6 festival days; then by these words Sabbath days in Col. 2.16. may be understood the 8th day Sabbaths which followed the 7 festival days, and also all other yearly Sabbaths with it, as those mentioned Levite. 23.7.8.21.24.27.32.

Or, if this yet pleaseth not, (for they are hard to please, so eagre they are against the Lord's Sabbaths) then thus, if by holy day, or feast, you will needs understand all days, both the feasts of 7 days a piece, and all other single Sabbath days forementioned; then by the word Sabbaths, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in Col. 2.16. the Apostle may be understood to speak not of the Sabbath of days, but of the Sabbaths of years, of which you may read Levite. 25.4.8.10.11. where you have mention of the 7th year, to be kept for a Sabbath, & likewise of the 50th year, the year of Jubilee; so in all these ways, the 7th day Sabbath is not spokē of.

By all which answers it may appear, that it is no impossible thing to reconcile these two Scriptures Exod. 20.8.10. & Col. 2.16.17. for, it appeareth, how many ways the Apostles words may be taken, and still the Sabbath day, written in the Moral Law, not touched at all, by this text Col. 2.16. and are they not willful and malitiouse enemies, to the perfection of God's Law, & to his ordinance the Sabbath day, who when the Apostles words may be taken any of these ways, or some of these at least, so as God's moral Sabbath may be preserved, but yet none of them will please them, but some other unnecessary sense, must needs be violently thrust upon us, and namely such an one as may perpetually destroy the Lord's Sabbath? why, is there no way to expound one text of Scripture, but so as it must overthrow another? do men delight themselves, to make collectiones and gather conclusions, out of one portion of Scripture, which shall overturn forever, that expressly commanded in another portion of Scripture? where is the fear of God all this while, and reverence to his word and ordinances? are not these men guilty of the sin of adding to God's word? Deut. 12.32. & of that curse threatened for the same cause? Revel. 22.18? for like as they have added diverse inventions to that text. Exod. 31.13. against God's Sabbaths; so have they added God's 7th day Sabbath to this text Col. 2.17. for the ruin of it: and, they have added this their invention to S. Paul's words, that he spake universally of all Sabbaths, when he spake but indefinitely of some Sabbaths.

Thre things more I have to add by way of answer, unto this text Col. 2.16. the foremost is this, that there are reasons in this text why it cannot be, that this word Sabbaths, should be understood of the Sabbath written in the moral law: the former reason is this, that all the other things mentioned in this text Col. 2.16. are such things, as never came into the Moral Law, as 1. meat & drink. 2. holy day, or feast, 3. new Moons: wherefore, this giveth us an hint, to conclude, that the other thing mentioned in this text, namely the Sabbaths, should be of like kind, to wit, such Sabbaths as never came into the Moral Law neither: for, who could think, that all the other words and things in this text, should be pure ceremonies, and such as never came into the moral law; and this one word only, to wit, (Sabbaths) should contain in it a Moral day, and ceremonial days; or, days some whereof were never wrote by the finger of God, as the yearly Sabbaths, and some such as God wrote with his own finger, in the moral law, as the 7th day Sabbath?

An other reason fetched from the text is this, that if in this word Sabbaths they will includ the 7th day Sabbath, commanded in the Moral Law, then do they abolish by this text Col. 2.16. Not only the 7th day, and also the Rest, but also the very commandment it self, the 4th come. & that is abolished under these words, where it is said, that Christ hath Put out the handwriting of ordinances v. 14. In which words, the written 4th come. is abolished: and this I make appear thus; the 16th verse of this second Chapter to the Colossians, is a conclusion, as you may perceive by the note of inference used in it (Therefore) one of the premisses whereof you have in v. 14. Now the Apostles argument is on this wise; If the handwriting of ordinances (which is the written Law, which commanded meat and drink, and holy days, new Moons, and Sabbath days) be put out, and taken away; Then let no man condemn you in meat and drink, holy days, new Moons, and Sabbath days: But the handwriting of ordinances, is put out, and taken away: Therefore, let no man condemn you in meat & drink, holy days, new Moons, and Sabbath days. The Apostles Minor, you have in v. 14. and his conclusion in v. 16. now forasmuch as it is a rule with Logiceans, that there must not be more in the conclusion, then is in the premisses; hence it followeth, that if by the word Sabbaths in v. 16. they will understand the 7th day Sabbath, written in the 4th come. then by these words handwriting in v. 14. they must understand also the handwriting of the 4th come. or else there is more in the conclusion then in the premisses, for the premisse, v. 14. speaketh but of the hādwriting of ceremonies writ̄ by Moses only, but in the conclusion v. 16. if they will includ not only the ceremonial law writ̄ by Moses, but also a parte of those things written by God in the Tables of stone, then in the conclusion I say, they have both Moses his handwriting, and also a parte of God's handwriting, and so there is more in the conclusion then in the premisses: wherefore to avoid this absurdity, they must understand the word handwriting in v. 14. to include not only the handwriting of the ceremonies by the hand of Moses, but also they must understand thereby, that parte of God's handwriting whereby he commanded the 7th day Sabbath, which is the 4th come. and so you see they abolish the handwriting of the 4th come. it self, and so we shall have no 4th come. at all: thus you may see whereunto the opposition of God's Sabbaths out of this text Col. 2.16. tendeth, namely to the subversion of the 4th come. let them talk what they will of obedience to God's 4th come. and that they have a respect with David unto all God's commandments, yet all is but talk and words; judge the Tree by the fruits; you see all their endeavors tend unto the subversion of one of God's Moral Laws; and this is the first of my 3. Answers, which I told you I had more to add.

Now I come unto another of my answers, and it is this, that they that expound this text Col. 2.16. of the 7th day Sabbath, commanded in the Moral Law, they do cross and contradict their own Authors; & such writers of their own, as are of high estimation with them: I will produce a few of them, in stead of many, that might be alleged: I will begin with M. Perkins who frameth an objection of some adversaries, which they make out of these ii texts Col. 2.16. and Gal. 4.10. saying, that if we observe any difference of days, now in the New Testament, then we are no better then Jews: unto which texts M. Perkines thus answereth, That both these places speak of the feasts of the Jews, and of d fference of days, that stands in force by the Jewish ceremonial Law. Cases of conscience, Chapt. 16. Sect. 3. Pag. 108. Where you see M. Perkins, freeth this text Col. 2.16. from having anything to do against the Moral Law; or against the difference of days in force by the Moral Law, by saying, that it speaketh of a difference of days, which stood in force by the Jewish ceremonial Law: now the 7th day Sabbath was never commanded in the Jewish ceremonial law, but in the moral law.

Let us hear also what M. Dod saith in this point; he answereth to an objection framed out of this text Col. 2.16. against the Sabbath day on this wise: We must know (saith he) that here the Apostle speaketh of such Sabbaths, as are in the rank with the meats & drinks, whereof the spake before, of which sort were the first day of every month, and the first and last days of everyone of the 3 solemn feasts of the Jews, of these he speaketh in the plural number, and not of the Lord's Sabbath day, in the singular number, which hath a singular excellency, and, how ever times change, it never changeth: Dod on the 4th come. Pag. 132. In which words you see, M. Dod affirmeth, that this text Col. 2.16. speaketh only of the yearly Sabbaths, which the Jews kept in their 3 yearly feasts; or 3 solemn feasts; & doth plainly deny, that this text saith anything of the Lord's 7th day Sabbath, which he calleth the Lord's Sabbath day, in the singular number, by way of excellency.

Of this same judgment, is M. Greeneham in his work upon the Sabbath: of the same judgment also, is M. Elton upon the Colossians, on this text Col. 2.16. of the same judgment likewise, is Doctor Ames in his Thesis touching the Sabbath. To these five, I might add many more, that are of the same judgment, as themselves cannot but know, seeing they read them dally: one more I will add who is newly come forth, M. Richard Byfield against M. Brerewood on the Sabbath, who saith in express words, that this text Col 2.16. doth not abolish the Sabbath day in the 4th come. but those other Sabbaths &c. See him Pag 130. Thus you see, that they who would have the Apostle to speak of the moral Sabbath, mentioned in the moral law, as M. Chapel & his 9 confederates would, they are contrary unto Divines of great note of their own side.

Objection; say they, why do you allege M. Perkins and M. Dod, and others, why they do not defend your opinion for the 7th day Sabbath, do they? Herevnto I answer, it is not my purpose in this place to allege them, as if they spake for the 7th day Sabbath: but only for this purpose, to show that they, even thire own Divines will not endure it, that this text Col. 2.16. should be pressed any further, then against the Jewish ceremonial law: and that it concerneth not the Lord's Sabbath day, spoken of in the 4th come. singularly, but those yearly Sabbaths, spoken of plurally &c. This is all I aim at by alleging their Testimony, now the Testimony of a man against himself, is ever accounted strong and good: & for me to produce one of my adversaries to justify my cause, it is better and more forcible, then if I should allege an • undreth Divines, that are of the same judgment with me: and so much for this point.

My third answer to this text is this, suppose we that the 7th day Sabbath were a shadow of Christ by this text Col. 2.17. yet • ence will nothing follow necessarily, but that the Sabbath is abolished as touching its typicalnesse and shaddowish quality, that so it shall be no more used as a type or as a shadow of Christ to come: but for all this, it may remain still, as a sacred day and time for God's worship, as a day to keep memory of the Creation still, as a fit time to refresh man and beast in, by Rest from the toilsome labors of the former Six days, and so as an help and furtherance unto these moral duties of Rest from labor, and performance of Religiouse exercises. For the clereing of this, I refer you to what hath been said in Section the 18. only here let me give a touch: Circumcision, and the Passover, having either of them a double type or sign, when the one was fulfilled, yet these Sacraments were used with respect to the other unfulfilled; and admit the Sabbath should abolish as a shadow of Christ, why may it not remain as a sign of the Creation? Exod. 31.17. The difference of meats is abolished as a shadow of Christ, but remain, as in a fast; and admit the Sabbath be abolished as a shadow of Christ, why may it not remain, as an help and furtherance unto moral duties? and if the Proselyte Gentiles, observed the Passover with the Jews, neglecting such things therein, as were peculiar unto the Jews, and only observed such things therein, as were common to Jew and Gentile both (as hath been shown in Sect. 18) why may not we Gentiles, neglect the Sabbath as a s • addow of Christ, wherein it was peculiar unto the Jews, and observe it still in such respects, as it is common to Jew and Gentile both? as it is a sign of the Creation? and as it is an help and furtherance unto other moral duties? so much for answer to this text Col. 2.16.17.

And thus like a friend to God, his law, and ordinance therein, I have reconciled these two texts Exod. 20.8. & Col. 2.16.17. the which other men do make to fight together, like deadly enemies.

Before I conclude this Section, let me render a reason why I do on all occationes distinguish, betwixt the 7th day Sabbath & the anniversary Sabbaths: my reasons are these 1. because the 7th day Sabbath is more ancient then the yearly Sabbaths: for these began but after the giving of the Law; but that began before the giving of the Law. 2. Because God Sanctified and hallowed the 7th day Sabbath in a special manner Genes. 2.3. the which honor he did not to the yearly Sabbaths: these were holy but by precept, but that also by President: these were holy but by destination only, but that was holy by consecration also. 3. Because they are distinct in themselves, the one being once every week, the other once every year. 4. Because God placed the weekly 7th day Sabbath in his moral Law, and in the heart or first Table thereof, but the yearly Sabbaths were excluded thence, and never came into the Tables of stone. 5. Because the 7th day Sabbath was a sign of, and kept in memory of the Creation, which belongeth unto all men alike, but so was it not with the yearly Sabbaths: there is good reason therefore, why I should distinguish the weekly Sabbath, from the yearly Sabbaths, according as I have done in all my answers.

SECT. XX.

Having in the former Sections of this Chapter, answered all their arguments brought against the Lord's Sabbath; so as it manifestly appeareth, that it cannot be proved, that it is abolished, but that it is still in force: now in the last place, I purpose to spend this last section of this Chapter, in a Disswasory-declaration of the common sin of our time, to wit, the sin of Sabbath breaking.

And here I would not be mistaken, at the very Threshold & entry of my discourse: for by the sin of Sabbath-breaking, I do not understand the sin of profanation of the Lord's day, which now a days is called the sin of Sabbath-breaking, by our Ministers: for they in this point, make more sins, then ever God made: they deal by the Lord's day, as players do with some of their fellows, whom they make a Counterfeit King, in the sight of the people, by putting upon him some robes & ornaments, like those of the true King; & thus do our Ministers; that they might honor this Lord's day, in the eyes of the world, they have made it a counterfeit Sabbath day, and that by miscalling of it, Sabbath day: like as if a man should call one man, by another man's name: thus they have robbed the 7th day, of its proper & honorable name, that they might robe and decke with it, the 8th day: but to leave them to their vanities & counterfaitings; by Sabbath day, I mean the 7th day from the creation, the Saturday, & day where on God himself Rested, & which is mentioned in his Moral Law; and by the sin of Sabbath-breaking, I understand the violation and profanation of this day, contrary to God's express commandment.

The persons guilty of this sin, are both Ministers and people: for the people first; let them know, & take special notice of it, that they lay under the guilte of the sin of Sabbath-breaking, unto this day: & without repentance, are liable to those curses, threatened in the book of God, against transgressoures of the Laws of God: I speak what I think is the truth in my soul & conscience, & I have good cause thus to think; for, you have seen that it cannot be certainly & infallibly proved, to the undoubted satisfaction of any man's conscience, that ever God did abolish this Sabbath day; now if it cannot be most evidently & apparently proved, that it is abolished, then though there could nothing be said for it more, yet it is a sin to profane it: but I have more to say for it, as you shall hear in the next Chapter, for time to come therefore let men beware, that they do no more profane the Lord's Sabbath day; it will be a dongerouse matter to sin, & go on in sin, after admonition and information; this let them take notice of, as being forewarned, that they do live and lie in the weekly breach, of one of God's Laws: for every 7th day or Saturday, they do not only neglect the worship of God, but also notoriously profane the Lord's Sabbath day, by buying and selling, by riding and going too market and fro market, by ploughing and carteing, by working in their Shoppes and howsen, every man in his several trade and occupation, and by doing the most base drudgery and kitching works, on this sacred day: when God should be most in our minds, then he is furthest from our thoughts: let this be thought on, by all such, as make any conscience of God's commandments.

But hereunto the people will reply, saying, Alas, what would you have us to do? we are no scholars, if it be an error, it is in our Ministers and teachers, & not in us; you should do well to apply this doctrine unto our Ministers & not unto us; we cannot judge in such matters of difference & difficulty &c. To whom I answer, Alas, indeed, I pity you from my heart; this your error is radically indeed in your Ministers, for the blind, do lead the blind; nevertheless you have your share therein: because you justify their doeings, & approve of their sayings & doctrines in this point: God's proceedings are on this wise, that if the Minister doth not admonish the people, of those things which are sins: the Ministers indeed shall answer to God for thy blood, but what will this avail thee? for Thou shalt die for thine iniquity, as you may read, Ezek. 33.8. & for this cause, it is fite, I should give you notice thereof, albeit I mean to lay the chiefeload upon your Ministers backs. lastly whereas you plead, that you are not able to judge in such points as these. Herevnto I answer, that men should be ashamed to say they cannot judge, considering the time, as the Apostle speaketh; for men have now been trained up a longe time in the doctrine of Christian religion, & therefore should be able to judge; the Apostle biddeth us to Trye all things, & keep that which is good, 1. The 5.21. & again he saith, I speak as unto them which have understanding: judge ye what I say, 1. Cor. 10.15. Here you see the Apostle would have common people to be judges of that which he taught; & such were those noble Bereans, Act. 17.11. wherefore you ought to judge of this point, & to this end to read about it, to confer of it, and to studdy it: It is true, were it a point to be studdied out, by your own labor, from the root of it, there were difficulty in it perhapes above your capacities; but when a point is already studied to your hand, & a path way beaten out for your foot steppes, now there is no invincible difficulty in the matter: it is true, that commō people cannot plead a cause before the Judge, yet can they judge, having heard both parties plead; people cannot preach, yet can they judge of a sermon preached; so in this point of the Sabbath, though people could not first find it out, nor yet dispute it when found out, yet can they judge of the cause when they see it laid plainly open before their eyes, if they will open their eyes to see it, & they may judge of the cause, when they have seen it pleaded on both sides; to this end I have penned this book, wherein you have the arguments on both sides, plainly laid down, so as you may easily discern the truth, from error.

Yet further, to take away all excuses; the point in question, touching this Sabbath day, commanded in the Moral Law, it is A Catechism point: for all the 10. commandments, they are Catechism pointes, like as are the Creed, & the Lord's prayer: now it hath pleased Almighty God, to lay down these Catechism pointes, of all other pointes in religion, most plainly, & most familiarly, that he that runeth may read them; the 10 commandments are expressed to the capacety of the meanest in the Congregation, & of all the 10 commandments, there is not any one laid down in more familiar & easy terms & words to be understood, then is this 4th come. touching the Sabbath day; for God hath most lively & plainly, painted & pointed it out from all other days of the week, so that no man can doubt, which day of the week is that which God would have for his Sabbath day; no nor yet what duties God requireth to be done in that day: it is plain, that that is the day, which is properly called Sabbath day, in Scripture account; & which is the 7th day in Scriptures account, namely our Saturday: & the duties are Rest, & Holy actiones performed in that Rest: these things are so plain in the come. as they need no exposition; for they are put down in so many words, in the come. now, what need then is there of such store of learning, to attain to the knowledge of these things, as if common people cold not understand them, nor any but Ministers & men of learning could judge of them? men may as well say they understand not English, as to say, they cannot understand & judge which is the 7th day of the week, & what is meant, by Rest from labor, & performance of Holy actiones: for which is the 7th day, we cannot but know since the Sunday or Lord's day, is the first day; & what is meant by Holy actiones, or sanctifying of the day, we know by the like actiones we perform on every Lord's day: a small deal of learning is enough for a man to judge of these points; wherefore that is but an excuse, for people to say they are no scholars, & they cannot judge of such matters; what can you not judge of your Catechism points, which you learned in your Childhoode?

I confess for all this, there is difficulty about this point, to such as are not exercised in it (& by the way, it is a shame for any man, not to be so well exercised in all God's 10 commandments, as not to be able to defend them, unto the least jot & title against all opposers) but I desire thee good Reader, but to observe where the difficulty lieth: for the clearing of this, note with me these ii. things, The 4th come. &, the opposition made against this 4th come. For the former of these; the 4th come. together with the things therein commanded, are laid down most familiarly, & plainly, as hath been shown, so as thers no difficulty at all about that, no man but may easily understand, what it is which God requireth therein, & which day of the week God enjoined for a Sabbath: wherefore the difficulty that is, it is in the opposition, made by Ministers, against something commanded in the 4th come. now it is true indeed, that in this opposition, there ariseth difficulty, because they trouble the waters of men's understanding, by bringing many & intricate reasons out of Scriptures, against the Sabbath day written in the 4th come. which intricate arguments, if these Ministers would forbear, then there were no difficulty at all, all were as plain as a beaten path way; wherefore, since you see where the difficulty lieth, my counsel to all such people as plead ignorance, & want of learning in this controversy, shall be, that they would therefore rather follow God, then their Ministers: for God's way is a plain, smooth, easy, & beaten way, so as every man learned or unlearned, may easily know, what it is which God requireth in this Catechism point of his 4th come. but their Ministers way, in setting themselves to abandon and root out God's Sabbath, it is such a rugged way, & such a difficult way, full of so many secret & hidden windings & turnings, as people of common capacety cannot conceive it, nor judge of it, as themselves say: wherefore, my counsel unto these is this, that they rather take parte with God, & with his Sabbath, then with their Ministers against God & his Sabbath: because God's way is an easy & known way, but man's way is an intricate & difficult way.

And further, let them not dare to live in the weekly transgression of the 4th come. & profanation of God's Sabbath day, bearing themselves only upon this poor ground, that their Ministers say they may so do; & that their Ministers bring many arguments out of the Scripture, for the abolishing of God's Sabbath day, since those arguments (as themselves confess) they understand not, nor are able to judge of, for want of learning, when they hear or read them disputed of: the Apostle saith, whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Rom. 14.23. If then they cannot comprehend & conceive of the opposit arguments, brought against the Sabbath, when they are disputed too & fro on boths sids, how can they work in their calings on this Sabbath day? they cannot do it of faith, they must do it doubttingly, & so sinfully: wherefore the better & easier known way, is the surer & safer way, & that is to follow the example of God, resting upon the 7th day, because God rested on the 7th day; & thus much for people.

I come now unto Ministers; the first thing I lay to their charge, is the profanation of the sacred Scriptures, and word of God, by wresting of many and sundry texts of Scripture, against the 4th come. and the Lord's Sabbath day, therein mentioned: there are many and sundry texts of Scripture, both out of the old Testament & out of the New Testament, which they abuse against the Lord's Sabbath day, the particulars whereof you have heard in all this Chapter hitherto, and how vainly, impertinently, and friuolously they have used them, doth evidently appear by my several answers unto them: now do they not know, that one day they shall give an accompt to God, for taking God's Name in vain? and for irreverent tossing of God's word, hither and thither like a Tennise bale? yea which is worse, they turn the point of God's sword (his word I mean) against himself; setting Scriptures together by the ears: for they set abundance of Scriptures, both out of the old and new Testaments, against the Lord's Sabbath day, commanded to be kept by the 4th come. like as a man should set abundance of dogs upon a Bear: for they set all these texts of Scripture, against this one text of the 4th come: now what may be the ground of all this? I cannot devise any besides this, that their minds are forestaled with a prejudice against God's Sabbaths, as that they are Jewish and the like, and therefore down they must: and to this end, the Scripture must be set against them.

It hath ever been the practice of all sober and Godly Divines, to study and endeavor the reconciliation of Scriptures seemeing to make opposition and contradiction: but these men are of a contrary Spirit: for having to do with God's ten commandments, and by name the 4th come. they cannot abide to hear me speak of a reconciliation, and to make a reconcilment betwixt the 4th come. Exod. 20.8. and this text Colos. 2.16.17. but all their study and invention is, how they may make these two portiones of holy writ with others, to oppose one another in the highest manner, & one to shoulder out another: my indeauors are by a reconciliation, to cause an Harmony and sweet accord among the Scriptures, that so we may still retain a most ancient and profitable ordinance of God's in the Church; but their indeauors are, to reject all reconciliation, & to cause a jar and discord in the Scriptures, that so they may deprive the Church of God, of a most ancient and profitable ordinance of God's, commanded in his moral Law. This is a profane use and abuse of Scripture, to cause it to be at odds & variance with it self, when as by a reconciliation and fit sense, it may be made to agree & accord in a sweet Harmoney.

The 2 d thing I lay to the charge of Ministers, is that they have lived a long time in this sin of Sabbath breaking, and transgression of God's 4th come. in their several families; the which without unfeigned Repentance, will make them liable unto all those Curses temporal and eternal, thereatened in God's word, against such as live in the transgression of God's Laws. And further, if still they shall in time to come, live in the willful violation of this ordinance of God, I give them hereby to know, that they shall be guilty of a weekly sin, against God's 4th come. drawing down God's curses upon themselves and their families, every Saturday or Sabbath day, week by week, so long as they so live.

This error touching God's Sabbath day, is not like unto some other errors, which are errors in judgment only, but like unto those more dangerouse and perniciouse errors, which are errors both in judgment and in practice also; for you see, that such as are erroneously persuaded, that this sacred and Sanctified time, the 7th day Sabbath, is abolished; forthwith they fall to an erroniouse practice also, & to trample upon God's Sabbaths, by profanation of them openly; and by calling them Jewish reproachfully.

But happily they will reply, saying, we do not throw down God's Sabbath, but God himself doeth it; for it is God that hath abolished the 7th day Sabbath; and therefore you do ill to tax us for it: whereunto I answer, that it is false which they say; to father this their own deed upon God, is an heinouse evil; that God hath not done this thing is apparent, in as much as none of all those Scriptures of God's, which they have brought against this Sabbath, do necessarily abolish it, as you have seen by my answers unto them one by one, so it is not God then but themselves that have done it; and so I tax them justly.

Yet further, Ministers are guilty, not only and alone of the sin of Sabbath breaking, in their own families, but also which is more fearful, they are guilty of the same sin committed by the people weekly: for whats the cause, why the people do not Sanctify the Sabbath day properly so called, is it not hence, because Ministers teach people that it is abolished, & Jewish, and therefore they ought not to keep it holy? the people will lay the load of this sin, upon their Ministers another day, when God shall rekone with them for it, crying out upon their Teachers, who misled them. S. James telleth us, if some man hath converted another from his error, he shall save a soul, and shall hide a multitude of sins I am. 5.19.20. If then this be an argument to persuade all men, to labor to bring their brethren out of errors, because so they shall hide a multitude of sins: what a terror then should it be unto all Ministers, to think that they have seduced the people, and led them into errors; for thus they have opened a fountain of sins: for every single person in their congregation, Master & servant, Mistress & maid, Parent & child, everyone of these do hereby fall into the sin of Sabbath breaking every week, that is 50 times in one year, so as if a man hath lived but a matter of 40 or 50 years, he is guilty of the breach of God's 4th come. Twenty hundredth times; what a multitude of sins are here! & all these are the Minister guilty of; these are the multitude of sins committed by one single person in his congregation, but if a Minister hath 400 or 500 persons, or a thousand persons under his charge, what an infinite number of sins is he guilty of! let this be ceriously thought on.

Furthermore, if it doth come into the heart of the Magistrate at any time, to think of a reformation (as God grant it may) what is it that quencheth that motion of God's Spirit in him? is it not this, that he bethinketh him that his Minister, and so other Ministers, are of a contrary judgment, affirming with one consent, that this Sabbath day, is abolished, and ceremonial, & Jewish? so then, Ministers are not only guilty of the breach of God's Sabbaths, among the people for time past, but also they hinder Reformation, in the persons, in whose power it is to make Reformation: By the mercy of God, we live in a kingdom, that is governed by Christian Magistrates; and under such governors, as have already made reformationes, in many things, wherein they have been informed by the Clergy; and I verily believe, they would as willingly take this point into their considerations, if moved thereunto by the Ministry, as they have done other things: but behold, they who should inform them, and call upon them, are dumb and silent; nay enemies and adversaries to the cause! wherefore, that this Sabbath breaking is defended by Authority, and not reformed, but the reformation of it opposed by Authority, this is to be imputed unto Ministers; let this be ceriously thought on.

Herevnto happily some will reply, but these Ministers who do these things; are very zealouse & godly men &c. To whom I answer, the more zealouse the worse, & the more godly the worse: it were enough for the most godless & profane men, to set themselves against an ordinance of God's, & to oppose his Sabbaths; but for men fearing God, & zealouse for God, that these should show themselves so regardless of God's ordinance, & such enemies to his Sabbaths, this is in them a double iniquity: for, who but they should stand for God, and defend his Sabbaths?

In the third place, I lay many things to the charge of such Ministers as do oppose God's ancient Sabbath: as 1. that thereby they have defaced God's royal-Law, mangled it, & robbed it of its integrity & perfection: they have diminished the complete number of Tenn Commandments: they have made it a moral-ceremonial Law, an hotch potch; a very Monstre. 2. They bewray a great want of love unto God's Law, they do not love it for it self: for they indeauor might & main, to overthrow a parte of it: yea they are horribly partial, in that they will defend all the other partes of God's Law, against Anabaptists; but will not defend this parte also against them. 3. They open a flood gate to impiety and profaneness among people; & draw us to Anabaptistry, by throwing down God's Sabbaths. 4. They are guilty of that sin in Deut. 12.32. and of that curse in Revel. 22.18.19. threatened to such as do either add to God's word, or detract from it: for by that text, Ex. 31.13. they have unnecessarily detracted from God's Law, the 7th day Sabbath; &, to that text, Colos. 2.16.17. they have unnecessarily added, the 7th day Sabbath, for the ruin of it: now in thus doing, they behave themselves, like men, that are weary of God's service, as if it were a burden unto them to sanctify God's Sabbaths, & as if it grieved them that God's Sabbaths should be moral: were it not thus with them, they would never manage such arguments and Scriptures against God's Sabbaths as you see they have done, oh prejudice! oh temporizing!

But admit, that by reason of swaying with the times, a prejudice against the Sabbath as Jewish, is fastened in their breasts, I see no cause why they should reject the Matchless example & president of God himself, Exo. 20.10.11. is this Jewish too? for they cannot abide it, that the Church and people of God, should be imitators & followers of God like deer Children: that is, that they should labor on those days wherein God wrought, & rest on that day wherein God rested, & sanctify that time which God sanctified, yea and also commanded: but like men, that loved not to be like God, they will have the people rest when God wrought, & work when God rested, & profane the time which God Sanctified: they had rather go any way, then tread in God's steppes & follow him.

The last thing which I lay to the charge of Ministers, is that they have taken away one whole come. from the 10. commandments: in the former point, I have taxed them for takeing away some parte of a come. but here I tax them for taking away a whole come. by name the 4th come. and this I thus make good against them; 1. They have taken away the time, to wit, the 7th day, in the come. the which being gone, there is no day time left in the come. so that an hour upon any day in the week, spent at a Lecture, in prayer, singing a Psalm, & hearing God's word, is as much as the 4th come. can now require, by their expositions: now therefore the 4th come. needeth no longer go thus, Remember the Sabbath day: for it may go thus, Remember the Sabbath hour: 2. They have abolished the duties in the day, to wit, rest, & Holy actiones: for the word Sabbath signifying rest, this rest they have abolished, by making the word Sabbath & rest, in the 4th come. a sign, Exod. 31.13. and a Shaddow, Colos. 2.17. & so abolished; now if the Sabbath and rest be abolished, then may men labor in their callings every man in his own house severally; & this taketh away holy Assemblies in the congregation, & all public duties of a Sabbath: & thus have they abolished by their corrupt glosses & expositions, both the time, & the duties to be performed in the time, now these being gone, I pray show me what is left behind in the 4th come. for they have abolished everything that was commanded. 3. By making these words Sabbath day a sign, Exo. 31.13. and a Shaddow, Col. 2.17. and so abolished, thus they have taken away the Substance of the 4th come. & left us nothing but a shadow; so as now we may read the 4th come. thus: Remember the 0000000000, to Sanctify it: & thus much for the body of the 4th come.

Lastly, they have taken away the Reason and Motiue, which God took from his own example, & added it to his 4th come. Exod. 20, 11. this whole verse, v. 11. containing ii. most lively reasons & effectual, they have robbed God's Church of the use of them; for they neither use them themselves, no neither can man else use them, unto the day we now keep: for God did move unto the observation of the Saturday & 7th day. 1. Because him self at the Creation rested on it. 2. Because he had blessed that day, & hallowed it, & so made it an Holy day. now these two reasons neither are, nor can be applied to our Lord's day: for God at the creation did not rest on our Lord's day; no neither did he then bless & sanctify the Lord's day; for the Lord's day was not then known. Thus you see, how they baue made clear work; for they have taken away both the body of the 4th come. & the reason annexed to it by God; thus they have taken away the whole 4th come. head & tail, root & branch: it stands for us now only to look upon.

Loe, now we may say with the Prophet David, It is time for thee Lord to work, for they have destroyed thy Law, Psal. 119.126. Thus since I have faithfully & plainly discovered this Notoriouse error, I have done what in me lieth towards a reformation; only this remaineth, that with the residue of the congregation, I make this prayer unto God, That it may please him to bring into the way of truth, all such as have erred, & are deceived.

CHAPT. V. This Chapter containeth sundry & substantial arguments out of the word of God, proueing that the Lord's Sabbath day, written in the Moral Law, is still in force; & so ought to be unto the worlds end; like as are the other morales.

I Have now finished the four first partes of my book: the first whereof was in defense of the Moral Law. The second was an exposition of the 4th come. with a discovery of the corrupt expositions thereof. The third was an answer unto those Scriptures & reasons, wich are usually brought to prove the Lord's day, the Sabbath day. The fowrth was an answer, unto those abused Scriptures, which are brought against the Lord's Sabbath day. And now by order I am come unto the since parte of my book, and herein I am to prove unto you, the perpetuity of the Lord's Sabbath, and that it is still in force, and so ought forever to be.

Touching the Sabbath I note two things. 1. I see many learned and great Divines of late, prime men, and of the foremost rank in the Universities, both on this side and beyond the Seas, disclaiming and writing against the Lord's day Sabbath; but I see none of them show us where we shall have another Sabbath, in the absence of this: as the former bewrayed their learning and judgment, so this latter bewrayed their forgetfulness: what, shall the Church of God be left without a Sabbath now? shall we turn from Superstition to Anabaptistry? I join with them in throwing down the Lord's day for a Sabbath, but I dare not put an end to the work, when it is but half done.

2. As those Jews of old cried, the Temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, so I observe the Patrons of the Lord's day, to cry out of the profanation of the Lord's Sabbaths, the prophanatiō of the Lord's Sabbaths, as if they were the only friends to God's Sabbaths; whereas in deed & in truth, they are the chief enemies to them, and are foully mistaken in their judgment: for they are the Lord's days which they mean, & not the Lord's Sabbath days: if therefore any man may in a right accompt be said to be a true friend to God's Sabbaths, it is not they, it is he that writeth for them, and defendeth them against the world, and corruptions of the time: he may indeed say with Elijah, I have been very Ielouse for the Lord of hosts: for they have forsaken thy Covenant, broken down thy Sabbaths, and I only am left.